Who is teaching undergraduate Anatomy and Physiology? A faculty and course profile for 2005–2006.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In October 2005 the Human Anatomy and Physiology Society (HAPS) began collecting data on anatomy and physiology courses taught at the undergraduate level in the U.S. and Canada. These data were used to create spreadsheets and graphs indicating the student loads, numbers of full‐time and part‐time faculty, and the terminal degrees held by those faculty. Additional data were collected concerning the specific topic of the degree obtained, e.g. Zoology, Biology, Anatomy, etc.. Data were obtained for 101 colleges with a total course enrollment of 40,185; we estimate that this represents roughly 10% of the annual student enrollment. The average course size is 400, with a range of 4–2100, and the faculty:student ratio ranges from 1:4 to 1:200. The terminal degree level was identified for 469 faculty, and specific degree topics were obtained for 259 of those individuals. There was great diversity in the faculty backgrounds. Among full‐time faculty, those reporting degrees in biology were most common (26%) followed by physiology (16%), anatomy and related topics (12%), vertebrate biology (10%), and microbiology (6%). Other observations on surveyed courses include: 84% are taught by full‐time faculty that include at least one Ph.D.; 71% have full‐time faculty that include at least one Ph.D. or MS/MA specializing in anatomy and/or physiology; faculty with professional degrees (MD, DC, DVM, etc.) comprise 13% of full‐time faculty and 24% of part‐time faculty; and 3.8% are taught exclusively by part‐time faculty. This survey was important in the development of the HAPS Position Statement on Faculty Accreditation. These data and the position statement will be made available for reference by institutions and accreditation agencies.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".