Helping Learners in Difficulty – The Incidence and Effectiveness of Remedial Programmes of the Medical Radiation Sciences Programme at University of Toronto and the Michener Institute for Applied Sciences, Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Academic difficulty can often be a significant problem for students in health professional programmes. Students in difficulty are often identified late in their training and run the risk of dismissal if remediation is not successful. Since the inception of the Medical Radiation Sciences Program (MRSP) at the University of Toronto, Faculty of Medicine, and the Michener Institute (MI) in 1999, a number of students have required remediation due to problems in the didactic or clinical component of their training. Not all remediation was successful, and a number of students have been dismissed. There is relatively sparse evidence in the educational literature regarding the nature of academic difficulties that health professional students encounter, and what constitutes appropriate remedial education. The purpose of this research was to evaluate the incidence and prevalence of remediation in the MRSP and the nature of the academic problems. In addition, this study looked at the type of remedial instruction that the Radiation Sciences Board of Examiners (BOE) recommended for these students as well as the effectiveness of these recommendations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study consisted of a review of the academic records of students who failed one or more courses and underwent pre-clinical or clinical remediation, and who were presented at the Medical Radiation Sciences Board of Examiners at the University of Toronto between September 1999 and December 2004. Data extraction forms were developed to obtain demographic information, the nature of the academic problems, the remedial recommendation, and their outcomes. RESULTS: This study identified 69 students who were presented to the BOE 95 times. Forty-four students (44/69, 64%) were from the Radiation Therapy stream, 16 students (16/69, 23%) were from the Nuclear Medicine stream and 9 students (9/69, 13%) were from the Radiographic Technology stream. Most of the remediation occurred due to pre-clinical 50 (50/69, 72%), clinical 15 (15/69, 22%) and both preclinical and clinical problems 4 students (4/69, 6%). Out of 54 students who required pre-clinical remediation, 40 (74%) were promoted. Out of 19 students who required clinical remediation, 10 (10/19, 53%) passed their remediation. Six students (6/69, 9%) were dismissed from the programme due to unsuccessful remediation; 2 due to pre-clinical and 4 due to clinical problems. Based on these results, the remediation process at the MRSP was successful; however, 6 students (6/69, 9%) were dismissed from the programme during the last 4 years despite lengthy unsuccessful remediation. CONCLUSION: Our study provided an important perspective about the remediation process at the MRSP at the Michener Institute for Applied Health Sciences. Despite its retrospective methodology, it attempted to identify the magnitude of learning problems that lead to remediation, and identified the efficacy of the remedial programmes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.049 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".