Preceptorship in the Ghanaian context: “Coaching for a winning team”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Preceptorship is an approach to teaching and learning in the clinical setting. It is purported to facilitate the connection between nursing education and clinical practice, foster an ethos for critical thinking, and contribute to professional development. As part of nursing education in Ghana, preceptors collaborate with educational institutions to enhance the supervision of students in the clinical settings. However, working relations between the hospitals and the health training institutions in many regions in Ghana are challenging, with hospitals only passively involved in the education of students. Purpose: The purpose of the current study was to explore the perceptions of Ghanaian nursing students, preceptors and nurse educators regarding their preceptorship experience. Methods: A focused ethnographic approach guided the study. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 26 nurse educators, nursing students, and preceptors from a regional hospital and a diploma level nursing educational institution in a small city in Ghana. Eight nurse educators and nine nursing students participated from the educational institution and nine preceptors participated from the hospital. Results: Findings from this study indicated that: a) preceptorship in Ghana was not well established and was in the developmental stage; and b) clinical teaching and learning were influenced by the stakeholders involved in nursing education in Ghana. Conclusions: Although preceptors were used in Ghana, the clinical teaching approach did not reflect the concept of preceptorship. Stakeholders in nursing education from both within and outside the clinical settings influenced the clinical teaching environment. Findings from the study present baseline data for stakeholders in nursing education to promote effective preceptorship programs in Ghana.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".