Zhang Niu, Henderson Charles N R
J Chiropr Educ. 2015 Mar;29(1):16-21. doi: 10.7899/JCE-14-12. Epub 2014 Dec 17.
Despite wide use, the value of formative exams remains unclear. We evaluated the possible benefits of formative assessments in a physical examination course at our chiropractic college.
Three hypotheses were examined: (1) Receiving formative quizzes (FQs) will increase summative exam (SX) scores, (2) writing FQ questions will further increase SE scores, and (3) FQs can predict SX scores. Hypotheses were tested across three separate iterations of the class.
The SX scores for the control group (Class 3) were significantly less than those of Classes 1 and 2, but writing quiz questions and taking FQs (Class 1) did not produce significantly higher SX scores than only taking FQs (Class 2). The FQ scores were significant predictors of SX scores, accounting for 52% of the SX score. Sex, age, academic degrees, and ethnicity were not significant copredictors.
Our results support the assertion that FQs can improve written SX performance, but students producing quiz questions didn't further increase SX scores. We concluded that nonthreatening FQs may be used to enhance student learning and suggest that they also may serve to identify students who, without additional remediation, will perform poorly on subsequent summative written exams.
尽管形成性考试被广泛使用，但其价值仍不明确。我们评估了在我校脊椎按摩疗法学院的一门体格检查课程中进行形成性评估可能带来的益处。
检验了三个假设：（1）接受形成性测验（FQ）将提高总结性考试（SX）成绩；（2）编写FQ问题将进一步提高总结性考试成绩；（3）FQ可以预测SX成绩。在该课程的三个不同轮次中对假设进行了测试。
对照组（3班）的SX成绩显著低于1班和2班，但编写测验问题并接受FQ（1班）的学生的SX成绩并不比仅接受FQ（2班）的学生显著更高。FQ成绩是SX成绩的显著预测指标，占SX成绩的52%。性别、年龄、学术学位和种族不是显著的共同预测因素。
我们的结果支持这样的观点，即FQ可以提高书面SX考试成绩，但编写测验问题的学生并没有进一步提高SX成绩。我们得出结论，无威胁性的FQ可用于促进学生学习，并表明它们还可用于识别那些在后续总结性书面考试中若无额外辅导就会表现不佳的学生。
