Learning in International Practice Placement Education: A Grounded Theory Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: There is a growing trend towards international practice placement education in occupational therapy, yet little research documents the learning that individuals who participate in such experiences report. The purpose of this study was to examine the process of learning that arises through engagement with occupational therapy practice placement education in an international context. Method: A constructivist grounded theory methodology was employed. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with eight individuals who had completed an international practice placement during their tenure as an occupational therapy student. Findings: The core category of learning identified by participants was personal and professional development. The subcategories included thinking outside the box, adaptability/flexibility, cultural sensitivity, recognition of the value of interpersonal relationships, and gaining confidence through moving beyond one's comfort zone and through increasing autonomy. The comments from participants also invoke critical reflection on the appropriateness of the transfer of North American occupational therapy practice into resource-poor countries. Conclusion: This research documents the process of learning described by a group of individuals who participated in international practice placement education as part of their occupational therapy education. The research contributes to knowledge about international practice placement education in occupational therapy.
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 | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".