Perspective Transformation in RN-to-BSN Distance Education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines perspective transformation (or professional resocialization) in RN-to-BSN students obtaining their degree by distance education. A socialization scale was used to compare newly admitted and graduating RN-to-BSN students who had taken their courses onsite, by distance education, or a mixture of the two methods. The scores of entering and graduating RN-to-BSN students also were compared to those of graduates from the generic program to identify if program and experience are factors in scores achieved. Results indicate that all BSN graduates had significantly higher scores than the diploma-prepared nurses entering the RN-to-BSN program. RN-to-BSN graduates who had used distance education had the highest scores, followed by the onsite RN-to-BSN students. Students who had taken a mixture of distance and onsite courses had scores similar to those of generic program graduates. Experience and full-time employment status were significantly associated with higher scores among graduating RN-to-BSN students. Implications for nurse educators working with RN-to-BSN students who use distance education are discussed.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".