8 hours to finish
200-250 words
Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
poster
Just from $13/Page
Collaborative vs.
Traditional
Classroom Testing
Reese Van Putten, Skylar Lee, Jayson Martinez,
and Ibrahim Alruwaili
Background and different test types – Ibrahim
[give background on collaborative testing and why it may be beneficial. Give examples of the different types
of testing (look at the survey we made, there is true collaborative and two two-step methods)]
Pros
● Grades, Learning, and Retention – Students
learn from older copies of standardized tests
(Volante, 2004).
● Strengthening Life/Career Skills – Students
develop essential social skills (Webb, 1997).
● Reducing Stress – Several experts documented
evident reduction in anxiety from students
working together during exams (Efu, 2018).
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.
Survey Analysis
● Zero Negative Experiences in the Past with
Collaborative Testing (No Yellow)
● 85% of Students who have taken a
Collaborative Test had a Positive Experience
References from Paper
Eastridge, J. A., & Benson, W. L. (2020). Comparing Two Models of Collaborative Testing for
Teaching Statistics. Teaching of Psychology, 47(1), 68-73.
Giuliodori, M. J., Lujan, H. L., & DiCarlo, S. E. (2008). Collaborative group testing benefits
high- and low-performing students. Advances in physiology education, 32(4), 274–278.
https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00101.2007
Lusk, M., & Conklin, L. (2003). Collaborative testing to promote learning. The Journal of
nursing education, 42(3), 121–124.
Marcinek, A. (2011). Importance of collaborative assessment in a 21st century classroom.
Edutopia Blog.
Meinster, Martha O. & Rose, Karen C. (1993). Cooperative Testing in Introductory-Level
Psychology Courses. [Washington, D.C.] : Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED365406
Shen, J., Cheng, K. E., Bieber, M., & Hiltz, S. R. (2004). Traditional in-class Examination vs.
collaborative online examination in asynchronous learning networks: Field evaluation
results. AMCIS 2004 Proceedings, 364.
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
Webb, N. M., Troper, J. D., & Fall, R. (1995). Constructive activity and learning in collaborative
small groups. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(3), 406–423.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.406
Webb, N. (1997). Assessing Students in Small Collaborative Groups. Theory Into Practice,
36(4), 205-213. Retrieved March 25, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1477365
Woody, W. D., Woody, L. K., & Bromley, S. (2008). Anticipated Group versus Individual
Examinations: A Classroom Comparison. Teaching of Psychology, 35(1), 13–17.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280701818540
Volante, L. (2004). Teaching to the Test: What Every Educator and Policy-Maker Should Know.
Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy.
Yuretich, R. F., S. A. Khan, R. M. Leckie, and J. J. Clement. 2001. “Active-Learning Methods to
Improve Student Performance and Scientific Interest in a Large Introductory
Oceanography Course.” Journal of Geoscience Education 49 (2):111–9.
doi:10.5408/1089-9995-49.2.111.
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&
https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00101.2007
https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X0603400304
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0022-0663.87.3.406
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1477365
https://doi.org/10.1080/00986280701818540
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/00220970309602059?needAccess=true&
