Game assessment: fun as well as effective

Alternative methods of assessing student knowledge are useful since assessment is increasingly being emphasized by administrators, accrediting agencies and legislators. A game (team) format to assess students' knowledge of course material was experimentally compared with the traditional format of testing a student who answers individually. Team‐game scores were more often correct than individual scores in all comparisons. Team decisions, which involved cooperation within one's group while at the same time competing against other teams, were rarely the result of a single individual deciding on the team answer. Students preferred the game‐assessment condition more and also perceived it as a more accurate measure of their course knowledge.

[1]  L. Benjamin.  Instructional Strategies in the History of Psychology , 1979 .

[2]  J. E. Ackil.  PhysioPursuit: A Trivia-Type Game for the Classroom , 1986 .

[3]  Joy L. Berrenberg,et al.  The Create-A-Game Exam: A Method to Facilitate Student Interest and Learning , 1991 .

[4]  Ronald A. Berk,et al.  Survey of 12 Strategies to Measure Teaching Effectiveness , 2005 .

[5]  B. Gibson.  Research Methods Jeopardy: A Tool for Involving Students and Organizing the Study Session , 1991 .

[6]  E. Weldon,et al.  Cognitive effort in additive task groups: The effects of shared responsibility on the quality of multiattribute judgments , 1985 .

[7]  S. DiCarlo,et al.  Collaborative testing enhances student learning. , 2002, Advances in physiology education.

[8]  Warren E. Watson,et al.  A realistic test of individual versus group consensus decision making. , 1989 .

[9]  Brad A. Dufrene,et al.  Identifying Academic Skill and Performance Deficits: The Experimental Analysis of Brief Assessments of Academic Skills , 2004 .

[10]  Shelley E. Taylor,et al.  Social psychology, 8th ed. , 1994 .

[11]  Charles E. Miller,et al.  Group decision rules and the rejection of deviates. , 1979 .

[12]  David L. Duhon,et al.  Evaluating and Improving Student Achievement in Business Programs: The Effective Use of Standardized Assessment Tests , 2003 .

[13]  S. DiCarlo,et al.  Student retention of course content is improved by collaborative-group testing. , 2003, Advances in physiology education.

[14]  K. Rickard,et al.  The Hypothesis-Testing Game: A Training Tool for the Graduate Interviewing Skills Course , 1988 .

[15]  William A. Barnard.  Group Influence and the Likelihood of a Unanimous Majority , 1991 .

[16]  Antonio Russo,et al.  Collaborative Test Taking , 1999 .

[17]  Charles E. Miller,et al.  Effects of group decision rules on decisions involving continuous alternatives: The unanimity rule and extreme decisions in mock civil juries. , 2004 .

[18]  S P Rao,et al.  Peer instruction improves performance on quizzes. , 2000, Advances in physiology education.

[19]  N. S. Hemmes,et al.  Effects of the contingency for homework submission on homework submission and quiz performance in a college course. , 2005, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[20]  Dean Tjosvold,et al.  Effects of Social Context on Consensus and Majority Vote Decision Making , 1982 .

[21]  Joanna S. Gorin,et al.  Evaluating Collaborative Learning and Community , 2005 .

[22]  David A. Pizarro,et al.  Emotion and Memory Research: A Grumpy Overview , 2004 .

[23]  N. Webb.  Group Collaboration in Assessment: Multiple Objectives, Processes, and Outcomes , 1995 .

[24]  Robert D. Hannafin,et al.  Using Web-Based Computer Games to Meet the Demands of Today’s High-Stakes Testing , 2003 .

[25]  R. C. Day,et al.  Systematic reinforcement: academic performance of underachieving students. , 1971, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[26]  Lisa D. Butler,et al.  Cooperative College Examinations: More Gain, Less Pain When Students Share Information and Grades , 2003 .

[27]  Marcie N. Desrochers,et al.  Supplementing Lecture with Simulations in Developmental Disabilities: SIDD Software , 2001 .

[28]  G. Mulder,et al.  Effects of phentermine and pentobarbital on choice processes during multiple probability learning (MPL) and decision processes manipulated by pay‐off conditions , 1997 .

[29]  C. Keutzer.  Jeopardy© in Abnormal Psychology , 1993 .

[30]  C. Hale,et al.  Your Lot in Life , 1996 .

[31]  T. Jong,et al.  The Relation between Prior Knowledge and Students' Collaborative Discovery Learning Processes. , 2005 .

[32]  N. Webb.  Collaborative Group Versus Individual Assessment in Mathematics: Processes and Outcomes , 1993 .

[33]  D. Goh,et al.  The Effect of Individually Contracted Incentives on Intelligence Test Performance of Middle- and Low-SES Children. , 1981 .

[34]  Bryan L. Bonner,et al.  Expertise in Group Problem Solving: Recognition, Social Combination, and Performance. , 2004 .

[35]  Dorwin Cartwright,et al.  Group dynamics, 3rd ed. , 1968 .

[36]  L. S. Vygotskiĭ,et al.  Mind in society : the development of higher psychological processes , 1978 .

[37]  R. Hastie,et al.  The common knowledge effect: Information sharing and group judgment. , 1993 .

[38]  Tatsuya Kameda,et al.  Effects of Assigned Group Consensus Requirement on Group Problem Solving and Group Members' Learning , 1991 .

[39]  Murray S. Jensen,et al.  Impact of Positive Interdependence During Electronic Quizzes on Discourse and Achievement , 2002 .

[40]  J. Tudge.  Peer influences on cognitive development: Piagetian and Vygotskian perspectives , 1989 .

[41]  Craig Gibson,et al.  Assessment Essentials: Planning, Implementing, and Improving Assessment in Higher Education , 2000 .

[42]  Reeshad S. Dalal,et al.  The effects of member expertise on group decision-making and performance , 2002 .

[43]  S. Fiske,et al.  Social Psychology , 2019, Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences.

[44]  W. Damon,et al.  Critical distinctions among three approaches to peer education , 1989 .

[45]  M. Mendl.  Performing under pressure: stress and cognitive function , 1999 .