Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fundamentally concerning the relationship and dynamics between education, professionalism and ethical awareness, this interdisciplinary, edited volume showcases novel research perspectives on professional ethics in education, practice, and the work life of welfare professionals in the Nordic countries. Contextualising the term ‘welfare professions’ as the collective definition of teachers, early childhood educators, social educators, social workers and nurses in the Nordic countries, the book chiefly concerns their ability to navigate within the complex political and institutional frameworks that surround their working environments. Chapters position their competence to act with strong critical, ethical awareness and integrity as a key tenet of a well-functioning education system, and provide research-based perspectives and reflections on how the dichotomy between ethical standards and realities of practice can lead to ethical pressure and moral distress. With contributions from Denmark and the Nordic countries, as well as Canada and the US, the book offers empirical and theoretical perspectives into the relationship between education, professionalism and ethical awareness, and is supported with empirical examples and research-based case studies. Ultimately, the book showcases and promotes research aimed at strengthening professionalism based on critical, innovative and practice-focused education. This enlightening book will be essential reading for global academics, researchers and postgraduate students in the fields of pedagogy, professional development, the sociology of education, and education ethics more broadly. Those involved with issues of welfare in society, working life research, policy and professional values will also find the volume of use.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.024 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".