Level of and Motivation for Extracurricular Activity Are Associated with Academic Performance in the Veterinary Curriculum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objectives of this project were to determine the number of school-sanctioned extracurricular opportunities available to veterinary students and characterize the policies of school administrations toward extracurricular involvement and academic standing. Further, we sought to describe the level of extracurricular involvement of veterinary students, determine the association between extracurricular activity involvement and academic performance, and determine the motivation for extracurricular involvement of veterinary students. Survey data were obtained from 18 associate deans of colleges of veterinary medicine regarding the number of extracurricular student organizations within their school and administrative recommendations regarding student involvement. Another survey was administered and responded to by 665 veterinary students enrolled in curricular years 1-3 at Kansas State University and Texas A&M University regarding their extracurricular involvement. Associate deans of 11 schools responded that they make formal or informal recommendations to students about extracurricular activities, workload, and academic priority (61.1%). In a multivariate model, students who participated two times per week or more had a significantly higher overall grade point average (GPA) than students participating once per week (p<.0500). Students for whom the primary reason for participation was networking or social enhancement had a significantly lower overall GPA than students for whom the primary reason was gaining new knowledge and skills (p<.0500). These results indicate that student extracurricular involvement is a consideration for administrators when counseling students in academic difficulty. Moderate levels of extracurricular involvement can contribute to the academic success of students, but students should temper their level of involvement based upon their own motivations.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".