Nursing across cultures: the communicative needs of internationally educated nurses working with older adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Canada and elsewhere, internationally educated nurses (IENs) provide valuable resources to address existing and predicted nurse shortages concurrent with the needs of aging and growing multicultural populations (Buchan, 2002a; Canadian Nurses Association [CNA] and Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions [CFNU], 2004; Epp, et al., 2002). Research indicates that limited language proficiency hinders some IENs entering or staying in the workforce (L. Munro, 2003) or leads others to take employment below their skill level. This study aimed to explore the communication skills required of Registered Nurses and Registered Practical Nurses working with older adults in Ontario. The specific research questions were: (1) what sociolinguistic and sociocultural needs do IENs experience in their work with older adults? and (2) what do IENs see as the strengths and weaknesses in the educational opportunities they have had in terms of meeting the sociolinguistic and sociocultural needs of working with older adults? Using interviews and questionnaires, data were collected over 9 months from 19 IEN and 9 non-IEN participants. Within a theoretical framework of Sociocultural Theory, which recognises language as an important cultural artifact and mediational tool (Daniels, 2001), and the concept of Legitimate Peripheral Participation, which provides a way of understanding learning as a social practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991), overt and underlying themes within and across participants were identified. Findings support those of Epp et al., (2002), Bauman et al., (2006) and Jeans et al., (2005), indicating that IENs may experience significant barriers including but not limited to language proficiency, pragmatic flexibility and most specifically sociocultural competence when coming to work in Ontario. In many cases, educational supports to address these issues are inconsistent and inadequate, leaving many IENs unable to confidently function at the required entry level of nursing, despite having passed the required courses, language and nursing exams for entry into practice
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".