The philosophy of chiropractic: an action research model of curriculum review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La philosophie de la chiropratique a toujours ete consideree comme un element indispensable du programme des colleges de chiropratique. La presente etude decrit un processus de revision dans lequel les etudiants et les etudiantes ainsi que les membres du corps professoral etaient invites a faire connaitre leur opinion sur differents aspects du programme, concernant la philosophie au Canadian Memorial Chiropractic College. Environ la moitie des etudiants (n = 292) et soixante p. cent des professeurs a temps plein ou a temps partiel (n = 66) ont repondu au questionnaire. Les etudiants ont indique que la philosophie etait un element tres important de leur formation en chiropratique et qu'ils avaient l'impression que le programme actuel ne repondait pas a leurs besoins a cet egard. Qui plus est, a leur avis, la plupart des membres du corps professoral ne consideraient pas la philosophie a sa juste valeur. De leur cote, les professeurs voyaient la philosophie d'un bon oeil et consideraient qu'elle devait faire partie integrante de la formation des etudiants, ce qui contrastait nettement avec les perceptions de ces derniers. L'information ainsi recueillie a servi de catalyseur et a donne lieu a une serie de groupes de consultation sur la philosophie, constitues d 'etudiants et de professeurs. Les discussions qui en ont decoule ont permis de clarifier certains points du programme de philosophie et ont entraine des changements, notamment en ce qui concerne le contenu, le format et les methodes d'evaluation, ainsi qu'au sein du corps professoral.
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 | 0.078 | 0.101 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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".