MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015330733 · doi:10.2202/1548-923x.2094

A Journey of Critical Consciousness: An Educational Strategy for Health Care Leaders

2010· article· en· W2015330733 on OpenAlexaff
Beverley Getzlaf, Margaret S. Osborne

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicService-Learning and Community Engagement
Canadian institutionsAthabasca University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCritical consciousnessConsciousnessSociologyCritical reflectionEquity (law)Health careCritical theoryValue (mathematics)Public relationsPerspective (graphical)Social justicePsychologyPedagogySocial sciencePolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Healthcare leaders who develop a critical perspective of the relationship between culture and health; value respect for differences, inclusiveness, equity, and social justice; and use their power to enact these values in their spheres of influence, both professionally and personally, are better able to improve care for a diversity of clients. Graduate students can be assisted to develop such a critical perspective through a course designed as a journey of critical consciousness. We describe this journey that takes students through phases of awareness, reflection, and action in which they come to understand the concepts of critical theory and discourse analysis and begin to use these to create changes in their work settings in the direction of equity and social justice. We suggest broader implications for programs and invite readers to begin their own journeys of critical consciousness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.031
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0310.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0250.030
Scholarly communication0.0270.029
Open science0.0040.034
Research integrity0.0120.025
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.186
GPT teacher head0.548
Teacher spread0.363 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Nursing Education ScholarshipSame topicService-Learning and Community EngagementFrench-language works237,207