“<i>It was Like Magic</i>”: Relationships Supporting Compassion, Creativity, and Sense of Coherence in Nutrition Students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this exploratory research was to understand the experiences and learnings of dietetic and nutrition students following a 3-week intensive summer course designed to enhance students’ understandings of compassion, creativity, and sense of coherence as they apply to personal growth and socially just professional practice. Seven of 15 students participated in one-on-one, semi-structured interviews. Data analysis was conducted using inductive thematic analysis, resulting in 3 meta-themes: (i) personal meaning and sense making, (ii) relational and power dynamics, and (iii) disruption; participants contextualized these themes via a dynamic interplay within and among the domains of self, pedagogy, and practice. As a result of taking this course, participants developed an enhanced sense of coherence, self-compassion, well-being, and a more equity-focused understanding of health. Student development may have been achieved through attending to student experience and a relational pedagogical epistemology that allowed students to make personal, interpersonal, and systemic connections among their own subjective experiences, the experiences of peers, and broader social impacts on health. Given nutrition classrooms are largely positivist, it is important to consider how these environments as relational contexts may support or undermine compassion, sense of coherence, and ultimately the health and well-being of students.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".