ArticleCureus2023
The Impact of Periodic Formative Assessments on Learning Through the Lens of the Complex Adaptive System and Social Sustainability Principles.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMedical institutions in India have employed different periodic formative assessment (FA) methods with variable impact. The formative evaluation must incorporate feedback to improve learning. Formative assessment has helped inexperienced students apprehend their weaknesses, make choices, prepare for summative exams, and allow teachers to identify regions wherein students may also need aid. This study attempts to quantify the impact of the weekly, monthly, and semester formative assessments and view it retrospectively through the lens of complex adaptive systems and social sustainability principles.
methodsWe used a post-exam survey and statistical analysis to compare the students' performance between the timely periodic formative assessments in a competency-based curriculum. The cohort consisted of 2018 (semester), 2019 (weekly), and 2020 (monthly) first-year medical students. Cronbach alpha, spearman's correlation coefficient, descriptive statistics, and repeated measure analysis of variance were used to explore the reliability and relationship between formative assessment and summative scores of each cohort and find any significant difference. The authors also analyzed the accordance between the FA exam performance and students' perceptions, deduced broad themes, and discussed the appropriateness and feasibility of students' suggestions for changes.
resultsA significant correlation was found only between the weekly formative assessment and summative scores (r=0.74, p=0.01). The analysis of variance established significant differences between all summative scores of respective periodic formative assessments. The weekly formative assessment showed the highest mean summative examination scores. This study helped comprehend preclinical students' apprehension after the intervention of periodic formative assessments. The students found this intervention helpful in driving and detecting gaps in learning but preferred focused feedback, clinically oriented practices, and countered mental health issues.
conclusionThe continuous periodic formative assessment model had a valid educational impact but was not sustainable according to social sustainability principles. A complex adaptive framework can be utilized to make it sustainable.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.