MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417467170 · doi:10.3138/jvme-2025-0054

A Novel Performance Gaps Analysis and Objective-Setting Framework for Veterinary Students in a Workplace-Based Distributed Model of Clinical Training

2025· article· en· W4417467170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emma Tallini, Hannah Davies, Peter Cockcroft

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Veterinary Medical Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicVeterinary Practice and Education Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkloadConsistency (knowledge bases)PersonalizationRelevance (law)Veterinary educationProblem-based learningBest practiceWorkforceActive learning (machine learning)Faculty development

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents the implementation of an individualised learning outcome (LO)-setting framework that is based on individual performance data at the University of Surrey School of Veterinary Medicine and showcases a best practice model for outcomes-based education. Designed to align student learning with the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) Day One Competences, the framework empowers students to identify and address specific knowledge and skill gaps through a structured and data-informed process. Drawing on a range of performance indicators, including global performance assessments, structured oral examinations, skills logs, and personal reflections, the model ensures that LOs are both targeted and achievable. Unlike traditional student-led approaches, which often lack consistency and alignment with core competences, this framework introduces a more rigorous and tailored learning experience. Key to its success is the involvement of tutors who provide scaffolding and guidance to help students formulate meaningful and realistic objectives, which fosters greater engagement with clinical training and enhances readiness for practice. Although the approach offers substantial educational benefits, including improved relevance and personalisation of learning, its implementation requires careful consideration of staff workload and sustainability. To address this, strategies such as automation and virtual support are proposed. Further research is encouraged to evaluate the long-term impact of performance-led learning on student engagement during clinical rotations and subsequent graduate outcomes. Overall, this initiative represents a significant step forward in veterinary education, demonstrating how personalised, performance-informed learning can better prepare students for clinical placements and help them tailor the learning opportunities to meet their individual needs.

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)0.043
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.226

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0430.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0050.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0140.009
Open science0.0070.013
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.419
GPT teacher head0.600
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Veterinary Medical EducationSame topicVeterinary Practice and Education StudiesFrench-language works237,207