SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION IN CANADA: INCHING TOWARD THE PROGRESSIVE1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The history of social work education in Canada can be characterized as a debate about the mission of social work practice between two perspectives: the “professional ” (or function) and the “progressive ” (or cause) one. This paper briefly outlines the history of social work education in Canada, describes the current delivery structure of social work education, and summarizes the responsibilities of the various standard-setting bodies. It then discusses the issues identified through a recent planning process in the context of the larger debate about the mission of social work. RESUMEN La historia del trabajo social en el Canadá puede caracterizarse como un debate entre dos perspectivas, una que da énfasis a la función del trabajo social y otra que se enfoca mas en las razones de su existencia. Este articulo ofrece una sinopsis de la historia de la educación del trabajo social en el Canadá, describe la presente estructura y las responsabilidades de los diferentes cuerpos que establecen los estándares corrientes. Finalmente, describe puntos de debate identificados a través de un proceso de planeamiento en el contexto de una amplia
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.030 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".