Theoretical and Methodological Foundations to Revalue Evaluation in Medical Microbiology and Parasitology

Assessment in Medical Microbiology and Parasitology has traditionally relied on memorization-based written tests, which often fail to capture clinical competencies. To analyze the theoretical and methodological foundations that enable the re-signification of evaluation in this discipline, proposing strategies that integrate scientific practice with professional training, and contribute to raising the educational quality of medical teaching. A mixed-method study with a documentary and applied design was conducted using the analytical-descriptive approach. The research included a literature review of recent scientific publications, consultations with experts in microbiology, parasitology, and medical pedagogy, and methodological triangulation. The procedure comprised three phases: (1) diagnosis of prevailing assessment practices, (2) design of instruments such as rubrics, checklists, and practical tests, and (3) application of these instruments in simulated clinical scenarios. The diagnostic phase revealed a predominance of traditional written examinations focused on rote learning, which limited the evaluation of clinical competencies. The implementation of innovative instruments allowed 75% of students to achieve positive outcomes in simulated scenarios. These results demonstrated improvements in knowledge integration, practical skills, and professional attitudes, highlighting the effectiveness of formative and performance-based assessment strategies. The revaluation of assessment in the subject of MMP, through the integration of formative instruments such as rubrics and checklists in simulated clinical scenarios, contributes to a more comprehensive and relevant education in the health sciences. The results of this study demonstrate that this strategy not only enhances academic performance but also strengthens students’ motivation, confidence, and reflective capacity. Methodological triangulation confirmed the consistency of these findings, showing that the combination of written examinations, practical performance, and critical reflection increases the validity and reliability of the evaluative process.