The validity of Engagement and Feedback Assessments (EFAs): identifying students at risk of failing

Abstract

Abstract Background Imperial College School of Medicine, London UK, introduced a new curriculum in 2019, with a focus on the GMC outcomes for graduates, and pedagogy best practice. The new curriculum included formative assessments, named engagement and feedback assessments (EFAs), to support learning, and attainment in the summative examinations. The aims of this study were to assess the validity of EFAs and to determine whether they have utility as a modified form of programmatic assessment to inform decision-making regarding possible interventions by measuring and analysing attendance at and performance in these formative events. Methods Seven hundred and sixty-one students were included in the study and assessment results were included for academic years 2019/20 to 2020/21. Forty-one data points per student, (27 in Year 1 and 14 in Year 2) were used, to compare EFA scores with the summative performance. Attendance was monitored through engagement with the EFAs. Results Cohort 1 (enrolled 2019): In year 1, EFAs were associated with summative exam scores (overall r = 0.63, p < 0.001). Year 2, EFA scores were also associated with summative scores (overall r = 0.57, p < 0.001), including the clinical practical assessment (r = 0.45, p < 0.001). Missing two or more EFAs was associated with a significant increase in the likelihood of failing one or more summative examinations in the first year (OR: 7.97, 95% CI 2.65–34.39) and second year (OR: 3.20, 95% CI 1.74–5.95). Missing more than two EFAs in their first year was also associated with a higher risk of failing a summative examination in the second year (OR: 2.47, 95% CI 1.33–4.71). Students who increased their attendance between year 1 and 2 fared better in summative assessment than those who maintained poor attendance, whereas those that reduced their attendance fared worse than those that maintained high attendance. Cohort 2 (enrolled 2020): Analysis of cohort 2 supported these findings and in this cohort missing two or more EFAs was again associated with an increased likelihood of failing a summative examination (OR = 4.00, 95% CI = 2.02–7.90). Conclusion Our EFA model has validity in predicting performance in summative assessments and can inform prospective interventions to support students’ learning. Enhancing attendance and engagement can improve outcomes.