What Is it like to be an International Student at Veterinary School? Perception and Performance in First Year—A Case Study at a UK Veterinary School
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transition into higher education requires students to adjust to a new environment while showing greater independence in managing their own academic and personal life. This is often more difficult for international students who have to adjust to a different country, culture, and potentially another language. A cohort of first-year veterinary medicine students (17% international students) was investigated at a UK university using qualitative and quantitative questionnaires rating first-year experience and support services and statistical analysis of students' assessment performance. While the overall undergraduate perception was that they had learned a lot and progressed well, students in both groups struggled to cope with the workload. The non-UK educated students and students with English as a foreign language also struggled more with teaching delivery in lectures and participation in self-directed group learning and were more likely to feel that the veterinary degree program was too difficult. There was no statistical difference in how British and international students perceived the support system, although it was noticeable that the level of tutorial support was perceived as tutor-dependent. The international students particularly struggled with the assessments in early modules and also with the spot assessment method. However, in the practical assessments, using observed, structured practical exam stations, international and British students performed equally well. Increased support in the initial transition time, especially with regard to communication skills and confidence required for interactive teaching and learning environments such as small-group teaching, as well as increased time for specific assessment types, might benefit the needs of many international students.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".