MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6922194277 · doi:10.11575/prism/26237

From Social Welfare to Social Work, the Broad View versus the Narrow View

2014· other· en· W6922194277 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2014
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsSocial workSocial changeWelfareSocial WelfareWork (physics)Social policyNarrativeSocial philosophyWelfare stateSocial position

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation looks back through the lens of a conflict that emerged during the development of social work education in Alberta, and captured by a dispute about the name of the school. The difference of a single word – welfare versus work – led through selected events in the history of social work where similar differences led to disputes about important matters. The themes of the dispute are embedded in the Western Tradition with the emergence of social work and its development at the focal point for addressing the consequences described as a ‘painful disorientation generated at the intersections where cultural values clash.’ In early 1966, the University of Calgary was selected as the site for Alberta’s graduate level social work program following a grant and volunteers from the Calgary Junior League. Initiated in the early 1960s by the AASW, social agencies, representatives from Calgary and Edmonton and the University of Alberta, to conduct a study led by the Alberta Social Work Education Research Committee. The Study completed in 1965 concluded with a recommendation to establish a school of social work in Alberta; the University of Alberta, Board of Governors assigned the school to the new University of Calgary. The Study examines the history of the School of Social Welfare and the controversy surrounding the name associated with the broad view of social work. The critique led to a narrative that its graduates were not prepared for practice. Several efforts were made to change the name; however, AASW aligned itself with the School’s critics to oppose the name change. Following the appointment of a new Dean in the early 1980s, the direction and vision of the program changed. Although the program increasingly reflected a narrow view of social work, its scholarly work in the form of research and publications established its legitimacy and credibility particularly within the University and created the condition for changing the name to the Faculty of Social Work. The role of ideology and the theoretical framework of new institutionalism include a discussion of agency and structure, emergence, philosophical anthropology and the development of the tendency toward isomorphism as the predictor and explanation for organizations in the same field adopting similar organizational forms.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0220.127
Scholarly communication0.0250.010
Open science0.0020.014
Research integrity0.0060.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)→French-language works237,207→