Cumulative versus end-of-course assessment: effects on self-study time and test performance.

CONTEXT: Students tend to postpone preparation for a test until the test is imminent, which raises various risks associated with 'cramming' behaviours, including that for suboptimal learning. Cumulative assessment utilises spaced testing to stimulate students to study more frequently and to prevent procrastination. This randomised controlled study investigated how cumulative assessment affects time spent on self-study and test performance compared with end-of-course assessment. METHODS: A total of 78 undergraduate medical students in a Year 2 pre-clinical course were randomly assigned to either of two conditions. Students in the cumulative assessment condition were assessed in weeks 4, 8 and 10. Students in the end-of-course assessment condition were assessed in week 10 only. Each week, students reported the number of hours they spent on self-study. RESULTS: Students in the cumulative assessment condition (n = 25) spent significantly more time on self-study than students in the end-of-course assessment condition (n = 37) in all weeks of the course except weeks 5, 9 and 10. Overall, the cumulative assessment group spent 69 hours more on self-study during the course than did the control group, although the control group spent 7 hours more in studying during the final week of the course than did the cumulative assessment group. Students in the cumulative assessment condition scored slightly higher on questions concerning the content of the last part of the course. CONCLUSIONS: Cumulative assessment encourages students to distribute their learning activities over a course, which leaves them more opportunity to study the content of the last part of the course prior to the final examination. There was no evidence for a short-term effect of cumulative assessment on overall knowledge gain. We hypothesise that larger positive effects might be found if retention were to be measured in the long term.

Cumulative assessment: strategic choices to influence students' study effort.

BACKGROUND: It has been asserted that assessment can and should be used to drive students' learning. In the current study, we present a cumulative assessment program in which test planning, repeated testing and compensation are combined in order to influence study effort. The program is aimed at helping initially low-scoring students improve their performance during a module, without impairing initially high-scoring students' performance. We used performance as a proxy for study effort and investigated whether the program worked as intended. METHODS: We analysed students' test scores in two second-year (n = 494 and n = 436) and two third-year modules (n = 383 and n = 345) in which cumulative assessment was applied. We used t-tests to compare the change in test scores of initially low-scoring students with that of initially high-scoring students between the first and second subtest and again between the combined first and second subtest and the third subtest. During the interpretation of the outcomes we took regression to the mean and test difficulty into account. RESULTS: Between the first and the second subtest in all four modules, the scores of initially low-scoring students increased more than the scores of initially high-scoring students decreased. Between subtests two and three, we found a similar effect in one module, no significant effect in two modules and the opposite effect in another module. CONCLUSION: The results between the first two subtests suggest that cumulative assessment may positively influence students' study effort. The inconsistent outcomes between subtests two and three may be caused by differences in perceived imminence, impact and workload between the third subtest and the first two. Cumulative assessment may serve as an example of how several evidence-based assessment principles can be integrated into a program for the benefit of student learning.