MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408021319 · doi:10.18060/28814

Examining Social Work Education

2024· article· en· W4408021319 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Social Work · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of WaterlooSimon Fraser UniversityColorado Mesa UniversityDe La Salle UniversityIllinois State UniversityMontclair State UniversityUtah Valley UniversityUniversity of Southern MaineUniversity of DenverUniversity of AlbertaFlorida Gulf Coast UniversityFordham UniversityNorth Carolina Central UniversityTexas State UniversityGeorgia State UniversityUniversity of PittsburghBeijing Normal UniversityTulane UniversityArizona State UniversityEast Carolina UniversityEastern Washington UniversityUniversity of South FloridaJames Madison UniversityFlorida International UniversityWest Chester UniversityBoise State UniversityUniversity of AkronUniversity of PennsylvaniaValparaiso UniversityQueensland University of TechnologyUniversity of ConnecticutWestern Carolina UniversityRhode Island CollegeWestern Kentucky UniversityWashburn UniversityYork UniversityUniversity of MissouriWestern Michigan UniversityPortland State UniversityButler UniversityGeorge Mason UniversityOhio State UniversityUniversity of EssexUniversity of Southern California
KeywordsSocial workWork (physics)SociologyEngineering ethicsProject commissioningMedical educationPsychologyPublishingMedicinePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This issue contains 11 articles by 40 authors, both national and international. The majority are empirical papers, using qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods. More than one article presents a case study, which gives me an opportunity to promote this methodology. One of my first research projects was a case study of the child welfare system in the State of Indiana, as we were asked to focus only on Indiana’s system (Barton et al., 2006). In my role as editor of Advances in Social Work, I see many manuscripts that are in-depth studies of a department, classroom, or grant program, for example. These provide detailed information about a particular context in a “real-world” setting, thus receive the designation of case study.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.934
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.424
Teacher spread0.376 · 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