CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 20Student Assessment and FeedbackScience Education and PedagogyEducational Assessment and Pedagogy

Two-Stage Exams: A Powerful Tool for Reducing the Achievement Gap in Undergraduate Oceanography and Geology Classes

Open access
School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST), University of Hawai‘i,, Bruno, Barbara, Engels, Jennifer, Ito, Garrett, Gillis-Davis, Jeffrey, Dulai, Henrietta, Carter, Glenn, Fletcher, Charles +1 more·2017·Oceanography
DOI 10.5670/oceanog.2017.241
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5670/oceanog.2017.241

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. Arthurs, L., and A. Templeton. 2009. Coupled col- laborative in-class activities and individual fol- low-up homework promote interactive engage- ment and improve student learning outcomes in a college-level Environmental Geology course. Journal of Geoscience Education 57(5):356-371, https://doi.org/10.5408/1.3544287. · DOI
  2. Bruno, B.C., J.L.K. Wren, K. Noa, E.M. Wood- Charlson, J. Ayau, S.L. Soon, H. Needham, and C.A. Choy. 2016. Summer bridge program estab- lishes nascent pipeline to expand and diversify Hawai'i's undergraduate geoscience enrollment. Oceanography 29(2):286-292, https://doi.org/ 10.5670/oceanog.2016. · DOI · Paper page
  3. Carl Wieman Science Education Initiative. 2014. Two- stage exams, http://www.cwsei.ubc.ca/resources/ files/Two-stage_Exams.pdf. · DOI · Paper page
  4. Cohen, J. 1988. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences. Routledge, United Kingdom, 567 pp.
  5. Crouch, C.H., and E. Mazur. 2001. Peer instruction: Ten years of experience and results. American Journal of Physics 69(9):970-977, https://doi.org/ 10.1119/1.1374249. · DOI · Paper page
  6. Deslauriers, L., E. Schelew, and C. Wieman. 2011. Improved learning in a large-enrollment physics class. Science 332(6031):862-864, https://doi.org/ 10.1126/science.1201783. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Fengler, M., and P.M. Ostafichuk. 2015. Successes with two-stage exams in mechanical engineer- ing. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA15) Conference, McMaster University, May 31-June 3, 2015.
  8. Freeman, S., S.L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M.K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M.P. Wenderoth. 2014. Active learning increases student perfor- mance in science, engineering, and mathematics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 111(23):8,410-8,415, https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1319030111. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Gilley, B.H., and B. Clarkston. 2014. Collaborative test- ing: Evidence of learning in a controlled in-class study of undergraduate students. Journal of College Science Teaching 43(3):83-91.
  10. Haak, D.C., J. HilleRisLambers, E. Pitre, and S. Freeman. 2011. Increased structure and active learning reduce the achievement gap in intro- ductory biology. Science 332:1,213-1,216, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204820. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Knierim, H., and R.K. Davis. 2015. Two-stage exams improve student learning in an introductory geol- ogy course: Logistics, attendance, and grades. Journal of Geoscience Education 63:157-164, https://doi.org/10.5408/14-051. · DOI
  12. Leight, H., C. Saunders, R. Calkins, and M. Withers. 2012. Collaborative testing improves performance but not content retention in a large-enrollment introductory biology class. CBE -Life Sciences Education 11:392-401, https://doi.org/10.1187/ cbe.12-04-0048. · DOI · Paper page
  13. Lindsley, J.E., D.A. Morton, K. Pippitt, S. Lamb, and J.M. Colbert-Getz. 2016. The two-stage examina- tion: A method to assess individual competence and collaborative problem solving in medical stu- dents. Academic Medicine 91(10):1,384-1,387, https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000001185. · DOI
  14. Lorenzo, M., C.H. Crouch, and E. Mazur. 2006. Reducing the gender gap in the physics class- room. American Journal of Physics 74(2):118-122, https://doi.org/10.1119/1.2162549. · DOI
  15. Lucas, A. 2009. Using peer instruction and i-clickers to enhance student participation in cal- culus. PRIMUS 19(3):219-231, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10511970701643970. · DOI
  16. Lusk, M., and L. Conklin. 2003. Collaborative test- ing to promote learning. The Journal of Nursing Education 42(3):121-124.
