MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2499016561 · doi:10.3138/jvme.1215-201r

A Guide for Making Valid Interpretations of Student Evaluation of Teaching (SET) Results

2016· article· en· W2499016561 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kenneth D. Royal

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSet (abstract data type)Promotion (chess)Medical educationCurriculumSample (material)PsychologyMathematics educationMedicinePedagogyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Student evaluations of teaching (SETs) are conducted in virtually every veterinary medical school in the world. Results of these evaluations are typically used to evaluate faculty performance and often serve as the primary basis for promotion and tenure decisions. However, given the high-stakes nature of these evaluations, it is critical that stakeholders (faculty, curriculum committees, department chairs, deans, etc.) be able to identify the extent to which the scores are likely to be valid or not. Thus, the purpose of this article was to develop a guide for faculty and administrators to assess the interpretative validity of SET scores given an array of sample size, response rate, and score standard deviation possibilities.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.033
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.975

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.033
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.168
GPT teacher head0.551
Teacher spread0.383 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations26
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207