Transformative learning in an interprofessional student-run clinic: a qualitative study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Student-run free clinics are increasingly seen as a way for students in health professions to have early authentic exposures to providing care to marginalized populations, often in the context of interprofessional teams. However, few studies characterize what and how students may learn from volunteering at a student-run free clinic. We aimed to examine shifts in attitude or practice that volunteers report after completing a placement at an interprofessional student-run clinic in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Transcripts from semi-structured reflective focus groups were analyzed in an exploratory thematic manner and from the perspective of transformative learning theory. Volunteers reported attitude shifts toward greater self-awareness of assumptions, recognition of the need for systemic interventions, and seeing themselves as learning and contributing meaningfully in a team even without direct-client contact. Practice shifts emerged of individualizing assessment and treatment of patients as well as increased comfort working in interprofessional teams. Attitude and practice shifts were facilitated by authentic interactions with individuals from marginalized populations, taking a patient-centered approach, and an interprofessional context. Interprofessional student-run free clinics are suited to triggering disorienting dilemmas that set the stage for transformative learning, particularly when volunteers are guided to reflect.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".