CPD evidence: how to show what you learned from a course

A certificate of attendance says you were in the room. It does not say what you took away, or whether any of it is still with you a month later.

Continuing professional development is often counted in hours or points. This guide is about a harder kind of CPD evidence: how to show what you learned from a course, in a form you could show an appraiser, an employer or yourself next year.

EdProcto's page for professionals describes quizzes written from your own course material, which is one way to run the routine below. A notebook is another.

Does a certificate of attendance show what you learned from a course?

No. A certificate of attendance shows presence, and research on continuing education finds that a course changes practice only a little on average. Nearly all of that research is on doctors and other health professionals. Read it as the nearest evidence for other professions, not as a finding about yours.

Three of the four describe one pattern: a course that makes you answer, practise or work a case changes more than one where you listen. Mansouri and Lockyer (2007) add a detail that matters for a CPD record: the later the outcome was measured, the smaller the effect (a correlation of -0.31).

Where the reviews disagree

The largest and newest review does not confirm the pattern. Forsetlund et al. (2021) found few trials that set interactive meetings directly against lectures (three, with 370 professionals, for yes-or-no measures of practice), and judged the evidence too uncertain to say which does more. Their exploratory comparison across the trials put lectures ahead by 1.21 percentage points.

Length is disputed too. Cervero and Gaines (2015) report better outcomes from longer activities; Forsetlund et al. (2021) found slightly larger effects from shorter meetings, an estimate they warn may not be reliable.

So hours are a weak guide in either direction. What the reviews share is the yardstick: each judged a course by what professionals knew or did afterwards.

How accurately do professionals judge their own competence?

Not accurately enough for a self-rating to stand in for a check. Davis et al. (2006) looked for studies comparing doctors' ratings of their own competence with an outside measure. Seventeen met their standard and gave 20 comparisons: in 13 the self-rating had little, no or an inverse relationship with the outside measure, and in 7 a positive one. Several studies found the worst accuracy among the least skilled and the most confident. The authors call the evidence less than ideal and conclude that judging competence may need more outside assessment.

The wider picture is no kinder. Zell and Krizan (2014) combined 22 meta-analyses that set self-evaluations of ability beside measured performance, in areas from academic and language ability to medical, sporting and vocational skills. The correlations ranged from .09 to .63, with a mean of .29. People were more accurate when the rating concerned one specific domain and when the task was objective, familiar or simple.

"I feel up to date on the new standard" is a broad judgement. "I answered four of five questions on it from memory" is specific and objective. Our guide to testing yourself when you are learning on your own covers the research on learners' self-assessment; a qualification does not cure the problem.

How do you show what you learned from a CPD course?

Write five questions from the course's own material on the day, answer them from memory after a week and after a month, look up what you missed, and record one change in your practice. The numbers are our working convention; no study prescribes them.

1. On the day, write five questions. Take them from the slides, the handout or your notes, and beside each write the answer and the page it sits on. Or paste the handout into EdProcto's quiz maker, on the home page, and keep the five questions Procto AI writes that sit closest to your work.
2. Write one thing you intend to do differently, with a date by which you will have tried it.
3. A week later, answer from memory. Close the notes, write every answer in full, then mark it against the material.
4. Look up each miss, and add a line on why you missed it. Our guide to the questions you got wrong sorts the kinds of miss.
5. A month after the course, answer all five again, including those you got right.
6. Write the practice note. Did you make the change from step 2, and what came of it? If not, say why.

The case for answering from memory after a gap is set out in the professionals' first guide, on studying for a professional exam while working full time. In one trial it describes, Kerfoot et al. (2007), medical students emailed a weekly question on a topic scored higher on that topic at the year's end.

Step 2 has evidence of its own. Wakefield et al. (2003) followed family doctors after small-group courses on prescribing. Of the 99 given the teaching modules, 91 named at least one change they planned to make. For three of the four conditions studied, doctors who had committed to a change were more likely to have changed their prescribing over the next six months, measured from a pharmacy registry and not from their own accounts. Doctors who commit may differ in other ways, so this is no proof that writing causes change. It is a reason to check a written intention against what you did.

