Standards for Practice of North American Child and Youth Care Professionals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2022 Standards for Practice of North American Child and Youth Care Professionals: Code of Ethics represents a significant revision of the profession’s guiding ethical framework. Developed by the Association of Child and Youth Care Practice (ACYCP) in collaboration with the Canadian Council, the updated code builds on Martha Mattingly’s foundational 1995 version and the 2017 revision. This iteration addresses the evolving contexts of practice, including the expansion of virtual and online life spaces, the lasting impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, and heightened demands for equity and social justice. Major updates emphasize anti-oppressive and trauma-informed practice, ethical responsibilities of indirect care practitioners, and culturally responsive approaches across diverse settings. Framed as a living document, the Code provides a contemporary moral compass for practitioners, organizations, and leaders, reaffirming the profession’s core commitments while equipping child and youth care professionals to navigate increasingly complex ethical challenges.
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 | 0.142 | 0.284 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.005 |
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".