Continuous and Summative Assessments in Midwifery Education: Examining Predictive Validity and Independence in Eswatini
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.64754/thedyke.v19i1.485Keywords:
Continous assessment, summative assessment, predictive validity, midwifery education , EswatiniAbstract
Assessment in nursing and midwifery education is critical for ensuring competence and progression. This study examined the relationship between continuous assessment (CA) and summative examinations among midwifery students at Good Shepherd Catholic College of Health Sciences in Eswatini (N = 30). Using total population sampling and secondary data from multiple modules, the study employed correlation and regression analyses in SPSS v23. Results indicated moderate positive correlations (r = .20–.61) between CA and examination scores, with an average r ≈ .40. Regression models yielded low adjusted R² values, suggesting that CA explained only a small portion of the variance in exam performance. Findings highlight inconsistencies between CA and summative outcomes, raising questions about assessment design, academic integrity, and predictive validity. The study recommends strengthening assessment frameworks by aligning them with Bloom’s taxonomy, implementing standardised procedures, and providing faculty development. This contributes to debates on balancing formative and summative evaluation in health professions education.
References
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Classroom assessment and pedagogy. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315659312.
Chufama, M., & Sithole, F. (2021). The pivotal role of diagnostic, formative and summative assessment in higher education institutions’ teaching and student learning. International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Publications, 4(2), 5–15.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315456539.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
Etikan, I., & Bala, K. (2023). Sampling methods in educational research: A methodological review. International Journal of Education and Research, 11(3), 45–56.
Field, A. (2018). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (5th ed.). Sage.
French, S., Dickerson, A., & Mulder, R. A. (2023). A review of the benefits and drawbacks of high-stakes final examinations in higher education. Higher Education, 86(2), 189–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00979-6.
Gamage, D., Pradeep, U., & de Silva, K. (2022). Competency-based assessment in health professions education: Emerging trends and implications. Medical Teacher, 44(6), 655–663. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057339.
Jena, P. K. (2019). Academic assessment system of learners in IGNOU. International Journal of Advanced Research, 7(5), 1124–1133. https://doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/9020.
Kubiszyn, T., & Borich, G. D. (2024). Educational testing and measurement (12th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Lazareva, E., & Agostini, F. (2024). Alternative assessments in higher education: Challenges for validity and reliability. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 49(1), 56–72. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2023.2201214
Li, J., & Zhang, Y. (2021). Formative assessment and student achievement: A meta-analysis of international studies. Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability, 33(4), 613–639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11092-021-09388-2.
Luoma, P., & Hietanen, L. (2024). The role of quantitative methods in modern educational research. Journal of Educational Methodology, 14(2), 145–160.
Makule, D., & Kibusi, S. M. (2020). The role of simulation-based education in enhancing midwifery competence: Evidence from sub-Saharan Africa. BMC Nursing, 19(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-020-00486-1.
Makuvire, T., Mufanechiya, A., & Dube, T. (2023). Grade inflation and the credibility of continuous assessment in African higher education. Zimbabwe Journal of Educational Research, 35(1), 1–18.
Maki, P. L. (2023). Assessing for learning: Building a sustainable commitment across the institution (3rd ed.). Routledge.
McCarthy, B., Murphy, S., Larkin, P., & Hegarty, J. (2018). Simulation in midwifery education: A systematic review. Nurse Education Today, 62, 77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2017.12.009.
Messick, S. (1995). Validity of psychological assessment: Validation of inferences from persons’ responses and performances as scientific inquiry into score meaning. American Psychologist, 50(9), 741–749. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.50.9.741.
Morales, M., Salmerón, A., Maldonado, A. D., Masegosa, A. R., & Rumí, R. (2022). An empirical analysis of the impact of continuous assessment on the final exam mark. Mathematics, 10(21), 3994. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10213994.
Morris, R., Perry, T., & Wardle, L. (2021). The impact of formative assessment on student outcomes in higher education: A review of the evidence. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 46(6), 843–857. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2020.1810505.
Pudaruth, S., Juwaheer, T. D., & Devi, R. (2013). An evaluation of continuous assessment and final examinations in tertiary education: A case study. International Journal of Educational Management, 27(7), 699–714. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEM-02-2013-0018.
Shepard, L. A. (2021). Classroom assessment and accountability. In E. Baker & P. Peterson (Eds.), International encyclopedia of education (4th ed., pp. 495–502). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.04005-4.
Titova, E. V. (2022). Continuous assessment as a means of learning outcomes enhancement (Master’s thesis). University of Eastern Finland.
Ukwueze, A. C. (2012). Correlation between web-based continuous assessment and examination scores in open and distance education: Implications for academic counselling. Malaysian Journal of Distance Education, 14(2), 71–87.
Wiliam, D., & Leahy, S. (2024). Embedding formative assessment: Practical techniques for K–12 classrooms (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Upon acceptance and publication, authors grant The Dyke a non-exclusive licence to publish and distribute their article in all formats and media. This means: Authors may freely share, deposit, and republish their work (e.g., in institutional repositories, websites, or future publications), provided proper citation and acknowledgment of The Dyke as the original publisher.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles in The Dyke are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).
Under this licence:
- Others may copy, redistribute, remix, transform, and build upon the work for any purpose, even commercially.
- Appropriate credit must be given to the original author(s) and source (The Dyke), along with a link to the license.
- Any changes made must be indicated.
Full licence details: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Archiving and Preservation
The Dyke supports long-term preservation of scholarly work through partnerships with digital repositories and indexing services, including Sabinet African Journals. Authors are also encouraged to deposit a copy of their published article in institutional or subject-specific repositories.
