MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4399055510 · doi:10.3138/jvme-2023-0172

Developing and Implementing a Competency-Based Veterinary Medicine Program at the Université de Montréal

2024· article· en· W4399055510 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michèle Doucet, Marilou Bélisle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificationCurriculumMedical educationPortfolioFormative assessmentCapacity buildingQuality assuranceFaculty developmentProcess (computing)MedicineProfessional developmentPsychologyPedagogyPolitical scienceComputer scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article outlines the comprehensive reform of the Doctorate in Veterinary Medicine (DVM) program at the Université de Montréal, with a focus on the integration of a competency-based approach within the existing curriculum. The primary purpose of this reform was to enhance student competency and address specific deficiencies in competencies as revealed by annual outcomes assessment surveys. The authors developed a competency framework with seven competencies and specific elements, providing a foundation for the educational redesign. This framework guided the creation of learning-assessment situations (LAS) aimed at promoting active and contextualized learning throughout the program. The competency development and assessment pathway (CDAP) matrix was established to align LAS within the traditional program structure and track student progress. A learning portfolio and a competency certification process were introduced to support student learning and assess competency achievement. The authors discuss change management, including the paradigm shift toward programmatic assessment, and provide insights into the evolution of the program post-implementation. Preliminary outcomes assessment reveals positive changes in how teaching staff and students perceive the program. Despite challenges related to human resource constraints, the authors emphasize the significance of this reform, which aligns with current trends in medical education. This paper underscores the importance of tailoring educational approaches to specific institutional environments while maintaining programmatic rigor and quality assurance.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education→Same topicInnovations in Medical Education→French-language works237,207→