Comparison of answer-until-correct and full-credit assessments in a team-based learning course

Michelle Z. Farland, Patrick B. Barlow, T. Levi Lancaster, Andrea Franks

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective. To assess the impact of awarding partial credit to team assessments on team performance and on quality of team interactions using an answer-until-correct method compared to traditional methods of grading (multiple-choice, full-credit). Methods. Subjects were students from 3 different offerings of an ambulatory care elective course, taught using team-based learning. The control group (full-credit) consisted of those enrolled in the course when traditional methods of assessment were used (2 course offerings). The intervention group consisted of those enrolled in the course when answer-until-correct method was used for team assessments (1 course offering). Study outcomes included student performance on individual and team readiness assurance tests (iRATs and tRATs), individual and team final examinations, and student assessment of quality of team interactions using the Team Performance Scale. Results. Eighty-four students enrolled in the courses were included in the analysis (full-credit, n=54; answer-until-correct, n530). Students who used traditional methods of assessment performed better on iRATs (full-credit mean 88.7 (5.9), answer-until-correct mean 82.8 (10.7), <0.001). Students who used answer-until-correct method of assessment performed better on the team final examination (fullcredit mean 45.8 (1.5), answer-until-correct 47.8 (1.4), <0.001). There was no significant difference in performance on tRATs and the individual final examination. Students who used the answer-untilcorrect method had higher quality of team interaction ratings (full-credit 97.1 (9.1), answer-untilcorrect 103.0 (7.8), p=0.004). Conclusion. Answer-until-correct assessment method compared to traditional, full-credit methods resulted in significantly lower scores for iRATs, similar scores on tRATs and individual final examinations, improved scores on team final examinations, and improved perceptions of the quality of team interactions.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number21
JournalAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education
Volume79
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2015

Fingerprint

credit
Learning
Students
learning
examination
student
interaction
performance
Ambulatory Care
grading
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Control Groups
Group
rating

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education
  • Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics(all)

Cite this

Comparison of answer-until-correct and full-credit assessments in a team-based learning course. / Farland, Michelle Z.; Barlow, Patrick B.; Levi Lancaster, T.; Franks, Andrea.

In: American journal of pharmaceutical education, Vol. 79, No. 2, 21, 01.01.2015.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{7bc736fa269c439a91620efa8c70f68c,
title = "Comparison of answer-until-correct and full-credit assessments in a team-based learning course",
abstract = "Objective. To assess the impact of awarding partial credit to team assessments on team performance and on quality of team interactions using an answer-until-correct method compared to traditional methods of grading (multiple-choice, full-credit). Methods. Subjects were students from 3 different offerings of an ambulatory care elective course, taught using team-based learning. The control group (full-credit) consisted of those enrolled in the course when traditional methods of assessment were used (2 course offerings). The intervention group consisted of those enrolled in the course when answer-until-correct method was used for team assessments (1 course offering). Study outcomes included student performance on individual and team readiness assurance tests (iRATs and tRATs), individual and team final examinations, and student assessment of quality of team interactions using the Team Performance Scale. Results. Eighty-four students enrolled in the courses were included in the analysis (full-credit, n=54; answer-until-correct, n530). Students who used traditional methods of assessment performed better on iRATs (full-credit mean 88.7 (5.9), answer-until-correct mean 82.8 (10.7), <0.001). Students who used answer-until-correct method of assessment performed better on the team final examination (fullcredit mean 45.8 (1.5), answer-until-correct 47.8 (1.4), <0.001). There was no significant difference in performance on tRATs and the individual final examination. Students who used the answer-untilcorrect method had higher quality of team interaction ratings (full-credit 97.1 (9.1), answer-untilcorrect 103.0 (7.8), p=0.004). Conclusion. Answer-until-correct assessment method compared to traditional, full-credit methods resulted in significantly lower scores for iRATs, similar scores on tRATs and individual final examinations, improved scores on team final examinations, and improved perceptions of the quality of team interactions.",
author = "Farland, {Michelle Z.} and Barlow, {Patrick B.} and {Levi Lancaster}, T. and Andrea Franks",
year = "2015",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.5688/ajpe79221",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "79",
journal = "American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education",
issn = "0002-9459",
publisher = "American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of answer-until-correct and full-credit assessments in a team-based learning course

AU - Farland, Michelle Z.

