Technology and learning-oriented feedback assessment: A case study in medical education
Researcher Bulletin of Medical Sciences,
Vol. 30 No. 1 (2025),
20 June 2026
,
Page e6
Abstract
Objective: Present study aimed to explore the Kahoot platform as a technology for feedback-driven evaluation in medical education
Materials and Methods: Three focus groups including undergraduate and dental students were formatively evaluated using the Kahoot platform, during two semesters include at least three exams. Students participated in the scheduled exam using a special code. The answer immediately was shown and the teacher was able to provide oral and textual explanations and even upload slides if there was any ambiguity in the answer. To evaluate the platform efficiency, a standardized 12-item questionnaire was provided. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive statistics.
Results: Kahoot made the exam more pleasant and reduced stress (97%). It was an effective way to learn more accurately and deeply regarding feedback and reflective learning (91.4%). Providing feedback, created better environment learning than traditional learning (88.6%). Motivate to learn more (88.5%) and focus on the subject (84.7%) were other results.
Conclusion: Kahoot platform can facilitate students’ perceptions about their educational weaknesses. Deeper learning takes form by interaction with the teacher and the weaknesses are eliminated. This process can create a test-learning bridge by making evaluation enjoyable and targeting the two together. So, it’s a promising tool for formative assessment in medical education.
- Kahoot platform; Formative assessment; Feedback-oriented exam; Evaluation technologies; Test-learning
How to Cite
References
. Girlich D, Bonnin RA, Dortet L, Naas T. Sadler D. Formative Assessment: Revisiting the Territory, Assessment in Education, Vol. 5 (1), 77-84. 1998.
2. Ismail MA-A, Ahmad A, Mohammad JA-M, Fakri NMRM, Nor MZM, Pa MNM. Using Kahoot! as a formative assessment tool in medical education: a phenomenological study. BMC medical education. 2019;19(1):1-8.
3. Blanco M, Ginovart M. On how moodle quizzes can contribute to the formative e-assessment of first-year engineering students in mathematics courses. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education. 2012;9(1):354.
4. Ismail MA-A, Mohammad JA-M. Kahoot: A promising tool for formative assessment in medical education. Education in medicine journal. 2017;9(2).
5. Norcini J, Anderson B, Bollela V, Burch V, Costa MJ, Duvivier R, et al. Criteria for good assessment: consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference. Medical teacher. 2011;33(3):206-14.
6. Wang AI, Lieberoth A, editors. The effect of points and audio on concentration, engagement, enjoyment, learning, motivation, and classroom dynamics using Kahoot. European conference on games based learning; 2016: Academic conferences international limited.
7. Yien J-M, Hung C-M, Hwang G-J, Lin Y-C. A game-based learning approach to improving students' learning achievements in a Nutrition course. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology-TOJET. 2011;10(2):1-10.
8. Erhel S, Jamet E. Digital game-based learning: Impact of instructions and feedback on motivation and learning effectiveness. Computers & education. 2013;67:156-67.
9. Burguillo JC. Using game theory and competition-based learning to stimulate student motivation and performance. Computers & education. 2010;55(2):566-75.
10. Huizenga J, Admiraal W, Akkerman S, Dam Gt. Mobile game‐based learning in secondary education: engagement, motivation and learning in a mobile city game. Journal of computer assisted learning. 2009;25(4):332-44.
11. Kiili K. Digital game-based learning: Towards an experiential gaming model. The Internet and higher education. 2005;8(1):13-24.
12. Charles D, Charles T, McNeill M, Bustard D, Black M. Game‐based feedback for educational multi‐user virtual environments. British Journal of Educational Technology. 2011;42(4):638-54.
13. Cugelman B. Gamification: what it is and why it matters to digital health behavior change developers. JMIR serious games. 2013;1(1):e3139.
14. Nicol DJ, Macfarlane‐Dick D. Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in higher education. 2006;31(2):199-218.
15. Yusoff MSB, Yee LY, Wei LH, Siong TC, Meng LH, Bin LX, et al. A study on stress, stressors and coping strategies among Malaysian medical students. International Journal of Students' Research. 2011;1(2).
16. Atkinson SR. Elevated psychological distress in undergraduate and graduate entry students entering first year medical school. PLoS One. 2020;15(8):e0237008.
17. Bore M, Kelly B, Nair B. Potential predictors of psychological distress and well-being in medical students: a cross-sectional pilot study. Adv Med Educ Pract. 2016;7:125-35.
18. Prensky M. Fun, play and games: What makes games engaging. Digital game-based learning. 2001;5(1):5-31.
19. Baid H, Lambert N. Enjoyable learning: the role of humour, games, and fun activities in nursing and midwifery education. Nurse education today. 2010;30(6):548-52.
20. Cauley KM, McMillan JH. Formative assessment techniques to support student motivation and achievement. The clearing house: A journal of educational strategies, issues and ideas. 2010;83(1):1-6.
21. Regueras LM, Verdu E, Munoz MF, Perez MA, De Castro JP, Verdu MJ. Effects of competitive e-learning tools on higher education students: A case study. IEEE Transactions on Education. 2009;52(2):279-85.
22. Dellos R. Kahoot! A digital game resource for learning. International Journal of Instructional technology and distance learning. 2015;12(4):49-52.
23. Keller J. Development and use of the ARCS model of motivational design (Report No. IR 014 039). Enschede, Netherlands: Twente Univ of Technology(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No ED 313 001). 1983.
24.Kahoot! Game-based blended learning & classroom response system. . 2014.
- Abstract Viewed: 0 times