MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405707282 · doi:10.1521/jsyt.2024.43.2.16

Maintaining Critically Conscious Learning Environments in Marriage and Family Therapy and Master of Social Work Education: A Polyethnographic Study

2024· article· en· W4405707282 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
José María García Páez, Deborah J. Buttitta, Dana J. Stone

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Systemic Therapies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyWork (physics)Social workCritically illFamily therapySocial learningSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologySociologyPsychotherapistPedagogyMedicinePolitical scienceLawIntensive care medicineEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Diversity and multicultural curricula are educational requirements in marriage and family therapy (MFT) and master of social work (MSW) programs, yet teaching this content to developing mental health professionals brings unique challenges. In recent years these challenges have intensified due to sociopolitical discourse and the assault of persistent injustices, the impact of which affects both educators and students. Using polyethnography, MFT and MSW educators worked within a dialogic and relational space to explore stories and make meaning of emerging challenges. Mirroring principles of collaborative and narrative therapies, the polyethnographic process revealed several factors, including critical self-reflection, reckoning, and communal coping as key elements to support and maintain critically conscious learning environments while educating future clinicians.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.305 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Systemic TherapiesSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207