Bibliographic record
Abstract
In an era marked by global uncertainty, trauma, rapid social change, and existential challenges, the integration of spirituality into social work education and practice is vital. Drawing on over three decades of personal clinical experience, research, and an extensive literature review, this article offers a compelling rationale for the inclusion of spirituality as a core and foundational component of social work education and professional practice. It proposes an initial framework for the spiritual competencies required for ethically and effectively addressing the spiritual dimensions in practice that practitioners will most likely encounter. Key elements such as spiritual awareness, humility, attunement, safety, and appropriateness are explored alongside the development of spiritually informed pedagogy. The framework supports a developmental approach to learning from the levels of awareness and exposure to immersion and experiencing and for integration and sense of mastery along with the knowledge, skills, and attitudes at each level for spiritually sensitive practice. The framework provides practical guidance for social work educators, students, practitioners, and researchers. Ultimately, the article calls for a paradigm shift that embraces spirituality as essential to holistic, culturally responsive, ethically grounded and best practices in social work.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.013 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".