The University of California Veterinary Student Leadership Program: Comparison of a Five-Day with a Three-Day Course
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leadership skills can be learned and leadership activities can be stimulated with an effective educational program. The University of California, Davis, School of Veterinary Medicine has demonstrated and previously reported on the enthusiasm for and outcomes of their five-day leadership program for incoming veterinary students. The course was altered and again offered as a five-day program to the next veterinary class but, because of timing and limited resources, was reduced to three days the following year. Thirty students were accepted each year on a first-come first-served basis. This article compares the five-day and three-day program curricula and post-program evaluations. Although the students decided whether or not to participate, short-term effects of the programs were the introduction of a new vocabulary, improved confidence to become leaders, and stimulation of student participation in veterinary student leadership roles. A course like this can get students off to a good start, but it is very likely that to achieve a long-term effect, continued exposure throughout the veterinary curriculum is needed.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".