The character of nursing students’ critical reflection at the end of their education
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background : In nursing education, theoretical and practical knowledge are intertwined and integrated in the prospective nurses’ lifeworld. To enable this, and to develop a critical reflective approach, students should adopt a critical attitude. This study aims to gain a deeper understanding of the character of prospective nurses’ critical reflection. Methods : This is a descriptive qualitative study. Data were gathered using written narratives, individual and focus group interviews. Qualitative content analysis was employed. Results : Three themes were identified: being open to changes, distancing oneself, and challenging one’s understanding. In the first theme, students’ critical reflection was expressed through an openness to changes of self-perception and openness to professional development during the education. In the second theme, critical reflection was identified as variations on distance-taking. Inserting distance from a direct experience makes the experience easier to process, understand and relate to the learner’s concept of nursing. In the third theme, courage to question what was taken for granted is identified as a necessity to challenging self-understanding and willingness to engage in uncertainty. Conclusions : It would appear that the academic part of training, with the possibility of reflection in small groups, provides students with conceptual tools for reflective learning as well as giving them the opportunity to relate critically to professional practice and to the professional nurse role.
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 | 0.011 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".