Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter discusses changes in Canadian social work education stimulated by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) .First, an historical summary of social work in Canada is provided related to Indigenous peoples.In the Canadian context, Indigenous refers to First Nations, Métis, and Inuit Peoples.Elements of Canada s settler colonialism history are unpacked, illustrating how colonialism has (mis) shaped and (mis) informed contemporary social work practice.Second, implications for social work education and practice are presented through discussion of five Calls to Action of the TRC, focusing on a reconciliation path of the School of Social Work (SSW) in Montreal, Quebec, Canada (or, more hopefully, a path leading towards reconciliaction , a term applied to the Canadian context by TRC Commissioner Chief Warren Littlechild) .Reconciliaction lies at the intersection of reflective-and actionbased reconciliation.As Solverson (2018) cautions, while cursory reconciliation rhetoric is easy and self-affirming, meaningful reconciliaction is necessarily difficult and uncomfortable (p. 2) .The final section is devoted to a discussion of how authentic Indigenization, or reconciliaction, in social work can be practiced on the ground in communities and whether social workers could be effective and do no harm if they fail to question social work practice s transportability across cultures and languages or its relevance to the contexts in which it is being transplanted (Gray & Hetherington, 2013: 27) . Historical contextsContemporary social work practice that is respectful, relational, and supportive of holistic client well-being relies on critical reflection on social work s history in Canada and acknowledges that the social work profession has had a predominantly negative history with Indigenous Peoples in Canada.Reports on Indigenous children s living conditions from inside Residential Schools were available to social workers (e.g., Bryce,
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".