Abstract
Assessment has long played an important role as a measurement tool of student mastery over course content. However, testing has also been shown to be an effective learning tool. Cumulative testing, in which all material from the entire learning period is covered, has been assumed to be effective, yet few studies have explicitly tested its effectiveness compared to non-cumulative testing. Studies in psychology and mathematics courses suggest that cumulative final exams increase long-term retention of information, and cumulative testing during the semester can increase cumulative final exam performance and long-term retention. Because frequent testing has also been shown to increase student learning, the purpose of this quasi-experimental study is to investigate the effects of cumulative versus non-cumulative midterms on student learning in a course that uses frequent assessment. In this study, one section of an introductory biology course for non-majors was given seven cumulative midterms, with about half of the questions drawn from previous units and the rest covering the current unit. The other section was given seven non-cumulative midterms that focused on current material while other course characteristics were held constant. Student performance on a common, cumulative final exam and a retention exam five months later were compared. Midterm format had no effect on final exam performance, contradicting the few studies done in psychology and mathematics courses. Thus, there may be no additional benefit of cumulative testing if exams are given frequently. Cumulative midterms appeared to increase retention after five months, but only for students who entered the course with low reasoning skills. Interestingly, students with high reasoning skills appeared to retain more from the course if they were given non-cumulative midterms. Possible explanations and ideas for future research are discussed.
Highlights
The idea that assessments drive learning, and should be carefully designed, is a widespread idea in higher education, yet there is still so much about the effects of various kinds of assessment that we do not understand [1]
Few studies have explicitly tested the benefits of cumulative exams, defined as tests that include material taught during the entire learning period–often a term or semester
We implemented our treatment in two sections of the same introductory biology course for non-majors, with one section taking cumulative midterms while the other took non-cumulative midterms
Summary
The idea that assessments drive learning, and should be carefully designed, is a widespread idea in higher education, yet there is still so much about the effects of various kinds of assessment that we do not understand [1]. Based on the ideas of the testing effect and spaced study, we would expect that cumulative exams would increase student learning and retention more than non-cumulative exams that only cover the most recent unit of the course. University psychology students retained more four to five months after the final exam on question items that had been tested on a cumulative final exam compared to questions that were not tested on the final exam [2]. Another study done in university psychology courses found that students who took cumulative finals retained more knowledge compared to students who took noncumulative finals, and this was true both directly after the final exam and up to 18 months after the course [3]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
