MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2951896981 · doi:10.3138/jvme.0418-048r

Creation and Evaluation of a Food Animal Curriculum Roadmap for Veterinary Students at the University of Minnesota

2019· article· en· W2951896981 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P Boyer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicDiverse Educational Innovations Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAdobe Systems
KeywordsCurriculumEconomic shortageMedical educationVeterinary educationCompanion animalVeterinary medicineMedicinePsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Less than 5% of US veterinary school graduates go on to practice predominantly food animal medicine, contributing to a serious shortage of veterinarians practicing in rural areas. Exposing students to clinical and farm experiences while in veterinary school is an effective way to recruit them to various types of veterinary careers. Students at the University of Minnesota College of Veterinary Medicine (UMN CVM) were not always aware of food animal course options within the curriculum. Additionally, food animal faculty had noted that while face-to-face mentoring was the most effective way to help students select courses, it was too dependent upon faculty availability and students’ comfort level in reaching out for advice. Consequently, it was decided to develop an online catalog of course options focusing on food animal topics. This course catalog, called the Food Animal Curriculum Roadmap, was designed as an interactive roadmap similar to a map of subway lines, where each line represents a species of interest (beef, dairy, small ruminant, swine, and poultry) and each station is a course. The roadmap was made available to all students at the college. A user survey showed that 96% of the respondents ( n = 30) indicated that they had a better understanding of course offerings after using the Food Animal Curriculum Roadmap.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.576

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.095
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.272 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical EducationSame topicDiverse Educational Innovations StudiesFrench-language works237,207