Educating the Caritas Nurse: Developing Curriculum for Practicing Within a Unitary Caring Science
Bibliographic record
Abstract
St. Catherine University initiated curriculum development of a multicultural and holistic baccalaureate (BSN) section for adult learners in 2015. Students began matriculation in Fall 2017. This initiative was founded on an “ethic of belonging” (Watson, 2005 a,b) and embraced unitary caring science. Unitary concepts of health, pattern, meaning, consciousness, caring, presence, and mutual process (Newman et al., 2008) were used to guide a conceptual/contextual teaching-learning process of spiraling from simple, to complicated, and finally complex nursing situations of multicultural groups. Development of awareness (expanding consciousness) within the student was facilitated via use of the Caritas Processes® (Watson, 1979, 1985, 1999, 2005a, 2008, 2012) and caring attributes or modes of caring first articulated by Roach (2013). This program is based on core values of social justice, diversity, ethics, caring, excellence, holism, integrity, and patient-centeredness as described by the National League of Nursing (2010). Unique approaches to developing caritas literacy (Lee, Palmieri, & Watson, 2017) are articulated in classroom, laboratory, simulation, clinical, and online experiences in this hybrid program. Students dwell within the caritas field created by faculty as they attune to their true purpose in life. Nursing is practiced as a “calling” rather than a vocation as students discover what is of value and what is real for them. Meditation, contemplative practices, reflective dialogue, and holistic therapies are shared alongside practices of Western medicine. In this way, the heart of the collective group, as social or cultural consciousness, unfolds a pattern of relating and healing that is sustainable for all. Praxis, the art and science of nursing in practice, brings forth compassionate action in the world and cosmos. References Lee, S. M., Palmieri, P. A., & Watson, J. (2017). Global advances in human caring literacy. NY: Springer Publishing Company.National League for Nursing. (2010). Outcomes and competencies for graduates of practical/vocational, diploma, associate degree, baccalaureate, master’s, practice doctorate, research doctorate programs in nursing. NY: National League for Nursing.Newman, M., Smith, M., Pharris, M., & Jones, D. (2008). The focus of the discipline revisited. Advances in Nursing Science. 31(1), E16-E27.Roach, S. (2013). Caring the Human Mode of Being. In M. Smith, M. Turkel, and Z. Wolf (Eds.)., Caring in nursing classics: An essential resource. (Ch. 9). NY: Springer Publishing Company.Watson, J. (1979). Nursing the philosophy and science of caring. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.Watson, J. (1985). Nursing: Human science and human care: A theory of nursing. Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett.Watson, J. (1999). Postmodern nursing and beyond. London, England: Churchill Livingstone.Watson, J. (2005a). Caring science as sacred science. Philadelphia, PA: F. A. Davis.Watson, J. (2005b) Caring Science:Belonging before being as ethical cosmology. Nursing science quarterly. 18(4). 304-305. DOI: 10.1177/0894318405280395Watson, J. (2008). Nursing: The philosophy and science of caring. Boulder, CO: University Press of Colorado.Watson, J. (2012). Human caring science: A theory of nursing (2nd ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".