Heat transfer measurements of a re-entry capsule using fast response thermocouples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this qualitative, descriptive study, the process of achieving change in knowledge and attitudes through Master's education in nursing is examined. Twenty-two recent graduates from three Ontario universities participated in semi-structured, taped interviews. Participants recounted personal and professional changes they attributed to completing a Master's program in Nursing and their experience of the process of change. After responding to questions about differences they perceived in themselves, participants reviewed Mezirow's (1991; 1994) 11 stages of perspective transformation and discussed whether these phases resonated for them. Some felt that the stages described their experience accurately; others reported their experience of the process was not as dramatic as Mezirow's description implied. Several who had taken degree completion baccalaureate programs perceived their baccalaureate experience to be more congruent with Mezirow's transformation process than the change process in their Master's program. At the Master's level, the majority felt the changes were evolutionary, not revolutionary. Most reported that rather than undergoing a perspective transformation, they were building on values and attitudes from the baccalaureate level. This study contributes to understanding the processes of change experienced by students in graduate education in nursing.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".