Skip to main content

Q&A on Collaborative or Two-Stage Exams

Q&A on Collaborative or Two-Stage Exams

December 15, 2020
Rachel Goc

Usually exams are viewed as an assessment of a single student’s knowledge at a particular point in time. Turning that idea on its head is the technique of two-stage exams, where the act of taking the exam is a team effort and is a continuation, rather than an encapsulation, of the learning experience. Referred to as both “collaborative” and “two-stage” exams, students first complete and turn in an exam individually. Then, working in small groups, they take the same exam again.

Research into collaborative learning and exams has noted that one of its strengths is in how students perceive the process. In a literature review for her study on collaborative testing in nursing education, Sheryl Standahl noted that students reported less anxiety, increased motivation, and improved student relations (143). During the pandemic, we have heard from students reporting feelings of isolation, anxiety, and difficulty sustaining motivation. Instructors have also reported that administering assessments remotely has involved academic integrity considerations that have been difficult to resolve. While collaborative exams are not a panacea for any of these deep and widespread issues, they offer an approach that directly addresses student experiences learning during a pandemic and faculty’s difficulties administering assessments remotely.

Q&A with a Northwestern faculty member

Hilary Truchan, Assistant Professor of Instruction, Department of Molecular Biosciences

Q. Why did you initially become interested in trying out collaborative or two-stage exams?

​I learned about two-stage exams through several professional development courses in teaching and learning through the CIRTL network when I was a postdoctoral fellow here at NU. I remember watching a YouTube video where a professor successfully implemented them in a large lecture hall of more than 200 students and I was intrigued by the extreme organization required and the energy of the room. The idea of the exams themselves was enticing because they provide an opportunity to turn a formal assessment into a learning opportunity. Students typically do not learn from mistakes they may have made on exams; they very likely do not review at them at all. This is a missed opportunity. Two-stage exams stress the importance of learning the material and incentivize the students to do so. Additionally, the method of learning in the second stage is highly effective in that they are teaching and/or learning from their peers.

Q. What were some problems or lessons learned when you first tried out this technique?

The first time I implemented two-stage exams, I made their individual exams worth 85% of their exam grade and their group exam (second stage) worth 15%. Our class period was only 50 minutes long, so they took their individual exams in one class period and completed the group exam in the first 20-25 minutes of the next class period. My goal was that in them knowing there was a second stage that could improve their exam grade, they would take the time in between the two classes to reflect on questions they were confused on, research them, and learn the material. However, before the second exam in that course, I overheard a couple conversations in the classroom where students were discussing how the group exam really didn’t impact their grade, so they didn’t put in the effort to potentially learn from their mistakes as I had hoped. Overall, the 85/15 grading scheme was not enough incentive for them.

Q. Why did you decide to continue using the technique and adapt it for online?

I decided to continue with two-stage exams because they truly are an effective learning strategy. Like all professors, my goal is for my students to learn and be able to apply the course material. I try and stress to my students that if they can achieve that, a good grade will naturally follow. I wanted to provide this same learning opportunity during the switch to remote learning and felt it was achievable with the technology available.

Q. What has changed in your approach since moving online?

Besides moving from paper exams to Canvas and Zoom, not much has changed. In the classroom, at the start of the class period before the second stage, I would have all the students come to the front of the room and I would give them a playing card. They had to then find the three other students with that playing card (e.g., find the other “7’s” or find the other “queens”), and that is how I randomized the groups. Now I have a class of 40 students, so I let Zoom randomize the groups during breakout formation and I modify the Canvas exam so that the first question asks them to type in the names of their group members. When I have a larger class in future quarters, I will pre-form groups in Canvas and Zoom because figuring out who is in what group to assign grades can be rather tedious for larger classes.

Another change in moving online is that while students are taking the individual portion of the exam, they can easily copy or screenshot the questions to use in studying for the second stage. This is not possible when doing two-stage exams in person, and the students must rely on memory (when the second stage is offered in a different class period). This was just a realization in moving to remote learning and not a problem; they are learning, and that is the ultimate goal of this exam strategy.

