PROGRAMMATIC ASSESSMENT: BAGAIMANA PENERAPANNYA?

https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.73691

Nadia Greviana(1*), Dina Qurratu Ainin(2), Sylvia Mustika Sari(3), Mora Claramita(4)

(1) Departemen Pendidikan Kedokteran, Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta- INDONESIA
(2) Medical Education Center, Indonesian Medical Education and Research Institute (IMERI), Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta- INDONESIA
(3) Departemen Pendidikan Kedokteran, Fakultas Kedokteran Universitas Jenderal Achmad Yani- INDONESIA
(4) Departemen Pendidikan Kedokteran dan Bioetika, Fakultas Kedokteran Kesehatan Masyarakat dan Keperawatan Universitas Gadjah Mada- INDONESIA
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Background: Assessment is essential in medical education as it provides an overview of the quality of students and the educational process. An urgent problem that arises regarding competence-based education is in ensuring the use of appropriate assessment approaches that provide information regarding the overall performance of students as well as feedback on students learning and provide justification for decision making according to student learning progress. Programmatic assessment is an approach that facilitates various obstacles in conventional assessment.

Gaps: Programmatic assessment is a new approach that is rapidly emerging in the world of medical education globally. However, in practice, a more appropriate way is needed to introduce and implement programmatic assessment in Indonesia.

Recommendation: Implementation of programmatic assessment requires the role and support from and for all stakeholders. The implementation of the five components of programmatic assessment required flexibility to adapt it to the local context, and accompanied by efforts of mentorship, promoting reflective inquiry, and providing constructive feedback in order to improve the quality of the assessment. This recommendation is expected to help medical and health professions education institutions that will implement programmatic assessment in Indonesia.


Keywords


programmatic assessment, mentoring, portfolio

Full Text:

PDF


References

  1. Harden RM. Outcome-based education. In: Dent JH, Harden RM. A Practical Guide for Medical Teacher 4th edition. 2013. Churchil Livingstone Elsevier: 151-5
  2. Torre DM, Schuwirth LWT, Van der Vleuten CPM. Theoretical considerations on programmatic assessment. Med Teach. 2020; 42(2): 213-20
  3. Schut S, Maggio LA, Heeneman S, van Tartwijk J, van der Vleuten C, Driessen E. Where the rubber meets the road - An integrative review of programmatic assessment in health care professions education. Perspect Med Educ. 2021 Jan;10(1):6-13.
  4. Van Der Vleuten C, Schuwirth L, Driessen E, Dijkstra J, Tigelaar D, Baartman L, Van Tartwijk J. 2012. A model for programmatic assessment fit for purpose. Medical Teacher. 34(3):205–214.
  5. Heeneman S, Oudkerk Pool A, Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CP, Driessen EW. 2015. The impact of programmatic assessment on student learning: theory versus practice. Medical Education. 49:487–98.
  6. van der Vleuten CP, Schuwirth L, Driessen E, Govaerts M, Heeneman S. 2015. Twelve tips for programmatic assessment. Medical Teacher. 37(7): 641–646.
  7. Schuwirth LWT and van der Vleuten CPM. 2011. Programmatic assessment: from assessment of learning to assessment for learning. Medical Teacher. 33:478–85.
  8. Perry M, Linn A, Munzer BW, Hopson L, Amlong A, Cole M, Santen SA. Programmatic Assessment in Emergency Medicine: Implementation of Best Practices. J Grad Med Edu. 2018 Feb;10(1):84-90.
  9. Wilkinson TJ and Tweed MJ. Deconstructing programmatic assessment. Advances in Medical Education and Practice. 2018; 9: 191–197.
  10. Heeneman S, de Jong LH, Dawson LJ, Wilkinson TJ, Ryan A, Tait GR, Rice N, Torre D, Freeman A, van der Vleuten CPM. Ottawa 2020 consensus statement for programmatic assessment – 1. Agreement on the principles. Med Teach. 2021 Oct; 43(10): 1139-1148.
  11. Driessen EW, van Tartwijk J, Govaerts M, Teunissen P, van der Vleuten CP. The use of programmatic assessment in the clinical workplace: a Maastricht case report. Medical Teacher. 2012;34:226–31.
  12. Bok HG, Teunissen PW, Favier RP, Rietbroek NJ, Theyse LF, Brommer H, et al. Programmatic assessment of competency-based workplace learning: when theory meets practice. BMC Med Educ. 2013;13:123.
  13. Schut S, Driessen E, van Tartwijk J, van der Vleuten C, Heeneman S. Stakes in the eye of the beholder: an international study of learners' perceptions within programmatic assessment. Med Educ. 2018 Jun;52(6):654-663.
  14. Schuwirth LWT and van der Vleuten CPM. Current Assessment in Medical Education: Programmatic Assessment, Journal of Applied Testing Technology, 2019. 20(S2), 2-10.
  15. Shelley Ross, Karen E. Hauer, Keith Wycliffe-Jones, Andrew K. Hall, Laura Molgaard, Denyse Richardson, Anna Oswald, Farhan Bhanji & on behalf of the ICBME Collaborators, 2021. Key considerations in planning and designing programmatic assessment in competency-based medical education. Medical Teacher. 2021; 43(7): 758-764.
  16. Emilia O. Kajian Sistematik: Strategi Pembelajaran Klinik di Setting Rawat Jalan. JPKI. 2015. 4(2): 43-7
  17. Ajjawi R and Boud D. Researching feedback dialogue: an interactional analysis approach. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2017. 42(2): 252-265
  18. Suhoyo Y, van Hell EA, Prihatiningsih TS, Kuks JBM, Cohen-Schotanus J. Exploring cultural differences in feedback processes and perceived instructiveness during clerkships: replicating a Dutch study in Indonesia. Med Teach. 2014; 36(3): 223-29
  19. Soemantri D. Greviana N, Findyartini A, Azzahra TB, Suryoadji KA, Mustika R, Felaza E. PLoS ONE. 2021. 16(12).e026128
  20. Ramani S and Krackov SK. Twelve tips for giving feedback effectively in the clinical environment. Med Teach. 2012;34(10):787-91
  21. Holmboe et al. Portfolios in Holmboe & Hawkins (eds). Practical Guide to the Evaluation of Clinical Competence. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2008. 86-101
  22. Pool et al. Student perspectives on competency-based portfolios: Does a portfolio reflect their competence development? Perspect Med Educ. 2020; 9:166-72.
  23. Suzanne Schut, Sylvia Heeneman, Beth Bierer, et al. Between trust and control: Teachers' assessment conceptualisations within programmatic assessment. Medical Education. 2020; 54: 528–37
  24. Greviana N, Mustika R, Soemantri D. Development of e-portfolio in undergraduate clinical dentistry: How trainees select and reflect on evidence. Eur J Dent Educ. 2020; 24:320-27.
  25. Woodward CA. Program Evaluation. In Norman GR, van der Vleuten CPM, Newble DI. International Handbook of Research in Medical Education. 2002; vol. 7. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers: 127-55.



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.73691

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 865 | views : 980

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2022 Nadia Greviana,Dina Qurratu Ainin, Sylvia Mustika Sari, Mora Claramita

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia (The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education) indexed by:

  
JPKI Stats