Collaborative Baccalaureate Programs: Preliminary Data on Canadian Undergraduate Nursing Students' Satisfaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ten years ago, nursing education in Ontario, Canada, changed when entry to practice and licensure became a bachelor's of science in nursing (BScN) for RNs. This article presents the initial results of an ongoing 5-year longitudinal study on undergraduate students' satisfaction within a collaborative BScN program and predictors of satisfaction with their nursing education. METHOD: BScN nursing students from one group of collaborative sites participated in a survey pertaining to satisfaction with their program. Data were collected via paper and pen or online. RESULTS: Initial data found that students were satisfied or strongly satisfied with their collaborative nursing education (M ± SD = 183.9 ± 32.7). However, any type of conflict had a significant negative relationship with satisfaction in all domains. No other significant predictors of satisfaction were uncovered. CONCLUSION: Overall, students were very satisfied with a collaborative model of baccalaureate nursing education. Conflict of any type decreases satisfaction within all domains of nursing education. [J Nurs Educ. 2017;56(7):420-424.].
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".