L’implantation du e-portfolio dans un programme par compétence en science infirmière : le cheminement de 10 ans.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le e-portfolio s’avère un outil pédagogique de plus en plus utilisé dans le programme baccalauréat en science infirmière, car il permet non seulement la croissance et le développement de l’apprenante et de l’apprenant, mais informe aussi l’employeur, les paires et les organisations professionnelles de l’acquisition des habiletés et des connaissances inhérentes à la profession (Chertoff, 2015; Green, Wyllie, & Jackson, 2014). L’École des sciences infirmières de l’Université de Moncton explore l’utilisation du e-portfolio depuis dix ans. L’expérience débute en 2007 par la mise en place d’une étude qualitative longitudinale qui a suivi le parcours de sept étudiantes afin d’explorer comment l’identité professionnelle se développe lors de la création et du maintien d’un portfolio électronique à partir du logiciel Iwebportfolio. Bien que les écoles de science infirmière reconnaissent l’importance de promouvoir la pensée savante et l’écriture académique chez la population étudiante, les outils facilitant l’atteinte de ces compétences se font rares ou sont difficilement applicables (Garrett, MacPhee, & Jackson, 2013; Stefani, Mason, & Pegler, 2007). Toutefois, le portfolio est un outil prometteur qui favorise le développement de l’identité professionnelle et permet de l’articuler (Desjardins, 2002). Grâce aux entrevues annuelles et à l’examen de la qualité de la réflexion critique dans les artéfacts placés dans le e-portfolio, une évolution dans l’appropriation des rôles inhérents à la profession infirmière a été notée chez les participants. En fait, les résultats de cette expérience ont appuyé l’inclusion du e-portfolio, via la plateforme eduportfolio, dans le nouveau programme par compétences en science infirmière en 2010. D’ailleurs, la première cohorte étudiante à maintenir un e-portfolio tout au long de ses études fut diplômée en mai 2017 et un sondage a été complété par 43 de ses membres. Cet article décrit notre parcours en lien avec l’utilisation du e-portfolio, en incluant les leçons apprises à la suite des trois études réalisées ainsi que les expériences vécues en salle de classe (entrevues lors d’une étude qualitative longitudinale, groupes de discussion et sondage). The e-portfolio is an increasingly popular educational tool in the Bachelor of Science in Nursing program as it not only allows for the growth and development of the learner, but also informs the employees, peers, and professional organizations of the acquisition of the skills and knowledge inherent to this profession (Chertoff 2015; Green, Wyllie, & Jackson 2014). The University of Moncton’s School of Nursing has been exploring the use of the e-portfolio for ten years. The experience started in 2007 with the implementation of a longitudinal qualitative study that followed the educational career of seven students to explore how the professional identity is developed during the creation and maintenance of an electronic portfolio using Iwebportfolio. Although nursing schools recognize the importance of promoting scholarly thinking and academic writing among students, tools facilitating the attainment of these skills are rare and hardly applicable (Garrett, MacPhee, & Jackson 2013; Stefani, Mason, & Pegler 2007); however, the portfolio is a promising tool that fosters the development of the professional identity and allows for its articulation (Desjardins 2002). With the annual interviews and examination of the quality of the critical reflection in artifacts placed in the e-portfolio, evolution in the development of the roles inherent to the nursing profession has been observed among participants. In fact, the results of this experience supported inclusion of the e-portfolio, through the eduportfolio platform, in the new competency-based nursing program in 2010. Moreover, the first group of students to maintain an e-portfolio throughout their studies graduated in May 2017, and a survey was completed by 43 of its members. This article describes our journey linked to the use of the e-portfolio, including the lessons learned following three studies conducted as well as classroom experiences (interviews during a longitudinal qualitative study, group discussions and a survey).
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 | 0.010 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".