MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043946838 · doi:10.1515/ijnes-2012-0045

In Real Time: Exploring Nursing Students’ Learning during an International Experience

2013· article· en· W2043946838 on OpenAlexaff
Barbara Afriyie Asenso, Sheryl Reimer‐Kirkham, Barbara Astle

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Competency in Health Care
Canadian institutionsTrinity Western UniversityWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransformative learningThematic analysisNurse educationPedagogyExperiential learningPsychologyNursingQualitative researchMedical educationMedicineSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nursing education has increasingly turned to international learning experiences to educate students who are globally minded and aware of social injustices in local and global communities. To date, research with international learning experiences has focused on the benefits for the students participating, after they have completed the international experience. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how nursing students learn during the international experience. The sample consisted of eight nursing students who enrolled in an international learning experience, and data were collected in "real time" in Zambia. The students were observed during learning activities and were interviewed three times. Three major themes emerged from the thematic analysis: expectations shaped students' learning, engagement facilitated learning, and critical reflection enhanced learning. Implications are discussed, related to disrupting media representations of Africa that shape students' expectations, and educational strategies for transformative learning and global citizenship.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.146
GPT teacher head0.498
Teacher spread0.352 · 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

Citations25
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Nursing Education ScholarshipSame topicCultural Competency in Health CareFrench-language works237,207