Collaborative Testing Improves Performance but Not Content Retention in a Large-Enrollment Introductory Biology Class
Open accessAbstract
Collaborative testing has been shown to improve performance but not always content retention. In this study, we investigated whether collaborative testing could improve both performance and content retention in a large, introductory biology course. Students were semirandomly divided into two groups based on their performances on exam 1. Each group contained equal numbers of students scoring in each grade category (“A”–“F”) on exam 1. All students completed each of the four exams of the semester as individuals. For exam 2, one group took the exam a second time in small groups immediately following the individually administered test. The other group followed this same format for exam 3. Individual and group exam scores were compared to determine differences in performance. All but exam 1 contained a subset of cumulative questions from the previous exam. Performances on the cumulative questions for exams 3 and 4 were compared for the two groups to determine whether there were significant differences in content retention. Even though group test scores were significantly higher than individual test scores, students who participated in collaborative testing performed no differently on cumulative questions than students who took the previous exam as individuals.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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 benefits of two-stage exams can vary; not all studies have demonstrated significant long-term retention, and the effects may diminish over time.
“However, these benefits can vary, as not all studies have demonstrated significant long-term retention, and the effects may diminish over time (Cao & Porter, 2017;Kinnear, 2021;Leight et al., 2012).”
From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Leight et al., 2012
The Discussion (page unavailable) says collaborative exam scores were higher, but content retention on the subsequent exam was no better; it also notes that other studies found different results. This supports the claim that benefits vary and that significant retention gains are not always found. The paper does not establish that an effect diminishes over time. (LLM, conf=0.84)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredTwo-stage exams promote collaboration.
“promote collaboration (Leight et al., 2012;Levy et al., 2023;Yu, 2010)”
From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Leight et al., 2012
Two-stage exams provide immediate feedback following an exam.
“provide immediate feedback following an exam (Garaschuk & Cytrynbaum, 2019;Gilley & Clarkston, 2014;Leight et al., 2012;Nicol & Selvaretnam, 2021;Rieger & Rieger, 2020;Rivaz et al., 2015;Vázquez-García, 2018;Vogler & Robinson, 2016)”
From Active learning through flexible collaborative exams: Improving assessments across disciplines (2026) · cites this paper as Leight et al., 2012
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
Test-Enhanced Learning: Taking Memory Tests Improves Long-Term Retention
Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x · Cited by 2,867 · see citing works
Restructuring the Classroom: Conditions for Productive Small Groups
Cohen, E. G. (1994) · Review of Educational Research · doi:10.3102/00346543064001001 · Cited by 2,120 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 24
- Beichner R Saul J 2003 Introduction to the SCALE-UP (Student-Centered Activities for Large-Enrollment Undergraduate Programs) project. Proceedings of the International School of Physics, Varenna, Italy, July 2003. www.ncsu.edu/PER/Articles/Varenna_SCALEUP_Paper.pdf (accessed 5 April 2012)
- Benner P From Novice to Expert 1984 Menlo Park, CA Addison-Wesley
- Cortright R Collins H Rodenbaugh D DiCarlo S Student retention of course content is improved by collaborative-group testing Adv Physiol Educ 2003 27 102 108 12928319
- Crowe A Dirks C Wenderoth MP Biology in Bloom: implementing Bloom's taxonomy to enhance student learning in biology CBE Life Sci Educ 2008 7 368 381 19047424 PMC2592046
- Donovan M Bransford J Pellegrino J How People Learn: Bridging Research and Practice, Committee on Learning, Research and Educational Practice 1999 Washington, DC National Academy Press
- Epstein M Epstein B Brovsic G Immediate feedback during academic testing Psychol Rep 2001 88 889 894 11508040
