Collaborative testing is recognised as an effective assessment approach linked to positive student outcomes including enhanced test performance and reduced assessment anxiety. While collaborative testing approaches appear beneficial to university students in general, it is unclear whether students from different year levels benefit to the same…

Two-phase testing assesses individual performance (phase 1) and then allows collaborative learning within small groups (phase 2). While groups typically outperform individuals, less is known about the social decision schemes that influence member collaboration. In a classroom setting, we compared individual and group performance on a standard test…

The study analyzes students' performance scores in formative assessments depicting the individual and group settings. A case study design was adopted using quantitative approach to extract data of 198 undergraduate students. Data were analyzed quantitatively using descriptive statistics--means and frequencies; spearman correlations, multiple…

In two experiments, 90 undergraduates took six tests as part of an educational psychology course. Using a crossover design, students took three tests individually without feedback and then took the same test again, following the process of team-based testing (TBT), in teams in which the members reached consensus for each question and answered…

Active student engagement with course materials, such as note-taking and cooperative learning, is associated with greater performance. This study investigated the relationship between scores achieved by students in an undergraduate course and active engagement during testing, whether using a cheat sheet or engaging in a form of cooperative…