Understanding the Professional Socialization of Canadian Physical Therapy Students: A Qualitative Investigation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To understand the professional socialization of physical therapy (PT) students. METHOD: Forty-two students enrolled in our newly developed master's degree programme wrote three-page reflective journals on a critical learning incident after each of three selected clinical experiences. The journals were coded and analyzed, and major themes were identified and described. A separate cohort of 44 students participated in focus groups after the same three clinical experiences to check the trustworthiness of the results. RESULTS: Following the first placement, the main themes coded were emotions, self-confidence, professionalism in the real world, communication, and learning by doing. After the intermediate placement, major themes were idealism versus realism, depth of communication with clients, and breadth of communication with family members and colleagues. Aspects of clinical learning were variable, and self-confidence remained an issue. After the final placement, most students were deeply engaged with their clients and self-confidence had developed to the point of self-efficacy. Tensions increased between the concept of ideal practice and the pragmatics of actual practice, and the concept of self as protégé (rather than as object of the supervisor's evaluation) emerged. The themes were subsequently assembled in a booklet with representative quotations. CONCLUSION: These results contribute to foundational knowledge required by PT educators, including clinical instructors, by explicitly describing the professional socialization of PT students.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".