Tensions in post-examination feedback: information for learning versus potential for harm

Self-regulation is recognised as being a requisite skill for professional practice This study is part of a programme of research designed to explore efficient methods of feedback that improve medical students' ability to self-regulate their learning. Our aim was to clarify how students respond to different forms and content of written feedback and to explore the impact on study behaviour and knowledge acquisition.

Year 2 students in a 4-year graduate entry medical programme completing four formative progress tests during the academic year were randomised into three groups receiving different feedback reports. All reports included proportion correct overall and by clinical rotation. One group received feedback reports including lists of clinical presentations relating to questions answered correctly and incorrectly; another group received reports containing this same information in combination with response certitude. The final group received reports involving normative comparisons. Baseline progress test performance quartile groupings (a proxy for academic ability) were determined by results on the first progress test. A mixed-method approach with triangulation of research findings was used to interpret results. Outcomes of interest included progress test scores, summative examination results and measures derived from study diaries, questionnaires and semi-structured interviews.

Of the three types of feedback provided in this experiment, feedback containing normative comparisons resulted in inferior test performance for students in the lowest performance quartile group. This type of feedback appeared to stimulate general rather than examination-focused study.

Medical students are often considered relatively homogenous and high achieving, yet the results of this study suggest caution when providing them with normative feedback indicating poorer performance relative to their peers. There is much need for further work to explore efficient methods of providing written feedback that improves medical students' ability to self-regulate their learning, particularly when giving feedback to those students who have the most room for improvement.