Assessment of the Midwifery Education Program at the University of British Columbia – A Survey of Graduates and Midwife Mentors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Midwifery Program at the University of British Columbia is the only academic centre for midwifery education in British Columbia. The program consists of arts and science courses, midwifery theoretical and clinical courses, problem-based learning tutorials, laboratory simulations, clinical experiences in community midwifery, and a semester of interprofessional placements in a local or global setting. As university based midwifery education is new to British Columbia, critical evaluation of the curriculum is essential. Between 2005 and 2010, we examined the curriculum annually from the perspective of new graduates (n=34) and their mentors (n=21) to inform curriculum renewal and development. Overall graduates felt well prepared for clinical practice after graduating, and highly valued their clinical placements. Both graduates and midwife mentors reported competence with most clinical skills, and senior midwives noted the graduates’ fluency with both the hospital and home setting. Need for improvement was noted with respect to suturing and venipuncture. There were some discrepancies in the assessment of competencies. While all graduates felt well or adequately prepared to recognize and manage when a normal birth changes to abnormal, not all mentor midwives agreed. Conversely, midwife mentors felt that graduates were prepared in the area of client communication and counseling, yet graduates felt less confident in this area. Over the years, the Midwifery Education curriculum has evolved to address feedback received via the yearly curriculum evaluation. The academic calendar has been modified to allow students and faculty more time for preparation, integration and reflection during the introductory year, to facilitate the consolidation phase in the core clinical courses, and to facilitate senior research projects. Courses on counseling, pharmacology for midwives, lactation consultation, global maternity care, and anatomy labs have been added to the curriculum. The program continues its effort to enhance theoretical and clinical teaching by offering regular preceptor workshops.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".