Cited by 38Innovations in Medical EducationStudent Assessment and FeedbackInnovative Teaching and Learning Methods

Assessment as Learning in Medical Education: Feasibility and Perceived Impact of Student-Generated Formative Assessments

Open access
Lakhtakia, Ritu, Otaki, Farah, Alsuwaidi, Laila, Zary, Nabil·2022·JMIR Medical Education

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Background: Self-regulated learning (SRL) is gaining widespread recognition as a vital competency that is desirable to sustain lifelong learning, especially relevant to health professions education. Contemporary educational practices emphasize this aspect of undergraduate medical education through innovative designs of teaching and learning, such as the flipped classroom and team-based learning. Assessment practices are less commonly deployed to build capacity for SRL. Assessment as learning (AaL) can be a unique way of inculcating SRL by enabling active learning habits. It charges students to create formative assessments, reinforcing student-centered in-depth learning and critical thinking. Objective: This study aimed to explore, from the learners’ perspectives, the feasibility and perceived learning impact of student-generated formative assessments. Methods: This study relied on a convergent mixed methods approach. An educational intervention was deployed on a cohort of 54 students in the second year of a 6-year undergraduate medical program as part of a single-course curriculum. The AaL intervention engaged students in generating assessments using peer collaboration, tutor facilitation, and feedback. The outcomes of the intervention were measured through quantitative and qualitative data on student perceptions, which were collected through an anonymized web-based survey and in-person focus groups, respectively. Quantitative survey data were analyzed using SPSS (IBM), and qualitative inputs underwent thematic analysis. Results: The students’ overall score of agreement with the AaL educational intervention was 84%, which was strongly correlated with scores for ease and impact on a 5-point Likert-type scale. The themes that emerged from the qualitative analysis included prominent characteristics, immediate gains, and expected long-term benefits of engagement. The prominent characteristics included individuals’ engagement, effective interdependencies, novelty, and time requirements. The identified immediate gains highlighted increased motivation and acquisition of knowledge and skills. The expected long-term benefits included critical thinking, problem solving, and clinical reasoning. Conclusions: As a form of AaL, student-generated assessments were perceived as viable, constructive, and stimulating educational exercises by the student authors. In the short term, the activity provided students with a fun and challenging opportunity to dive deeply into the content, be creative in designing questions, and improve exam-taking skills. In the long term, students expected an enhancement of critical thinking and the inculcation of student-centered attributes of self-regulated lifelong learning and peer collaboration, which are vital to the practice of medicine.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2196/35820

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [1]Edmondson DR Boyer SL Artis AB Self-directed learning: a meta-analytic review of adult learning constructs Int J Educ Res 2012 7 1 40 8
  2. [9]Rodríguez-Gómez GI Ibarra-Sáiz MS Peris-Ortiz M Lindahl JM Assessment as learning and empowerment: towards sustainable learning in higher education Sustainable Learning in Higher Education: Developing Competencies for the Global Marketplace 2015 Cham, Switzerland Springer 1 20

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lakhtakia, R., Otaki, F., Alsuwaidi, L., & Zary, N.
Affiliations
Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (AE)
Corresponding author
Lakhtakia, Ritu
Venue
JMIR Medical Education
Published
2022-07-22
Volume
8
Issue
3
Pages
e35820
ISSN
2369-3762 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4285319758
Cited by
38
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2021: 1
FWCI
6.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • JMIR Medical Education (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
Keywords
assessment as learning, formative assessment, student self-regulation, medical students, peer collaboration, student perceptions, critical thinking, clinical reasoning, student-centered learning

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review