INTRODUCTION: This study examined the effect of collaborative testing on student learning, attitude toward testing, and course satisfaction at a chiropractic college. METHODS: THE STUDY COMPARED TESTING PERFORMANCE BETWEEN TWO COHORTS OF STUDENTS TAKING AN ADVANCED NEUROANATOMY COURSE: a control group (n = 78) and an experimental group (n = 80). Scores examined for each cohort included sums of quizzes, examination scores, and a comprehensive final examination. The control cohort completed weekly quizzes as individuals, while the experimental cohort completed the quizzes collaboratively in small groups. Both cohorts completed three unit examinations and the comprehensive final examination as individuals. Additionally, pretest-posttest and delayed posttest scores were examined. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) (including repeated measures MANCOVA) were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The experimental cohort scored significantly higher compared to the control cohort on all quizzes (F = 217.761; df = 1,156; p < .05) and overall course grades (F = 16.099; df = 1,156; p < .05). There were no significant differences in either the comprehensive final (posttest) (F = 3.138; df = 1,122; p > .05) or the delayed posttest (taken 5 weeks after the end of the course) (F = 0.431; df = 1,122; p > .05) between the two cohorts. The overall scores for both cohorts on the delayed posttest were significantly lower than the posttest scores (F = 4.660; df = 1,122; p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This project extends previous findings that students using collaborative testing have significantly increased short-term course performance compared with those students using traditional testing. No differences in learning or retention were noted.
INTRODUCTION: This study examined the effect of collaborative testing on student learning, attitude toward testing, and course satisfaction at a chiropractic college. METHODS: THE STUDY COMPARED TESTING PERFORMANCE BETWEEN TWO COHORTS OF STUDENTS TAKING AN ADVANCED NEUROANATOMY COURSE: a control group (n = 78) and an experimental group (n = 80). Scores examined for each cohort included sums of quizzes, examination scores, and a comprehensive final examination. The control cohort completed weekly quizzes as individuals, while the experimental cohort completed the quizzes collaboratively in small groups. Both cohorts completed three unit examinations and the comprehensive final examination as individuals. Additionally, pretest-posttest and delayed posttest scores were examined. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) and multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA) (including repeated measures MANCOVA) were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: The experimental cohort scored significantly higher compared to the control cohort on all quizzes (F = 217.761; df = 1,156; p < .05) and overall course grades (F = 16.099; df = 1,156; p < .05). There were no significant differences in either the comprehensive final (posttest) (F = 3.138; df = 1,122; p > .05) or the delayed posttest (taken 5 weeks after the end of the course) (F = 0.431; df = 1,122; p > .05) between the two cohorts. The overall scores for both cohorts on the delayed posttest were significantly lower than the posttest scores (F = 4.660; df = 1,122; p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: This project extends previous findings that students using collaborative testing have significantly increased short-term course performance compared with those students using traditional testing. No differences in learning or retention were noted.
Keywords:
Decision Making; Educational Assessment; Group Process; Teaching