Perspectives on transfer of learning by nursing students in primary healthcare facilities
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
Supportive work environments promote professional socialisation and integration of theory in practice. Qualitative data generated through four nominal groups were deductively analysed using the components of the systemic model of training transfer. This article reports on the perspectives of nurse clinicians, clinical facilitators, and students from the training institution regarding aspects of student characteristics, educational design, transfer climate and work environment that influence nursing students’ transfer of learning in primary healthcare (PHC) facilities. A perception exists that students lack the desire to use knowledge and skills mastered in the training programme in clinical practice. Although the educational design strives to promote transfer of classroom learning, students may not be motivated to transfer classroom learning. The learning climate hampers transfer of learning because the students’ perceptions are that they are unwelcome, not taken into consideration and not respected. The lack of essential equipment demotivates students. This study confirms the interrelatedness of the systemic transfer of training model and emphasises the importance of considering all elements that influence learning transfer when planning clinical placements of 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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