Report from the STEM 2026 Workshop on Assessment, Evaluation, and Accreditation

A gathering of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) higher education stakeholders met in November 2018 to consider the relationship between innovation in education and assessment. When we talk about assessment in higher education, it is inextricably linked to both evaluation and accreditation, so all three were considered. The first question we asked was can we build a nation of learners? This starts with considering the student, first and foremost. As educators, this is a foundation of our exploration and makes our values transparent. As educators, how do we know we are having an impact? As members and implementers of institutions, programs and professional societies, how do we know students are learning and that what they are learning has value? The focus of this conversation was on undergraduate learning, although we acknowledge that the topic is closely tied to successful primary and secondary learning as well as graduate education. Within the realm of undergraduate education, students can experience four-year institutions and two-year institutions, with many students learning at both at different times. Thirty-seven participants spent two days considering cases of innovation in STEM education, learning about the best practices in assessment, and then discussing the relationship of innovation and assessment at multiple levels within the context of higher education. Six working groups looked at course-level, program-level, and institution-level assessment, as well as cross-disciplinary programs, large-scale policy issues, and the difficult-to-name “non-content/cross-content” group that looked at assessment of transferable skills and attributes like professional skills, scientific thinking, mindset, and identity, all of which are related to post-baccalaureate success. These conversations addressed issues that cut across multiple levels, disciplines, and course topics, or are otherwise seen as tangential or perpendicular to perhaps “required” assessment at institutional, programmatic, or course levels. This report presents the context, recommendations, and “wicked” challenges from the meeting participants and their working groups. Along with the recommendations of workshop participants, these intricate challenges weave a complex web of issues that collectively need to be addressed by our community. They generated a great deal of interest and engagement from workshop participants, and act as a call to continue these conversations and seek answers that will improve STEM education through innovation and improved assessment. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DUE-1843775. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation

Report from the STEM 2026 Workshop on Assessment, Evaluation, and Accreditation

A gathering of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) higher education stakeholders met in November 2018 to consider the relationship between innovation in education and assessment. When we talk about assessment in higher education, it is inextricably linked to both evaluation and accreditation, so all three were considered. The first question we asked was can we build a nation of learners? This starts with considering the student, first and foremost. As educators, this is a foundation of our exploration and makes our values transparent. As educators, how do we know we are having an impact? As members and implementers of institutions, programs and professional societies, how do we know students are learning and that what they are learning has value? The focus of this conversation was on undergraduate learning, although we acknowledge that the topic is closely tied to successful primary and secondary learning as well as graduate education. Within the realm of undergraduate education, students can experience four-year institutions and two-year institutions, with many students learning at both at different times. Thirty-seven participants spent two days considering cases of innovation in STEM education, learning about the best practices in assessment, and then discussing the relationship of innovation and assessment at multiple levels within the context of higher education. Six working groups looked at course-level, program-level, and institution-level assessment, as well as cross-disciplinary programs, large-scale policy issues, and the difficult-to-name “non-content/cross-content” group that looked at assessment of transferable skills and attributes like professional skills, scientific thinking, mindset, and identity, all of which are related to post-baccalaureate success. These conversations addressed issues that cut across multiple levels, disciplines, and course topics, or are otherwise seen as tangential or perpendicular to perhaps “required” assessment at institutional, programmatic, or course levels. This report presents the context, recommendations, and “wicked” challenges from the meeting participants and their working groups. Along with the recommendations of workshop participants, these intricate challenges weave a complex web of issues that collectively need to be addressed by our community. They generated a great deal of interest and engagement from workshop participants, and act as a call to continue these conversations and seek answers that will improve STEM education through innovation and improved assessment. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. DUE-1843775. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation

