Occupational Therapy Students' and Graduates' Satisfaction with Professional Education and Preparedness for Practice
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Occupational therapy students' and graduates'perceptions of their professional education have received limited attention. PURPOSE: This paper presents the perspectives of occupational therapy students and graduates regarding satisfaction with their professional education and preparedness for practice. METHODS: Students and graduates provided feedback as part of an occupational therapy educational program evaluation at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. Data were collected through surveys, focus groups, and telephone interviews. RESULTS: Both students and recent graduates reported that they felt they lacked technical, intervention skills. Longer-term graduates were comfortable with their knowledge and skills, especially their ability to provide individualized intervention. Overall, students and graduates were satisfied with their education; however, it appeared to take between six months and two years of clinical practice for therapists to feel clinically competent. IMPLICATIONS: The results of this evaluation may have important implications for educational programs, students, graduates, fieldwork supervisors, and employers.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it