Abstract
PURPOSE: Medical institutions in India have employed different periodic formative assessment (FA) methods with variable impact. The formative evaluation must incorporate feedback to improve learning. Formative assessment has helped inexperienced students apprehend their weaknesses, make choices, prepare for summative exams, and allow teachers to identify regions wherein students may also need aid. This study attempts to quantify the impact of the weekly, monthly, and semester formative assessments and view it retrospectively through the lens of complex adaptive systems and social sustainability principles. METHODS: We used a post-exam survey and statistical analysis to compare the students' performance between the timely periodic formative assessments in a competency-based curriculum. The cohort consisted of 2018 (semester), 2019 (weekly), and 2020 (monthly) first-year medical students. Cronbach alpha, spearman's correlation coefficient, descriptive statistics, and repeated measure analysis of variance were used to explore the reliability and relationship between formative assessment and summative scores of each cohort and find any significant difference. The authors also analyzed the accordance between the FA exam performance and students' perceptions, deduced broad themes, and discussed the appropriateness and feasibility of students' suggestions for changes. RESULTS: A significant correlation was found only between the weekly formative assessment and summative scores (r=0.74, p=0.01). The analysis of variance established significant differences between all summative scores of respective periodic formative assessments. The weekly formative assessment showed the highest mean summative examination scores. This study helped comprehend preclinical students' apprehension after the intervention of periodic formative assessments. The students found this intervention helpful in driving and detecting gaps in learning but preferred focused feedback, clinically oriented practices, and countered mental health issues. CONCLUSION: The continuous periodic formative assessment model had a valid educational impact but was not sustainable according to social sustainability principles. A complex adaptive framework can be utilized to make it sustainable.