Teaching for Transformation: Master of Social Work Students Identify Teaching Approaches That Made a Difference
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transformative learning captures the process by which students engage in their learning, experience a change in perspective, of themselves or society, and then enact their new understanding. The purpose of this 4-year, four-cohort study was to identify the transformative learning experiences of Master of Social Work students and specific student engagement strategies they felt made a difference in preparing them for professional practice. Six focus groups ( n = 40) were conducted using established focus group methodology. All focus groups were audio recorded, professionally transcribed verbatim, and subject to qualitative content analysis. Students identified six themes in student engagement strategies that facilitated their transformative learning, including transformative aspects of the curriculum, experiences with peers, qualities in their relationships with faculty that fostered critical reflection, a sense of identity, and mentoring. This study will help educators better identify teaching strategies to engage students in their personal and professional transformative learning.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it