Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
DOES TWO-STAGE COLLABORATIVE TESTING IMPROVE RECALL AND RETENTION OF ANATOMICAL CONCEPTS?
Danielle C. Bentley, PhDDiv. of Anat. University of [email protected]
James Faul, BScHMBUniversity of Toronto
Tamara M. Rosner, PhDCTSIUniversity of Toronto
Leonor Separi, BScDept. of Mol. Gen.University of Toronto
INTRODUCTION
Retaining basic anatomy knowledge is imperative to all health care professionals. Two-stage collaborative testing has been previously shown to enhance student learning, as demonstrated through both short-term recall of course material and long-term retention of course material. Two-stage Collaborative Testing = complete test as individual, then complete same test in group.
However, previous research on two-stage collaborative testing has generally compared separate cohorts of students; a research design that fails to control for between-student variance.
Primary Research Aim: to determine the educational impact of two-stage collaborative testing on student recall / retention using a blocked-randomized cross-over design to control variance.
Participants: ANAT1110 is an introductory anatomy course for students in the Radiation Science program at UofT/Michener. The 2019 cohort included 97 students; 84 of which provided end-of-term informed consent. Almost half (45%) of students had very limited previous anatomy experience, despite the majority (81%) having completed a university degree.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Block-randomized, groups of 3-4 students
Term Test 1 (TT1)
Term Test 2 (TT2)*
Term Test 3 (TT3)*
FINAL EXAM
TT1 material
TT2 material *
TT3 material *
Groups A-O
Groups P-AD
Recall Quiz 2* Recall Quiz 3*Recall Quiz 1
(*experimental conditions)
collaborationpractice
collaborationpractice
collaborative!
collaborative!
-25-20-15-10-505
101520
Term Test Two Term Test Three
Per
cent
age
(on
reca
ll qu
iz)
Recall
AtoOPtoAD
60
62
64
66
68
70
72
74
Term Test Two Material Term Test Three Materal
Per
cent
age
(on
stra
tifie
d te
rm te
st
ques
tions
)
Retention
AtoOPtoAD
collaborative
collaborative
collaborative
collaborative
independent
independent
independent
independent
AnatomyGroup
AnatomyGroup
Material
A-OP-AD
A-OP-AD
TWO-STAGE COLLABORATIVE TESTING
IMPROVES RECALL BY 6.3% (ns)
TWO-STAGE COLLABORATIVE TESTING
IMPROVES RETENTION BY 1.6% (ns)
NEGATIVE STUDENT FEEDBACK
share ideas
learn to collaboratereal-worldcommunication
practice
“grade-boost”
discussions
immediate feedback
stigma
“majority wins”
studentsforcefully
persuading others
negativegroup
dynamics
Positive group dynamics frustration arguments
Students who wrote TT2 collaboratively experienced a “boost” of 2.6 ± 2.1 % on that test
= “boost” of 0.53% in the course
Students who wrote TT3 collaboratively experienced a “boost” of 3.9 ± 2.9 % on that test
= “boost” of 0.79% in the course
Q: “DOESN’T COLLABORATIVE TESTING ARTIFICIALLY BOOST MARKS” ??
A: VERY MINIMALLY
Q: “DON’T STUDENTS STUDY LESS WHEN COLLABORATIVELY TESTED” ??
A: NOPE
60
65
70
75
80
85
Term Test Two Term Test Three
% (o
n T
erm
Tes
t)
Individual Performance
Entire Class Collaborative Condition Individual Condition
Q: “WILL YOU CONTINUE COLLABORATIVE TESTING IN YOUR COURSE ??
A: ABSOLUTELY !
Fall 2019 cohort: To 1) demonstrate repeatability of results and 2) enhance statistical power
POSITIVE STUDENT FEEDBACK
