Tonight I continued watching the JMBE Live! session with Claire Meaders from the University of California San Diego. The session was recorded on May 5, 2023. The session focused on the study on collaborative two-stage exams. There were equity gaps on the individual portion of the exams. The good news: there were no equity gaps on the group portion of the exams: they did not identify significant differences. Collectively, Meaders noted, equity gaps slightly decreased for the student final exam grades. Meaders asked participants what methods they thought group members used for the group exam. The number one response was using the answers from the student who know the most. What students actually did was to discuss each question until all members agreed. About 84% of students used this approach, which was also emphasized by the instructors on the exam preface. Students reported that they understood the material more clearly when they had the group exams. Students also perceived the exams as helpful, enjoyable, and that they did not take advantage of individuals from the team. Overall, students reported positive feelings. The researchers did not identify significant differences in perceptions across demographic groups. Forty nine students reported that the structure of the collaborative exams was helpful. Several students also mentioned that the collaborative/two-stage exams were enjoyable and helped them learn. Some negative perceptions were that the two-stage exams were mentally exhausting and not enough time for group discussion. Meaders found no significant differences in student perceptions across gender, PEER student status, or by group exam. Meaders concluded that two-stage exams worked well online and in-person. Stanley Maloy asked about how the groups were created. Meaders noted that instructional assistants (IAs) help establish classroom community and worked with their groups. Students seemed to have positive perceptions of the teamwork. Meaders explained that they believe that competition was overcome by and emphasis on teamwork. The individual exam, Meaders noted, may help students become more engaged in the group work. Meaders explained that for accommodations students received additional time for the individual portion but no changes were made to the group exam portion. Interestingly, online students could work collaboratively in breakout rooms. In person, they took the exams in the teaching labs. They were given one or two copies of the exam to encourage group work. Maloy asked if teamwork skills improved, and Meaders explained that while their study didn’t address this directly, anecdotally they had examples of improvement. Maloy asked about the impact of ChatGPT. Meaders explained that their exams are open-note but no computers. The questions are focused on higher-level Bloom’s application and critical thinking. Meaders also spoke about how they use ChatGPT to learn about scientific writing and citation etiquette. Meaders also noted that they analyzed de-identified data and can’t identify specific learning gains. I love how Meaders designed this study, and now I want to learn more about the ChatGPT studies!
