Opportunities and Challenges for Practical Training in Public Health: Insights from Practicum Coordinators in Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dietetic educators and practicum coordinators (PC) play critical roles in preparing students for practice. Dietitians have made significant progress in the development of educational curricula, competencies, and other resources to support knowledge and skill attainment in public health. There are identified gaps in the literature concerning practical training in sustainable food systems and public health, creating barriers in knowledge exchange and improvements in practicum programs in Canada. This paper discusses the potential opportunities and challenges associated with the number of placements for practical training in public health based on interviews with PCs in Ontario. The findings are limited to the perspectives of 7 PCs with experience in practical training and are a starting point for ongoing evaluation. Identified opportunities within traditional and "emerging settings" for practical training in public health included: the uniqueness of the experience, the potential for students to learn outside their comfort zones, and greater possibilities for dietitians in new roles and settings. Challenges included the need for significant PC engagement with nondietetic preceptors and a narrow view of dietetic practice among some dietitians. Interprofessional teams, emerging settings, and flexible learning approaches may create and support practical training opportunities in food systems and public health going forward.
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 | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".