University of British Columbia Faculty of Medicine
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Curriculum Management and Governance Structure (See Figure 1)FIGURE 1: Governance of the MD Program ♦ The governance structure of the MD undergraduate program (Figure 1) has been reviewed and changed over the past two years to reflect the implementation of a new curriculum introduced in 1997. ♦ Terms of reference have been developed for all the committees. ♦ Management of the program is now centrally coordinated by the undergraduate dean's office. ♦ Clerkships are still departmentally managed. Office of Education ♦ Educational support for all the health professions programs at UBC is provided by the Division of Educational Support and Development, located in the Office of the Coordinator of Health Sciences. ♦ About 80% of the division's work is to support the Faculty of Medicine in the areas of student assessment, program evaluation, Web-site management, and curriculum and faculty development. Budget to Support Educational Programs ♦ The school is in the process of defining the budget for the MD undergraduate program. Valuing Teaching ♦ During the past three years there has been a major focus on faculty development to support the implementation of the new curriculum, with a particular focus on the training and in-service support of PBL tutors. ♦ Faculty development is coordinated by two half-time directors of faculty development, advised by a faculty development committee. ♦ The newly formed Teaching Recognition and Evaluation Committee is working on a proposal to develop a special designation for faculty who devote the majority of their time to reaching. CURRICULUM RENEWAL PROCESS Learning Outcomes ♦ The school has a set of defined competencies for medical undergraduates (a copy is available from the first author). Changes in Pedagogy ♦ The new MD undergraduate program has a major focus on small-group, self-directed learning, including three PBL tutorials each week for the first two years. ♦ There is emphasis on early patient contact through three continuity courses: Family Practice; Communication/Clinical Skills; and Doctor, Patient and Society. Application of Computer Technology ♦ Students are required to own computers. ♦ Curriculum information, such as schedules, lecture notes, images, and other learning resources, as well as learning objectives and weekly quizzes, are provided on a Web site. ♦ Some assignments and examinations are computer-based. ♦ Communication with students is largely through electronic mail. ♦ Computer literacy skills are taught as part of the curriculum. Curriculum Review Process ♦ The Program Evaluation Committee is responsible for evaluating the implementation of the new curriculum. ♦ Each course that has been implemented has been reviewed at least once and modifications made. ♦ Over the next five years the success of the program will continue to be evaluated against longer-term outcome measures. ♦ The new MD undergraduate program was introduced in August 1997. ♦ The final year of the new program will be implemented in 2000–2001. ♦ The new curriculum was developed as a consequence of recommendations from the 1993 Accreditation Report. ♦ A strategic planning group set up by the dean developed a blueprint for the new curriculum in November 1994. ♦ Implementation was led by the Curriculum Implementation Task Force, whose members were course directors and educational and administrative support staff. ♦ Successful implementation can be attributed to factors such as leadership and support from the dean, the creation of some new administrative and leadership positions, a core of dedicated faculty, a major faculty development initiative, involvement of students in monitoring evaluation and problem solving, and good feed-back and feed-forward loops. ♦ Barriers include variable support from department heads and disaffection of faculty in a few key departments; financial problems in the medical school and a shrinking teaching pool; burnout of the pioneer faculty, limited success in attracting new education leaders to key positions; and ongoing problems with communication in a large faculty. Future Goals and Challenges ♦ Major goals to be achieved over the next few years are to create a student-assessment system that better reflects the aims of the curriculum, and to improve the delivery of the curriculum to maximize integration and cumulative learning and minimize redundancies and gaps.
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 | 0,001 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,554 | 0,193 |
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 ».