MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4322626212 · doi:10.1097/jte.0000000000000275

Learning and Study Strategies of Students in the First Year of an Entry-Level Physical Therapist Program

2023· article· en· W4322626212 on OpenAlexaff
Melissa H. Scales, Srikant Vallabhajosula

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Physical Therapy Education · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicOccupational Therapy Practice and Research
Canadian institutionsTellabs (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPercentileCurriculumPsychologyTest (biology)Medical educationAnxietyMedicinePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The learning and study strategies of entry-level physical therapist (PT) students may not be as effective as those needed for success in an entry-level PT education program. The Learning and Study Strategies Inventory, third edition (LASSI) is a reliable tool to assess learning and study strategies. The purpose of this study was to assess the learning and study strategies of first-year PT students and if the strategies change over the first year. REVIEW OF LITERATURE: There is little research on using the LASSI with PT students; however, the LASSI has been used with other health care professional students. SUBJECTS: The participants (n = 211) were from 5 cohorts of PT students in their first year of an entry-level PT education program. METHODS: In the first week of the curriculum the students took the LASSI in class. The results were released individually to each student. No intervention was provided. At the end of the first year, the students retook the LASSI. Paired samples t-tests were run to determine whether the 10 subtest mean percentile scores changed significantly from baseline to follow-up and how they compared to established LASSI benchmarks. RESULTS: Six subtest scores, Anxiety, Attitude, Concentration, Information Processing, Selecting Main Ideas, and Test Strategies, showed significant changes (P ≤ .005) from baseline to follow-up. However, all subtest averages fell below the 75th percentile mark, which is reported as the threshold requiring reflection to improve skills for learning and study strategies. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Students, on average, may not have adequate learning and study strategies when they start an entry-level PT education program. The LASSI may be an effective tool to focus resources in a timely and proactive manner for those students who may need them. Determining the resources needed earlier may decrease the need for later remediation, attrition, or licensure examination failures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.131
GPT teacher head0.575
Teacher spread0.443 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Physical Therapy EducationSame topicOccupational Therapy Practice and ResearchFrench-language works237,207