Student Assessment of the Educational Benefits of Using a CD-ROM for Instruction of Basic Surgical Skills
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE FOR STUDY: At Texas A&M University, introductory-level surgical lecture and laboratory notes were converted to a CD-ROM format that included illustrative photographs as well as instructional videos demonstrating the basic surgical skills that all students were required to master. The CD-ROM was distributed to all students in place of traditional paper notes in the second-year surgical class in the professional veterinary curriculum. The study reported here was designed to evaluate the educational benefits of the use of the CD-ROM in place of traditional paper notes by examining the attitudes and practices of students before and after exposure to the CD-ROM format. METHODOLOGY: An anonymous survey was distributed to students in the second-year introductory surgery course on the first day of class and again on the last day of class. Responses to questions were tabulated, response frequencies determined, and Chi-square analysis performed to determine differences between initial and final responses. RESULTS: On the final survey, 89 per cent of students responded that the instructional videos definitely helped them prepare for the laboratory, and 77 per cent responded that they were more likely to practice techniques learned from the CD-ROM videos than those learned from traditional study materials. The majority of students believed that the CD-ROM improved both the course (60 per cent) and their learning experience (62 per cent) as compared to traditional paper notes. CONCLUSIONS: Including instructional videos on the CD-ROM enhanced the educational experience of the students by promoting preparedness for laboratories and promoting practice of techniques learned from the videos outside of the laboratory.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".