sexta-feira, 17 de novembro de 2017

Research funding



Governo vai criar fundo privado para financiar pesquisa e inovação


O governo federal vai criar um inédito fundo privado com o objetivo de apoiar a pesquisa de alto nível no país e qualificar universidades e institutos nacionais a fim de que alcancem maior projeção e visibilidade internacionais.

O fundo deverá ser lançado oficialmente em dezembro e seus recursos – que podem chegar a R$ 2 bilhões por ano –, serão oriundos sobretudo de empresas dos setores elétrico, de bioenergia e petróleo, de telecomunicações e de mineração, que têm de investir ou por contrato ou por dispositivos legais cerca de 1% da receita líquida em pesquisa e desenvolvimento.

Segundo o modelo atual, essas empresas têm a incumbência de construir projetos e encontrar instituições para desenvolvê-los. Muitas vezes, porém, tal processo encontra obstáculos e parte desses recursos acaba não sendo investido na área. Transformam-se em multas das agências reguladoras ou são transferidos para o Tesouro Nacional.

A ideia é alimentar o fundo com parte desse dinheiro, além de oferecer a oportunidade de que outras empresas também contribuam com ele.

Seu formato não será o de um fundo patrimonial – como o do Instituto Serrapilheira, iniciativa privada de apoio a pesquisa –, no qual os rendimentos de uma dotação inicial servem para financiar projetos. A ideia do governo é provê-lo anualmente com os recursos das empresas e distribui-lo por meio de editais.
A previsão é que ele comece a funcionar em 2018 e distribua recursos a partir de 2019.

"A proposta é muito interessante e, por suas características, traz um novo alento aos pesquisadores brasileiros", diz Sandoval Carneiro Júnior [membro titular da Academia Brasileira de Ciências - ABC], professor emérito da UFRJ e diretor-executivo do Instituto Tecnológico Vale.

Marco Antonio Zago  [membro titular da Academia Brasileira de Ciências - ABC], reitor da USP, também elogia a iniciativa, pois considera que ela "pode trazer abruptamente uma quantidade considerável de recursos novos para a ciência e tecnologia, num momento de grande aperto.


Excelência

Embora a Capes, entidade ligada ao Ministério da Educação, seja a responsável por estruturar o fundo, ele será independente e contará com administração privada, com a participação de organizações como a Academia Brasileira de Ciências, a SBPC e a Confederação Nacional da Indústria, além de órgãos como a própria Capes e o CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico).

O fundo será atrelado ao Programa de Excelência de Universidades e Institutos, que está sendo criado pelo MEC. Para evitar a contratação de um grande corpo burocrático, ele utilizará a Capes e o CNPq para executar o programa, que deve durar dez anos. E que conta com as seguintes iniciativas:

1) Desenvolver e internacionalizar as instituições de ensino superior.
2) Dar apoio a grupos de excelência em pesquisa básica e aplicada que possam projetar as universidades brasileiras entre as melhores do mundo.
3) Melhorar o relacionamento da academia com o setor privado e com a sociedade, com vistas à inovação.


Este último ponto é crucial, na visão de Carneiro Júnior. "Esse modelo pode propiciar uma interação bastante profícua e necessária entre o que pesquisamos na academia e o setor produtivo."

Com o caráter privado do fundo, busca-se evitar que ele seja contingenciado pelo governo federal ou esteja submetido à lei do teto de gastos, que limita a aplicação de recursos públicos ao Orçamento do ano anterior mais a inflação.

O reitor da USP rechaça a ideia de que a criação do fundo poderia significar uma privatização da área de ciência e tecnologia - crítica comum a iniciativas desse tipo.

Os órgãos governamentais devem ficar responsáveis pela elaboração dos editais e pela avaliação do uso dos recursos distribuídos.


Diagnóstico

Dirigentes da Capes vêm apresentando a ideia do fundo e discutindo-a com membros de dentro e de fora da academia há cerca de três meses.

O diagnóstico que embasa a iniciativa é que o Brasil tem crescido nas últimas décadas em produção científica e tecnológica, mas que a qualidade não acompanha essa marcha. Ademais, as universidades não possuem projeção que corresponda à importância da economia nacional.

Por fim, a capacidade de inovação do país vem decaindo em comparação com a de outras nações. No Ranking Global de Inovação, o Brasil despencou da 47ª posição em 2011 para a 69ª em 2017.

