MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3173997094 · doi:10.1096/fasebj.2018.32.1_supplement.505.2

Professionalism: Moving towards a 360° anatomy education

2018· article· en· W3173997094 sur OpenAlexaff
Timothy D. Wilson, Snježana Linkeš, Rick D. Ezekiel

Notice bibliographique

RevueThe FASEB Journal · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEngineering
ThématiqueAnatomy and Medical Technology
Établissements canadiensWestern University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésContext (archaeology)ApprehensionClass (philosophy)Set (abstract data type)InstitutionScope (computer science)Medical educationPedagogyPsychologyHigher educationMedicineSociologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Context Higher education, in particular graduate education, is undergoing expansion in multiple dimensions. On one hand the need to specialize and carve one's research niche remains a required primary focus of many research intensive institutions. Concurrently however, the ability of these institutions to host newly minted doctoral students as de novo faculty is stagnant. This paradoxical squeeze has forced students, supervisors, and institutions to garner resources to look beyond the classical pathways to success for graduates. One of the primary methods by which student career focus is broadened is through graduate programs that validate, value, and develop skills of professionalism. By expanding student competencies beyond their tacit laboratory skills, students explore alternate career paths, heighten their presence in their immediate fields of research, find a greater sense of satisfaction, and less apprehension as they complete their studies. But how is professionalism achieved? Often, the scope and context of many professional comportments fall outside the skill set of supervisors and graduate program requirements leaving students to fend for themselves. The current study explores student attitudes surrounding some aspects of professionalism as they attend a required class within an anatomical program where none of the outcomes are anatomically related. Instead, the class explores topics of grantspersonship, writing for success, reading critically, debating powerfully, and giving great presentations. One important aspect of the course is a 6‐week module in collaboration with the institution's Student Success Centre (SSC). In this module, career counsellors lead the class without professor present enabling robust and candid discussions about the students' next steps. Results Over the past 4 years MSc students (n=31) in the Clinical Anatomy program gave informed consent to study their responses to multiple reaction evaluations to professionalism activities during their time with SSC counsellors. Through surveys inspecting attitudes before and after professionalism activities, significant and positive enhancements in attitude were discovered. We found that four of six attitudes were positively influenced. These include Career Optimism (p<0.05), Need for Career Information (p<0.01), Networking (p<0.01), and Interview Anxiety (p<0.01). Two of the components of the reaction evaluation were not significantly influenced, Career Exploration (p=0.328) and Personality Inspection (p=0.183). Next Steps The results demonstrate how through ancillary but important tweaks to student outcomes in a anatomical curriculum, major changes in attitude can be achieved. Whether the measured changes in attitude translate into behavioural changes that affect career trajectory and success is yet to be determined. The next step in this research will be to conduct post‐graduate surveys in order to determine if and how these career professionalism formation activities translated into better career manifestations of success. Longer term goals will explore how program specific courses in professionalism dovetail effectively with institutionally‐driven endeavours to serve the needs of students in the fast‐changing landscape of future careers. This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Autre devis · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,943
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,348

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,288
Écart entre enseignants0,274 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeAutre devis
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2018
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueThe FASEB JournalMême sujetAnatomy and Medical TechnologyTravaux en français237 207