A remedial intervention linked to a formative assessment is effective in terms of improving student performance in subsequent degree examinations

Figures & data

Table

Practice points

Faculty report uncertainty about the efficacy of remediation. This study adds that remediation linked to poor performance on formative assessment predicted improved performance in summative assessment. A large sample and rigorous statistics ensured variables relevant to assessment outcome were accounted for during analysis. However, retrospective data precludes analysis by reason for remediation or identification of the active components of remediation.

Table 1.  Demographic comparison of students by whether or not they had a remedial intervention

	No intervention (n = 711)	Intervention (n = 198)	p-value
Gender
Male	38.7 (275)	62.1 (123)	<0.001
Female	61.3 (436)	37.9 (75)
Maturity
School leaver	81.6 (580)	83.3 (165)	0.569
Mature student	18.4 (131)	16.7 (33)
Graduate
Undergraduate	85.4 (607)	91.9 (182)	0.016
Graduate	14.6 (104)	8.1 (16)
Funding source
Home	93.8 (667)	86.9 (172)	0.001
Overseas	6.2 (44)	13.1 (26)
Intercalated degree
Yes	16.2 (115)	11.6 (23)	0.114
No	83.8 (596)	88.4 (175)

Note: Values are % (n).

Table 2.  Value of a remedial intervention in predicting fourth year written summative exam results

	Parameter estimate	Standard error	Odds ratio (95% confidence interval)	p-value
Interview (no = base)	−0.689	0.246	1.99 (1.23, 3.22)	0.005
Gender (female = base)	0.282	0.135	0.75 (0.58, 0.98)	0.037
Overseas (home = base)	−0.201	0.242	1.22 (0.76, 1.97)	0.408
Graduate (no degree = base)	−0.581	0.207	1.79 (1.19, 2.68)	0.005
Third year written exam (CAS 18–20 = base)
CAS 0–8	6.761	0.758	NA	<0.001
CAS 9–11	5.764	0.699		<0.001
CAS 12–14	5.082	0.684		<0.001
CAS 15–17	3.218	0.640		<0.001

Notes: Cohort (2005–2009) was entered into the model as a fixed covariate with all other variables entered simultaneously. Nagelkerke pseudo R² = 33.3%.

Table 3.  Value of a remedial intervention in predicting fourth year OSCE summative exam results

	Parameter estimate	Standard error	Odds ratio (95% confidence interval)	p-value
Interview (o = base)	−0.822	0.206	2.78 (1.52, 3.40)	<0.001
Gender (female = base)	0.412	0.121	0.66 (0.52, 0.84)	0.001
Overseas (home = base)	−0.146	0.218	1.16 (0.76, 1.77)	0.502
Graduate (no degree = base)	0.009	0.174	0.99 (0.70, 1.39)	0.958
Third year written exam (CAS 18–20 = base)
CAS 0–8	3.877	0.552	NA	<0.001
CAS 9–11	4.031	0.521		<0.001
CAS 12–14	3.258	0.479		<0.001
CAS 15–17	2.654	0.470		<0.001

Notes: Cohort (2005–2009) was entered into the model as a fixed covariate with all other variables entered simultaneously. Nagelkerke pseudo R² = 21.2%.