An Evaluation of an Experiential Learning Program in Global and Indigenous Health: The University of Manitoba’s Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Scholarship Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a mixed-methods outcome evaluation to examine student experiences and learning in the University of Manitoba’s Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Scholarship Program in Global and Indigenous Health. Our scholarship program is a bi-directional, 3-month international experiential learning program, including both undergraduate and graduate students, with associated online course focused on community engagement. Students completed a semi-structured narrative report at the conclusion of their funding related to their experience and learning. The Likert questions were analyzed descriptively and student responses to the open-ended questions were utilized for thematic analysis. Also included in this paper is a summary of our lessons learned through program administration. A total of 38 students completed the program between 2016 and 2018, with 95% reporting that they either met or exceeded their goals in the program. Three overarching and inter-related themes emerged in our thematic-analysis of students’ narrative reports, including success through relationships and new perspectives, challenges of the unfamiliar, and personal growth through strong emotions. Many students reported personal growth as their greatest success and linked this with new perspectives and awareness of how different contexts shaped their understanding of health issues. Overcoming challenges in their placements contributed to students’ confidence in their ability to problem-solve. Overall, students reported value in their experiential learning, which further supports the growing trend to incorporate both experiential learning and formal education in community engagement in public health pedagogy. However, international experiential learning requires considerable financial and human resource commitments to ensure its success.
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 | 0.021 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".