Ischemic stroke as a complication of cryptococcal meningitis and immune reconstitution inflammatory syndrome: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Cryptococcal meningitis remains the leading cause of adult meningitis in Sub-Saharan Africa. Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome (IRIS) following anti-retroviral therapy (ART) initiation is an important complication. Here we report the first documented case of a IRIS reaction presenting as an ischemic stroke. CASE PRESENTATION: A 38 year old newly diagnosed HIV-infected, ART naive Malawian male presented to a tertiary referral hospital in Blantyre, Malawi with a 2 week history of headache. A diagnosis of cryptococcal meningitis was made and the patient was started on 1200 mg fluconazole once daily and flucytosine 25 mg/kg four times daily as part of the Advancing Cryptococcal Treatment for Africa (ACTA) clinical trial. There was an initial clinical and microbiological response to anti-fungal treatment and anti-retroviral therapy was started at week 4. The patient re-presented 16 days later with recurrence of headache, fever, and a sudden onset of left sided weakness in the context of rapid immune reconstitution; peripheral CD4 count had increased from a baseline of 29 cells/μl to 198 cells/μl. Recurrence of cryptococcal meningitis was excluded through CSF examination and fungal culture. Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) of the brain demonstrated multi-focal DWI (diffusion weighted imaging) positive lesions consistent with an ischemic stroke. Given the temporal relationship to ART initiation, these MRI findings in the context of sterile CSF with raised CSF protein and a rapid immune reconstitution, following an earlier favorable response to treatment is most consistent with a paradoxical Immune Reconstitution Inflammatory Syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Stroke is an increasing cause of morbidity and mortality amongst HIV infected persons. Ischemic stroke is a recognized complication of cryptococcal meningitis in the acute phase and is thought to be mediated by an infectious vasculitis. This is the first time an ischemic stroke has been described as part of a paradoxical IRIS reaction. This report adds to the spectrum of clinical IRIS presentations recognized and highlights to clinicians the potential complications encountered at ART initiation in severely immunocompromised patients

Fish losses for whom? A gendered assessment of post-harvest losses in the barotse floodplain fishery, Zambia

Few studies examine post-harvest fish losses using a gender lens or collect sex-disaggregated data. This mixed-methods study assessed fish losses experienced by female and male value chain actors in a fishery in western Zambia to determine who experiences losses, why, and to what extent. Results indicate that participation in the fishery value chain is gendered and most losses occur during post-harvest activities. Discussions with fishers, processors, and traders suggest the value chain is more fluid than often depicted, with people making calculated decisions to sell fresh or dried fish depending on certain conditions, and mostly driven by the need to avoid losses and attain higher prices. The study shows that gender norms shape the rewards and risks offered by the value chain. This could be the reason why a greater proportion of women than men experienced physical losses in our study sample. Female processors lost three times the mass of their fish consignments compared to male processors. Technical constraints (lack of processing technologies) and social constraints (norms and beliefs) create gender gaps in post-harvest losses. Addressing unequal gender relations in value chains, whilst also promoting the use of loss-reducing technologies, could increase fish supply and food security in small-scale fisheries

Transcriptional Subtyping and CD8 Immunohistochemistry Identifies Patients With Stage II and III Colorectal Cancer With Poor Prognosis Who Benefit From Adjuvant Chemotherapy

This work was funded by Cancer Research UK: C212/A13721 and C11884/A24387Peer reviewedPublisher PD

If you build it, they still may not come: outcomes and process of implementing a community-based integrated knowledge translation mapping innovation

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Maps and mapping tools through geographic information systems (GIS) are highly valuable for turning data into useful information that can help inform decision-making and knowledge translation (KT) activities. However, there are several challenges involved in incorporating GIS applications into the decision-making process. We highlight the challenges and opportunities encountered in implementing a mapping innovation as a KT strategy within the non-profit (public) health sector, reflecting on the processes and outcomes related to our KT innovations.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A case study design, whereby the case is defined as the data analyst and manager dyad (a two-person team) in selected Ontario Early Year Centres (OEYCs), was used. Working with these paired individuals, we provided a series of interventions followed by one-on-one visits to ensure that our interventions were individually tailored to personal and local decision-making needs. Data analysis was conducted through a variety of qualitative assessments, including field notes, interview data, and maps created by participants. Data collection and data analysis have been guided by the Ottawa Model of Research Use (OMRU) conceptual framework.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Despite our efforts to remove all barriers associated with our KT innovation (maps), our results demonstrate that both individual level and systemic barriers pose significant challenges for participants. While we cannot claim a causal association between our project and increased mapping by participants, participants did report a moderate increase in the use of maps in their organization. Specifically, maps were being used in decision-making forums as a way to allocate resources, confirm tacit knowledge about community needs, make financially-sensitive decisions more transparent, evaluate programs, and work with community partners.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>This project highlights the role that maps can play and the importance of communicating the importance of maps as a decision support tool. Further, it represents an integrated knowledge project in the community setting, calling to question the applicability of traditional KT approaches when community values, minimal resources, and partners play a large role in decision making. The study also takes a unique perspective--where research producers and users work as dyad-pairs in the same organization--that has been under-explored to date in KT studies.</p

Canine and human gastrointestinal stromal tumors display similar mutations in c-KIT exon 11