Assim, o componente fundamental do fundo e do programa de excelência é a tentativa de aprofundar a internacionalização da pesquisa brasileira, associando-a aos melhores grupos do mundo.

Pesquisa feita pela Elsevier, empresa que é referência na área de ciência e tecnologia, mostrou que 63% dos pesquisadores brasileiros nunca deixaram o país para fazer pesquisa. O impacto (a quantidade de citações) dos artigos desses cientistas é 24% menor do que a média mundial.

Já os artigos dos 28,6% de pesquisadores que regularmente fazem ciência em colaboração com estrangeiros têm, em média, o dobro do impacto da média mundial.

"É claro que é necessário um apoio básico, permanente e distribuído ao qual todos os pesquisadores tenham acesso", afirma Marco Antonio Zago. "Por outro lado, grandes avanços da ciência exigem recursos vultosos e que têm de ser concentrados em algumas iniciativas que tenham mais substância."


Questionamentos

Carlos Américo Pacheco, diretor-presidente da Fapesp, também vê com bons olhos a iniciativa, mas diz que pode haver resistência de agências reguladoras e setores econômicos, inclusive com questionamentos jurídicos sobre a destinação dos recursos. "Essa iniciativa é boa. Ela abre debate sobre alternativas para financiar a pesquisa."

Ele afirma que um dos méritos do projeto é ir além da busca por recursos. "Envolve também solicitar planos para a universidade acerca do que ela pretende fazer na área de internacionalização e pesquisa de qualidade."

Mas a comemoração pelo "dinheiro novo" para a pesquisa nacional, diz Marco Antonio Zago, "não exclui outros movimentos para aumentar o orçamento do CNPq, ou para eventualmente descontingenciar fundos setoriais".


Iniciativas envolvidas no programa: os três eixos

1. Inovação
    Melhorar e agilizar o relacionamento entre as universidades e as empresas
   Incentivar a geração de produtos e processos de interesse nacional


2. Internacionalização
   Universidades e instituto de pesquisa devem apresentar plano para internacionalizar a pós-graduação
  Ênfase na mobilidade de doutorandos, pós-doutorandos e professores para o exterior e do exterior para o Brasil


3. Excelência
   Apoio a "clusters" (grupos de pesquisa de uma mesma universidade ou instituto de pesquisa ou locais próximos)  de excelência em pesquisa básica e aplicada
  Pesquisas devem se concentrar em áreas competitivas internacionalmente.





A Diretoria da Academia Brasileira de Ciências esclarece que ainda (17/11/2017) não recebeu nenhuma informação oficial sobre o assunto, e que se manifestará quando da notificação.



Veja a matéria original da Folha de S. Paulo com infográficos.

(Fernando Tadeu Moraes e Phillippe Watanabe para Folha de S.Paulo)

quarta-feira, 15 de novembro de 2017

Physician's words



The Iatrogenic Potential of the Physician’s Words

 
 
 
JAMA. Published online October 31, 2017.  doi:10.1001/jama.2017.16216
 
 
Some of the information that physicians convey to their patients can inadvertently amplify patients’ symptoms and become a source of heightened somatic distress, an effect that must be understood by physicians to ensure optimal management of patient care. This effect illustrates the iatrogenic potential of information, as opposed to the iatrogenic potential of drugs and procedures.

Somatic symptoms and underlying disease do not have a fixed, invariable, one-to-one equivalence. Symptoms can occur in the absence of demonstrable disease, “silent” disease occurs without symptoms, and there is substantial interindividual variability in the symptoms resulting from the same pathology or pathophysiology. One mediator of this variability between symptoms and disease is the patient’s thoughts, beliefs, and ideas. These cognitions can amplify symptoms and bodily distress. Although cognitions may not cause symptoms, they can amplify, perpetuate, and exacerbate them, making symptoms more salient, noxious, intrusive, and bothersome.

Several common clinical scenarios exemplify the iatrogenic potential of the physician’s words—for example, instituting a new medication regimen, reviewing an informed consent document, presenting ambiguous laboratory test information, and preparing patients for painful procedures.

