Assessment-Seeking Strategies:

Competency-based medical education (CBME) relies on workplace-based assessment (WBA) to generate formative feedback (assessment for learning-AfL) and make inferences about competence (assessment of learning-AoL). When approaches to CBME rely on residents to initiate WBA, learners experience tension between seeking WBA for learning and for establishing competence. How learners resolve this tension may lead to unintended consequences for both AfL and AoL. We sought to explore the factors that impact both decisions to seek and not to seek WBA and use the findings to build a model of assessment-seeking strategy used by residents. In building this model we consider how the link between WBA and promotion or progression within a program impacts an individual's assessment-seeking strategy. We conducted 20 semi-structured interviews with internal medicine residents at Queen's University about the factors that influence their decision to seek or avoid WBA. Using grounded theory methodology, we applied a constant comparative analysis to collect data iteratively and identify themes. A conceptual model was developed to describe the interaction of factors impacting the decision to seek and initiate WBA. Participants identified two main motivations when deciding to seek assessments: the need to fulfill program requirements and the desire to receive feedback for learning. Analysis suggested that these motivations are often at odds with each other. Participants also described several moderating factors that impact the decision to initiate assessments, irrespective of the primary underlying motivation. These included resident performance, assessor factors, training program expectations, and clinical context. A conceptual framework was developed to describe the factors that lead to strategic assessment-seeking behaviors. Faced with the dual purpose of WBA in CBME, resident behavior in initiating assessment is guided by specific assessment-seeking strategies. Strategies reflect individual underlying motivations, influenced by four moderating factors. These findings have broad implications for programmatic assessment in a CBME context including validity considerations for assessment data used in summative decision-making including readiness for unsupervised practice.