- Freeman S O'Connor E Parks J Cunningham M Hurley D Haak D Dirks C Wenderoth M Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology CBE Life Sci Educ 2007 6 132 139 17548875 PMC1885904
- Giuliodori M Lujan H DiCarlo S Collaborative group testing benefits high- and low-performing students Adv Physiol Educ 2008 32 274 278 19047503
- Knight J Wood W Teaching more by lecturing less Cell Biol Educ 2005 4 298 310 16341257 PMC1305892
- Kornell N Hays M Bjork R Unsuccessful retrieval attempts enhance subsequent learning J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn 2009 35 989 998 19586265
- Lusk M Conklin L Collaborative testing to promote learning J Nurs Educ 2003 42 121 124 12661712
- Marsh E Roediger H The memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing Psychonomic Bull Rev 2007 14 194 199 17694900
- Metz A Lord T French D Crow L Quantitative assessment of student learning in large undergraduate science classrooms: approaches and caveats College Science Teachers Guide to Assessment 2009 Arlington, VA NSTA Press 31 34
- Millis B Cottell P Cooperative Learning for Higher Education Faculty 1998 Phoenix, AZ American Council on Education and Oryx Press
- Mitchell N Melton S Collaborative testing: an innovative approach to test taking Nurse Educ 2003 28 95 97 12646830
- Rao S Collins H DiCarlo S Collaborative testing enhances student learning Adv Physiol Educ 2002 26 37 41 11850326
- Roediger H Marsh E The positive and negative consequences of multiple-choice testing J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cog 2005 31 1155 1159 16248758
- Sandahl S Collaborative testing as a learning strategy in nursing education Nurs Educ Perspect 2010 31 142 147 20635617
- Smith A Stewart R Shields P Hayes-Klosteridis J Robinson P Yuan R Introductory biology courses: a framework to support active learning in large enrollment introductory science courses Cell Biol Educ 2005 4 143 156 15917873 PMC1103716
- Straits W Gomez-Zwiep S Better multiple-choice assessments. In: College Science Teachers Guide to Assessment, ed. T Lord, D French, and L Crow, Arlington, VA: NSTA Press 2009 45 48
- Sumangala R Collins H DiCarlo S Collaborative testing enhances student learning Adv Physiol Educ 2002 26 37 41 11850326
- Tanner K Allen D Approaches to biology teaching and learning: from assays to assessments—on collecting evidence in science teaching Cell Biol Educ 2004 3 69 74 15257331 PMC437645
- Walker J Cotner S Baepler P Decker M A delicate balance: integrating active learning into a large lecture course CBE Life Sci Educ 2008 7 361 367 19047423 PMC2592041
- Wood W Innovations in teaching undergraduate biology and why we need them Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol 2009 25 93 112 19575638
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
“…demonstrate that two-stage exams create intense engagement among students (Rieger & Heiner, 2014; Wieman et al., 2014), promote collaboration (Leight et al., 2012; Levy et al., 2023; Yu, 2010), provide immediate feedback following an exam (Garaschuk & Cytrynbaum, 2019; Gilley & Clarkston,…”
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
“…& Heiner, 2014; Zimbardo et al., 2003; Yuretich et al., 2001); increased motivation and improved perception of the course (Gilley & Clarkston, 2014; Leight et al., 2012; Schindler, 2004; Stearns, 1996; Yu et al., 2010; Zipp, 2007); improved students’ relationships with groupmates (Cortright et…”
- Authors
- Leight, H., Saunders, C., Calkins, R., & Withers, M.
- Affiliations
- West Virginia University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Withers, Michelle
- Venue
- CBE—Life Sciences Education
- Published
- 2012-12
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 392-401
- ISSN
- 1931-7913 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC3516795
- OpenAlex
- W2108728567
- Cited by
- 77
- References
- 2
- Citations by year
- 2026: 5 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 18.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- cc-by-nc-sa
- Locations
- CBE—Life Sciences Education (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
- Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
- Keywords
- collaborative testing, group testing, content preservation, exam performance, introductory biology, large-enrollment courses
- MeSH terms
- Biology, Cooperative Behavior, Data Collection, Educational Measurement, Female, Humans, Male, Research Design, Retention, Psychology, Students
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
