infographic

Collaborative vs. Traditional

Classroom Testing Reese Van Putten, Skylar Lee, Jayson Martinez,

and Ibrahim Alruwaili

Some Background on Collaborative Testing

The traditional testing method that we are familiar with has many flaws (Efu, 2018; Louis, 2004)

There are 2 primary types of Collaborative Testing (Efu 2018)

3 main benefits are observed from Collaborative Testing

-True Collaborative -Two-Step or Pyramid Test

-Better grades and retention -Real-life applications -Reduced stress

-Stressful -Not effective learning -No communication

Grades, Learning, and Retention

● Feedback for regular exams and quizzes are not as helpful for students. It would take a longer time to get the feedback to students in the first place (Giuliodori, 2008).

● Students have benefitted from learning from older copies of standardized tests than just from teachers that do not use older versions of standardized tests (Volante, 2004).

● Some have recommended a two part exam for students. The first part would be individual exams, and the second part will be collaborative assessments (Efu, 2018).

Strengthening Life/Career Skills

● The education systems in various institutions are merely meant for the strengthening of both life and career skills. Students are supposed to show their strengths in working as a group and their prowess

without supervision.

● Performance of collaborative test enhanced students who performed poorly while that for groups benefited all students collectively (Giuliodori, 2008).

● Students require standardized tests to know where their strengths lie (Volante, 2004). When a student fails in a particular area, more focus is to be given in the area to develop more.

● Furthermore, putting students in collaborative learning and tasks can help them develop essential social skills and grow their self-esteem (Webb, 1997).

Reducing Stress

● Experts Slusser and Erickson (2006); Lusk and Conklin (2003); and Zimbardo, Butler, and Wolfe (2003) documented evident reduction in anxiety from students working together during exams (Efu, 2018).

● Two decades of research have proved a decrease in stress. Experts Meinster & Rose (1993) in particular have reported it (Zimbardo et al. 2003).

● 328 students were tested and 81% affirmed reduced angst during study (Zimbardo et al. 2003). ○ 88% of the students had less uneasiness throughout testing.

● Teachers’ remarks regarding students reactions after they worked in pairs during final examinations: ○ “They are typically smiling, laughing, talking animatedly together, some even hugging, but also showing no signs

of the anxiety and dread we have observed for many years... (Zimbardo et al. 2003).”

Potential Issues/Cons

● Social loafing: Otherwise known as the “free-rider problem,” this is when a student did not study for the test and allows other students to do the work for them (Webb, 1997)

● Division of Labor: Students working together may split parts of the test to utilize time-management and expertise, which allows students to only know pieces of the course material (Webb, 1997)

● Test Design and Evaluation: Tests grades will be objective to the group and not the individual (Efu, 2018)

● Virtual Testing: There is little research on how collaborative testing could be effectively applied to virtual tests.

Link to Survey

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSd4YS5IZKqW9g-WY6SgrlakwQvKOhJ4tnHdHnXYqT63FM0wcQ/

viewform?usp=sf_link

References

Efu, S. I. (2018). Exams as Learning Tools: A Comparison of Traditional and Collaborative Assessment in Higher Education. Retrieved February 05, 2021, from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/87567555.2018.1531282

Giuliodori, M. (2008, December 01). Collaborative group testing benefits high- and low-performing students. Retrieved February 06, 2021, from https://journals.physiology.org/doi/full/10.1152/advan.00101.2007

Meinster, M., & Rose, K.C. (1993). Cooperative Testing in Introductory-Level Psychology Courses. Lusk, Marilyn & Conklin, Lynn. (2003). Collaborative testing to promote learning. The Journal of nursing education. 42. 121-4. Slusser, S. R., & Erickson, R. J. (2006). Group Quizzes: An Extension of the Collaborative Learning Process. Teaching Sociology,

34(3), 249–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X0603400304 Volante, L. (2004, September 25). Teaching to the test: What every educator and policy-maker should know. Retrieved February

06, 2021, from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ848235 Webb, N. (1997). Assessing Students in Small Collaborative Groups. Theory Into Practice, 36(4), 205-213. Retrieved February 7,

2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1477365 Zimbardo, P. G., Wolfe, V. A., & Butler, L. D. (2003). Cooperative College Examinations: More Gain, Less Pain When Students Share

Information and Grades. Retrieved February 05, 2021, from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00220970309602059?needAccess=true&