  17. Lyle, K.S., and W.R. Robinson. 2003. A statisti- cal evaluation: Peer-led team learning in an organic chemistry course. Journal of Chemical Education 80(2):132-134, https://doi.org/10.1021/ ed080p132. · DOI
  18. Oakley, B., R.M. Felder, R. Brent, and I. Elhajj. 2004. Turning student groups into effective teams. Journal of Student Centered Learning 2(1):9-34.
  19. Pocock, S.J. 2006. Current controversies in data mon- itoring for clinical trials. Clinical Trials 3(6):513-521, https://doi.org/10.1177/1740774506073467. · DOI
  20. Rieger, G., and C. Heiner. 2014. Examinations that support collaborative learning: The students' perspective. Journal of College Science Teaching 43(4):41-47, https://doi.org/10.2505/4/ jcst14_043_04_41. · DOI · Paper page
  21. Ruiz-Primo, M.A., D. Briggs, H. Iverson, R. Talbot, and L.A. Shepard. 2011. Impact of undergrad- uate science course innovations on learning. Science 331:1,269-1,270, https://doi.org/10.1126/ science.1198976. · DOI
  22. Sandahl, S.S. 2010. Collaborative testing as a learning strategy in nursing education. Nursing Education Perspectives 31(3):142-147.
  23. Shindler, J.V. 2004. "Greater than the sum of the parts?" Examining the soundness of collaborative exams in teacher education courses. Innovative Higher Education 28:273-283, https://doi.org/ 10.1023/B:IHIE.0000018910.08228. · DOI
  24. Smith, M.K., W.B. Wood, W.K. Adams, C. Wieman, J.K. Knight, N. Guild, and T.T. Su. 2009. Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science 323:122-124, https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1165919. · DOI · Paper page
  25. Smith, M.K., W.B. Wood, K. Krauter, and J. Knight. 2011. Combining peer discussion with instruc- tor explanation increases student learning from in-class concept questions. CBE -Life Sciences Education 10:55-63, https://doi.org/10.1187/ cbe.10-08-0101. · DOI
  26. Snyder, J.J., J.D. Sloane, R.D.P. Dunk, and J.R. Wiles. 2016. Peer-led team learning helps minority stu- dents succeed. PLoS Biology 14(3):e1002398, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002398. · DOI
  27. Springer, L., M.E. Stanne, and S.S. Donovan. 1999. Effects of small-group learning on undergraduates in science, mathematics, engineering, and technol- ogy. Review of Educational Research 69(1):21-51.
  28. Stearns, S.A. 1996. Collaborative exams and learning tools. College Teaching 44(3):111-112, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/87567555.1996.9925564. · DOI
  29. Tenney, A., and B. Houck. 2003. Peer-led team learn- ing in introductory biology and chemistry courses: A parallel approach. Journal of Mathematical Sciences 6:11-20.
  30. Wamser, C.C. 2006. Peer-led team learning in organic chemistry: Effects on student perfor- mance, success, and persistence in the course. Journal of Chemical Education 83:1,562-1,566, https://doi.org/10.1021/ed083p1562. · DOI
  31. Wieman, C., G.W. Rieger, and C.E. Heiner. 2014. Physics exams that promote collaborative learn- ing. The Physics Science Teacher 52:51-53, https://doi.org/10.1119/1.4849159. · DOI · Paper page
  32. Yuretich, R.F., S.A. Khan, R.M. Leckie, and J.J. Clement. 2001. Active-learning methods to improve student performance and scientific inter- est in a large introductory oceanography course. Journal of Geoscience Education 49(2):111-119, https://doi.org/10.5408/1089-9995-49.2.111. · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (SOEST), U. O. H., Bruno, B., Engels, J., Ito, G., Gillis-Davis, J., Dulai, H., Carter, G., Fletcher, C., & Böttjer-Wilson, D.
Affiliations
Oceanography Society (US)
ORCID
Venue
Oceanography
Publisher
The Oceanography Society
Published
2017-06-01
Volume
30
Issue
2
ISSN
1042-8275 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.5670/oceanog.2017.241
OpenAlex
W2606592678
Cited by
20
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 3
FWCI
6.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
Oceanography (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1565950, 1557349)
  • Directorate for STEM Education
  • Office of Experimental Program to Stimulate Competitive Research (OIA-1557349, #1557349)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Student Assessment and Feedback
  • Social Sciences › Education › Science Education and Pedagogy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
Keywords
achievement gap, student assessment, course evaluation

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