Exam Review Versus Categorical Feedback: Which Improves Scores by Doctor of Physical Therapy Students?

Feedback after computer-based assessments is essential to the learning process. Options include knowledge of results (KR), knowledge of correct results (KCR), and elaborated feedback (EF). This study aimed to identify whether specific or broader forms of postassessment feedback optimize physical therapist students' computer-based assessment scores.

Health care educators have various types of feedback they can provide to students. Educators may consider the need for exam integrity and increasing student engagement when determining what type of feedback to deliver. Elaborated feedback seems to be most effective in higher-order learning objectives than KCR or KR to improve learning outcomes and can be delivered in clear and engaging ways for students while maintaining exam integrity.

Forty-nine first-year Doctor of Physical Therapy students.

This study was a quasi-experimental design. Students were given a feedback form postassessment: secure exam review with note sheet (KCR) or Strengths and Opportunities Report (EF). Students repeated assessments on the same content (mix of repeat and related items). Exam scores and question performance were analyzed with linear and logistic regression. Students were surveyed about feedback preferences.

After adjusting for differences in the initial exam scores and graduate Grade Point Average, KCR improved retake exam scores (confidence interval [CI95] = 0.07-1.82 percentage points). Knowledge of correct results was more effective than EF for repeated questions (RR = 1.53, CI95 = 1.12-2.09, P = .0031). Knowledge of correct results and EF were similarly effective for related questions (RR = 1.01, CI95 = 0.76-1.33, P = .9997). Most students (89.75%) preferred KCR.

Compared with EF, KCR provided modest improvements on follow-up exams, specifically on repeated questions. Because students are unlikely to encounter repeated questions on licensure exams, EF may be an excellent choice to balance exam integrity and feedback quality.