Abstract
Background The Progress Test (PT) was developed to assess student learning within integrated curricula. Whilst it is effective in promoting and rewarding deep approaches to learning in some settings, we hypothesised that implementation of the curriculum (design and assessment) may impact on students’ preparation for the PT and their learning. Aim To compare students’ perceptions of and preparations for the PT at two medical schools. Method Focus groups were used to generate items for a questionnaire. This was piloted, refined, and then delivered at both schools. Exploratory factor analysis identified the main factors underpinning response patterns. ANOVA was used to compare differences in response by school, year group and gender. Results Response rates were 640 (57%) and 414 (47%) at Schools A and B, respectively. Three major factors were identified: the PT’s ability to (1) assess academic learning (2) support clinical learning; (3) the PT’s impact on exam preparation. Significant differences were found between settings. In the school with early clinical contact, more frequent PTs and no end of unit tests, students were more likely to appreciate the PT as a support for learning, perceive it as fair and valid, and use a deeper approach to learning—but they also spent longer preparing for the test. Conclusion Different approaches to the delivery of the PT can impact significantly on student study patterns. The learning environment has an important impact on student perceptions of assessment and approach to learning. Careful decisions about PT deployment must be taken to ensure its optimal impact.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Albano, M. M. G., Cavallo, F., Hoogenboom, R., Magni, F., Majoor, G., Manenti, F., et al. (1996). An international comparison of knowledge levels of medical students: The Maastricht Progress Test. Medical Education, 30, 239–245.
Arnold, L., & Willoughby, T. (1990). The quarterly profile examination. Academic Medicine, 65, 515–516.
Berkel, H. J. M. (1990). Assessment in a problem-based medical curriculum. Higher Education, 19, 123–146.
Berkel, H. J. M., Nuy, H. J. P., & Geerligs, T. (1994). The influence of progress tests and block tests on study behaviour. Instructional Science, 22, 317–333.
Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher Education, 32, 347–364.
Blake, J. M., Norman, G. R., Keane, D. R., Mueller, C. B., Cunnington, J., & Didyk, N. (1996). Introducing progress testing in McMaster University’s problem based medical curriculum: Psychometric properties and effect on learning. Academic Medicine, 71, 1002–1007.
Coombes, L., Ricketts, C., Freeman, A., & Stratford, J. (2010). Beyond assessment: Feedback for individuals and institutions based on the progress test. Medical Teacher, 32, 486–490.
Entwistle, N., McCune, V., & Hounsell, J. (2002). Approaches to studying and perceptions of university teaching-learning environments: Concepts, measures and preliminary findings. ETL Project Occasional Report 1. Retrieved 23 November 2010, from http://www.etl.tla.ed.ac.uk/docs/ETLreport1.pdf.
Freeman, A., van der Vleuten, C., Nouns, Z., & Ricketts, C. (2010). Progress testing internationally. Medical Teacher, 32, 451–455.
Mattick, K., Dennis, I., & Bligh, J. (2004). Approaches to learning and studying in medical students: Validation of a revised inventory and its relation to student characteristics and performance. Medical Education, 38, 535–543.
Mattick, K., & Knight, L. (2007). High-quality learning: Harder to achieve than we think? Medical Education, 41, 638–644.
Muijtjens, A. M., Hoogenboom, R. J., Verwijnen, G. M., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (1998). Relative or absolute standards in assessing medical knowledge using progress tests. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 3, 81–87.
Muijtjens, A. M. M., Schuwirth, L. W. T., Cohen-Schotanus, J., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2008). Differences in knowledge development exposed by multi-curricular progress test data. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 13, 593–605.
Muijtjens, A. M. M., Timmermans, I., Donkers, J., Peperkamp, R., Medema, H., Cohen-Schotanus, J., et al. (2010). Flexible electronic feedback using the virtues of progress testing. Medical Teacher, 32, 491–495.
Newble, D. I., & Jaeger, K. (1983). The effect of assessments and examinations on the learning of medical students. Medical Education, 17, 165–171.
Norman, G. R., & Streiner, D. L. (2008). Biostatistics: The bare essentials (PMPH USA).
Reid, W. A., Duvall, E., & Evans, P. (2007). Relationship between assessment results and approaches to learning and studying in year two medical students. Medical Education, 41, 754–762.
Van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Verwijnen, G. M., & Wijnen, W. H. F. W. (1996). Fifteen years of experience with progress testing in a problem-based learning curriculum. Medical Teacher, 18, 103–109.
Verhoeven, B. H., Verwijnen, G. M., Scherpbier, A. J. J. A., & van der Vleuten, C. P. M. (2002). Growth of medical knowledge. Medical Education, 36, 711–717.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix: a copy of the questionnaire as delivered to students
Appendix: a copy of the questionnaire as delivered to students
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wade, L., Harrison, C., Hollands, J. et al. Student perceptions of the progress test in two settings and the implications for test deployment. Adv in Health Sci Educ 17, 573–583 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9334-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9334-z