What kinds of question to write

Five recall questions show that you remember five facts. Mix the kinds, so that at least two ask you to use what the course taught.

All five are in the builder. Two more suit professional judgement: the staged reveal, where each further clue costs points, and highlight the text, where you mark the sentences that answer.

What does a reflective CPD entry need?

A reflective CPD entry needs three things: what you learned, how you checked it, and what you did differently afterwards. The course title, the date and the hours go at the top, and they are its least informative lines.

Requirements differ by profession and country, so read your own regulator's or professional body's current rules before relying on any format, this one included. One example, from pages checked on 9 October 2026, is the Solicitors Regulation Authority (2026), which regulates solicitors in England and Wales. It sets out five steps: reflect on your practice, identify your learning needs, plan and address them, record the activity, and evaluate its effect. Its page on recording (Solicitors Regulation Authority, 2025) says that a bare list of completed activities does not give it the assurance it looks for, and suggests noting the key things you learned and how your practice will improve. Your own body may count hours or points, ask for a reflection, or both.

A reflection with nothing checked behind it is a self-rating, with the weakness described above. Put a tested result in the entry beside the paragraph of thoughts.

A worked example entry

The course, the project and the figures are invented for the example, from project management.

Activity. Half-day workshop on earned value reporting, 6 October, 3.5 hours.

What I learned. Earned value is the budget for the work actually finished: a project 40% complete on a £200,000 budget has earned £80,000, whatever has been spent. The cost performance index is earned value divided by actual cost; below 1 means over budget. The budget divided by that index forecasts the final cost, if spending continues at the same efficiency.

How I checked it. Five questions from the handout, written on the day. 13 October, from memory: 3 of 5. I had divided by the schedule performance index and forgotten the assumption; reread pages 14 to 16. 6 November: 5 of 5.

What I did differently. My monthly report now shows the index and the forecast beside the spend. The first showed £80,000 earned for £100,000 spent: an index of 0.8 and a forecast of £250,000 against £200,000. I raised it with the sponsor that week.

Each line can be checked: the scores against the dated answers, the change against the report.

How do you keep current when the guidance changes?

Re-test the parts that changed, not the whole document. Keeping current is partly unlearning: when a standard, a guideline or a policy is revised, the danger is the old answer you still know well.

Years in practice do not settle it. Choudhry et al. (2005) reviewed studies relating doctors' knowledge and quality of care to their years in practice. Of 62 evaluations, 32 (52%) found performance falling with more years on every outcome measured, and one found it rising on every outcome. The review is of doctors and does not establish the cause.

1. List what changed between the old version and the new.
2. Write one question for each change that touches your work, with the old rule as the tempting wrong answer.
3. Answer them after a week and after a month.
4. Add a line to your CPD log: the document, its date, the changes tested and the scores.

EdProcto's page for professionals names this use: a quiz from each new guideline or policy, so that what changed is what gets learned.

What is a personal test record, and what is it not?

A personal test record is your own dated evidence that you tested what you learned: the questions, when you answered them, what you scored, what you missed and what you looked up. It gives you a list of what to revisit and the "how I checked it" line of a reflective entry.

It is not:

• A qualification, a licence or a registration.
• Proof of competence to practise. Five questions sample a course; they do not assess a job.
• An outside assessment. You chose the questions and sat them unobserved.
• A replacement for the attendance record, where your body asks for one.
• A promise about any audit, appraisal or renewal. Your body's rules and its reviewer decide what is accepted.
• Complete. Questions you write yourself reach only what you noticed on the day.

How does EdProcto fit a CPD routine?

EdProcto is the best tool for this routine when the questions should come from the course's own handout and not from your memory of it, because it takes over the two steps that are easiest to skip: writing the questions and coming back to them.

Give the quiz maker the handout, the slides' text or the revised guideline. Procto AI writes the questions from that material and cites the passage behind each. In study mode the right answer and an explanation appear as soon as you respond, the misses can be retried alone, and the quiz falls due again a few days later. For the sitting a month on, switch to exam mode: timed, no going back, results at the end. Your attempts stay under your account.

