Collaborative Assessment in the Gross Anatomy Lab.

Purpose: In 2018, the Michigan State University College of Human Medicine incorporated two-stage examinations into the gross anatomy curriculum. Multiple studies have investigated two-stage examinations and have largely reported positive findings. Here, we used a mixed-methods approach to further investigate the feasibility and student perceptions of the two-stage examination in the context of a medical school curriculum that emphasizes longitudinal group-based learning and formative assessments. Methods: Three student cohorts were assessed with a formative two-stage examination at the end of their first-year anatomy experience. Data for the quantitative analysis included examination scores from the individual and group portions of the two-stage examination. For the qualitative stage of this project, we utilized a constructivist grounded theory methodology in which data, including both post-examination survey results and one-on-one semi-structured student interviews, were transcribed (interviews), coded, inductively and iteratively reviewed, and thematically interpreted. Results: Survey and interview results revealed an overwhelmingly positive perception of the collaborative assessment experience. Student comments demonstrated educational value in the immediate feedback provided by this examination format and suggested that collaboration during the examination transformed the assessment into a learning experience. Conclusions: While two-stage examinations have the potential to positively transform an assessment into a learning experience, we also identified complex relationships between content knowledge and anxiety that may affect student perceptions. In addition, examination logistics (e.g., curricular timing) have the potential to negatively affect student perceptions, indicating that faculty should consider these factors when implementing collaborative assessments into their curriculum.