Students' conception of local responses to global problems for a more peaceful and sustainable world: A collaborative education project between Brazil, Canada, Qatar, and New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background The concept of global citizenship aims to prepare learners to be able to function and be competitive within a global environment. Successful learners may effectively “think globally” but “act locally,” aiming to contribute to positive global change. Objective The goal of this project was to develop research‐informed curricular content for global citizenship tailored to pharmacy students using a pre‐established pedagogical framework. The intended learning outcome for the content was for students to “generate local responses to global problems for a more peaceful and sustainable world.” Methods This study occurred over three phases. Phase 1 consisted of semi‐structured interviews with practicing pharmacists in Brazil (n = 4), Canada (n = 4), New Zealand (n = 4), and Qatar (n = 4) to identify global issues for case development. Phase 2 consisted of pilot testing developed cases from Phase 1 via individual interviews with target students in Canada (n = 2) and a focus group in New Zealand (n = 5). Phase 3 consisted of implementation of a 1.5‐hours teaching event in New Zealand using the refined case material and formative assessment of final‐year pharmacy students (n = 120). Results Phase 1 resulted in five case scenarios (antimicrobial resistance, drug shortages, ocean pollution, climate change, and rise of nationalism) across three categories (global health and wellbeing, climate and environment, and geopolitics and power) that were tested and refined in Phase 2. Phase 3 resulted in student groups being able to achieve the intended learning outcome on a median of 4 (range, 2‐5) of the developed cases. Students' interventions included new dispensing models, use of technology, community engagement, education initiatives, and others. Conclusion Findings support the notion that when tasked to “think globally,” students are able to “act locally” by designing pharmacy practice interventions to reduce the impact of political, environmental, and health‐related global problems.
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 | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 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".