BUILDING NURSE-STUDENT RELATIONSHIPS IN THE SCHOOL COMMUNITY: AFEMINIST PERSPECTIVE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: With the release of the Community Health Nurses of Canada standards of practice (2003), the importance for nurses to establish empowering relationships within supportive environments is paramount. Moreover, it is important for nurses to recognize and understand how their position and the power it holds may influence relationships with clients in their practice. Purpose: Guided by feminist inquiry, the major purpose of this research was to critically examine the relationships between Public Health Nurses (PHNs) and adolescent students in the school community. Specific questions included: How do PHNs describe their relationships with adolescent students within a school community? What broader contextual factors shape the formation and development of these relationships? Methods: Using open-ended questions and a dialogic approach, 13 PHNs who work in secondary school nursing at one urban public health unit participated in one of three focus groups. Thematic analysis was conducted as described by Morse and Field (1995). Findings: Study findings suggest that the formation and development of the PHN- Student relationship is likened to that of building a school comprised of five interlocking “building blocks”: visibility, trust, collaboration, continuity and power. Visibility was the PHN “gateway” for individual student contact. PHNs were considered trustworthy due to their outsider status to the school system. Collaboration was foundational to the relationship and involved negotiation, compromise and consultation. Continuity reinforced the need for time and consistency in public health programs and within the relationship. Power was found within hierarchical layers and reinforced by social relations of culture, gender and class. Conclusion: In order to build empowering PHN-student relationships, PHNs must critically reflect on their individual nursing practice and policies, which influence relationship formation. Realizing the potential empowering and disempowering influences of gender, race, class, religion and other social determinants on health, PHNs are in a position to advocate for and promote the health and well-being of adolescent students. Further critical nursing research that incorporates the perspectives of students and others influential in the formation of the PHN-student relationship is needed. Key Words: nurse-client relationship, Public Health Nurse, school nursing, adolescent students, relationship formation, feminist inquiry
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 | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".