Knowledge of the nonspecific, diffuse, ambiguous adverse effects of a drug (such as fatigue, difficulty concentrating, nausea, dizziness, headache) increases the frequency with which they are experienced and reported.1 Whether the information is imparted through discussion with the physician or when obtaining informed consent, patients who learn about the common, nonspecific adverse effects of β-blockers, statins, estrogen-containing oral contraceptives, and agents for obstructive urinary symptoms report more of these putative adverse effects than comparable patients not informed of them. For example, in a study of 76 patients who received β-blocker treatment for hypertension, erectile dysfunction occurred in 32% of the 38 patients explicitly informed of this adverse effect and in 13% of the 38 patients not specifically warned about it.2 Likewise, in a double-blind trial of statins, the incidence of muscle-related adverse effects increased from 1.00% per year to 1.26% per year when patients (n = 9899) were subsequently unblinded and given the active drug.3

The nocebo phenomenon (the development of adverse effects to placebo) strongly supports that patient knowledge of adverse effects influences the reported incidence of these symptoms. Thus, the frequency and profile of adverse effects manifested by patients randomized to receive placebo in controlled, double-blind clinical trials are similar to those they have been told may occur with the active comparator drug.

Providing test results of dubious clinical significance also can lead to increased symptoms. For example, in a randomized study of acute low back pain, one group (n = 210) underwent spine imaging, whereas the other group (n = 211) did not. A treatment plan of conservative medical management was implemented in both groups. At 3-month follow-up, the former group had significantly more pain, greater functional impairment, and more physician visits.4 The problems involved in conveying equivocal test results or anatomical abnormalities of unknown clinical significance (“incidentalomas”) are likely to increase in importance as the volume and resolution of diagnostic testing accelerate.

Pain is particularly sensitive to the beliefs, thoughts, and expectations of patients. The specific language used in describing and preparing patients for painful procedures can affect the pain experience. For example, in a randomized study of women receiving epidural anesthesia or spinal anesthesia (n = 140) for childbirth, those told that the intradermal injection of a local anesthetic would “feel like a bee sting: this is the worst part of the procedure” reported significantly more pain than did those told “the local anesthetic…will numb the area and you will be comfortable during the procedure.”5 The importance of cognitions in the experience of pain is particularly timely, given the current crisis in opiate treatment for chronic, nonmalignant pain.


The Mechanism of Viscerosomatic Amplification

Viscerosomatic amplification has been proposed as an explanatory mechanism whereby information can affect the perception of symptoms.6 The information conveyed by the physician does not cause somatic symptoms but rather amplifies symptoms—symptoms that may be due to the underlying medical condition or to normal physiology (eg, ectopy, orthostatic hypotension), common benign dysfunctions (hoarseness, bloating, cramps), transient and self-limited ailments (rashes, upper respiratory tract infections), stressful life events, lack of exercise, insufficient sleep, or dietary indiscretion.

New medical information can initiate a self-perpetuating and self-validating cycle of symptom amplification (eFigure in the Supplement). Learning that a symptom may be more noteworthy or medically significant amplifies it. Reattributing the symptom to a new and more serious and more concerning source then causes the patient to monitor and scrutinize the symptom more closely, and this heightened attentional focus amplifies the symptom, making it more intense and intrusive, more disturbing and distressing.6,7 The misattribution also launches a selective search for additional symptoms to corroborate the suspicion that something is wrong, resulting in a heightened awareness of other diffuse, transient, or ambiguous symptoms that were previously ignored, minimized, or dismissed as insignificant. The seeming emergence of these “new” symptoms (along with dismissal of observations that do not confirm the suspected cause) is taken as further evidence of seriousness. The cycle of amplification is also fueled by mounting anxiety: Increasing worry and concern about the symptom’s medical significance, and its apparent worsening, make it more threatening and ominous.

 
Modulating Symptom Amplification and Minimizing Undue Distress

Careful attention to what and how information is conveyed can minimize the inadvertent fostering of excessive, disproportionate, and unduly bothersome symptoms. The initial therapeutic step is an exploration of the patient’s ideas about the symptoms: What is the suspected cause of the symptoms and their putative significance, what is the future course expected to be, what is most worrisome and troubling about them? The answers to these questions can lead to more realistic and reassuring discussion of the patients’ specific concerns.

