Implementing Collaborative Mock Exam Review

Authors

  • Nisha Abraham University of Texas at Austin

Keywords:

exam review, student support, promising practice, information retrieval

Abstract

DOI: https://doi.org/10.36896/3.1pp2

Exam reviews are a common offering within and across courses, often supported by departments, learning centers, and success centers. However, the majority of typical exam review formats follow the lecture or direct-teach format, with instructor- centered re-teaching or problem-solving as the mode of review. In lieu of this traditional and more passive offering, Balch (1998) found that students of all academic ability benefitted from active practice exam reviews and outperformed those who participated in typical exam reviews. In these active practice exam reviews, students spend time in the review actively solving problems, developing solutions and answering exam-style questions rather than passively receiving answers or watching an expert solve question Cranney et al. (2009) also saw positive gains in student outcomes based on the testing effect of repeated quizzing and testing, as opposed to re-study.

 

Author Biography

  • Nisha Abraham, University of Texas at Austin

    Nisha Abraham coordinates the Supplemental Instruction Program at the Sanger Learning Center. She received her B.S. in cell and molecular biology from The University of Texas at Austin in 2007, her M.S. in biology from Texas A&M University in 2012 and her M.A. in STEM Education from The University of Texas at Austin in 2019. She was a teaching assistant for several undergraduate biology classes, developed graduate TA training for the Center for Teaching Excellence, and conducted research on improving student motivation and performance in science education. Nisha’s area of interest is understanding the impacts of the SI program to student outcomes and retention.

     

References

Balch, W. R. (1998). Practice versus review exams and final exam performance. Teaching of Psychology, 25(3), 181-185. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15328023top2503_3

Cranney, J., Ahn, M., McKinnon, R., Morris, S., & Watts, K. (2009). The testing effect, collaborative learning, and retrieval-induced facilitation in a classroom setting. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 21(6), 919-940. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440802413505

Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2016). Random Thoughts... Why students fail tests 2. Ineffective teach-ing. Chemical Engineering Education, 50(3), 211-212. https://journals.flvc.org/cee/article/view/88356/84892

Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319(5865), 966-968. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1152408

Karpicke, J. D., & Grimaldi, P. J. (2012). Retrieval-based learning: A perspective for enhancing meaningful learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 401-418. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-012-9202-2

Shew, D. P., & Maletsky, L. P., & Clark, G., & McVey, M. (2019), June 15-June 19). Practice exam program impact on student academic performance and student retention [Paper presentation]. 2019 ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Tampa, FL, United States. https://peer.asee.org/33182

Published

2020-08-01

Issue

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2020): J-CASP: Volume 3, Issue 1 (Spring/Summer 2020)

Section

Promising Practices

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms: 

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

How to Cite

Implementing Collaborative Mock Exam Review. (2020). Journal of College Academic Support Programs, 3(1), 3. https://jcasp-ojs-txstate.tdl.org/jcasp/article/view/124

Similar Articles

1-10 of 82

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.