Baccalaureate and practical nursing students’ experience with academic accommodation: A qualitative descriptive study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
• Increased numbers of nursing students using and accessing academic accommodation. • Nursing student experience with accommodation in classroom, lab and clinical environment. • Used to examine our institutional structures and policies to support diverse learners. Based on the National Educational Association of Disabled Students report, there are numerous gaps in supporting students with disabilities. We examined undergraduate students’ experiences with academic accommodation in the nursing program. Presently, there is minimal research that examines the transition of nursing students with academic accommodation needs in higher educational institutions in the classroom, lab, and clinical environment in Canada. A qualitative descriptive design was used to elicit nursing students' experience with academic accommodation in classroom, lab, and clinical practice within higher education. Nine in-depth semi-structured interviews revealed the challenges and barriers nursing students encountered in their academic journey. Three emergent themes were identified: Students’ experience of their academic accommodation journey, the academic accommodation process through the learning accommodation centre, and recommendations from students’ perspectives. The findings from our study have implications relevant in supporting nursing students, understanding students’ academic accommodation experiences and processes, and informing institutional policies within associated degree nursing programs.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| 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".