ORAL GROUP EXAMINATION METHOD TO EVALUATE COLLABORATIVE AND INDIVIDUAL LEARNING

ORAL GROUP EXAMINATION METHOD TO EVALUATE COLLABORATIVE AND INDIVIDUAL LEARNING

K. Stenderup, S. Overby (2021).  ORAL GROUP EXAMINATION METHOD TO EVALUATE COLLABORATIVE AND INDIVIDUAL LEARNING. 14.

The engineering education at Aarhus University, Denmark, includes the course Statistics and Design of Experiments (DoE) that encompasses both collaborative and individual learning activities. The choice of examination method is important, as students adapt their learning behavior accordingly. Group examinations align well with collaborative learning and individual examinations are successful in assessing individual learning and detecting free riders. To avoid organizing and exposing the students to two examinations and thus imposing additional undesirable costs, we aimed to develop a single highly structured oral group examination method that addresses both collaborative and individual learning in an organized fashion without increasing demands on academic staff. The oral group examination method described in this study is a three-in-one exam where all group members in a project group are present at all times. First, the students’ collaborative skills were addressed with focus on knowledge application and analysis. Then their individual skills were addressed with focus on basic knowledge understanding. Finally, students were given the opportunity to evaluate their own knowledge and create new knowledge, which includes the pinnacle of Bloom’s taxonomy pyramid. The examination method was tried out with four classes of engineering students (142 in total): two Chemical engineering and two Biotechnological engineering classes in their second and third year. Afterwards, students reflected on their perception of the exam in a survey. In summary, the examination method embraced assessment of both collaborative and individual learning and provided time for in-depth discussions with all group members, in the project group, on a high taxonomic level. We encourage other educators to explore this examination method. The present study includes a “ready-to-implement” protocol and a “ready-to-use" Student Scoring Sheet to keep track of the contribution of each student.

