Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism

Current Issue

By Issue

By Author

By Subject

Author Index

Keyword Index

About Journal

Aims and Scope

Editorial Board

Publication Ethics

Indexing and Abstracting

Related Links

FAQ

Peer Review Process

News

Online formative assessments: exploring their educational value

Authors

Department of obstetrics and Gyanecology, International Medical University, Jalan Rasah, Seremban, 70200, Malaysia

Abstract

Introduction: Online formative assessments (OFA’s) have beenincreasingly recognised in medical education as resources thatpromote self-directed learning. Formative assessments are usedto support the self-directed learning of students. Online formativeassessments have been identified to be less time consuming withautomated feedback. This pilot study aimed to determine whetherparticipation and performance in online formative assessments(OFA’s) had measurable effects on learning and evaluate thestudents’ experience of using the OFA’s in the department ofObstetrics and Gynaecology.Methods: This is a cross-sectional study conducted amongfourth year medical students (n=92) during their seven weekpostings in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Five sets of onlineformative assessments in the format of one best answers (OBA),Objective structured practical examination (OSPE) and Shortanswer question (SAQ) with feedback were delivered over fiveweeks through the online portal. The mean scores of the endof posting summative exam (EOP) of those who participated inthe assessments (OFA users) and of those who did not (non-OFAusers) were compared, using Students t-test. The frequency oftool usage was analysed and satisfaction surveys were utilized atthe end of the course by survey questionnaire using the five pointLikert scale.Results: The mean scores of the students in end of postingsummative examination marks for students who had participatedin the online formative assessment (OFA users) and for those whohad not (non OFA users) showed no significant difference in allthe three components OBA, SAQ and OSPE (p=0.902, 0.633,0.248). Majority of the students perceived that OFAs fulfilled thestated aims and objectives and so they would persuade their peersto participate in the OFAs.Conclusions: Online formative assessments are perceived astools that promote self-directed learning, improved knowledgeand tailor learning for individual learning needs and style.Keywords: Assessments, Self-directed learning, Education

References
  1. Murad MH, Coto-Yglesias F, Varkey P, Prokop L, Murad AL. 2010. The effectiveness of self-directed learning in health professions education: A systematic review. Med Educ 44:1057–1068.
  2. Sargeant J, Mann K, Sinclair D, van der Vleuten C, Metsemakers J. 2008. Understanding the influence of emotions and reflection upon multi-source feedback acceptance and use. Adv Health Sci Educ 13:275–288
  3. Rolfe I, McPherson J: Formative assessment: how am I doing?. Lancet. 1995, 345: 837-839. 10.1016/S0140-6736(95)92968-1
  4. Prober CG, Khan S. Medical education reimagined: a call to action. Acad Med. 2013;88:1407–10.
  5. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
  6. Schutz, P. A., & Davis,H. A.). Emotions and self-regulation during test taking. Educational Psychologist, 2000 : 35, 243- 256.
  7. Greenhalgh T: Computer assisted learning in undergraduate medical education. BMJ. 2001, 322: 40-4.
  8. Alexandraki I, Mooradian A: Academic advancement of clinician educators: why is it so difficult?. Int J Clin Pract. 2011, 65 (11): 1118-1125.
  9. Palmer E. The assessment of a structured online formative assessment program: a randomised controlled trial. BMC Medical Education; 2014:14:8
  10. Velan GM, Kumar RK, Dziegielewski M, Wakefield D: Web-based assessments in pathology with QuestionMark Perception. Pathology. 2002, 34: 282-4. 10.1080/00313020220131372.
  11. Wang TH. 2011. Developing web-based assessment strategies for facilitating junior high school students to perform self-regulated learning in an e-Learning environment. Comput Educ 57:1801–1812.
  12. Gikandi JW, Morrow D, Davis NE. 2011. Online formative assessment in higher education: A review of the literature. Comput Educ 57:2333–2351.
  13. Johnson GM: Optional online quizzes: College student use and relationship to achievement. Can J Learn Tech [serial online]. 2006,
  14. Cook DA, Levinson AJ, Garside S. 2010. Time and learning efficiency in Internet-based learning: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Adv Health Sci Educ 15:755–770
  15. Carrillo-de-la-Pena MT, Bailles E, Cseras X, Martinez I, Ortet G, Perez J. 2009. Formative assessment and academic achievement in pre-graduate students of health sciences. Adv Health Sci Educ 14:61–67
  16. Kibble J. 2007. Use of unsupervised online quizzes as formative assessment in a medical physiology course: Effects of incentives on student participation and performance. Adv Physiol Educ 31:253–260.
  17. Sly L. 1999. Practice tests as formative assessment improve student performance on computer-managed learning assessments. Assess Eval Higher Educ 24:339–343.
  18. Kuhn D, Dean D. Is developing scientific thinking all about learning to control variables? Psychological Science. 2005;16(11):866–870.
  19. Rushton A. 2005. Formative assessment: A key to deep learning? Med Teacher 27:509–513
  20. Kibble JD, Johnson TR, Khalil MK, Nelson LD, Riggs GH, Borrero JL, Payer AF. 2011. Insights gained from the analysis of performance and participation in Online Formative Assessment. Teach Learn Med 23:125–129.
  21. Angus SD, Watson J. 2009. Does regular online testing enhance student learning in the numerical sciences? Robust evidence from a large data set. Br J Educ Technol 40:255–272.
  22. Bouwmeester RAM, de Kleijn RAM, Freriksen AWM, van Emst MG, Veeneklaas RJ, van Hoeij MJW, Spinder M, Ritzen MJ, ten Cate OTJ, van Rijen HVM. Online formative tests linked to microlectures improve academic achievement. Med Teacher, epub ahead of print. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.818633.
  23. Buchanan T. 2000. The efficacy of a World-Wide Web mediated formative assessment. J Comp Assist Learn 16:193–200
  24. Peat M, Franklin S. Has student learning been improved by the use of online and offline formative assessment opportunities? Aust J Ed Technol. 2003;19(1):87–99.
  25. Brothen T, Wambach C. Effective student use of computerized quizzes. Teach Psychol. 2001;28:292–294.
  26. Haberyan KA. Do weekly quizzes improve student performance on general biology exams? Am Biol Teach. 2003;65:110–114
  27. McDermott KB, Agarwal PK, D'Antonio L, Roediger HL, 3rd, McDaniel MA. Both multiple-choice and short-answer quizzes enhance later exam performance in middle and high school classes. J Exp Psychol Appl. 2014;20:3–21. [PubMed]
  28. Seale J, Chapman J, Davey C: The influence of assessments on students' motivation to learn in a therapy degree course. Med Educ. 2000, 34: 614-621. 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2000.00528.x.
  29. Sadler DR. 1989. Formative assessment and the design of instructional systems. Instruct Sci 18:119–144.
  30. Hattie J, Timperley H. 2007. The power of feedback. Rev Educ Res 77:81–112.
  31. Walker DJ, Topping K, Rodrigues S. 2008. Student reflections on formative e-assessment: Expectations and perceptions. Learn, Media Technol 33:221–234.
  32. Henley DC. 2003. Use of Web-based formative assessment to support student learning in a metabolism/nutrition unit. Eur J Dental Educ 7:116–122.
Journal of Advances in Medical Education & Professionalism
Volume 6, Issue 2 - Serial Number 2
27
April 2018
Pages 51-57
Files
Share
How to cite
Statistics