Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This paper expands the understanding of student-teacher connection and offers direction for educators in supporting connection as a place of possibility. BACKGROUND: The evolution of a humanistic paradigm in nursing education is evident in research exploring student-teacher relationships. Connection is described within humanistic student-teacher relationships, reported as part of experiences of students, educators and clinicians within emancipatory curricula, and emerged as a central metaphor in a metasynthesis of caring in nursing education. Additionally, student-teacher connection in clinical nursing education has been reported as creating positive outcomes for students' learning experiences and professional socialization. DISCUSSION: In this paper, student-teacher connection is envisioned as having a value beyond these tangible outcomes - a value that arises from the essence of connection itself. The qualities inherent in the essence of connection - knowing, trust, respect and mutuality - create a transformative space in which students are affirmed, gain insight into their potential, and grow toward fulfilling personal and professional capacities: student-teacher connection emerges as a place of possibility. The possibilities that exist for students and teachers in a connected relationship are exemplified as connection is proposed as a cornerstone in supporting students at risk of failing a clinical nursing course. CONCLUSION: Acknowledging student-teacher connection as a place of possibility highlights the importance of student-teacher relationship to students' learning and raises implications for preparation and evaluation of educators, and educational practice within the international nursing arena. Of note is the need for the preparation of educators to include a focus of developing relational competence as well as evaluation processes that consider the teacher-in-relationship. Regardless of the educational setting, educators are challenged to consider their beliefs and actions and the influence these exert on relationships with students. Further research exploring specific possibilities within connection is required.
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 | 0.010 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".