MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329415526 · doi:10.1515/ijnes-2013-0031

Educating Nurses for the Twenty-First Century Abilities-Based Outcomes and Assessing Student Learning in the Context of Democratic Professionalism

2013· review· en· W2329415526 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Nursing Education Scholarship · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education Learning Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumContext (archaeology)Nurse educationDemocracyWork (physics)PsychologyPedagogyMedical educationMedicinePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes recent work in implementing a framework of abilities-based learning outcomes and related practices for assessing student learning in a Canadian Baccalaureate nursing degree program. The authors describe steps in implementing an abilities-based paradigm for nursing education, and subsequently developing an assessment framework based on abilities-based learning outcomes. The discussion reviews theoretical and policy-level influences involved in this initiative. The curriculum work is also discussed in terms of current trends in higher education emphasizing the assessment of student learning. The discussion concludes by linking these efforts to recent calls for a paradigm shift in the preparation of professionals, noting how the assessment of student learning can contribute to democratic professional formation in nursing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.904
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.178
GPT teacher head0.559
Teacher spread0.381 · 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