Models for Teaching Career Development and Practice Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Published in 2002, the “Template for a Recommended Curriculum in ‘Veterinary Professional Development and Career Success’” compiled a comprehensive list of recommended topics to develop an effective complement of nontechnical skills, knowledge, aptitudes, and attitudes (SKAs) in veterinary students.1 Authors of the curriculum recognized that developing an effective delivery system for the suggested material would likely present a challenge and formulated a set of recommendations to help achieve that end. These included collaborating with the National Commission on Veterinary Economic Issues (NCVEI) to achieve visibility and broad-based support across the veterinary profession; seeking support from private practitioners and academic administrators in Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges (AAVMC) member institutions; developing liaison with the Association of Veterinary Practice Management Consultants and Advisors (AVPMCA) to garner both their input and support; and coordinating meetings to help fine-tune the recommended curriculum and to work together on overcoming implementation constraints. To that end, a workshop was conducted on July 19, 2003, for veterinary college administrators, educators, and practice management consultants. The workshop had two objectives: (1) demonstrating educational methods that have been successfully used for teaching in the arena of career development and practice management and (2) developing a professional network to facilitate communication and collaboration toward effective teaching and learning. Sponsored by the NCVEI Working Group on SKAs (with additional financial support from Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc.), the program included presentations from several individuals on methods being used to successfully teach career development and practice management by their respective institutions. Each presentation was allocated 15 to 20 minutes, followed by five to 10 minutes of discussion. Summaries of several of these presentations follow.
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 | 0.003 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".