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are common mesenchymal neoplasms in the gastrointestinal tract of humans and dogs. Little is known about the pathogenesis of these tumors. This study evaluated the role of <it>c-KIT </it>in canine GISTs; specifically, we investigated activating mutations in exons 8, 9, 11, 13, and 17 of <it>c-KIT </it>and exons 12, 14, and 18 of platelet-derived growth factor receptor, alpha polypeptide (<it>PDGFRA</it>), all of which have been implicated in human GISTs.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Seventeen canine GISTs all confirmed to be positive for KIT immunostaining were studied. Exons 8, 9, 11, 13 and 17 of <it>c-KIT </it>and exons 12, 14, and 18 of <it>PDGFRA</it>, were amplified from DNA isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Of these seventeen cases, six amplicons of exon 11 of <it>c-KIT </it>showed aberrant bands on gel electrophoresis. Sequencing of these amplicons revealed heterozygous in-frame deletions in six cases. The mutations include two different but overlapping six base pair deletions. Exons 8, 9, 13, and 17 of <it>c-KIT </it>and exons 12, 14, and 18 of <it>PDGFRA </it>had no abnormalities detected by electrophoresis and sequencing did not reveal any mutations, other than synonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) found in exon 11 of <it>c-KIT </it>and exons 12 and 14 of <it>PDGFRA</it>.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The deletion mutations detected in canine GISTs are similar to those previously found in the juxtamembrane domain of <it>c-KIT </it>in canine cutaneous mast cell tumors in our laboratory as well as to those reported in human GISTs. Interestingly, none of the other <it>c-KIT </it>or <it>PDGFRA </it>exons showed any abnormalities in our cases. This finding underlines the critical importance of <it>c-KIT </it>in the pathophysiology of canine GISTs. The expression of KIT and the identification of these activating mutations in <it>c-KIT </it>implicate KIT in the pathogenesis of these tumors. Our results indicate that mutations in <it>c-KIT </it>may be of prognostic significance and that targeting KIT may be a rational approach to treatment of these malignant tumors. This study further demonstrates that spontaneously occurring canine GISTs share molecular features with human GISTs and are an appropriate model for human GISTs.</p

Albiglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (Harmony Outcomes): a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial

Background: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists differ in chemical structure, duration of action, and in their effects on clinical outcomes. The cardiovascular effects of once-weekly albiglutide in type 2 diabetes are unknown. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of albiglutide in preventing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. Methods: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in 610 sites across 28 countries. We randomly assigned patients aged 40 years and older with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (at a 1:1 ratio) to groups that either received a subcutaneous injection of albiglutide (30–50 mg, based on glycaemic response and tolerability) or of a matched volume of placebo once a week, in addition to their standard care. Investigators used an interactive voice or web response system to obtain treatment assignment, and patients and all study investigators were masked to their treatment allocation. We hypothesised that albiglutide would be non-inferior to placebo for the primary outcome of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, which was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. If non-inferiority was confirmed by an upper limit of the 95% CI for a hazard ratio of less than 1·30, closed testing for superiority was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02465515. Findings: Patients were screened between July 1, 2015, and Nov 24, 2016. 10 793 patients were screened and 9463 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to groups: 4731 patients were assigned to receive albiglutide and 4732 patients to receive placebo. On Nov 8, 2017, it was determined that 611 primary endpoints and a median follow-up of at least 1·5 years had accrued, and participants returned for a final visit and discontinuation from study treatment; the last patient visit was on March 12, 2018. These 9463 patients, the intention-to-treat population, were evaluated for a median duration of 1·6 years and were assessed for the primary outcome. The primary composite outcome occurred in 338 (7%) of 4731 patients at an incidence rate of 4·6 events per 100 person-years in the albiglutide group and in 428 (9%) of 4732 patients at an incidence rate of 5·9 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·78, 95% CI 0·68–0·90), which indicated that albiglutide was superior to placebo (p&lt;0·0001 for non-inferiority; p=0·0006 for superiority). The incidence of acute pancreatitis (ten patients in the albiglutide group and seven patients in the placebo group), pancreatic cancer (six patients in the albiglutide group and five patients in the placebo group), medullary thyroid carcinoma (zero patients in both groups), and other serious adverse events did not differ between the two groups. There were three (&lt;1%) deaths in the placebo group that were assessed by investigators, who were masked to study drug assignment, to be treatment-related and two (&lt;1%) deaths in the albiglutide group. Interpretation: In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, albiglutide was superior to placebo with respect to major adverse cardiovascular events. Evidence-based glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists should therefore be considered as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline