Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 100 year milestone of university nursing education at UBC offers a pause for reflection and inquiry. History assists us to illuminate current issues and debates in light of past events. An examination of the legacy of Ethel Johns and others who held the vision of why nursing education should enter the university in 1919 sheds light on these current issues and past events. As the first Director, Ethel Johns referred to the establishment of the University of British Columbia Department of Nursing as “the experiment”. Reflections on “the experiment” provides a standpoint to consider how this courageous and visionary leader might have viewed the outcomes of the “experiment” in 21st century Canadian university nursing education. Discourses and developments in nursing education today lead us to question if Johns’ vision is reflected in the value of a BSN preparation today. This presentation will explore questions pervasive in the history of academic nursing education through the lens of Ethel Johns and other leaders in nursing: Who and what inspired the original vision? What forces were at play and most important how do the themes of knowledge, leadership and social accountability, relate to the vision of nursing education today? Public health nursing was the original impetus for a university education at UBC and inspires a look at how the practice is viewed today as well as reflection on how or if the value of a BSN preparation is upheld by the profession and society. Projecting a vision from whence we have come is the opportunity that historical reflection affords us.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".