Bibliographic record
Abstract
“What brings you here today?” is a familiar question in a health clinic in Canada, but it may not be one that comes immediately to the mind of an internationally educated health professional. The way health professionals communicate with patients in their cultures can sound overly direct in Canadian clinics. “Why are you here?” would be typically asked to patients in settings such as the Ukraine and Egypt. A stepping stone that supports the understanding of linguistic appropriacy and the Canadian health care context is offered at the Languages Institute of Mount Royal University, Calgary. The Communication Skills for Health Professionals (CSHP) project teaches language and communication skills through a performance based approach. Our scholarship of teaching and learning inquiry explored how students in this project value filmed role play simulations as a learning tool for developing communication skills and knowledge. This article describes the instructional context of our study, its methodology, four key findings and implications for the role of the English language instructor, for student learning and for program implementation. The impact of filmed role play simulation on learning, acculturation into the Canadian health care context, professional identity formation, and the integration of communication skills within various contexts are discussed.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".