Beyond Competence: Why We Should Talk About Employability in Veterinary Education
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
The purpose of this article is to explore employability as a complement to competency in defining the overarching objectives of veterinary education. Although the working usage of the term competency has evolved and stretched in recent years, and contemporary competence frameworks have expanded to better reflect the range of capabilities required of a veterinary professional, the potential remains for the dominance of competency-led discourse to obscure the aim of producing not only competent but also successful and satisfied veterinarians. Expanding the educational mission to include employability may provide this broader focus, by stretching the end point, scope, and scale of veterinary education into the crucial transition-to-practice period, and beyond. In this article we review available evidence from multiple stakeholder perspectives and argue that employability expands the focus beyond servicing the needs of the public to better integrate and balance the needs of all the stakeholders in veterinary education, including the graduates themselves. By refocusing the goal of veterinary education to include the richer end point of success, turning the attention to employability could enhance current attribute frameworks and result in veterinarians who not only better meet the needs of those they serve but are also better prepared to experience fulfilling and satisfying careers. Finally, we suggest one educational approach may be to conceptualize competency, professionalism, and employability as overlapping dimensions of the successful veterinary professional.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it