Identifying the factors contributing to Canadian physiotherapists’ decisions to supervise physiotherapy students: Results from a national survey
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Clinical education is a critical component of physiotherapy student training; however, clinical coordinators report increasing difficulty in securing sufficient, appropriate clinical placement experiences for students to meet national education requirements (Baldry Currens & Bithell, 2000). Although research evidence is limited, stressors in the workplace and a dislike of student evaluation procedures are among the key reasons for the reluctance of physiotherapists to supervise students (Creaser, 2006; Davies, Hanna, & Cott, 2011). A survey instrument was developed, validated and administered to Canadian physiotherapists to identify the contributors to their decisions to supervise physiotherapy students. In total, 3148 physiotherapists from diverse practice areas and practice settings representing all Canadian provinces and territories completed the survey. Six factors (Clinical Instructor Feelings of Stress, Student Contribution to Workplace Efficiency, Dislike of the Assessment Instrument, Student Preparation and Attitude, Clinical Instructor Preparation to Evaluate, and Professional Role & Responsibility) emerged from an exploratory factor analysis as contributors to supervisory decisions. Significant differences were present in the identified factors between supervising and non-supervising physiotherapists and across geographic regions; however, the effect sizes were small. Stress emerged as the most influential contributor to the decision to supervise a student; however, many of the identified factors were associated with, and exacerbated, clinical instructor stress. Enhanced supervisor training is one strategy that may mitigate some of the stress associated with student supervision. The challenges associated with supervising students in private practice were also highlighted in this study, providing a perspective that has been missing from the literature related to clinical education. Despite differences in healthcare delivery, population demographics, and individual physiotherapy program delivery across Canada, there appear to be small differences between supervising and non-supervising physiotherapists across regional and practice boundaries. The influence of a physiotherapist’s beliefs about their professional role appears to be more influential in the decision to supervise students than this study suggests, and provides new directions for future research. A multipronged approach, that includes all stakeholders in physiotherapy clinical education, is needed to resolve the issues of student placement capacity and to make the supervision of students a less stressful and a more rewarding undertaking.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».