Two-Stage Exams – Collaborative Learning Alongside High-Stakes Exams

High stakes exams, in the context of a college course, are when the learner’s exam score has a substantial impact on their final grade.

Why do we use them?

High-stakes exams:

• Very common and will feel familiar to the vast majority of students.
• Can be designed to be both reliable and objective measures (though this isn’t easy).
• Fairly time-efficient when compared to other assessment methods.
• Can reduce opportunities for academic dishonesty when proctored in-person.

Why we might hesitate to use them?

• They are difficult to calibrate. Instructors often find that a given exam was too hard or too easy and end up adjusting scores after the fact.
• They encourage cramming behavior among students.
• They cause anxiety and stress for students, well beyond the “necessary discomfort” or “desirable difficulty” that effective learning requires.
• Evidence shows they exacerbate equity gaps for minoritized groups.
• They represent a “single point of failure” in which poor performance on a single day can have huge impacts on the student’s grade and prospects.

But for now, let’s set aside the question of whether to use high-stakes exams and instead focus on how to make them better.

Two-Stage Exams:

One technique is called Two-Stage Exams (a.k.a. two-phase exams, collaborative exams, team-based testing). I learned about this technique back before 2020 (in the before times), but it has been around for roughly three decades. I started using it in my classes shortly thereafter and I haven’t looked back. To me it is a great example of a small change, requiring minimal instructor effort method that can nevertheless impact student experience and learning. I heard this technique discussed recently on Episode 13 of the Designed for Learning Podcast (hosted by Jim Lang, author of the truly excellent book “Small Teaching”). The guest was Rachel Branco, a neuroscientist and an associate teaching professor at the University of Notre Dame, where she teaches courses through both the Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry and the Neuroscience and Behavior Program.

The basics:

Stage 1 – Individual: Students complete the exam on their own during the first two thirds of the time and turn it in (1).

Stage 2 – Group: In groups of ~3, students complete the exact same exam collaboratively (2).

Score – Each student’s total score is a weighted average of the two stages, such as 80% Individual plus 20% Group (3). This usually means that the Group score bumps the Individua score by 2-3% (4).

That’s it!

Benefits:

• Fast feedback separate from a grade: Students get feedback from their peers (who are not grading them) at the moment when their intrinsic motivation to learn is at its peak.
• Collaborative learning shows students concrete evidence that they can learn by interacting with their peers, not only from a professor or textbook.
• Student questions about the exam are answered immediately, rather than festering for days and students come away with a fairly accurate sense of how they did on the Individual portion. This drastically reduces frustrated student questions (or demands for more points) after handing back an exam.
• There is social pressure to study: At least some students report studying more and differently because they know they will have to explain their ideas to their peers at the exam.
• Lastly, evidence suggests better retention of learning by students!

Costs:

• Exam planning: The instructor has to have both Individual and Group stage copies. Pro tip: Use brightly colored paper for the Individual copies, so that they are easy to visually locate and sort.
• Grading increase (not much): The instructor has to grade a few more exams. However, because the Group stage exams are generally much more correct, they are usually fast and easy to grade.
• Students with testing-related accommodations: The instructor, student and Access Center will spend a little more time planning for exams, including various options for extended time, or for opting out of the process. (5)

Dr. Branco’s Guide

The podcast guest, Dr. Rachel Branco discussed her own mistakes and false starts, focusing on her use of this technique in very large classes (200-300), but the guide she created has excellent additional ideas. I encourage you to visit and learn more.

Implementation Guide for Two-Stage Exams – Notre Dame Learning

High-stakes exams can inadvertently create barriers for our students. Two-stage exams are one small, manageable step toward a more equitable classroom. If you decide to give it a try this semester, I’d love to hear how it impacts you and your students.

Notes

1. Timing: The split of Individual/Group phase timing can be adjusted. The pioneers of this technique did not change the total amount of exam time at all, but some instructors find that it is more comfortable if they add 10-20% to the exam time.
2. 3-person groups are ideal. 2 or 4 can work if needed.
3. This ratio can also be adjusted.
4. Usually, there is a “no harm” policy stating that a Group score cannot lower a student’s overall score.
5. Access Center leaders have explicitly said this is a workable technique. I’m happy to share the ideas generated in that meeting about working with specific student accommodations.

The featured image is free to use, found on unsplash.com, by Alissa De Leva.

Generative AI disclosure: After writing this piece I used generative AI to help me write the “call to action” at the end, as well as a first draft of the short “teaser blurb” that went out by email.  Want to know more? Send me an email and we can chat!