Pharmacy students' perceived willingness and ability to negotiate for paid co-operative education positions
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Evidence of a gender wage gap has been identified across many professions, with some evidence in pharmacy. Negotiation is one potential strategy to address this gap and it is underutilized, especially among women. No studies to date have examined pharmacy student perceptions of negotiation when applying for co-operative education positions - a potential sign of willingness to negotiate for entry-level positions upon graduation. Objectives: To examine pharmacy students' comfort with and ability to engage employers in negotiation over wage and other work-related considerations for mandatory and paid co-operative education work terms at the University of Waterloo (Waterloo, Ontario, Canada). Methods: Two focus groups, one for female and one for male students, were performed with students who had completed at least one co-operative education placement. Focus groups aimed to elucidate students perceived ability to negotiate with potential employers, to identify strategies that educators can employ to better support students through the hiring and negotiation process, and to elicit student perceptions on the gender wage gap in pharmacy. Focus groups were audio recorded and transcribed verbatim, and data were coded inductively by two independent reviewers, employing thematic analysis. Results: Three major and two minor themes were identified: Preservation of the relationship; Power differential and perceived ability to negotiate; Institutional support and training; Negative experience with negotiation and wage gaps; and the presence of a gendered approach to negotiation. Pharmacy students rarely engage in negotiation during co-operative hiring processes at the University of Waterloo, with some female students expressing hesitation to negotiate due to concerns about being perceived as "bossy". Students of both genders felt poorly equipped to engage in negotiation with a potential employer, and lacked confidence in initiating such a conversation. Conclusions: Students identified a number of factors which influence their ability and desire to negotiate wages during co-op placement, including the requirements and logistics of placements, the perceived power imbalance between students and potential employers, and a concern that any wage negotiation may overshadow the value placed by students on the opportunities to provide patient care. Educators can play a role in equipping students, especially female students, with tools to enter into conversations on wages with potential employers.
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 | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».