Student course performance and collaborative testing: a prospective follow-on study.
Objective: This prospective study evaluated the efficacy of collaborative testing on student performance at a chiropractic college. Methods: This study compared testing performance between 2 cohorts of chiropractic students taking a neuroanatomy course: a control group (n = 73) and an experimental g...
| Publicado en: | Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics Vol. 31; no. 8; pp. 611 - 616 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Elsevier B.V.
Oct2008
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=105592612&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 105592612 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 01614754 8GE jtl: Journal of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics issn: 01614754 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Oct2008 vid: 31 iid: 8 pid: 1265 pub: Elsevier B.V. place: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania artinfo: ui: 105592612 2010128200 10.1016/j.jmpt.2008.09.004 NLM18984244 105592612 ppf: 611 ppct: 5 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Student course performance and collaborative testing: a prospective follow-on study. aug: au: Meseke CA Nafziger RF Meseke JK affil: Academic Affairs, Palmer College of Chiropractic, Florida Campus, Port Orange, Fla. sug: subj: Education, Chiropractic Evaluation Educational Measurement Students, Chiropractic Data Analysis Software Data Analysis, Statistical Descriptive Statistics Multivariate Analysis of Variance P-Value Prospective Studies Human ab: Objective: This prospective study evaluated the efficacy of collaborative testing on student performance at a chiropractic college. Methods: This study compared testing performance between 2 cohorts of chiropractic students taking a neuroanatomy course: a control group (n = 73) and an experimental group (n = 80). Scores examined for each cohort included weekly quizzes, unit examinations, and a comprehensive final examination. The control cohort completed weekly quizzes as individuals, whereas the experimental cohort completed the quizzes collaboratively in small groups. Both cohorts completed the unit examinations and the comprehensive final examination as individuals. Multivariate analysis of variance was used for statistical analysis. Results: Overall, the experimental group differed from the control group (Wilks [lambda] = 0.300; F = 33.081; df = 10,142; P < .01). In addition to the weekly quizzes and the final grades, the mean of the sums of the quiz scores and mean of the sums of the examination scores were significantly higher for the experimental group as compared with the control group (P < .05). Conclusions: The results of this study reaffirmed previous study findings that collaborative testing appears to have increased student performance. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|