↓ Skip to main content

A qualitative exploration of student perceptions of the impact of progress tests on learning and emotional wellbeing

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Medical Education, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (98th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
93 Mendeley
Title
A qualitative exploration of student perceptions of the impact of progress tests on learning and emotional wellbeing
Published in
BMC Medical Education, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12909-017-0984-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jill Yielder, Andy Wearn, Yan Chen, Marcus A. Henning, Jennifer Weller, Steven Lillis, Vernon Mogol, Warwick Bagg

Abstract

Progress testing was introduced to the MBChB programme at the University of Auckland in 2013. As there has been a focus in published literature on aspects relating to the format or function of progress tests, the purpose of this study was to explore a qualitative student perspective on the introduction of progress testing and its impact on approaches to learning and perceived stress. This article presents the qualitative aspects of a longitudinal evaluation study. The qualitative data were derived from eight focus groups of Year 2-5 medical students in the University of Auckland medical programme. Two themes, 'Impact on Learning' and 'Emotional Wellbeing' and their subthemes offered insight into student perceptions and behaviour. Students described a variety of learning responses to progress testing that clustered around the employment of a range of learning strategies based on their experience of sitting progress tests and their individualised feedback. A range of emotional responses were also expressed, with some finding progress tests stressful, while others enjoyed not needing to intensively cram before the tests. Progress tests appear to influence the approach of students to their learning. They employ a mix of learning strategies, shaped by their performance, individualised feedback and the learning environment. While students expressed some stress and anxiety with respect to sitting progress tests, this form of testing was viewed by these students as no worse, and sometimes better than traditional assessments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 93 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 93 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 13 14%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Master 8 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 6%
Lecturer 6 6%
Other 22 24%
Unknown 30 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 26 28%
Social Sciences 11 12%
Psychology 10 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 4%
Unspecified 3 3%
Other 9 10%
Unknown 30 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 40. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 July 2023.
All research outputs
#941,596
of 24,140,950 outputs
Outputs from BMC Medical Education
#68
of 3,670 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#20,025
of 319,583 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Medical Education
#2
of 61 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,140,950 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,670 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,583 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 61 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.