The Lived Experiences and Challenges Faced by Male Nursing Students: A Canadian Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Despite the impending shortage of nurses in Canada and globally, the recruitment and retention of males to the profession has been a challenge in the new millennium due to a variety of social barriers and negative stereotypes propagated by the mass and social media, and in part by schools of nursing themselves. Purpose: To examine the lived experiences of male nursing students in Ontario, Canada and their perceptions of reported educational and practice barriers, and social stereotypes. Design: A phenomenological approach was employed to examine the lived experiences of 37 male nursing students. Methods: Purposive and snowball sampling techniques were employed to recruit male students from a mid-sized university school of nursing. In depth, face-to-face interviews were conducted and guided by semi-structured open-end questions. Interviews were transcribed verbatim, coded and thematically categorized to make sense of the essential meanings. Results: Barriers to recruitment and retention of males in schools of nursing included the feminization of nursing curriculums; reverse discrimination by female nursing students, faculty and nursing clinical staff; a lack of positive male role models in academia, and negative social stereotypes including that men in nursing are effeminate, gay or are labeled as inappropriate caregivers Conclusion: The active recruitment and retention of males into schools of nursing may help to address, in part, the predicted global shortages facing the profession, while also helping to promote gender diversity and social equity in this critical health care profession.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".