Evolution of Canadian Nursing Curricula: A Critical Retrospective Analysis of Power and Caring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of Canadian nursing curricula has mutually influenced and reflected nursing's historical course: nursing practice and education are inextricably linked. This paper is a critical retrospective analysis of the evolution of nursing curricula in Canada from the 20th century to the present. Falk Rafael's (1996) dialectic exploration of power and caring in nursing guides the analysis. An ordered, assimilated, and empowered curriculum development framework results. Foucault's (1980) work in the sociology of knowledge and Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, and Tarule's (1986) epistemological conceptualization of women's knowledge development are incorporated. The intricacies of the relationship between nursing curriculum development and Canadian history, the navigation of societal paradoxes that mutually drive and inform education and practice, and the instrumental need for nursing education research are considered. A fourth and new dialectic layer is suggested that places nursing on the inter-professional team of architects of a co-constructed emancipatory curriculum.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".