Engagement with Online Pre-exam Formative Tests Improves Exam Performance and Feedback Satisfaction

Figures & data

Table 1 Snapshot of test activity during the first six weeks of semester

Completion status	Test 1 Compulsory	Test 2	Test 3	Test 4	Test 5
Number of tests completed	44	15	7	5	0
Number of tests In progress	1	6	1	2	4

Table 2 What did the students think of the tests?

Response	Percentage
I have done some or all of the revision tests.	100
I did one or more of the tests more than once.	47.4
I did the revision tests within a week of the lecture.	15.8
I did the revision tests within a month of the lecture.	26.3
I did the revision tests when I was revising for the exam.	94.7
I did not do the tests.	0
I prefer to do all of my revision just before the exam, rather than learning the material when it is delivered.	15.8
I find it easier to revise for the exam, if I have ensured my understanding of the material when it is delivered.	68.4
I only did the tests that backed up lectures that I understood less well.	0
If I understood the lecture, I did not feel it was necessary to the test.	5.3
I felt better prepared for the examination having done some or all the tests.	94.7
The tests help re-enforce my understanding of the lecture material.	89.5
The tests made me aware of material that I did not understand from the lectures.	68.4
The instant feedback helped me see where I had gone wrong with the questions	100
I found the tests a useful way to learn.	94.7
The standard of feedback was better in this module than other modules.	100
They do not count towards the module mark, so what is the point doing them?	0
I am more likely to do a test if it is online than if it is in the module handbook.	78.9
‘It was a very easy way to see how my revision was progressing by first doing the test and getting the mark, then redoing it after the revision of that lecture checking the mark and the feedback on the questions.’
‘The online tests were very useful in directing my learning and revision, highlighting areas that I lacked knowledge.’

Figure 1 Relationship between the number of tests attempted and exam performance. Scatterplot to show how the exam score relates to the number of tests attempted. The exam scores were plotted on the y-axis depending on the number of tests completed (x axis). The whole survey cohort is included (n = 46). There is a significant positive correlation (r = 0.681, P < 0.001), with exam performance better in the students who did the most tests.

Figure 2 Mean exam score versus the number of tests attempted. Column chart showing the mean exam scores for students grouped into categories based on the number of tests attempted. Note that some of the categories overlap (e.g. the 0 test group is included in the 0–2 test group, which is itself included in the 0–4 test group). Numbers in each category: 0, n = 8; > 0, n = 38; 0–4, n = 23; 5–10, n = 23; 0–2, n = 17; 8–10, n = 17 Error bars are ± SE.

Figure 3 Relationship between number of sessions attended and exam score. Column chart showing the mean exam scores of students grouped by attendance. For 9–10 times n = 10 and for 11 times n = 36. Error bars are ± SE.

Figure 4 Relationship between mean test score and exam score. Scatterplot to show how the mean score in the tests relates to the exam scores. Data are only included for students who did > 0 test (n = 38). There is a statistically significant positive correlation (r = 0.431, P = 0.007) between the mean test mark and the exam performance.

Figure 5 Comparison of exam score for LSC-20050 with other modules. Column chart showing the mean score for LSC-20050 and the mean scores for other LSC-coded modules for students who took >3 LSC-coded exams (n = 26). Error bars are ± SE.

Figure 6 Comparison of mean exam scores for LSC-20050 and other modules versus number of tests attempted. Students were grouped into two categories dependent on the number of tests they completed and the LSC-20050 scores (dark blue bars) were compared with the mean exam scores of other bioscience modules (light blue bars). For the 0–4 tests group n = 15 and for the 8–10 group n = 11. Error bars are ± SE.