A thematic analysis of social work students’ assignments of reflection on interviews with older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is an increasing need of gerontological education in social work to enhance the knowledge of aging and interests in senior care among students. This study is conducted based on an experiential-learning strategy with a combination of having an ethnographic interview with an older adult and writing a reflection paper afterward as an assignment embedded in a Gerontology course of the Bachelor of Social Work program in western Canada. Thematic analysis was applied to eight reflection papers in which a consent was obtained from 2020 to 2021 cohorts of social work students. Three key themes emerged: connection between learned knowledge and interview topics, resonation interview content with personal experiences, and a positive perception of aging and a positive attitude toward working with aging populations. The findings support the combination of ethnographic interview and reflection paper as a pedagogical approach in gerontological education not only for improving students’ learning experience and knowledge but also for establishing a positive perception of aging and older adults. The study also reveals the necessity of more interaction between students and older adults to enhance a better understanding of aging-related issues and promote willingness to work with older adults.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".