International Practicum: Not just another overseas jaunt--Supporting learning objectives and the development of graduate attributes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The nursing profession faces ongoing challenges related to the globalization of nursing education, research, and practice. An online review of undergraduate nursing course offerings and opportunities demonstrates that universities strive to broaden their nursing experience as part of the education experience. Universities and schools of nursing work hard to offer international practicum to students and there are financial implications and risks associated with overseas travel. A literature search using Library One which includes CINAHL Plus, OVID, ProQuest Nursing & Allied Health Source, and PubMed demonstrated limited description in the literature on whether or not international nursing practicum placements achieve the learning objectives designated in an undergraduate nursing unit, as well as whether or not these practicums support the development of graduate attributes for nusing students. This discussion paper will be one of the first to fill this identified gap in the literature as a reflection on four overseas placements for undergraduate nursing students and how the placements met the stated learning objectives and desired graduate attributes. The Nurse Academics involved in the international practicums critically reflected on the activities of the students and determine the placements support the intent of the units and they help student nurses develop a cross-cultural and international outlook which underwrites provision of patient- and family-centred care for a multicultural population such as that of Australia.
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 | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".