Authors (New): 
Karin Stenderup
Sanne Sandberg Overby
Pages: 
14
Affiliations: 
Aarhus University, Denmark
Keywords: 
Second-Year Undergraduate
Chemical Engineering
Biotechnology Engineering
Testing/Assessment
Student-centered learning
CDIO Standard 11
Year: 
2021
Reference: 
Bay, D., & Pacharn, P. (2017). Impact of group exams in a graduate intermediate accounting class. Account. Educ., 26(4), 316-334.: 
10.1080/09639284.2017.1292465
Billings, D. M. (2017). Collaborative Testing. J. Contin. Educ. Nurs., 48(7), 302-303.: 
10.3928/00220124-20170616-06
Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. New York: David McKay.: 
Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing : a revision of Bloom's Taxonomy of educational objectives (Abridged ed.). New York: Longman.: 
Bretz, S. L. (2012). Navigating the Landscape of Assessment. J. Chem. Educ., 89(6), 689-691.: 
10.1021/ed3001045
Brown, S. A., & Glasner, A. (1999). Assessment matters in higher education : choosing and using diverse approaches (1 ed.). Buckingham.: 
Caldecott, M., & Emmioglu, E. (2017). Do Group Exams Support English as an Additional Language Student Learning? Multicultural Learning and Teaching, 12(1), 27-48.: 
10.1515/mlt-2014-0013
Hanna, K., Roberts, T., & Hurley, S. (2016). Collaborative Testing as NCLEX Enrichment. Nurse Educator, 41(4), 171-174.: 
10.1097/NNE.0000000000000241
Jang, H., Lasry, N., Miller, K., & Mazur, E. (2017). Collaborative exams: Cheating? Or learning? American Journal of Physics, 85(3), 223-227.: 
10.1119/1.4974744
Kolmos, A., & Holgaard, J. E. (2009). Gruppebaseret eller individuel projekteksamen – fordele og ulemper. Dansk Universitetspædagogisk Tidsskrift, 4(7), 33-43.: 
Krogh, L., & Aarup Jensen, A. (Eds.). (2013). Visions, challenges, and strategies : PBL principles and methodologies in a Danish and global perspective (1 ed.). Aalborg: Aalborg University Press.: 
LaBossiere, M. D., Dell, K. A., Sunjic, K., & Wantuch, G. A. (2016). Student perceptions of group examinations as a method of exam review in pharmacotherapeutics. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 8(3), 375-379.: 
10.1016/j.cptl.2016.02.002
Levine, R. E., Borges, N. J., Roman, B. J. B., Carchedi, L. R., Townsend, M. H., Cluver, J. S., . . . Thompson, B. M. (2018). High-Stakes Collaborative Testing: Why Not? Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 30(2), 133-140.: 
10.1080/10401334.2017.1365719
Levy, D., Svoronos, T., & Klinger, M. (2018). Two-stage examinations: Can examinations be more formative experiences? Active Learning in Higher Education, 146978741880166.: 
10.1177/1469787418801668
Lindsley, J. E., Morton, D. A., Pippitt, K., Lamb, S., & Colbert-Getz, J. M. (2016). The Two-Stage Examination: A Method to Assess Individual Competence and Collaborative Problem Solving in Medical Students. Academic Medicine, 91(10), 1384-1387.: 
10.1097/ACM.0000000000001185
LoGiudice, A. B., Pachai, A. A., & Kim, J. A. (2015). Testing together: When do students learn more through collaborative tests? Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1(4), 377-389.: 
10.1037/stl0000041
Mahoney, J. W., & Harris-Reeves, B. (2017). The effects of collaborative testing on higher order thinking: Do the bright get brighter? Active Learning in Higher Education, 1-13.: 
10.1177/1469787417723243
Molsbee, C. P. (2013). Collaborative testing and mixed results. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 8(1), 22-25.: 
10.1016/j.teln.2012.09.001
Momsen, J., Offerdahl, E., Kryjevskaia, M., Montplaisir, L., Anderson, E., & Grosz, N. (2013). Using Assessments to Investigate and Compare the Nature of Learning in Undergraduate Science Courses. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 12(2), 239-249.: 
10.1187/cbe.12-08-0130
Nafziger, R., Meseke, J. K., & Meseke, C. A. (2011). Collaborative testing: the effect of group formation process on overall student performance. The Journal of chiropractic education, 25(1), 11-15.: 
10.7899/1042-5055-25.1.11
Pienta, N. J. (2011). Striking a Balance with Assessment. J. Chem. Educ., 88(9), 1199-1200.: 
10.1021/ed200442j
Rhodes, M. M. (2010). A Laboratory Practical Exam for High School Chemistry. J. Chem. Educ., 87(6), 613-615.: 
10.1021/ed100200k
Rieger, G. W., & Heiner, C. E. (2014). Examinations That Support Collaborative Learning: The Students' Perspective. Journal of College Science Teaching, 43(4), 41-47.: 
10.2505/4/jcst14_043_04_41
Rivaz, M., Momennasab, M., & Shokrollahi, P. (2015). Effect of collaborative testing on learning and retention of course content in nursing students. Journal of advances in medical education & professionalism, 3(4), 178-182.: 
Siegel, M. A., Roberts, T. M., Freyermuth, S. K., Witzig, S. B., & Izci, K. (2015). Aligning Assessment to Instruction: Collaborative Group Testing in Large-Enrollment Science Classes. J. Coll. Sci. Teach., 44(6), 74-82.: 
Vázquez-García, M. (2018). Collaborative-group testing improves learning and knowledge retention of human physiology topics in second-year medical students. Adv. Physiol. Educ., 42(2), 232-239.: 
10.1152/advan.00113.2017
Wieman, C. E., Rieger, G. W., & Heiner, C. E. (2014). Physics Exams that Promote Collaborative Learning. The Physics Teacher, 52(1), 51-53.: 
10.1119/1.4849159
Go to top
randomness