MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2810896866 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v8n12p1

Implementing the process oriented guided-inquiry learning (POGIL) pedagogy of group scenario exercises in fundamentals and Medical Surgical II nursing courses

2018· article· en· W2810896866 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicProblem and Project Based Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedical educationNursingPsychologySignificant differenceMedicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and objective: Research with Process Oriented Guided Inquiry Learning (POGIL), an interactive learning pedagogy, has shown improvement in grades and student satisfaction in science and nursing courses. POGIL is an active teaching strategy which utilizes small groups of students to analyze case studies. The student teams participate in groups of four to problem solve topics based on the material taught. POGIL can be additional to lecture and didactic teaching methods to help with the synthesis and analysis of content taught. The object of this study was to compare final course and national standardized exam grades between POGIL and comparison groups in both Fundamentals and Medical-Surgical II nursing courses.Methods: A quantitative, comparative design was used.Results: The Fundamentals POGIL group had significantly higher scores on a standardized national exam (p = .001) than a comparison group; no significant difference in final course grades was found. The Medical-Surgical Nursing II POGIL and comparison groups had no significant differences in standardized national exam or final course grades. Students in POGIL groups were given a satisfaction survey and indicated the experience was helpful to improving grades and understanding course content.Conclusions: In classes that used POGIL, there were higher scores on a standardized national exam scores but not final course grades for students in the Fundamentals course. Using POGIL in Medical Surgical Nursing II courses revealed no difference in final course grades or on national standardized exam scores. The use of POGIL for beginning nursing students may be more helpful as these students are in the process of determining which learning strategies are most helpful as they progress through the nursing curriculum. Introducing a new pedagogy to students in their last semester of the nursing program was not as helpful possibly because students have established successful strategies for learning prior to this last semester. Future research to further explore the impact of POGIL on grades and standardized tests scores in other nursing curriculum courses such as mental health or care of the emerging family is recommended. Exploring POGIL and the impact on the development of clinical thinking and clinical practice is another line of inquiry that could be explored.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.095
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.427 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it