Q. How do you weigh the two parts of the exam in the grading scheme?

I have completely changed my methodology for this. After I discovered that 85/15 was not enough incentive, I switched to 80/20. However, I find adjusting the grading for this to be time consuming. More importantly, I think it is challenging for the students to really visualize the impact that the group exam can have on their grade. I want them to be incentivize to put in work and learn prior to the second stage of the exam. Therefore, I have completely changed the grading scheme. I now add points to their individual exam grades based on their group grade performance. This is the grading scheme I have been following this quarter:

100% on group exam = 10 points added to individual exam grade
>95% on group exam = 7 points added to individual exam grade
>90% on group exam = 5 points added to individual exam grade
>85% on group exam = 3 points added to individual exam grade
>80% on group exam = 1 point added to individual exam grade

This grading scheme allows them to clearly see the impact that the group exam can have on their final exam grade. I believe it creates more motivation than weighted grading. The average on the individual portion of my exams is typically between a 75-82%, and the average for the group portion is typically around a 90%, so this grading scheme does not result in a “windfall” grade gain but is enough to motivate students to learn from the assessments.

Q. Do you have any specific setup tips or advice for instructors who want to try this out?

If you have a class with fewer than 50 students, I recommend letting Zoom create the breakout rooms for you and modifying the first question of the second-stage exam to be an “essay-style” question where they type in the names of their group members. However, that works best when students are taking the second stage of the exam synchronously in the next class period. Some instructors prefer to pre-assign groups in Canvas, open the second stage of the exam for a longer period, say 24 hours, and allow the students to figure out when they can get together to take the exam. This technique has the benefit of not taking up class time and may be helpful for larger classes where some of your students are international and in a different time zone. You could potentially group international students together to allow them to take the second stage of the exam at a more convenient time.

Getting it done in Canvas and Zoom

There are several possible routes to take with your two-stage exam, but generally speaking, you’ll need to create two Quizzes in Canvas and hold one or more synchronous Zoom sessions.

Option A:

  • Part 1: Using the settings in Canvas, a Quiz becomes available to students while they are also logged into Zoom. Students complete and submit this first version of the quiz.
  • Part 2: After submitting the quiz, students are put into breakout rooms. Students converse with each other and access outside sources for 30 minutes, after which the instructor opens a second Quiz with the same content. Students fill in their own individual responses, but their answers are now based on their collaborations. Or, as Professor Truchan described, have the students in Canvas groups and each group submits one exam.

Option B:

  • Part 1: Similarly to Option A, make a Quiz available to students. Depending on your needs for proctoring, you could have the students complete the Quiz simply using the Canvas tool, adding in Respondus Lockdown Browser and/or Monitor, or using a synchronous Zoom meeting.
  • Part 2: For the collaborative portion of the exam, schedule or open a Zoom meeting that students can join after they’ve submitted the first quiz. Use breakout rooms to split students into groups. Allow students access to the second Quiz during their conversations or after them, as described in Option A.

Option C:

  • If your class has many students who are not in the same time zones, you may need to provide several windows for the collaborative portion of the exam. Use the time zone tool NU Worldwide to identify which students are in different time zones. Identify several appropriate timed windows and set the quiz availability to and from dates to match for each set of students. Or have students sign up for a specific time slot to take the exam using the Canvas Scheduler.

Tips from Professor Truchan

  • I use the “copy” function to re-create the exam in Canvas and change the title to “Group Exam”. I then add an “essay” question as question #1 that asks them to type in their group members’ names. The groups are randomly created by Zoom during breakout room formation. I tell Zoom to limit the groups to 3-4 students. That seems to be the best size for collaboration. The exam is technically available to everyone in the class on Canvas, but only one student in their group is allowed to open it and fill it out. That student opens the exam in Canvas and shares their screen in the breakout room so all students can read the exam and work together. I identify this student as the “test-taker.” I ask that the “test-taker’s” name is listed first in question 1.
  • As far as working through the second stage, I stress that the group exam is a democratic process. They must agree to an answer on a question. If they can’t agree, then they must take a vote. I typically give half the time that they had for their individual portions; if they had 50 minutes for their individual exams, they get 25 minutes for the group exam. For adjusting grades, I use the grading scheme above and use the “fudge” option at the end of Canvas exams to modify their individual exam score according to their group exam grade performance.
  • I do not use Respondus Lockdown Browser for either portion of the exam. My questions are typically more application-based, so their notes or internet searches won’t be much help.

Learn More

Work Cited
  • Sandahl, S. S. (2010). Collaborative Testing as a Learning Strategy in Nursing Education. Nursing Education Perspectives (National League for Nursing), 31(3), 142–147.