Student Attitudes, Satisfaction, and Learning in a Collaborative Testing Environment

Overview

Journal J Chiropr Educ

Date 2010 May 19

PMID 20480011

Citations 5

Authors

Christopher A Meseke

Rita Nafziger

Jamie K Meseke

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

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.

Citing Articles

Aromatherapy for test anxiety in chiropractic students.

Wells B, Nightingale L, Derby D, Salsbury S, Lawrence D J Chiropr Educ. 2020; 35(1):50-58.

PMID: 32543886 PMC: 7958665. DOI: 10.7899/JCE-18-36.

Requiring students to justify answer changes during collaborative testing may be necessary for improved academic performance.

Zhang N, Henderson C J Chiropr Educ. 2017; 31(2):96-101.

PMID: 28157390 PMC: 5656153. DOI: 10.7899/JCE-16-5.

The Two-Stage Examination: A Method to Assess Individual Competence and Collaborative Problem Solving in Medical Students.

Lindsley J, Morton D, Pippitt K, Lamb S, Colbert-Getz J Acad Med. 2016; 91(10):1384-1387.

PMID: 27049544 PMC: 5044811. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001185.

Test anxiety and academic performance in chiropractic students.

Zhang N, Henderson C J Chiropr Educ. 2013; 28(1):2-8.

PMID: 24350946 PMC: 3967645. DOI: 10.7899/JCE-13-20.

A history of the journal of chiropractic education: twenty-five years of service, 1987-2011.

Green B, Jacobs G, Johnson C, Phillips R J Chiropr Educ. 2011; 25(2):169-81.

PMID: 22069342 PMC: 3204953. DOI: 10.7899/1042-5055-25.2.169.

References

Phillips A . Reducing nursing students' anxiety level and increasing retention of materials. J Nurs Educ. 1988; 27(1):35-41. DOI: 10.3928/0148-4834-19880101-09. View

Mitchell N, Melton S . Collaborative testing: an innovative approach to test taking. Nurse Educ. 2003; 28(2):95-7. DOI: 10.1097/00006223-200303000-00013. View

Lusk M, Conklin L . Collaborative testing to promote learning. J Nurs Educ. 2003; 42(3):121-4. DOI: 10.3928/0148-4834-20030301-07. View

. Shared test taking. J N Y State Nurses Assoc. 1996; 27(4):4-6. View

Dimitrov D, Rumrill Jr P . Pretest-posttest designs and measurement of change. Work. 2003; 20(2):159-65. View

Durrant L, PIERSON G, Allen E . Group testing and its effectiveness in learning selected nursing concepts. J R Soc Health. 1985; 105(3):107-11. DOI: 10.1177/146642408510500306. View

Meseke C, Nafziger R, Meseke J . Student course performance and collaborative testing: a prospective follow-on study. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2008; 31(8):611-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.09.004. View

Richardson D . Comparison of naive and experienced students of elementary physiology on performance in an advanced course. Adv Physiol Educ. 2000; 23(1):91-5. DOI: 10.1152/advances.2000.23.1.S91. View

Cortright R, Collins H, Rodenbaugh D, DiCarlo S . Student retention of course content is improved by collaborative-group testing. Adv Physiol Educ. 2003; 27(1-4):102-8. DOI: 10.1152/advan.00041.2002. View

10.

Lynch B . Cooperative learning in interdisciplinary education for the allied health professions. J Allied Health. 1984; 13(2):83-93. View

11.

Hickey B . Lessons learned from collaborative testing. Nurse Educ. 2006; 31(2):88-91. DOI: 10.1097/00006223-200603000-00012. View

12.

Meseke C, Bovee M, Gran D . Impact of collaborative testing on student performance and satisfaction in a chiropractic science course. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2009; 32(4):309-14. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2009.03.012. View

13.

Meseke J, Nafziger R, Meseke C . Facilitating the learning process: a pilot study of collaborative testing vs individualistic testing in the chiropractic college setting. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2008; 31(4):308-12. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.03.007. View

14.

Mateen F, DEon M . Neuroanatomy: a single institution study of knowledge loss. Med Teach. 2008; 30(5):537-9. DOI: 10.1080/01421590802064880. View

15.

Cortright R, Collins H, DiCarlo S . Peer instruction enhanced meaningful learning: ability to solve novel problems. Adv Physiol Educ. 2005; 29(2):107-11. DOI: 10.1152/advan.00060.2004. View

16.

DEon M . Knowledge loss of medical students on first year basic science courses at the University of Saskatchewan. BMC Med Educ. 2006; 6:5. PMC: 1397826. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6920-6-5. View

17.

Giuliodori M, Lujan H, DiCarlo S . Collaborative group testing benefits high- and low-performing students. Adv Physiol Educ. 2008; 32(4):274-8. DOI: 10.1152/advan.00101.2007. View

18.

Woloschuk W, Mandin H, Harasym P, Lorscheider F, Brant R . Retention of basic science knowledge: a comparison between body system-based and clinical presentation curricula. Teach Learn Med. 2004; 16(2):116-22. DOI: 10.1207/s15328015tlm1602_1. View