<![CDATA[Introduction: The implementation of diverse assessment methods has facilitated the collection of both quantitative and qualitative data, providing students with valuable feedback. Most programs reported that their assessment strategies were aligned with a competency framework, emphasizing constructive alignment and assessments structured according to Miller’s pyramid. Many programs highlighted the significance of multiple low-stakes workplace-based assessments for evaluating real-world competencies, alongside the use of the final test, including progress testing in the knowledge domain to decrease student load. The aim of this study is to compare student final score between the progress test and the final test. Methods: This is a mixed-method research. A quantitative of 506 students participated in the growth and development & geriatrics block, divided into two groups. Group A (progress test), comprising 253 students, underwent a progress test conducted over four exam sessions in 2024, as a pilot project. Meanwhile, Group B (final test), also with 253 students, completed a final test in 2023. The data from both groups were collected and analyzed using the T-independent test. Also, qualitative data was taken by student interviews. Result: Group A, assessed in 2024, achieved a higher average score (69.33 ± 11.22) compared to Group B (54.92 ± 11.49). The T-independent test yielded a P value of <0.0001, indicating a statistically significant difference. This suggests that the progress test method is more effective than the final test in enhancing students' final scores, as progress tests help alleviate cognitive load. Conclusion: As a pilot initiative, the progress test has proven effective in improving students' final scores. It is recommended that this approach be extended to other educational blocks that have similar characteristics to the interventional blocks to enhance overall educational quality.]]>
Copyrights © 2025
