Student and teaching characteristics related to ratings of instruction in medical sciences graduate programs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although the validity of students' ratings of instruction has been documented, several student and course characteristics may be related to the ratings students give their instructors. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to examine student ratings obtained from the Universal Student Ratings of Instruction (USRI) instrument. These responses were compared to various student characteristics. Also, teaching characteristics that were most closely associated with the ratings were determined. METHOD: A total of 1738 USRI forms were completed by graduate students enrolled in medical science courses from 1999 to 2006 in the Faculty of Medicine at a Canadian university. RESULTS: Between group comparisons showed that negative student perceptions about the course (i.e., did not have the freedom to select), perceiving the course workload as high, and low grade expectations held were related to negative student ratings of overall quality of instruction. In terms of the student and teaching characteristics, organization of course material and perceptions of whether students felt they learned a lot in the course were most closely related to global ratings of instructional quality. CONCLUSION: Implications for teaching focus on improving the organization and delivery of course content that meets the learning objectives of graduate students in medical sciences.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it