Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 5Student Assessment and FeedbackInnovative Teaching MethodsInnovations in Medical Education

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Correcting Missed Exam Questions as a Learning Tool in a Physiology Course

Rozell, Timothy G., Johnson, Jessica, Sexten, Andrea, Rhodes, Ashley E.·2017·Journal of College Science Teaching

Abstract

Students in a junior- and seniorlevel Anatomy and Physiology course have the opportunity to correct missed exam questions (“regrade”) and earn up to half of the original points missed. The three objectives of this study were to determine if (a) performance on the regrade assignment was correlated with scores on subsequent exams, (b) completing regrades improved grades on the comprehensive final exam and overall course grade, and (c) there was an optimal number of regrades that led to better student performance. Data were compiled over 7 years and original exam scores, regrade scores, final exam scores, and overall course scores were analyzed (n = 999). Performing well on regrades for an exam was found to be positively correlated to scores on the subsequent exam. Students doing at least one exam regrade had significantly greater mean final exam scores and overall course grades compared with students doing no regrades, and completing at least three regrades resulted in greater final exam and overall course grades than completing less than three regrades. From our results it appears that the exercise of reflecting on poorly understood course material with immediate instructor feedback is valuable for student comprehension and ability to apply basic concepts.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2505/4/jcst17_046_05_56

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. Ammirati, T. (1998). Targeted test revision—another approach to science testing. Journal of College Science Teaching, 28, 117–120.
  2. 10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.12.010121 · DOI · Paper page
  3. Jonassen, D. (2009). Reconciling a human cognitivie architecture. In S.D. Tobias & T.M. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: A success or failure? (pp. 13–33). New York, NY: Routledge.
  4. Perkins, D. (2006). Constructivism and troublesome knowledge: Issues of liminality. In J. Meyer & R. Land (Eds.), Overcoming barriers to student understanding: Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (pp. 33–47). New York, NY: Routledge.
  5. 10.1037/0022-0663.68.1.1 · DOI
  6. 10.1021/ed084p1445 · DOI
  7. Schroeter, C., Green, V.S., & Bess, E. (2010, June). Second time is a charm: The impact of correcting missed exam questions on student learning. NACTA Journal, 54(2), 21–29.
  8. Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In Mind in society: The develoment of higher psychological processes (pp. 79–91). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Cited by

See all 5

Metadata

Authors
Rozell, T. G., Johnson, J., Sexten, A., & Rhodes, A. E.
Affiliations
  • Kansas State University (US)
  • Eastern Kentucky University (US)
Venue
Journal of College Science Teaching
Published
2017-05
Volume
46
Issue
5
Pages
56-63
ISSN
  • 0047-231X (ISSN-L)
  • 1943-4898
OpenAlex
W2618889546
Cited by
5
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 2
FWCI
2.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
The journal of college science teaching (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
student reflection, instructor feedback, anatomy and physiology education, student performance, course grades, final exam scores

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Correcting Missed Exam Questions as a Learning Tool in a Physiology Course. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2505/4/jcst17_046_05_56
The paper
Rozell, T. G., Johnson, J., Sexten, A., & Rhodes, A. E. (2017). Correcting Missed Exam Questions as a Learning Tool in a Physiology Course. Journal of College Science Teaching. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/jcst17_046_05_56

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.