The kits are sets for boards, licences and certifications, each in the style of its exam and filled from your own material: for a qualification, not a one-day course. EdProcto is not affiliated with any board or certification body.

The CPD log stays yours. Copy the date, the score and the misses into it by hand, in whatever form your body asks for. A self-test result is a record of practice, not a credential.

The Free plan includes study mode, the re-tests, the kits and 20 questions a month written by Procto AI. The Learner plan lifts the limit on self-tests, raises the writing to 100 questions a month and takes a whole book chapter by chapter, with a map of what you know. Current terms are on the pricing page.

Quick questions

Is a certificate of attendance enough evidence for CPD?

That depends on your regulator or professional body, so check its current rules. As evidence of learning it is weak, because it records presence only. Add what you learned, how you checked it and what you changed.

How soon after a course should I test myself?

A week later and again after a month, before opening the notes. The gaps are our convention. In Mansouri and Lockyer (2007) the effect of continuing education was smaller the later it was measured, so do not stop at one check.

Can EdProcto write the questions from my course handout?

Yes. Its page for professionals explains it: paste the guideline, the standard or the chapter, and the questions come from it and cite it.

Does a self-test record prove I am competent to practise?

No. It shows that you checked your own learning on particular dates. It is not a qualification or a licence, and it promises nothing about an audit or a renewal.

References

• Cervero, R. M., & Gaines, J. K. (2015). The impact of CME on physician performance and patient health outcomes: An updated synthesis of systematic reviews. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 35(2), 131–138. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.21290
• Choudhry, N. K., Fletcher, R. H., & Soumerai, S. B. (2005). Systematic review: The relationship between clinical experience and quality of health care. Annals of Internal Medicine, 142(4), 260–273. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-142-4-200502150-00008
• Davis, D., O'Brien, M. A. T., Freemantle, N., Wolf, F. M., Mazmanian, P., & Taylor-Vaisey, A. (1999). Impact of formal continuing medical education: Do conferences, workshops, rounds, and other traditional continuing education activities change physician behavior or health care outcomes? JAMA, 282(9), 867–874. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.282.9.867
• Davis, D. A., Mazmanian, P. E., Fordis, M., Van Harrison, R., Thorpe, K. E., & Perrier, L. (2006). Accuracy of physician self-assessment compared with observed measures of competence: A systematic review. JAMA, 296(9), 1094–1102. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.296.9.1094
• Forsetlund, L., O'Brien, M. A., Forsén, L., Mwai, L., Reinar, L. M., Okwen, M. P., Horsley, T., & Rose, C. J. (2021). Continuing education meetings and workshops: Effects on professional practice and healthcare outcomes. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2021(9), Article CD003030. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003030.pub3
• Kerfoot, B. P., DeWolf, W. C., Masser, B. A., Church, P. A., & Federman, D. D. (2007). Spaced education improves the retention of clinical knowledge by medical students: A randomised controlled trial. Medical Education, 41(1), 23–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02644.x
• Mansouri, M., & Lockyer, J. (2007). A meta-analysis of continuing medical education effectiveness. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 27(1), 6–15. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.88
• Solicitors Regulation Authority. (2025, April 2). Recording and evaluating your learning and development. https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/resources/continuing-competence/record-evaluate/
• Solicitors Regulation Authority. (2026, September 3). Understanding your continuing competence requirements. https://www.sra.org.uk/solicitors/resources/continuing-competence/understanding-continuing-competence/
• Wakefield, J., Herbert, C. P., Maclure, M., Dormuth, C., Wright, J. M., Legare, J., Brett-MacLean, P., & Premi, J. (2003). Commitment to change statements can predict actual change in practice. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 23(2), 81–92. https://doi.org/10.1002/chp.1340230205
• Zell, E., & Krizan, Z. (2014). Do people have insight into their abilities? A metasynthesis. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9(2), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613518075