MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036214702 · doi:10.30845/ijhss.v10n3a1

Reflections on Self-Reflection: A Course-Based Qualitative Inquiry into the Self-Reflective Practice of Child and Youth Care Students

2020· article· en· W3036214702 on OpenAlexaff
Janelle Huhtala, Janaya Hewitt, Shayla Wood, Tannis Bassett, Gerard Bellefeuille

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Humanities and Social Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReflective Practices in Education
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSelf-reflectionCourse (navigation)Reflection (computer programming)Qualitative researchPsychologyReflective practicePedagogyMedical educationSociologyMedicineComputer sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Self-reflection is a skill that is central to child and youth care (CYC) students' professional development.Due to itsimportance and the role in CYC practice, it is important to know how self-reflection is regarded and practiced by CYC students in their field placements.The aim of this study is to investigatethe frequency, form, and meaning of selfreflection from the perspective of CYC students to gain insight into how CYC students apply the concept in their practice.Data are collected through semi-structured focus groups and an arts-based activity.From the data analysis, four main themes are extracted: (a) the importance of relationships, (b) a form of self-care, (c) time is required, and (d) a pathway to better practice.The findings reveal that despite the value placed on reflective practice in CYC education, there is a lack of research on the form that it takes in the practice (if it is practiced at all)of students in practicum placements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.024
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0240.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.014
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.113
GPT teacher head0.517
Teacher spread0.405 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Humanities and Social ScienceSame topicReflective Practices in EducationFrench-language works237,207