MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407578671 · doi:10.4324/9781003311768-15

Promoting Trauma-Informed Practice in Social Work Education Through an Experiential Learning Program

2025· book-chapter· en· W4407578671 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rita Dhungel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCounseling Practices and Supervision
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExperiential learningExperiential educationWork (physics)PsychologySocial workMedical educationPedagogyMedicinePolitical scienceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Experiential learning (EL) as a method of trauma-informed critical learning and transformative learning pedagogies is essential in social work education. EL allows social work students to actively become engaged in community practice and social justice activities while creating a safe learning environment and providing students with an opportunity to reflect on their own values, actions, and behaviors. EL, grounded on the 5Rs approach (respect, reciprocity, relevance, responsibility, and relationships), promotes trauma-informed critical learning for students to learn and grow. EL opportunities were first provided to the undergraduate social work course Social Work with Communities (SOWK 401) in 2019 and again in 2020 and 2021 at the School of Social Work at MacEwan University, Edmonton, Alberta. This chapter explores how EL fosters trauma-informed, critical, and transformative learning for students’ personal and professional growth through their participation in community-based projects and programs in both local and global contexts; it is grounded in the personal narratives of the co-author Rita Dhungel.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCounseling Practices and SupervisionFrench-language works237,207