Interactive Clinical Cases in Veterinary Education Used to Promote Independent Study
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
This study set out to encourage veterinary undergraduates to adopt independent and deep approaches to their study in a five-week third-year course on the alimentary system by incorporating problem solving and decision analysis. We were interested in exploring the effectiveness of two implementations of online interactive case scenarios and the amount of staff time required to develop, deploy, and support their use by students. The majority of students who responded to our questionnaire attempted all the cases available and were able to work with very little tutor input. Cases that prompted students to type an answer before allowing them to progress were rated by all students as making them think more. The realistic nature of the cases, the way they stimulated students' interest, and the need to apply existing knowledge gained in lectures were cited as three of the five characteristics that students most liked. These characteristics map to a range of learning processes that are considered to form a fully developed deep approach by research in this field over the past 40 years. While resource implications are still high, this use of these case scenarios did engage the vast majority of students in independent and deep approaches to their study.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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