Reflective practice and the role of transformational learning in healthcare
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Among possible adult learning theories, transformative learning emerged in the 1990’s with the aim to provide learners an educational experience consistent with the purpose of changing perspectives. Transformational learning theory provides the opportunity to learn, confront, engage and reflect on the possibility of learning through changes in perspective and to explore new meanings, roles, relationships and actions contained within it.Perspective transformation is, therefore, not only intended to create ownership of new knowledge, but its re-integration into new or re-configured ways of everyday living. The readiness to apply new knowledge is triggered by confronting an event, or mode of thought, that moves individuals from experiencing knowledge as a series of facts disconnected from their meaning and context into a relevant context, or one that has a different significance for the learner. New understanding requires that learners assess the meanings behind words, the coherence, truth and appropriateness of what is being communicated as well as the truthfulness, credibility and authenticity of the presenter. Unlike focusing only on instrumental learning in which logical problem solving and inquiry dominate, transformative learning entails the use of metaphor, analogies and reflective dialogue so that learners revise their interpretations of knowledge. In these ways transformative learning might help healthcare providers to change their frame of reference and perceptions to accommodate new and different ways of learning and engaging within a multidisciplinary clinical team.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".