Les représentations socio-professionnelles des étudiants en ergothérapie à l'Université d'Ottawa : étude exploratoire des concepts-clés et de leur évolution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article presente les resultats d'une etude exploratoire dont le but etait d'identifier les concepts clefs inherents aux representations socioprofessionnelles des etudiants en ergotherapie a l'Universite d'Ottawa. Cette recherche qualitative a utilise la methode d'association libre de mots parmi le corps etudiant. Les etudiants devaient repondre a la question suivante: donner dix mots qui vous viennent a l'esprit quand vous pensez au role de la profession d'ergotherapeute. Chaque classe a ete rencontree deux fois, au debut et a la fin de l'annee academique. Les donnees ont ete mises en categories d'apres leur similitude puis analysees globalement a partir d'un seul indicateur, la frequence. Plus de douze concepts-cles appris en classe ont ete identifies comme referents du processus de construction de l'identite professionnelle. Parmi ces derniers les cinq plus significatifs sont: centre sur le client, l'occupation, la readaptation, l'activite significative puis la spiritualite. L'evolution des concepts presents au cours des quatre annees du programme suggere un apprentissage de concepts nouveaux qui changent et se redefinissent au cours de la formation. Cette etude peut aider les educateurs et les cliniciens a identifier les concepts importants qui aident les etudiants a developper leur identite professionnelle.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".