MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2079497070 · doi:10.1097/acm.0b013e318253dacd

Developing a Sustainable Electronic Portfolio (ePortfolio) Program That Fosters Reflective Practice and Incorporates CanMEDS Competencies Into the Undergraduate Medical Curriculum

2012· article· en· W2079497070 on OpenAlexaffabout
Pippa Hall, Anna Byszewski, Stephanie Sutherland, Emma J. Stodel

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademic Medicine · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsBruyère
Fundersnot available
KeywordsElectronic portfolioPortfolioCurriculumMedical educationReflective practicePedagogyPsychologyBusinessMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The University of Ottawa (uOttawa) Faculty of Medicine in 2008 launched a revised undergraduate medical education (UGME) curriculum that was based on the seven CanMEDS roles (medical expert, communicator, collaborator, health advocate, manager, scholar, and professional) and added an eighth role of person to incorporate the dimension of mindfulness and personal well-being. In this article, the authors describe the development of an electronic Portfolio (ePortfolio) program that enables uOttawa medical students to document their activities and to demonstrate their development of competence in each of the eight roles. The ePortfolio program supports reflective practice, an important component of professional competence, and provides a means for addressing the "hidden curriculum." It is bilingual, mandatory, and spans the four years of UGME. It includes both an online component for students to document their personal development and for student-coach dialogue, as well as twice-yearly, small-group meetings in which students engage in reflective discussions and learn to give and receive feedback.The authors reflect on the challenges they faced in the development and implementation of the ePortfolio program and share the lessons they have learned along the way to a successful and sustainable program. These lessons include switching from a complex information technology system to a user-friendly, Web-based blog platform; rethinking orientation sessions to ensure that faculty and students understand the value of the ePortfolio program; soliciting student input to improve the program and increase student buy-in; and providing faculty development opportunities and recognition.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations82
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademic MedicineSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207