AU - Barlow, Patrick B.

AU - Levi Lancaster, T.

AU - Franks, Andrea

PY - 2015/1/1

Y1 - 2015/1/1

N2 - Objective. To assess the impact of awarding partial credit to team assessments on team performance and on quality of team interactions using an answer-until-correct method compared to traditional methods of grading (multiple-choice, full-credit). Methods. Subjects were students from 3 different offerings of an ambulatory care elective course, taught using team-based learning. The control group (full-credit) consisted of those enrolled in the course when traditional methods of assessment were used (2 course offerings). The intervention group consisted of those enrolled in the course when answer-until-correct method was used for team assessments (1 course offering). Study outcomes included student performance on individual and team readiness assurance tests (iRATs and tRATs), individual and team final examinations, and student assessment of quality of team interactions using the Team Performance Scale. Results. Eighty-four students enrolled in the courses were included in the analysis (full-credit, n=54; answer-until-correct, n530). Students who used traditional methods of assessment performed better on iRATs (full-credit mean 88.7 (5.9), answer-until-correct mean 82.8 (10.7), <0.001). Students who used answer-until-correct method of assessment performed better on the team final examination (fullcredit mean 45.8 (1.5), answer-until-correct 47.8 (1.4), <0.001). There was no significant difference in performance on tRATs and the individual final examination. Students who used the answer-untilcorrect method had higher quality of team interaction ratings (full-credit 97.1 (9.1), answer-untilcorrect 103.0 (7.8), p=0.004). Conclusion. Answer-until-correct assessment method compared to traditional, full-credit methods resulted in significantly lower scores for iRATs, similar scores on tRATs and individual final examinations, improved scores on team final examinations, and improved perceptions of the quality of team interactions.

AB - Objective. To assess the impact of awarding partial credit to team assessments on team performance and on quality of team interactions using an answer-until-correct method compared to traditional methods of grading (multiple-choice, full-credit). Methods. Subjects were students from 3 different offerings of an ambulatory care elective course, taught using team-based learning. The control group (full-credit) consisted of those enrolled in the course when traditional methods of assessment were used (2 course offerings). The intervention group consisted of those enrolled in the course when answer-until-correct method was used for team assessments (1 course offering). Study outcomes included student performance on individual and team readiness assurance tests (iRATs and tRATs), individual and team final examinations, and student assessment of quality of team interactions using the Team Performance Scale. Results. Eighty-four students enrolled in the courses were included in the analysis (full-credit, n=54; answer-until-correct, n530). Students who used traditional methods of assessment performed better on iRATs (full-credit mean 88.7 (5.9), answer-until-correct mean 82.8 (10.7), <0.001). Students who used answer-until-correct method of assessment performed better on the team final examination (fullcredit mean 45.8 (1.5), answer-until-correct 47.8 (1.4), <0.001). There was no significant difference in performance on tRATs and the individual final examination. Students who used the answer-untilcorrect method had higher quality of team interaction ratings (full-credit 97.1 (9.1), answer-untilcorrect 103.0 (7.8), p=0.004). Conclusion. Answer-until-correct assessment method compared to traditional, full-credit methods resulted in significantly lower scores for iRATs, similar scores on tRATs and individual final examinations, improved scores on team final examinations, and improved perceptions of the quality of team interactions.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926213554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84926213554&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.5688/ajpe79221

DO - 10.5688/ajpe79221

M3 - Article

VL - 79

JO - American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

JF - American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

SN - 0002-9459

IS - 2

M1 - 21

ER -