Collaborative Assessment That Supports Learning
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source of motivation for the final group exam is likely a combination of immediate feedback on the individual exam and the significant portion of the exam score attributed to the group exam (20% of overall exam score at both institutions).
“The source of motivation is likely a combination of immediate feedback on the individual exam and the significant portion of the exam score attributed to the group exam, which accounted for 20% of the overall exam score at both institutions”
From Two-Stage Final Exams: An Assessment Strategy for Enhanced Collaborative Learning and Reduced Student Stress (2026) · cites this paper as Rieger & Rieger, 2020
With less time available for the individual stage, instructors face constraints not only in the number and complexity of questions they can pose but also in the breadth of topics covered.
“With less time available for the individual stage, instructors face constraints not only in the number and complexity of questions they can pose but also in the breadth of topics covered (Kinnear, 2021;Rieger & Heiner, 2014;Rieger & Rieger, 2020).”
From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Rieger & Rieger, 2020
A typical two-stage exam allocates up to three-quarters of the available exam time to the individual stage and the remaining time to the collaborative stage.
“A typical two-stage exam allocates up to three-quarters of the available exam time to the individual stage and the remaining time to the collaborative stage (Rieger & Heiner, 2014;Rieger & Rieger, 2020).”
From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Rieger & Rieger, 2020
The consensus-finding crucial for learning in the collaborative stage is best stimulated by complex questions that require higher-level cognitive skills.
“Research shows that the consensus-finding crucial for learning in the collaborative stage is best stimulated by complex questions that require higher-level cognitive skills (B. S. Bloom et al., 1964;Heller & Hollabaugh, 1992;Rieger & Rieger, 2020;Stearns, 1996).”
From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Rieger & Rieger, 2020
The 80% individual and 20% group partition is a common weighting scheme and reflects standard practices in the field.
“This 80% individual and 20% group partition is a common weighting scheme and reflects standard practices in the field (Rieger & Rieger, 2020;Wieman et al., 2014).”
From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Rieger & Rieger, 2020
Cites
The power of testing memory: Basic research and implications for educational practice
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x · Cited by 2,037 · see citing works
The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention
Roediger, H. L., & Butler, A. C. (2011) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2010.09.003 · Cited by 1,796 · see citing works
The Critical Importance of Retrieval for Learning
Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1152408 · Cited by 1,791 · see citing works
Heller, P., & Hollabaugh, M. (1992) · American Journal of Physics · doi:10.1119/1.17118 · Cited by 726 · see citing works
7. The motivational basis of language learning tasks
Dörnyei, Z. (2002) · Language Learning & Language Teaching · doi:10.1075/lllt.2.10dor · Cited by 330 · see citing works
Fournier, K. A., Couret, J., Ramsay, J. B., & Caulkins, J. L. (2017) · Anatomical Sciences Education · doi:10.1002/ase.1677 · Cited by 68 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines
Callaghan, K., Kestin, G., Klales, A., McCarty, L., & Deslauriers, L. (2026) · Active Learning in Higher Education · doi:10.1177/14697874251344293 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“A typical two-stage exam allocates up to three-quarters of the available exam time to the individual stage and the remaining time to the collaborative stage (Rieger & Heiner, 2014; Rieger & Rieger, 2020).”
InfluentialCallaghan, K., Milbourne, T., Klales, A., Kestin, G., Arguelles, C., McCarty, L., & Deslauriers, L. (2026) · Journal of College Science Teaching · doi:10.1080/0047231x.2026.2620442 · Cited by 1 · see citing works
- Authors
- Rieger, G. W., & Rieger, C. L.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Corresponding author
- Rieger, Georg W.
- ORCID
- Rieger, Georg W.
- Venue
- Active Learning in College Science
- Publisher
- Springer International Publishing
- Published
- 2020
- Pages
- 821-837
- OpenAlex
- W3008444860
- Cited by
- 5
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2020: 1
- FWCI
- 1.47
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Springer eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Keywords
- collaborative assessment, active learning, student perceptions, introductory physics, large classes, STEM education, assessment design
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
