How does student educational background affect transition into the first year of veterinary school? Academic performance and support needs in university education

The first year of university is critical in shaping persistence decisions (whether students continue with and complete their degrees) and plays a formative role in influencing student attitudes and approaches to learning. Previous educational experiences, especially previous university education, shape the students’ ability to adapt to the university environment and the study approaches they require to perform well in highly demanding professional programs such as medicine and veterinary medicine. The aim of this research was to explore the support mechanisms, academic achievements, and perception of students with different educational backgrounds in their first year of veterinary school. Using questionnaire data and examination grades, the effects upon perceptions, needs, and educational attainment in first-year students with and without prior university experience were analyzed to enable an in-depth understanding of their needs. Our findings show that school leavers (successfully completed secondary education, but no prior university experience) were outperformed in early exams by those who had previously graduated from university (even from unrelated degrees). Large variations in student perceptions and support needs were discovered between the two groups: graduate students perceived the difficulty and workload as less challenging and valued financial and IT support. Each student is an individual, but ensuring that universities understand their students and provide both academic and non-academic support is essential. This research explores the needs of veterinary students and offers insights into continued provision of support and improvements that can be made to help students achieve their potential and allow informed "Best Practice"

Profiling strugglers in a graduate-entry medicine course at Nottingham: a retrospective case study

Background 10-15% of students struggle at some point in their medicine course. Risk factors include weaker academic qualifications, male gender, mental illness, UK ethnic minority status, and poor study skills. Recent research on an undergraduate medicine course provided a toolkit to aid early identification of students likely to struggle, who can be targeted by established support and study interventions. The present study sought to extend this work by investigating the number and characteristics of strugglers on a graduate-entry medicine (GEM) programme. Methods A retrospective study of four GEM entry cohorts (2003–6) was carried out. All students who had demonstrated unsatisfactory progress or left prematurely were included. Any information about academic, administrative, personal, or social difficulties, were extracted from their course progress files into a customised database and examined. Results 362 students were admitted to the course, and 53 (14.6%) were identified for the study, of whom 15 (4.1%) did not complete the course. Students in the study group differed from the others in having a higher proportion of 2ii first degrees, and scoring less well on GAMSAT, an aptitude test used for admission. Within the study group, it proved possible to categorise students into the same groups previously reported (struggler throughout, pre-clinical struggler, clinical struggler, health-related struggler, borderline struggler) and to identify the majority using a number of flags for early difficulties. These flags included: missed attendance, unsatisfactory attitude or behaviour, health problems, social/family problems, failure to complete immunity status checks, and attendance at academic progress committee. Conclusions Problems encountered in a graduate-entry medicine course were comparable to those reported in a corresponding undergraduate programme. A toolkit of academic and non-academic flags of difficulty can be used for early identification of many who will struggle, and could be used to target appropriate support and interventions

A validity study of the national UK colposcopy objective structured clinical examination-is it a test fit for purpose?

This study examines the validity and reliability of the British Society for Colposcopy and Cytopathology (BSCCP) objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). The BSCCP OSCE results obtained over eight OSCE circuits were analysed using SPSS 15. Face validity and content validity were established from expert opinion and blueprinting. Statistically significant difference was not shown in construct validity through level of experience (P = 0.867, P = 0.822, P = 0.59, P = 0.74, P = 0.12, P = 0.01; these are the P values for each of the patient interaction stations) however, concurrent validity was established against the gynaecology mini-CEX (sensitivity = 1, specificity = 0.8, positive predictive value = 0.947, negative predicitive value = 1). The reliability of the OSCE's range from Cronbach's alpha of 0.617 to 0.775. The OSCE has face, content and concurrent validity