MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7030008071

Mentoring practices in physical and occupational therapy: experiences of Canadian mentors and mentees

2012· dissertation· en· W7030008071 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2012
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMentoring and Academic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDebriefingOccupational therapyCompetence (human resources)Focus groupMeaning (existential)Qualitative researchCategorizationProfessional development
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study was to (a) gain an understanding of physical therapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) mentoring practices that occur in two large Canadian clinical teaching institutions, (b) understand how novice professionals are integrated into the workplace, and (c) examine the meaning that mentors and mentees attach to their mentoring experiences.The literature demonstrates that formal mentoring outcomes include building research competence (Byme & Keefe, 2002), strengthening personal and professional growth (Connor, Bynoe, Redfem, Pokora, & Clarke, 2000), contributing to an individual's academic career development (Pololi & Knight, 2005) and most importantly, promoting job satisfaction and retention (Smith, McAllister, & Snype-Crawford, 2001; Solomon, Salvatori, & Berry, 2001). The fact that no evidence with regard to physical and occupational therapy workplace mentoring exists inspired this study. This study examined the mentoring practices of five physical therapists and five occupational therapists working in two different university affiliated institutions. Using purposive sampling, six mentors with more than five years of experience, and four mentees with less or equal to one year of experience were recruited. Three in-depth interviews, and a concept mapping exercise followed by debriefing sessions in a focus group format, constituted the primary sources of data. Participants' and researcher's journals, and artifacts, such as memos, photographs, and interviews with four administrators/directors, completed the data collection. QSR Nvivo software was used to store and organize the data. The constant comparison method (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994) was utilized first to analyze the data. Thirty-two interview transcripts (526 pages) were coded to obtain conceptual themes. Categorization of data highlighted similarities and differences. Then, to triangulate the data, four participants' journals and interview and focus group transcripts were analyzed in depth using Lieblich's (1998) holistic-content approach. Using a narrative analysis approach allowed me to connect the data and constant comparison to explore the relationships and patterns across data (Maxwell & Miller, 2008). Narrative summaries were produced to represent a comprehensive view of four mentees and mentors' unique experiences; I used the ghostwriting approach to represent the narratives (Rhodes, 2000). The high expectations placed upon newly graduated professionals (McCloughen & O'Brien, 2005) coupled with the human resources shortage in the fields of PT and OT in Canada, render mentoring an essential element for hiring and retaining healthcare professionals. This study revealed that mentors facilitate the professional rite of practice of novice professionals by guiding them in choosing a profession, learning the ropes, and ultimately integrating them into the workplace. The findings demonstrated that previous clinical placements helped novices adapt to the workplace culture and assisted them with issues of place identity. In addition, this study highlighted the importance mentoring plays in constructing PT and OT professional identity. It showed that mentors and mentees working in complex healthcare settings all struggle, although in different ways, with the high demands of their jobs: However, with mentoring, they find ways to balance work and personal life. Finally, the results showed that the implementation of more formal mentoring programs might facilitate the integration of PT and OT professionals into the workplace, and suggested that institutions need to invest in these programs if they want to improve retention of their healthcare professionals, who are presently in higher demand than the existing supply.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.457
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.136
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicMentoring and Academic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207