Graduates' Views of the Ontario Midwifery Education Program
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A survey of all graduates of Ontario's Midwifery Education Program was done in 2003 in order to obtain their views about the adequacy of their preparation for professional practice, the satisfaction with program features and future educational aspirations. The respondents (123 of 181[68%] graduates) were nearly all working as midwives, most were working full time and more than half had been preceptors for students since the time of their own graduation. The most highly rated Program features were biological science courses, final year clinical courses, small group tutorials and skilled preceptors. The aspects of the Program that were most stressful were balancing the high demands of the Program with family responsibilities, relocating for clinical placements and having difficulties with preceptors. Overall, graduates felt well prepared for professional practice. All graduates reported undertaking continuing education and many were interested in master's level courses or programs. The crucial role of preceptors in students' educational experiences was reinforced by the survey results. preceptor development continue to be a high priority.
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 | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".