International Service Learning: An Overview
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
International Service Learning: An Overview\nKaitlynn McKirgan, SPT; Daniel Murty, SPT; Dr. Holly Roberts, PT, DPT, GCS, NCS\nAffiliation: 1. The School of Physical Therapy, University of Puget Sound\nAbstract \nPurpose\nA wide range of healthcare disciplines including nursing, public health, occupational therapy, and physical therapy (PT) now recognize global health participation and education as a necessary component of healthcare education. Increasingly, students applying to and choosing which PT program to attend must now consider the design, purpose, benefits, and potential drawbacks of such a program in their education. The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of International Service Learning (ISL) structure, its proposed benefits and concerns, and to briefly compare how the University of Puget Sound’s (UPS) pilot ISL program compared to recommendations found within the literature in order to define possible areas of improvement.\nMethods\nLiterature search was performed using PubMed, Google Scholar, ProQuest, Academic Search Premiere, and Cochrane. Search terms used were: Global health, international service learning, physical therapy, experiential learning. Programs described in the literature were compared to the course structure outlined in the UPS Global Health Perspectives Course PT677 Syllabus. The course instructor was interviewed to gain any knowledge not available within the syllabus regarding program structure.\nResults\nPechak and Thompson recommend 7 components to create a program with positive outcomes: 1. A partner that understands the role of PT; 2. Community identified needs; 3. Explicit service and learning objectives; 4. Reflection; 5. Preparations; 6. Risk Management; 7. Service learning outcome measure. Benefits to students participating in ISL programs include: increased confidence, improved communication skills, self- empowerment, independence, increased student self-assessment scores, increased experiential learning opportunities and increased understanding and confidence in professional roles when ISL project includes cooperation with other professions. Ethical concerns are inherent and individual programs must pay close attention to the impact they have on the communities they seek to serve. Common ethical dilemmas that should be considered include the power dynamic between the community and those rendering services, the quality of care being provided, sustainability at the community and individual levels, and community need.\nConclusion\nThe UPS pilot ISL program met 6/7 components for optimal ISL outlined by Pechak and Thompson: Use of an outcome measure to evaluate the service learning experience should be applied in future programs. Other recommended improvements to the program include incorporating instruction to local care providers to increase service community self-efficacy. Finally, increased medical Spanish education in the months leading up to the ISL program is advised.\nWorks cited Pechak CM, Thompson M. A Conceptual Model of Optimal International Service-Learning and Its Application to Global Health Initiatives in Rehabilitation. Physical Therapy. 2009;89(11):1192-1204. Smith SN, Crocker AF. Experiential learning in physical therapy education. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2017;8:427-433. doi:10.2147/AMEP.S140373. Reisch RA. International Service Learning Programs: Ethical Issues and Recommendations. Developing World Bioethics. 2011;11(2):93-98. doi:10.1111/j.1471-8847.2011.00299.x. Pechak C, Gonzalez E, Summers C, Capshaw S. Interprofessional Education: A Pilot Study of Rehabilitation Sciences Students Participating in Interdisciplinary International Service-Learning. Journal of Allied Health; Washington. 2013;42(3):e61-6. Fries KS, Bowers DM, Gross M, Frost L. Service learning in Guatemala: using qualitative content analysis to explore an interdisciplinary learning experience among students in health care professional programs. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2013;6:45-52. doi:10.2147/JMDH.S35867.
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 | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,014 | 0,017 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,006 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,002 |
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 ».