Introducing various formative assessment methods in Biochemistry of Phase I MBBS Curriculum
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2025-04
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
?Eldaghayes Publisher
Abstract
Background: Assessment in Competency-Based Medical Education (CBME) focuses on improving learning as an ongoing and longitudinal assessment so that facilitators can identify the needs of the learner, plan remedial measures, and provide learning opportunities to improve learning. Therefore, it is something we do with or for students and not for the students. Formative assessments consolidate the learning process and reinforce appropriate teaching–learning behavior. It is thus necessary that structured formative assessments be incorporated into the regular assessment system of the curriculum to ensure an optimal educational output. Aim: To design innovative formative assessment methods in a competency-based Biochemistry curriculum for undergraduate MBBS students and teachers and to assess the students’ acquisition and application of the acquired knowledge through the formative assessment methods being applied. Materials and Methods: This study was conducted in the Department of Biochemistry at Deben Mahata Government Medical College and Hospital of Purulia district in West Bengal. Facilitators or Teachers were sensitized about the newer formative assessment methods namely Teacher’s self-report of content-pedagogical knowledge and periodical logs for the teachers. On the other hand, methods of concept mapping, reflective self-assessment, and multiple choice questions (MCQs) were formulated for the students. All the newly designed formative assessment methods were designed on specific competency areas and discussed with the departmental faculty, tutors, and senior residents through a 1–2 series of group discussions. Teachers then introduced innovations in the continuous teaching process on a number of occasions. Teacher’s self-report of content-pedagogical knowledge was captured in a Likert scale of how they felt about teaching the CBME from 1 (not desirable) to 5 (highly desirable). Periodical logs for the teachers were created through general reporting points. Results: A total of 97 students studying in Phase I MBBS and learning Biochemistry were enrolled in the study. We found that 64 (66%) were male and 33 (34%) were female students. The newer Formative Assessment methods— concept mapping, reflective self-assessment, and MCQs proved to be beneficial for many students in the subject of Biochemistry as 72% of them felt these methods to be brain-storming and innovative while 36% felt them difficult. Such methods increased concentration in 67% of students, and 80% of students felt that they could correlate better during their performance in assessment. At the outset, solving MCQs proved to be tempting in 72% of the students followed by growing interest in explaining the concept maps in 67% of the students. Reflective self-assessment was easier for 64% of the students. The proportion of students who were present during various occasions of formative assessment supports the importance of the role of feedback in continuous teaching learning. Preparation for the assessment engaged them with the curriculum as per Graduate Medical Education Regulations and enabled better concentrating ability with more power to think and correlate various competencies. Conclusion: Designing and introducing newer innovative formative assessment methods proved to be fruitful as being introduced gradually after proper orientation of the students and facilitators of Biochemistry in the Phase I MBBS curriculum. The teachers felt motivated to implement these assessment methods from now onwards with continuous feedback to and from the students.
Description
Keywords
Innovation, Formative assessment, Concept mapping, Reflection, Feedback.
Citation
Santra R, Saha S, Barua N, Badyal DK, Samuel CJ.. Introducing various formative assessment methods in Biochemistry of Phase I MBBS Curriculum . National Journal of Physiology, Pharmacy and Pharmacology. 2025 Apr; 15(4): 267-271