Explaining the process of viscerosomatic amplification can be beneficial. Understanding that the interpretation of medical information can exacerbate and perpetuate symptoms, and learning about the processes of misattribution, selective attention, increased bodily scrutiny, and secondary anxiety, can have a palliative effect by providing patients with a more benign and reassuring explanation for their discomfort. The reassurance that the symptoms, however bothersome, are not medically harmful makes them less intrusive and more tolerable. The nocebo phenomenon provides a vivid, helpful, and nonpejorative illustration of the power of beliefs to amplify symptoms. This discussion also helps by emphasizing and encouraging adaptive coping to increase the tolerance of discomfort. It may be useful to prospectively identify patients at increased risk of disproportionate or undue nonspecific medication adverse effects, so that the amplification process can be explained to them in advance. This can be done with the Perceived Sensitivity to Medicines scale,8 a 5-item self-report questionnaire with demonstrated validity and reliability.

In addition to exploring the patient’s ideas and explaining the process of amplification, physicians need to use care in their choice of words. For example, in discussing potentially painful procedures, physicians can emphasize what will be done to alleviate the pain (such as simple relaxation techniques), use neutral language to describe the experience, and give the patient as much choice and control over the analgesic regimen as is medically feasible. Likewise, language is important in discussing nonspecific drug adverse effects, for example, focusing on the proportion of patients who do not have the adverse effects being enumerated, rather than on the proportion who do, and closely coupling information about benefits with information about adverse effects.

When obtaining informed consent, physicians must absolutely provide complete and truthful information and must avoid fostering a “paternalistic” patient-physician relationship. But balancing the requirement for full and complete disclosure with the iatrogenic potential of some information is problematic. “Contextualized informed consent” has been proposed as an ethical way of balancing these competing imperatives.9 When prescribing a medication, all serious and medically significant adverse effects are of course described, and the patient is instructed to report all adverse effects; however, if the patient agrees, benign, nonspecific symptoms are not enumerated in advance because it is explained that doing so makes them more likely.

Unusually distressing symptoms may point to difficulties in the patient-physician relationship, because symptoms can be a nonconfrontational and less explicit way of expressing doubts or concerns that patients feel and are unable or too embarrassed to voice openly. Symptoms can then become a covert, nonverbal communication of anxiety about pain, misgivings about medications, concerns about the meaning of a diagnostic test result, or concerns about the physician’s care or expertise.1

Conclusions
Information is an important mediator of the variability in the relationship between disease and symptoms. Some nonspecific drug adverse effects, undue pain from procedures, and symptoms exacerbated by learning about test results of unclear medical significance can be understood to share similar pathogenic mechanisms and respond to similar strategies of medical management.

Article Information 
 
Corresponding Author: Arthur J. Barsky, MD, Department of Psychiatry, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, 60 Fenwood Rd, Boston, MA 02115 (abarsky@bwh.harvard.edu).
Published Online: October 31, 2017. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.16216
Conflict of Interest Disclosures: The author has completed and submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest and none were reported.
 
 
References
1.
Barsky  AJ, Saintfort  R, Rogers  MP, Borus  JF.  Nonspecific medication side effects and the nocebo phenomenon.  JAMA. 2002;287(5):622-627.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Cocco  G.  Erectile dysfunction after therapy with metoprolol: the Hawthorne effect.  Cardiology. 2009;112(3):174-177.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Gupta  A, Thompson  D, Whitehouse  A,  et al; ASCOT Investigators.  Adverse events associated with unblinded, but not with blinded, statin therapy in the Anglo-Scandinavian Cardiac Outcomes Trial-Lipid-Lowering Arm (ASCOT-LLA): a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial and its non-randomised non-blind extension phase.  Lancet. 2017;389(10088):2473-2481.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Kendrick  D, Fielding  K, Bentley  E, Kerslake  R, Miller  P, Pringle  M.  Radiography of the lumbar spine in primary care patients with low back pain: randomised controlled trial.  BMJ. 2001;322(7283):400-405.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Varelmann  D, Pancaro  C, Cappiello  EC, Camann  WR.  Nocebo-induced hyperalgesia during local anesthetic injection.  Anesth Analg. 2010;110(3):868-870.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Brown  RJ.  Psychological mechanisms of medically unexplained symptoms: an integrative conceptual model.  Psychol Bull. 2004;130(5):793-812.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Pennebaker  JW, Epstein  D.  Implicit psychophysiology: effects of common beliefs and idiosyncratic physiological responses on symptom reporting.  J Pers. 1983;51:468-496. PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Horne  R, Faasse  K, Cooper  V,  et al.  The perceived sensitivity to medicines (PSM) scale: an evaluation of validity and reliability.  Br J Health Psychol. 2013;18(1):18-30.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Wells  RE, Kaptchuk  TJ.  To tell the truth, the whole truth, may do patients harm: the problem of the nocebo effect for informed consent.  Am J Bioeth. 2012;12(3):22-29.PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref

domingo, 12 de novembro de 2017

Interprofessional Education



III Colóquio Internacional de Educação e Trabalho Interprofissional em Saúde: como estamos formando?

