The outcome-based iCAN! / theyCAN! feedback paradigm differentiates strong and weak learning outcomes, learner diversity, and the learning outcomes of each learner: A shift to metacognitive assessment
I. Dimoliatis, I. Zerdes, A. Zampeta, Zoi Tziortzioti, E. Briasoulis, I. Souglakos
{"title":"The outcome-based iCAN! / theyCAN! feedback paradigm differentiates strong and weak learning outcomes, learner diversity, and the learning outcomes of each learner: A shift to metacognitive assessment","authors":"I. Dimoliatis, I. Zerdes, A. Zampeta, Zoi Tziortzioti, E. Briasoulis, I. Souglakos","doi":"10.2478/fco-2018-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background Can learning outcomes be transformed in useful tools revealing strong and weak learning outcomes, learners, teachers; reporting student self-assessment overestimation; informing formative feedback and summative examinations? Methods Based on the ESMO / ASCO global curriculum, 66 level-two learning outcomes were identified and transformed in the iCAN!-Oncology and theyCAN!-Oncology questionnaires, anonymously completed online, before and after teaching, by trainees and trainers respectively, in a five-day fulltime undergraduate oncology course. Results In total, students assessed themselves (iCAN!) with 55% before and 70% after the course (27% improvement); teachers assessed students (theyCAN!) with 43% before and 69% after (60% improvement). Twenty level-two learning outcomes (30%) were scored below the pass / fail cut-point by students while 46 (70%) by teachers, before the course; none after the course. Students assessed themselves the highest in “TNM system” before (81%) and after (82%), while the teachers assessed students so in “Normal cell biology” before (72%) and “Moral / ethical issues in clinical research” after (83%). The lowest assessed outcome was the “Research protocol” by students (28%) and teachers (18%) before, and the “Anticancer agents” after (54% by both). Individual students self-assessed themselves from 31% to 88% before, and from 54% to 88% after; individual teachers assessed students from 29% to 66% before, and from 55% to 94% after. The iCAN! / theyCAN! provided detailed individual student or teacher profile, tightfisted or generous. Conclusions The iCAN! / theyCAN! differentiate strong and weak learning outcomes, learners, teachers; reveal no student self-assessment overestimation; inform formative feedback and summative exams at a metacognitive level; generalize to any course and assessor; support evidence-based teaching and learning SWOT policy.","PeriodicalId":38592,"journal":{"name":"Forum of Clinical Oncology","volume":"9 1","pages":"17 - 29"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forum of Clinical Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/fco-2018-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Abstract Background Can learning outcomes be transformed in useful tools revealing strong and weak learning outcomes, learners, teachers; reporting student self-assessment overestimation; informing formative feedback and summative examinations? Methods Based on the ESMO / ASCO global curriculum, 66 level-two learning outcomes were identified and transformed in the iCAN!-Oncology and theyCAN!-Oncology questionnaires, anonymously completed online, before and after teaching, by trainees and trainers respectively, in a five-day fulltime undergraduate oncology course. Results In total, students assessed themselves (iCAN!) with 55% before and 70% after the course (27% improvement); teachers assessed students (theyCAN!) with 43% before and 69% after (60% improvement). Twenty level-two learning outcomes (30%) were scored below the pass / fail cut-point by students while 46 (70%) by teachers, before the course; none after the course. Students assessed themselves the highest in “TNM system” before (81%) and after (82%), while the teachers assessed students so in “Normal cell biology” before (72%) and “Moral / ethical issues in clinical research” after (83%). The lowest assessed outcome was the “Research protocol” by students (28%) and teachers (18%) before, and the “Anticancer agents” after (54% by both). Individual students self-assessed themselves from 31% to 88% before, and from 54% to 88% after; individual teachers assessed students from 29% to 66% before, and from 55% to 94% after. The iCAN! / theyCAN! provided detailed individual student or teacher profile, tightfisted or generous. Conclusions The iCAN! / theyCAN! differentiate strong and weak learning outcomes, learners, teachers; reveal no student self-assessment overestimation; inform formative feedback and summative exams at a metacognitive level; generalize to any course and assessor; support evidence-based teaching and learning SWOT policy.