MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109776232 · doi:10.3928/01484834-20090716-08

Nursing Pedagogy and the Intergenerational Discourse

2009· article· en· W2109776232 on OpenAlexaff
Vicki Earle, Florence Myrick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAdult and Continuing Education Topics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthosDiversity (politics)PedagogyContext (archaeology)Nurse educatorNurse educationSociologyNursingPsychologyMedicinePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines the effects of intergenerational diversity on pedagogical practice in nursing education and highlights the need for nurse educators to engage in a critical discourse regarding the adequacy of current pedagogy in fostering an ethos that can optimize the teaching-learning process and promote ongoing learning for the future. It is evident that further research is needed to promote awareness and understanding of the expectations of today's students and to reform nursing pedagogy to accommodate the current generation of learners in colleges and universities. In this article, the context of intergenerational diversity is explored, the importance of evidenced-based practice is reinforced, and current nursing pedagogy is examined, with the intention to stimulate a philosophical discourse among nurse educators regarding fundamental values and beliefs about pedagogical practice.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.043
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0010.011
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.455
Teacher spread0.429 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations34
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing EducationSame topicAdult and Continuing Education TopicsFrench-language works237,207