MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2256009279

Nurse Educators' Lived Experiences of Student-Centered Teaching in Practice Settings: A Proposed Interpretive Phenomenology

2015· article· en· W2256009279 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Olabisi Oyelana

Bibliographic record

VenueSTTI Leadership Connection · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumNurse educationNursingHealth carePsychologyMedical educationMedicinePedagogySociology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Arundell, F., & Cioffi, J. (2005). Using a simulation strategy: An educator's experience. Nurse Education in Practice, 5, 296 301. Avdal, E. U. (2012). The effect of self-directed learning abilities of student nurses on success in Turkey. Nurse Education Today, 33(8), 838-41. Blumberg, P. (2008) Developing Learner-centered teaching: A practical guide for faculty. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Candela, L., Dalley, K., & Benzel-Lindley, J. (2006). A case for learner-centered curricula Journal of Nursing Education, 45(2), 59–66. Colley, S. L. (2012). Implementing a change to a learner-centered philosophy in a school of nursing: Faculty perceptions. Nursing Education Perspectives, 33(4), 229-233. Higgs, J., & McAllister, L. (2005). The lived experiences of clinical educators with implications for their preparation, support and professional development. Learning in Health & Social Care, 4(3), 156171. Institute of Medicine (2010). The future of nursing: leading change, advancing health. Retrieved December 2013 from http://iom.edu/~/media/Files/Report%20Files/2010/The-Future-ofNursing/Future Munhall, P. (2012). Nursing research. A qualitative perspective (5th ed). Mississauga: Jones & Bartlett Learning. National League for Nursing (2008). Position statement: Preparing the next generation of nurses to practice in a technology-rich environment: An informatics agenda. Tiwari, A., Lai, P., So, M., & Yuen, K. (2006). A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students' critical thinking. Medical Education, 40(6), 547-554. Tseng, H., Chou, F., Wang, H., Ko, H., Jian, S. & Weng, W. (2011). The effectiveness of problem-based learning and concept mapping among Taiwanese registered nursing students. Nurse Education Today, 31(8), e41-e46. Van Manen, M. (2014). Phenomenology of Practice. Meaning-Giving Methods in Phenomenological Research and Writing. Walnut Creek, California, USA: Left Coast Press Inc. Weimer, M. (2013). Learner centered teaching. Five key changes to practice (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Zavertnik, J. E., Huff, T. A., & Munro, C. L. (2010). Innovative approach to teaching communication skills to nursing students. Journal of Nursing Education, 49(2), 65-71. (Weimer, 2013) Student Function of content

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.020
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.389
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSTTI Leadership ConnectionSame topicProblem and Project Based LearningFrench-language works237,207