Cargando…

Comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback

Introduction: Both formative and summative assessments have their place in medical curricula: formative assessment to accompany the learning process and summative assessment to ensure that minimum standards are achieved. Depending on the conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schüttpelz-Brauns, Katrin, Karay, Yassin, Arias, Johann, Gehlhar, Kirsten, Zupanic, Michaela
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7346285/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32685669
http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001334
_version_ 1783556375688773632
author Schüttpelz-Brauns, Katrin
Karay, Yassin
Arias, Johann
Gehlhar, Kirsten
Zupanic, Michaela
author_facet Schüttpelz-Brauns, Katrin
Karay, Yassin
Arias, Johann
Gehlhar, Kirsten
Zupanic, Michaela
author_sort Schüttpelz-Brauns, Katrin
collection PubMed
description Introduction: Both formative and summative assessments have their place in medical curricula: formative assessment to accompany the learning process and summative assessment to ensure that minimum standards are achieved. Depending on the conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback, students place more or less importance on formative assessment, and thus the fulfilment of its function may be questionable. This study describes how the low-stakes formative Berlin Progress Test (BPT) is embedded at two medical faculties with partially different framework conditions and what effects these have on the students' testing efforts and the evaluation of the test, especially the perception of its benefits and (intangible) costs, such as non-participation in contemporaneous activities and emotional impairments. Methods: In this study, the proportion of non-serious BPT participants at two medical faculties (total sample: N(F1)=1,410, N(F2)=1,176) in winter term 2015/16 was determined both by the number of unanswered questions on the test itself and in a survey using a standardized instrument (N(F1)=415, N(F2)=234). Furthermore, open questions were asked in this survey about perceived benefits and perceived costs, which were analyzed with qualitative and quantitative methods. Results: The BPT is generally better accepted at Faculty 2. This can be seen in the higher proportion of serious test takers, the lower perceived costs and the higher reported benefit, as well as the higher proportion of constructive comments. Faculty 2 students better understood the principle of formative testing and used the results of the BPT as feedback on their own knowledge progress, motivation to learn and reduction of exam fear. Discussion: When medical faculties integrate formative assessments into the curriculum, they have to provide a framework in which these assessments are perceived as an important part of the curriculum. Otherwise, it is questionable whether they can fulfil their function of accompanying the learning process.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7346285
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher German Medical Science GMS Publishing House
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73462852020-07-17 Comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback Schüttpelz-Brauns, Katrin Karay, Yassin Arias, Johann Gehlhar, Kirsten Zupanic, Michaela GMS J Med Educ Article Introduction: Both formative and summative assessments have their place in medical curricula: formative assessment to accompany the learning process and summative assessment to ensure that minimum standards are achieved. Depending on the conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback, students place more or less importance on formative assessment, and thus the fulfilment of its function may be questionable. This study describes how the low-stakes formative Berlin Progress Test (BPT) is embedded at two medical faculties with partially different framework conditions and what effects these have on the students' testing efforts and the evaluation of the test, especially the perception of its benefits and (intangible) costs, such as non-participation in contemporaneous activities and emotional impairments. Methods: In this study, the proportion of non-serious BPT participants at two medical faculties (total sample: N(F1)=1,410, N(F2)=1,176) in winter term 2015/16 was determined both by the number of unanswered questions on the test itself and in a survey using a standardized instrument (N(F1)=415, N(F2)=234). Furthermore, open questions were asked in this survey about perceived benefits and perceived costs, which were analyzed with qualitative and quantitative methods. Results: The BPT is generally better accepted at Faculty 2. This can be seen in the higher proportion of serious test takers, the lower perceived costs and the higher reported benefit, as well as the higher proportion of constructive comments. Faculty 2 students better understood the principle of formative testing and used the results of the BPT as feedback on their own knowledge progress, motivation to learn and reduction of exam fear. Discussion: When medical faculties integrate formative assessments into the curriculum, they have to provide a framework in which these assessments are perceived as an important part of the curriculum. Otherwise, it is questionable whether they can fulfil their function of accompanying the learning process. German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2020-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC7346285/ /pubmed/32685669 http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001334 Text en Copyright © 2020 Schüttpelz-Brauns et al. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. See license information at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Schüttpelz-Brauns, Katrin
Karay, Yassin
Arias, Johann
Gehlhar, Kirsten
Zupanic, Michaela
Comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback
title Comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback
title_full Comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback
title_fullStr Comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback
title_short Comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback
title_sort comparison of the evaluation of formative assessment at two medical faculties with different conditions of undergraduate training, assessment and feedback
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7346285/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32685669
http://dx.doi.org/10.3205/zma001334
work_keys_str_mv AT schuttpelzbraunskatrin comparisonoftheevaluationofformativeassessmentattwomedicalfacultieswithdifferentconditionsofundergraduatetrainingassessmentandfeedback
AT karayyassin comparisonoftheevaluationofformativeassessmentattwomedicalfacultieswithdifferentconditionsofundergraduatetrainingassessmentandfeedback
AT ariasjohann comparisonoftheevaluationofformativeassessmentattwomedicalfacultieswithdifferentconditionsofundergraduatetrainingassessmentandfeedback
AT gehlharkirsten comparisonoftheevaluationofformativeassessmentattwomedicalfacultieswithdifferentconditionsofundergraduatetrainingassessmentandfeedback
AT zupanicmichaela comparisonoftheevaluationofformativeassessmentattwomedicalfacultieswithdifferentconditionsofundergraduatetrainingassessmentandfeedback