Literature DB >> 20515379

Flexible electronic feedback using the virtues of progress testing.

Arno M M Muijtjens1, Ilske Timmermans, Jeroen Donkers, Robert Peperkamp, Harro Medema, Janke Cohen-Schotanus, Arnold Thoben, Arnold C G Wenink, Cees P M van der Vleuten.   

Abstract

The potential richness of the feedback for learners and teachers is one of the educational advantages of progress tests (PTs). Every test administration yields information on a student's knowledge level in each sub-domain of the test (cross-sectional information), and it adds a next point to the corresponding knowledge growth curve (longitudinal information). Traditional paper-based feedback has severe limitations and requires considerable effort from the learners to give meaning to the data. We reasoned that the PT data should be flexibly accessible in all pathways and with any available comparison data, according to the personal interest of the learner. For that purpose, a web-based tool (Progress test Feedback, the ProF system) was developed. This article presents the principles and features of the generated feedback and shows how it can be used. In addition to enhancement of the feedback, the ProF database of longitudinal PT-data also provides new opportunities for research on knowledge growth, and these are currently being explored.

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20515379     DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2010.486058

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Teach        ISSN: 0142-159X            Impact factor:   3.650


  8 in total

1.  The progress test of medicine: the Dutch experience.

Authors:  René A Tio; Bert Schutte; Ariadne A Meiboom; Janke Greidanus; Eline A Dubois; Andre J A Bremers
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2016-02

2.  On the issue of costs in programmatic assessment.

Authors:  Cees P M van der Vleuten; Sylvia Heeneman
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2016-10

3.  Progress test utopia.

Authors:  Cees van der Vleuten; Adrian Freeman; Carlos Fernando Collares
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2018-04

4.  Institutional strategies related to test-taking behavior in low stakes assessment.

Authors:  Katrin Schüttpelz-Brauns; Martin Hecht; Katinka Hardt; Yassin Karay; Michaela Zupanic; Juliane E Kämmer
Journal:  Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract       Date:  2019-10-22       Impact factor: 3.853

5.  Impact of Progress testing on the learning experiences of students in medicine, dentistry and dental therapy.

Authors:  Kamran Ali; Josephine Cockerill; Daniel Zahra; Christopher Tredwin; Colin Ferguson
Journal:  BMC Med Educ       Date:  2018-11-09       Impact factor: 2.463

6.  Resident and Faculty Attitudes Toward the Dutch Radiology Progress Test as It Transitions from a Formative to a Summative Measure of Licensure Eligibility.

Authors:  D R Rutgers; J P J van Schaik; W van Lankeren; F van Raamt; Th J Ten Cate
Journal:  Med Sci Educ       Date:  2018-08-17

7.  The use of progress testing.

Authors:  Lambert W T Schuwirth; Cees P M van der Vleuten
Journal:  Perspect Med Educ       Date:  2012-03-10

8.  The European Hematology Exam: The Next Step toward the Harmonization of Hematology Training in Europe.

Authors:  José-Tomás Navarro; Gunnar Birgegård; Janet Strivens; Wietske W G Hollegien; Naomi van Hattem; Manon T Saris; Marielle J Wondergem; Cheng-Hock Toh; Antonio M Almeida
Journal:  Hemasphere       Date:  2019-09-27
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.