An Exploration of Dietetic Students’ Experiences in a Noncourse-based Service-Learning Opportunity in a Canadian Academic Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: To investigate the experiences of dietetic students in a faculty-supervised, noncourse-based service-learning (NSL) opportunity called Nutrition Ignition! (NI!) to understand how NSL activities contribute to dietetic education. Methods: This study used focus group methodology. A convenience sample was recruited from current members of NI!. Participants completed a brief demographic questionnaire and then engaged in a focus group discussion led by a trained moderator who followed a semi-structured guide. Six focus group discussions were transcribed, and a common theme template was developed by researchers. Results: Out of 46 eligible members of NI!, 33 agreed to participate. The main reasons participants joined NI! were to develop professional skills and to help children in the community. Participants discussed many outcomes from their participation in NI!, including enhanced communication skills, especially in terms of knowledge translation; increased ability to be flexible and adapt to “real-world” situations; deeper awareness of the research process; and expanded world view. Conclusion: This study suggests that NSL is an effective way to build dietetic students’ personal and professional skills and provide an additional opportunity in academic settings to prepare dietetic students for entry-level practice.
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 | 0.025 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".