Didactic and Experiential Training to Teach Communication Skills: The University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Veterinary Medicine Collaborative Experience
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Teaching communication skills to veterinary students is recognized as important; however, incorporation of this into an already crowded curriculum is difficult. At the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Veterinary Medicine we provide mandatory communication lectures to freshmen and sophomores, and offer elective experiential courses to juniors and seniors. Providing both didactic and experiential training allows students to learn and practice communication techniques in a "safe" setting. Our approach to experiential training is unique in that graduate students in counseling psychology (masters and doctoral level) act as "clients" for the juniors, and professional simulated pet owners are hired for digitally captured role-plays with the seniors. A unique inter-professional partnership has been formed between the Schools of Veterinary Medicine, Education (Department of Counseling Psychology), and (Human) Medicine and Public Health to provide this experiential training for our students. The purpose of this article is to describe the communication training program at the University of Wisconsin-Madison School of Veterinary Medicine and to encourage other programs to reach across campus and partner with other colleges with the goal of improving training for all of the individuals involved.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".