Cargando…

Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class

Collaborative testing has been shown to improve performance but not always content retention. In this study, we investigated whether collaborative testing could improve both performance and content retention in a large, introductory biology course. Students were semirandomly divided into two groups...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Leight, Hayley, Saunders, Cheston, Calkins, Robin, Withers, Michelle
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Society for Cell Biology 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3516795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23222835
http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-04-0048
_version_ 1782252343000039424
author Leight, Hayley
Saunders, Cheston
Calkins, Robin
Withers, Michelle
author_facet Leight, Hayley
Saunders, Cheston
Calkins, Robin
Withers, Michelle
author_sort Leight, Hayley
collection PubMed
description Collaborative testing has been shown to improve performance but not always content retention. In this study, we investigated whether collaborative testing could improve both performance and content retention in a large, introductory biology course. Students were semirandomly divided into two groups based on their performances on exam 1. Each group contained equal numbers of students scoring in each grade category (“A”–“F”) on exam 1. All students completed each of the four exams of the semester as individuals. For exam 2, one group took the exam a second time in small groups immediately following the individually administered test. The other group followed this same format for exam 3. Individual and group exam scores were compared to determine differences in performance. All but exam 1 contained a subset of cumulative questions from the previous exam. Performances on the cumulative questions for exams 3 and 4 were compared for the two groups to determine whether there were significant differences in content retention. Even though group test scores were significantly higher than individual test scores, students who participated in collaborative testing performed no differently on cumulative questions than students who took the previous exam as individuals.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3516795
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher American Society for Cell Biology
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-35167952012-12-10 Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class Leight, Hayley Saunders, Cheston Calkins, Robin Withers, Michelle CBE Life Sci Educ Articles Collaborative testing has been shown to improve performance but not always content retention. In this study, we investigated whether collaborative testing could improve both performance and content retention in a large, introductory biology course. Students were semirandomly divided into two groups based on their performances on exam 1. Each group contained equal numbers of students scoring in each grade category (“A”–“F”) on exam 1. All students completed each of the four exams of the semester as individuals. For exam 2, one group took the exam a second time in small groups immediately following the individually administered test. The other group followed this same format for exam 3. Individual and group exam scores were compared to determine differences in performance. All but exam 1 contained a subset of cumulative questions from the previous exam. Performances on the cumulative questions for exams 3 and 4 were compared for the two groups to determine whether there were significant differences in content retention. Even though group test scores were significantly higher than individual test scores, students who participated in collaborative testing performed no differently on cumulative questions than students who took the previous exam as individuals. American Society for Cell Biology 2012 /pmc/articles/PMC3516795/ /pubmed/23222835 http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-04-0048 Text en © 2012 H. Leight et al.CBE—Life Sciences Education © 2012 The American Society for Cell Biology. This article is distributed by The American Society for Cell Biology under license from the author(s). It is available to the public under an Attribution–Noncommercial–Share Alike 3.0 Unported Creative Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0). “ASCB®,” “The American Society for Cell Biology®,” and “Molecular Biology of the Cell®” are registered trademarks of The American Society of Cell Biology.
spellingShingle Articles
Leight, Hayley
Saunders, Cheston
Calkins, Robin
Withers, Michelle
Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class
title Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class
title_full Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class
title_fullStr Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class
title_full_unstemmed Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class
title_short Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class
title_sort collaborative testing improves performance but not content retention in a large-enrollment introductory biology class
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3516795/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23222835
http://dx.doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-04-0048
work_keys_str_mv AT leighthayley collaborativetestingimprovesperformancebutnotcontentretentioninalargeenrollmentintroductorybiologyclass
AT saunderscheston collaborativetestingimprovesperformancebutnotcontentretentioninalargeenrollmentintroductorybiologyclass
AT calkinsrobin collaborativetestingimprovesperformancebutnotcontentretentioninalargeenrollmentintroductorybiologyclass
AT withersmichelle collaborativetestingimprovesperformancebutnotcontentretentioninalargeenrollmentintroductorybiologyclass