Experiences of nurse educators facilitating and teaching in an international setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Multiple studies focus on the experiences of visiting students from high resource regions that participated in clinical placements in lower resource countries but less focus on the experiences of the educators accompanying students. AIM: The purpose of this study was to explore the experiences of educators during an international clinical placement of nursing students in a country in West Africa. METHODS: We implemented a focussed ethnographic design. We purposively sampled educators who accompanied students on an international clinical placement. Data collection from 2018 to 2019 consisted of in-depth individual interviews. We utilized Roper and Shapira's (2000, 10.4135/9781483328294.) data analysis process, which includes coding keywords, identifying patterns and theorizing. FINDINGS: Three themes emerged from the data: rewards in accompanying students, challenges experienced and the need for mentoring and continuous support. Educators found it rewarding to see growth in students, how students developed as global citizens, how students developed critical thinking and problem-solving skills and create lifelong friendships. CONCLUSION: Educators who accompany nursing students to international clinical placement experience valuable learning and challenging issues. Educators must navigate, support and advance student learning when on an international placement. It is crucial to have adequate institutional support from both the home and host country.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".