Training and Preparedness of Clinical Coaches for Their Role in Training Student Veterinary Nurses in the United Kingdom: An Exploratory Inquiry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The experience that student veterinary nurses (SVNs) have in the clinical learning environment can be greatly influenced by the clinical coach (CC); the supervisory relationship will affect student retention and clinical competency. To support a positive student experience, the training and development of CCs must be critically reviewed and regularly updated. This research aimed to ascertain the current CC training undertaken and the preparedness of CCs for their role in training SVNs. We used a prospective cross-sectional study design. An online survey was distributed over 4 weeks to CCs across the United Kingdom representing a range of educational institutions, and it generated 80 responses. Prior to undertaking their initial CC training, CCs had been qualified practitioners for a median of 2.2 years (IQR = 4.16y). CCs stated they needed more course content during their training regarding student teaching and pastoral support, more support from associated institutions, and there was a call for a longer training period leading to a formal qualification. Providing CC training with broader course content and some level of evaluation should be considered to develop and assess the non-clinical skills that are vital to the role.
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 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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".