“That’s So Much More Important than the Grades”: Learning Client Centered Care through Experiential Learning at Aphasia Camp
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interventions aimed at increasing life participation for people with aphasia (PWA), such as camp-based programs, are being increasingly implemented throughout North America. Such camps present a unique experiential learning opportunity for students in speech-language pathology (SLP) programs. The purpose of this study was to examine the impact of participation in aphasia camp on SLP students’ acquisition of the skills and attitudes required for client-centered care for PWA. Ten SLP students who volunteered at a weekend-long aphasia camp participated in focus groups examining their learning outcomes following their camp experience. Conventional content analysis was used to analyze the focus group transcripts. Several themes emerged which were categorized into specific learning outcomes and contextual factors that facilitated the learning of these outcomes. Learning outcomes included: 1) students began to think of people with aphasia as more than their disability; 2) students developed more empathetic perspectives of people with aphasia; and 3) students improved their skills in supporting communication. Three contextual factors were also identified: 1) absence of evaluation; 2) absence of client-clinician power differential; and 3) interdisciplinary environment. These results demonstrate the potential utility of aphasia camps as a medium for learning client-centered care and highlight possible factors that encourage active 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.
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 | 0.007 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".