Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Formative assessment (FA) is an assessment concept that is of interest in education. The Doctor of Pharmacy program is one of the programs in which FA is usually implemented. This study aimed to describe the correlation between FA scores and summative assessment (SA) scores and to suggest possible key success factors that affect the effectiveness of FA. METHODS: This study employed a retrospective design using mixed methods for data collection. Data in the semesters 1/2020 and 2/2020 of the Doctor of Pharmacy curriculum in a Thailand pharmacy school were used. Three sets of data were gathered, including the course information (e.g. FA methods, FA scores, and SA scores) from 38 records, self-reports from 326 students and 27 teachers, and 5 focus group discussions. The quantitative data were statistically analyzed using descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation, while the qualitative data were analyzed using a content analysis framework. RESULTS: The analysis revealed five main methods that were used for FA, including individual quizzes, individual reports, individual skill assessments, group presentations, and group reports. Of all 38 courses, 29 (76.32%) had significant correlations between FA and SA scores at p-values < 0.05. The individual FA score was related to the correlation coefficient of the courses (p-value = 0.007), but the group FA score was not related (p-value = 0.081). In addition, only the frequency of individual quiz had a significant effect on the correlation coefficient. Moreover, the key success factors which affected the effectiveness of FA were divided into six themes, including the appropriate method, an effective reflection, frequency of assessment, the appropriate score, the adequate support system, and teacher knowledge management. CONCLUSION: The subjects that used individual FA methods provided a significant correlation between FA and SA, while those who used group FA methods did not show a significant correlation. Additionally, the key success factors in this study were appropriate assessment methods, frequency of assessment, effective feedback, appropriate scoring, and a proper support system.