Changes in the preceptor role: re‐visiting preceptors’ perceptions of benefits, rewards, support and commitment to the role
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: This is a report of a study to explore the relationships between preceptors' perceptions of benefits, rewards, support and commitment to the preceptor role. BACKGROUND: The preceptorship model is widely used in undergraduate and postgraduate nursing education. Preceptor relationships provide students with reality based and skills-oriented learning experiences and are useful for familiarizing newly hired nurses with clinical settings, hospital policies, procedures and routines. METHOD: Two sub-groups of 82 preceptors were recruited: (A) those in an ongoing preceptorship with undergraduate students and (B) those working with newly hired nurses. Four questionnaires were used: the Preceptor's Perceptions of Benefits and Rewards Scale, the Preceptor's Perceptions of Support Scale, the Commitment to the Preceptor Role Scale and a demographic information sheet. The data were collected in November 2004 and April-May 2005. FINDINGS: The findings parallel those reported in the earlier studies, but also reveal interesting differences between the two sub-groups. A positive correlation was found between preceptors working with nursing students and perceptions of support. In this sub-group, perceptions of support increased with years of nursing experience, time since graduation, and age. The preceptors had higher perceptions of the benefits and rewards than reported in earlier studies, but perceptions about support were lower in comparison with findings from an earlier Canadian study. Commitment to the role remained high. CONCLUSION: The preceptor role is undergoing changes associated with many factors, including workplace, type of nursing, and preceptees' varying learning needs. Awareness of the importance of this role and ongoing support are critical to its future success.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 it