MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307372037 · doi:10.3389/fvets.2022.1019305

Longitudinal assessment of competency development at The Ohio State University using the competency-based veterinary education (CBVE) model

2022· article· en· W4307372037 on OpenAlexaff
Emma K. Read, Connor Maxey, Kent G. Hecker

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Veterinary Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersOhio State University
KeywordsCurriculumMedical educationCompetency assessmentMedicineVeterinary educationProfessional developmentVeterinary medicinePsychologyPedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the development of the American Association of Veterinary Medical Colleges' Competency-Based Veterinary Education (CBVE) model, veterinary schools are reorganizing curricula and assessment guidelines, especially within the clinical rotation training elements. Specifically, programs are utilizing both competencies and entrustable professional activities (EPAs) as opportunities for gathering information about student development within and across clinical rotations. However, what evidence exists that use of the central tenets of the CBVE model (competency framework, milestones and EPAs) improves our assessment practices and captures reliable and valid data to track competency development of students as they progress through their clinical year? Here, we report on validity evidence to support the use of scores from in-training evaluation report forms (ITERs) and workplace-based assessments of EPAs to evaluate competency progression within and across domains described in the CBVE, during the final year clinical training period of The Ohio State University's College of Veterinary Medicine (OSU-CVM) program. The ITER, used at the conclusion of each rotation, was modified to include the CBVE competencies that were assessed by identifying the stage of student development on a series of descriptive milestones (from pre-novice to competent). Workplace based assessments containing entrustment scales were used to assess EPAs from the CBVE model within each clinical rotation. Competency progression and entrustment scores were evaluated on each of the 31 rotations offered and high-stakes decisions regarding student performance were determined by a collective review of all the ITERs and EPAs recorded for each learner across each semester and the entire year. Results from the class of 2021, collected on approximately 190 students from 31 rotations, are reported with more than 55 299 total competency assessments combined with milestone placement and 2799 complete EPAs. Approximately 10% of the class was identified for remediation and received additional coaching support. Data collected longitudinally through the ITER on milestones provides initial validity evidence to support using the scores in higher stakes contexts such as identifying students for remediation and for determining whether students have met the necessary requirements to successfully complete the program. Data collected on entrustment scores did not, however, support such decision making. Implications are discussed.

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)0.002
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Veterinary ScienceSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207