This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
BACKGROUND: Significant improvements in the delivery of criterion-based assessment techniques have improved confidence in standard setting and assessment quality. However, for underperforming students, a lack of evidence about longitudinal performance of this group poses dilemmas to educators when making decisions about the timing and nature of remediation. AIM: To investigate the longitudinal performance of the UK undergraduate medical degree students, with a particular focus on comparing the poorly performing students (i.e. those with borderline or failing grades) with the main cohort of students. METHOD: Over a 5-year period, 3200-student objective structured clinical examination (OSCE) assessments from a single medical school were investigated. A poorly performing subgroup of 125 students was identified and their longitudinal performance in the final 3 years of the undergraduate medical degree analysed. RESULT: The relative performance of this student group declines across serial OSCEs, despite current methods of 'remediation and retest'. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that typically students in the poorly performing subgroup achieve only short-term success with traditional remediation and retest models, and critically show an absence of longitudinal improvement. There is a clear need for institutions to develop profiling models that can help identify this student group and develop effective, research led models of remediation.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pell et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: