Implementation of Preceptorship in Ghana: “Marriage between school and clinical settings”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research study was designed to explore roles of nursing students, preceptors and nurse educators in the implementation of preceptorship in the Ghanaian context. Preceptorship provides the opportunity for preceptors to offer practical experience to nursing students in the clinical setting. In order to provide effective clinical teaching and learning in Ghana, preceptorship was introduced in nursing education and preceptors were prepared primarily to provide clinical teaching at the clinical settings in Ghana. Ghanaian nurse educators therefore draw on preceptors to supervise students in the clinical practice setting. In Ghana, however, preceptorship is faced with challenges such as ineffective lines of communication between the nursing educational institution and the clinical settings. To date, little research has been conducted to examine preceptorship in Ghana. Focused ethnography was used to guide the current study. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 26 participants. Eight nurse educators, nine nursing students, and nine preceptors from a regional hospital and a diploma level nursing educational institution in a small city in Ghana participated in the study. The findings from this study revealed that the preceptors’ role involved predominantly teaching and the evaluation of student performance. The nurse educators supervised both students and preceptors in the clinical setting. The major roles of students included asking questions and expressing an interest to learn. In Ghana, preceptors, nursing students and nurse educators played important roles in the implementation of preceptorship. Inadequate preceptor support, lack of equipment and discrepancies during the evaluation process however, were major challenges to effective clinical teaching and learning. It is worth noting that that the use of preceptorship in this resource deprived setting is a major accomplishment.
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 | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".