English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

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.

forum of clinical oncology

The outcome-based <i>iCAN!</i> / <i>theyCAN!</i> feedback paradigm differentiates strong and weak learning outcomes, learner diversity, and the learning outcomes of each learner: A shift to metacognitive assessment

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