Brasília, 07 - 09/12/2017


Tema: A educação interprofissional e o desafio de formar sujeitos implicados com as complexas necessidades de saúde do Brasil


PROGRAMAÇÃO











Faculty development



Study: Blending curriculum, PD

can help novice teachers improve

Comics and Medical Education



Medical and physician assistant students’ views on integrating comics into medical education

Amani Elghafri[1], Renee R. Stewart[2], Ramya A. Sampath[3], Jennifer C. Kesselheim[4], Michael J. Green[5]

Institution: 1. Internal Medicine Residency Program, Medical Education, Beaumont Hospital, Dearborn, MI, 2. Department of Humanities, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, 3. Division of General Internal Medicine and Primary Care, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, 4. Master of Medical Sciences in Medical Education Program, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, 5. Departments of Humanities and Medicine, Penn State College of Medicine, Hershey, PA,
Corresponding Author: Dr Amani Elghafri dr.elghafri@gmail.com
Categories: Professionalism/Ethics, Medical Education (General), Teaching and Learning 
 


Abstract

Purpose: This study explored comics as a tool for teaching medical and physician assistant (PA) students about end-of-life decisions and advance care planning.
Methods: Using a mixed method convergent design, a survey (consisting of a five-point Likert scale and open-ended questions) was administered to second-year medical and first-year PA students enrolled in an Ethics and Professionalism class at a US medical school. The survey assessed students’ perspectives on the addition of a comic “Betty P.” to assigned readings and about the use of comics in the classroom. Quantitative results were compared by demographics, and open-ended responses were analyzed qualitatively for emergent themes. Quantitative and qualitative findings were compared for correspondence.
Results: Of the 145 students who completed the survey (83%), 141 students (81%) had read the comic. The vast majority (89%) felt that “Betty P.” helped them understand end of life care for patients, and 84% felt that the comic did not distract them from the seriousness of the subject. Qualitative analysis revealed 2 major themes: 1) comics were educational, and 2) comics engaged learners emotionally. We observed convergence between quantitative and qualitative results.
Conclusion: Integrating comics as a supplemental teaching tool is an innovative way to engage medical students.  

Keywords: Comics and Medicine, Medical Education, Educational Comics, Medical Ethics, End of Life Care 
 
 

