Using Alumni Research to Assess a Veterinary Curriculum and Alumni Employment and Reward Patterns
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
RATIONALE FOR THE STUDY: The purpose of the study was to obtain an outcomes assessment of the professional degree program of a veterinary college and to determine whether recently published national gender differences were true for a program that has always been predominantly female. METHODOLOGY: A survey was developed and mailed to all alumni of the veterinary degree program at North Carolina State University. Anonymous responses were collected by an independent organization for summation. Results were expressed numerically where possible, although the survey included numerous opportunities for textual responses. Responses were stratified by year of graduation, in five-year increments, and by gender of the respondents. RESULTS: Sixty-one percent of graduates remained within North Carolina. While most of the prerequisite courses were considered useful preparation for the curriculum, physics and calculus were exceptions. Over half the alumni thought time allocations to specific courses were appropriate. However, there were substantial differences between courses. The alumni were satisfied with most aspects of the training program, although there were differences between various components. There were substantial gender differences in length of first employment, salaries, species treated, practice ownership and type of ownership, and career satisfaction. Most alumni work in small animal private clinical practice. Ninety-four percent were employed within three months of graduating. Ninety-five percent did no work with the state's predominant agricultural species. Nineteen percent of alumni were either unsure, probably would not, or definitely would not become a veterinarian if they could choose again. CONCLUSION: The survey was a tremendously valuable source of information. Results provided support for curricular revision. The survey also provided comparative data in relation to national norms, where such norms were available. Unfortunately, few reports of this type are available, making inter-institutional comparisons difficult. The Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges could assist with standardizing the process of outcomes assessment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,032 | 0,033 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».