Graduate student experience in focus: a photovoice investigation of physical and health education graduate students in Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Over the past couple decades, concerns have been raised regarding graduate student wellbeing and attrition in Canada and abroad. Although research on graduate education has increased in response to these concerns, these works are often focused upon a narrow aspect of the multifaceted reality of graduate education and have not been student-conducted. This situation is largely mirrored in the case of physical education (PE), although further complicated by the focus on the United States in which graduate programmes differ considerably from Canada, Europe, and elsewhere.Purpose/Aim: The purpose of this research was to conduct a broad investigation into our own experiences as PE graduate students in Canada. Two research questions guided our team of eight Canadian-based PE graduate students: What are our experiences as PE graduate students in Canada? How might we enhance the experience for ourselves and others like us? We hoped that if we worked together to better understand and thrive in our situations, we might develop a supportive peer community and be able to promote positive changes to PE graduate education.Design: Drawing upon the participatory research method of photovoice, we individually took photographs of our graduate experiences and then engaged in critical discussions about the meaning, conditions, and possibilities of those experiences. These discussions were analysed in an iterative process of independently and collaboratively coding, thematizing, and refining to produce themes of our experiences. Guided by the criteria of continuity and interaction in Dewey's theory of experience, we engaged in an interpretive analysis of the themes in terms of their educative and miseducative quality. Finally, we interpreted the quality of the larger experience of engaging in this participatory investigation.Findings: Thematic findings included our experience of: (a) work knowing no bounds, including the time-intensive struggle of work-life balance, dictates of funding and employment, and challenges of juggling multiple roles; (b) feeling fortunate for opportunities to grow as lifelong learners, to have support systems, and to engage with children and youths; and (c) feeling in limbo due to challenges to PE, our transient positions, and our mental health.Conclusion: We interpreted the majority of our thematic experiences to be educative and as pushing us to grow academically in constructive directions. Objective conditions such as graduate programmes, supervisors, peers, and family were primarily credited for this. We interpreted the minority of our thematic experiences as miseducative and as distorting our academic growth in unconstructive directions. This was almost exclusively attributed to internal conditions such as our failure to adapt ourselves to the environment. The larger experience of engaging in this participatory investigation was perceived as educative and due to the objective conditions of our newly formed community and Dewey's theory. Our communal reflection on our experiences via Dewey's criteria stimulated growth and the desire to continue in, rather than retreat from, PE and academia. We suggest that all PE graduate students would benefit from the opportunity to engage with a community of peers in sustained, theory-guided reflection on the quality of their graduate experiences.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».