Linking Theory to Practice in an Undergraduate Veterinary Curriculum: Students’ Perspectives
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Facilitated clinical relevance (FCR) at the University of Nottingham School of Veterinary Medicine and Science is a small-group educational model that promotes student-centered learning. The objectives of this study were: (1) to examine students' opinions of FCR as a learning approach compared with other teaching methods; and (2) to establish if gender, year of study, or prior exposure to FCR were predictors of attitude. Questionnaires were distributed to undergraduate veterinary students (N = 185) in the first and second year of study. Students' opinions were assessed by noting their degree of agreement with seven statements using a seven-point Likert-type scale. A total of 162 students (87.6%) completed the survey instrument. The findings indicate that FCR is highly valued among the students. The majority of students regarded FCR as directly relevant for clinical preparation because it helps them to integrate pre-clinical and clinical knowledge and skills in veterinary medicine. However, commonly identified challenges were peer dominance, less cooperative facilitators, and coping with the ambiguity of knowledge and reasoning. No significant differences were detected in attitude between students in the tested variables (p > 0.05). However, being in the first year of study, being male, and having prior exposure to FCR was found to predict a negative attitude (p < 0.006). To increase students' satisfaction, effective strategies must be designed and implemented to provide support for struggling individuals.
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.
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 | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it