terça-feira, 31 de outubro de 2017

Digital assessment




Stacey Newbern Dammann, EdD, and Josh DeSantis



For many professors, student assessment is one of the most labor-intensive components of teaching a class. Items must be prepared, rubrics created, and instructions written. The work continues as the tests are scored, papers read, and comments shared. Performing authentic and meaningful student assessment takes time. Consequently, some professors construct relatively few assessments for their courses.
Unfortunately, this practice limits professors’ ability to reliably assess student learning. If a course grade is a mosaic, then each assessment is a tile. A mosaic with just a few tiles only presents a part of the picture. Professors can improve the quality of their assessment mosaic by increasing the number of performances they assess. These smaller and more frequently administered snapshots of student learning are frequently termed formative assessments. The integration of frequent formative assessments improves the validity of course assessment and has been demonstrated to have a variety of benefits, including improving student achievement and helping students develop more agency over their own learning (Nicol & Macfarlane-Dick, 2006). By providing more numerous and authentic measurements of student thinking, professors can improve the fidelity of their assessment mosaic and the reliability of their assessments of student learning.
The proliferation of mobile devices and the adoption of learning applications in higher education simplifies formative assessment. Professors can, for example, quickly create a multi-modal performance that requires students to write, draw, read, and watch video within the same assessment. Other tools allow for automatic grade responses, question-embedded documents, and video-based discussion. In addition to simplifying formative assessment, the use of these tools has been shown to amplify student engagement (Hwang & Chang, 2011).
Emerging tools and approaches open new opportunities for professors to gather more frequent and more authentic formative assessment data. This, in turn, can help students learn the course material and can help professors to tailor their instruction to meet the needs of their students.
Formative Assessment Tools to Consider
There are hundreds of formative assessment tools available. Many, however, perform similar functions. You can narrow your search by considering what approach would work best in your teaching context then identifying a tool you can integrate into your practice. If you are a novice, start small and aim for a win. Choose a course for which you would like to improve the quality of your assessment then select one technology tool to get started with.  
  • Multi-Modal Assessments – Several applications allow professors to create multiple-choice and open-ended items that are distributed digitally and assessed automatically. Student responses can be viewed instantaneously and downloaded to a spreadsheet for later use. Examples of these tools include Socrative (socrative.com) and Poll Everywhere (www.pollev.com). Some tools in this category have unique capabilities. Formative (www.goformative.com) allows professors to upload charts or graphic organizers that students can draw on with a stylus. Formative also allows professors to upload document “worksheets” which can then be augmented with multiple-choice and open-ended questions. Nearpod (www.nearpod.com) allows professors to upload their digital presentations and create digital quizzes to accompany them. Nearpod also allows professors to share three-dimensional field trips and models to help communicate ideas.
  • Video-Based Assessments – Question-embedded videos are an outstanding way to improve student engagement in blended or flipped instructional contexts. Professors may upload their own videos and screen-capture files, or use pre-existing streaming video from YouTube. Once uploaded, videos may be embedded with multiple-choice or short answer items. Using these tools allows professors to identify if the videos they use or create are being viewed by students. EdPuzzle (edpuzzle.com) and Playposit (www.playposit.com) are two leaders in this application category. A second type of video-based assessment allows professors to sustain discussion-board like conversation with brief videos. Flipgrid (www.flipgrid.com), for example, allows professors to posit a video question to which students may respond with their own video responses.
  • Quizzing Assessments – Finally, tools that utilize close-ended questions that provide a quick check of student understanding are also available. Quizizz (quizizz.com) and Kahoot (www.kahoot.com) are relatively quick and convenient to use as a wrap up to instruction or a review of concepts taught. Quizizz works on any device with a browser and features specific apps for iOS and Chrome. Kahoot also has specific apps for iOS, Android, and Windows devices. Kahoot now features a team function and the ability to adjust the time limit for questions. Themes, memes, and avatars are available to choose so professors need only focus on the content of the assessment. Ten to 20 questions are easily administered in both tools; although longer assessments tend to lessen student engagement. Both multiple choice and true/false question format work well with either tool. These provide a fast-paced formative assessment that can address fact-based knowledge as well as higher order thinking.
Considerations
It is important to ensure that your integration of technology is aligned to sound formative assessment design. Formative assessment is most valuable when it addresses student understanding, progress toward competencies or standards, and indicates concepts that need further attention for mastery. Additionally, formative assessment provides the instructor with valuable information on gaps in their students’ learning which can imply instructional changes or additional coverage of key concepts. The use of tech tools can make the creation, administration, and grading of formative assessment more efficient and can enhance reliability of assessments when used consistently in the classroom. Selecting one that effectively addresses your assessment needs and enhances your teaching style is critical. Moreover, it is important that you determine if the tools you select are compliant with your institution’s accessibility and student privacy policies.
Summary
Using tech tools to support assessment can enhance the assessment mosaic of nearly every course. These tech-enhanced formative assessments produce actionable data that can help students learn more efficiently (Yorke, 2003). The design and function of the applications introduced in this article provide a starting point to enhancing your course assessment. The wide array of tech tools available allow professors to select one that match teaching styles and assessment needs. The promise of real-time assessment information and the convenience of collecting data digitally make emerging technologies a great place to advance your teaching practice.
References
Hwang, G. J., & Chang, H. F. (2011). A formative assessment-based mobile learning approach to improving the learning attitudes and achievements of students. Computers & Education, 56(4), 1023-1031.
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education, 31(2), 199-218.
Yorke, M. (2003). Formative assessment in higher education: Moves towards theory and the enhancement of pedagogic practice. Higher education45(4), 477-501.
Stacey Newbern Dammann, associate professor and chair, Department of Education, York College of Pennsylvania. Josh DeSantis, assistant professor of education, director of Masters of Education Program, York College of Pennsylvania.