Written-Based Progress Testing: A Scoping Review

Abstract

PurposeProgress testing is an increasingly popular form of assessment in which a comprehensive test is administered to learners repeatedly over time. To inform potential users, this scoping review aimed to document barriers, facilitators, and potential outcomes of the use of written progress tests in higher education. MethodThe authors followed Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review methodology to identify and summarize the literature on progress testing. They searched 6 databases (Academic Search Complete,

Longitudinal Assessment to Evaluate Continued Certification and Lifelong Learning in Healthcare Professionals: A Scoping Review

“…The 14 articles included in the review were published in the years 2012–2022. Twelve articles were background studies that informed the underpinnings for use of LA in continued certification (aim one) (Albanese & Case, 2016; Ali et al, 2018; Dion et al, 2022; Favier et al, 2017; Harman et al, 2020; Hatala et al, 2019; Horber et al, 2020; Iyer et al, 2021; Newton et al, 2020; Schuwirth & van der Vleuten., 2012; Turner et al, 2019; Wallner et al, 2020). Longitudinal assessment is a novel form of assessment and certifying boards may utilize these reports to help inform development of LA respective to their specialty and profession.…”

“…binge) learning (Dion et al, 2022: Favier et al, 2017; Schuwirth & van der Vleuten, 2012). Questions are normed to expectations for a new graduate and contextualization of questions is critical (Dion et al, 2022).…”

“…Eight of the 12 articles were based in the United States (U.S.) (Albanese & Case, 2016; Harman et al, 2020; Horber et al, 2020; Iyer et al, 2021; Newton et al, 2020; Sun et al, 2016; Wallner et al, 2020); one article was based in the U.S and Canada (Robinson et al, 2020); two articles were based in Canada (Dion et al, 2022; Hatala et al, 2019); one article was based in the United Kingdom (Ali et al, 2018); and two articles were based in the Netherlands (Favier et al, 2017) (Table 1).…”

“…Progress testing, which has been utilized in educational settings, is a form of LA with similar underpinnings. While it has been shown to be resource-intensive, progress testing has been shown to be a valid and reliable form of formative assessment that promotes learning and knowledge retention suggesting aspects of progress testing can be considered in the development of LA by certifying boards (Albanese & Case, 2016; Ali et al, 2018; Dion et al, 2022; Favier et al, 2017; Hatala et al, 2019; Schuwirth & van der Vleuten, 2012). Articles reporting solely on pilot testing of LA include those by the National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners for three osteopathic specialty boards (the American Osteopathic Board of Internal Medicine, the American Osteopathic Board of Pediatrics, and the American Osteopathic Board of Obstetricians and Gynecologists), the American Board of Family Medicine, and the American Board of Pediatrics (Horber et al, 2020; Newton et al, 2020; Turner et al, 2019).…”

O Teste de Progresso na residência médica em ginecologia e obstetrícia: a experiência nacional

“…Entre as diferentes modalidades de avaliação cognitiva, o Teste de Progresso (TP) se destaca por ser um método abrangente, longitudinal e seriado, em que um mesmo conjunto de itens é aplicado a aprendizes que se encontram em diferentes fases ou períodos de treinamento 1 . Quando comparado a outras modalidades de avaliação cognitiva, apresenta vantagens como promover a autoavaliação e avaliação formativa, permitindo reafirmar saberes prévios e identificar lacunas de aprendizagem 2 .…”