Interprofessional Education (IPE) Opportunities and Attitudes Among Counselling Psychology Students in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interprofessional education (IPE) is an international initiative set out to teach healthcare students how to effectively work together after graduation. The success of IPE largely depends on students’ attitudes towards interprofessional learning and perceptions of healthcare professions, which are assessed before entering IPE. Little is known about the attitudes and perceptions of students in mental and social health sciences. This study aimed to examine the attitudes and perceptions of counselling psychology students and contribute to the growing body of literature on mental health students’ attitudes towards IPE. Graduate level counselling psychology students (N = 77) from three Canadian universities completed an online questionnaire that included the Readiness for Interprofessional Learning Scale (RIPLS; McFadyen et al., 2005; Parsell & Bligh, 1999) and the Student Stereotype Rating Questionnaire (SSRQ; Barnes et al., 2000; Hean et al., 2006a). Counselling psychology students’ overall RIPLS scores (M = 82.97, SD = 7.57) indicates a high readiness to learn. Counselling psychology students’ overall SSRQ scores assigned to their own profession (M = 37.85, SD = 4.20) and other professionals, including medical doctors (M = 35.31, SD = 4.04), nurses (M = 36.60, SD = 4.36), social workers (M = 33.68, SD = 5.35), and occupational therapists (M = 35.70, SD = 4.56), suggest that students hold positive stereotypes across these different professions. Counselling psychology students’ RIPLS and SSRQ scores were comparable to, if not greater than, the RIPLS and SSRQ scores reported in previous studies involving other healthcare students. Findings from this study advocate for the inclusion of counselling psychology students in IPE programs in Canadian universities. Future implications and recommendations for healthcare education among counselling psychology students are presented.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".