Using collaborative two‐stage examinations to address test anxiety in a large enrollment gateway course

Abstract

Large enrollment foundational courses are perceived as "high stakes" because of their potential to act as barriers for progression to the next course or admittance to a program. The nature of gateway courses makes them ideal settings to explore the relationship between anxiety, pedagogical interventions, and student performance. Here, two-stage collaborative examinations were implemented to improve test-taking skills and address widespread test anxiety in an introductory human anatomy course. Test anxiety data were collected (using the Motivated Strategies for Learning Questionnaire) before the first examination and last examination. Most students experienced decreased test anxiety over the course of the semester; however, some students may have experienced performance limiting conditions due to test anxiety at the end of the semester based on academic ability in the course (in "C" students when compared to "A" students: P < 0.00006 and "B" students: P < 0.05), overall academic ability (in academically weaker students: P < 0.025), and demographic factors (in women: P < 0.025). The strongest performances on examinations were primarily observed in already academically strong students (mean individual performance: P < 0.000, mean group performance: P < 0.000). Furthermore, changes in test anxiety were not significantly associated with the group portion of the examinations. Patterns of changes in test anxiety over the course of the semester underscore a complex interaction between test anxiety, student background, and student performance. Results suggest that pathways for test anxiety in "high stakes" courses may be separate from the mechanisms responsible for the benefits of collaborative testing. Anat Sci Educ 10: 409-422. © 2017 American Association of Anatomists.

Implementation and Student Assessment of a Two-stage Midterm Exam in a First-year Physical Chemistry Course for International Engineering Students

“…Before taking the two-stage exam, 73% of the students thought that the group retake of the exam could potentially improve their grades, but after the group exam 89% of them reported that they found the group retake to be a helpful strategy to enhance their performance. This agrees with previous studies that suggest a lower level of test anxiety in group exams as a reason for improved performance [11]. Interestingly, and contrary to other reports of group exams, after compensating for marking discrepancies between markers, just over 10% of students did better on the individual portion of the exam than on the group portion (data not shown).…”

“…These collaborative tests most often take the form of two-stage group exams, in which students first complete a traditional individual exam, worth the majority of their exam mark, and immediately afterwards complete the same or a very similar exam in groups, during which time they have the opportunity to discuss the material and receive immediate feedback from their peers [10]. These discussions during the group portions of the exam have been shown to present valuable opportunities for students to share their knowledge [11], practice justifying their reasoning and thought-process for each answer [12], learn from their peers, and practice their communication skills [13] [14].…”

A collaborative two‐stage examination in biomedical sciences: Positive impact on feedback and peer collaboration

“…Other studies have focused on the broad positive experience for the individual, such as in a medical education psychiatry test where students learnt both about the subject matter and themselves through the interpersonal dynamics of the situation 53 . Other studies showed the clear advantage even for the strong students in the class, 38,54 but effect on stress and anxiety seem to have somewhat mixed outcomes 54,55 …”

“…53 Other studies showed the clear advantage even for the strong students in the class, 38,54 but effect on stress and anxiety seem to have somewhat mixed outcomes. 54,55 Students also proposed suggestions to improve the two-stage examination. Three aspects were highlighted: (a) better time allocation for each section of the two-stage examination; (b) better space allocation for different discussion groups; and (c) introduction of more open-ended questions suitable for group stage of two-stage examination.…”

Fostering Evidence‐Informed Teaching in Crucial Classes: Faculty Development in Gateway Courses

“…As detailed in a recently published article (Fournier, Couret, Ramsay, & Caulkins (), some students experienced reduced test anxiety, although this result was not universal. Nonproductive grade rates were reduced from 23% during the 2012–2013 academic year to 13% during the intervention, and to 15% in the subsequent two semesters.…”