Cultural challenges to implementation of formative assessment in Saudi Arabia: an exploratory study.

Background/Purpose: This study investigates challenges that students and faculty face to implement assessment for learning; and the activities, capabilities, enablers, and indicators which could impact performance. Method: The study is a mixed methods research, cross-sectional, exploratory study. The study was organized through two phases of data collection and analysis (QUAL -> quan). Based on qualitative focus group discussions (FGD), we first gathered data through field notes. Later, we engaged in analysis using techniques drawn from qualitative data including categorization, theme identification, and connection to existing literature. Based on this analysis, we developed a questionnaire that could provide quantitative measures based on the qualitative FGD. We then administered the questionnaire, and the quantitative data were analyzed to quantitatively test the qualitative findings. Twenty-four faculty and 142 students from the 4th and 5th clinical years participated voluntarily. Their perception of FA and the cultural challenges that hinder its adoption were evaluated through a FGD and a questionnaire. Results: The mean score of understanding FA concept was equal in faculty and students (p = 0.08). The general challenge that scored highest was the need to balance work and academic load in faculty and the need to balance study load and training and mental anxiety in students. There was no difference between faculty and students in perceiving "learning is teacher-centered" (p = 0.481); and "past learning and assessment experience" (p = 0.322). There was a significant difference between them regarding interaction with opposite gender (p50.001). Students showed higher value as regards the "gap between learning theories and assessment practice", "grade as a priority", and "discrimination by same faculty gender". Conclusion: The authors suggested a "Framework of Innovation in Endorsing Assessment for Learning". It emphasizes a holisitic approach through all levels of the System: Government, Accreditation Bodies, Policy makers; Institution, and Classroom levels.