Adopting rights-based approach to community practice: the experience of the Community Service Center, Nablus, Palestine - a case study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This study explores the experience of adopting and implementing a Rights-Based Approach (RBA) to community practice in Palestine using a case study methodology. The studied case is a community-based organization that is university affiliated and voluntary efforts-oriented; the Community Service Center (CSC). CSC is affiliated to An-Najah National University, Nablus, Palestine and is a partner in the McGill Middle East Program in Civil Society and Peace Building (MMEP), Montreal, Canada. CSC works in a context that is characterized by political, social and economic instability and uncertainty. Community work in this context, as a method of social work, is expected to target its goals through addressing issues of social and political nature simultaneously; contribute to national aspirations of building a state after decades of occupation and working to realize human rights of the disadvantaged through their empowerment and participation. Human rights-based social work constituted the theoretical framework of the study. This framework is based on linking human rights and social work in a way consistent with the mission of social work as a profession that targets the barriers to accessing human rights; poverty, discrimination, and lack of education. Therefore, a human rights-based community practice should imply respect of human rights in its means and outcomes. Data about this experience was collected from three sources; CSC documents, a sample of persons who were involved in CSC work, and the researcher's own experience as a founding director of the organization. Data was collected using qualitative methods; interviewing study participants, reviewing documents, and reflection on researcher's experience. Data was analyzed using qualitative traditions. The study concluded that successful adoption and implementation of RBA is conditioned by five factors: opportunity for the organization, professionality of the organization's team, team's commitment, RBAing
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 | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.039 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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; 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".