Student Exam Preparation Student Exam Preparation in an Introductory Soils in an Introductory Soils

ClassClass

Clay A. RobinsonClay A. Robinson

West Texas A&M UniversityWest Texas A&M University

BackgroundBackground Barbarick and Ippolito (2003) reported an Barbarick and Ippolito (2003) reported an

exponential rise to maximum model exponential rise to maximum model predicted student exam scores relative to predicted student exam scores relative to hours studied in introductory soils courses hours studied in introductory soils courses at Colorado State University and Front at Colorado State University and Front Range Community CollegeRange Community College

They further noted that 68% of students They further noted that 68% of students could achieve a 90% exam score by could achieve a 90% exam score by studying from 1.5 to 1.9 h hstudying from 1.5 to 1.9 h h-1-1 lecture, lecture, which was less than the Carnegie Rule of which was less than the Carnegie Rule of 2 h h2 h h-1-1 of class time of class time

BackgroundBackground Savelyeva, et al. (2004) examined several Savelyeva, et al. (2004) examined several

components of student schedules and components of student schedules and activities to identify whether these factors activities to identify whether these factors or gender influenced student gradesor gender influenced student grades

They found differences in male-female They found differences in male-female activities and study habits that might activities and study habits that might contribute to the higher grades attained by contribute to the higher grades attained by females at Kansas State Univ. and Virginia females at Kansas State Univ. and Virginia TechTech

RationaleRationale In discussions with students, I got the In discussions with students, I got the

impression that study time might not affect impression that study time might not affect grades of students in my classes.grades of students in my classes.

Students are sophomores to seniors from Students are sophomores to seniors from several majors: Agricultural business and several majors: Agricultural business and economics, animal science, plant and soil economics, animal science, plant and soil science, integrated pest management, science, integrated pest management, wildlife biology, and environmental sciencewildlife biology, and environmental science

ObjectivesObjectives In order to assist students in preparing for In order to assist students in preparing for

exams, I wanted to identify which student exams, I wanted to identify which student habits were predictive of success on habits were predictive of success on exams in my introductory soils courseexams in my introductory soils course

Exam CharacteristicsExam Characteristics Bloom’s Taxonomy classification of exam Bloom’s Taxonomy classification of exam

questionsquestions Soil formation and classification: Soil formation and classification:

• Knowledge and comprehension, 45% Knowledge and comprehension, 45% • Application and analysis, 55% Application and analysis, 55%

Soil biology and chemistry: Soil biology and chemistry: • Knowledge and comprehension, 50% Knowledge and comprehension, 50% • Application and analysis, 50%Application and analysis, 50%

Soil physical properties, water and erosion:Soil physical properties, water and erosion:• Knowledge and comprehension, 45% Knowledge and comprehension, 45% • Application and analysis, 55%Application and analysis, 55%

MethodsMethods Exam preparation questionnaires were Exam preparation questionnaires were

developed for the three 1-h exams given developed for the three 1-h exams given during the semester, asking students to during the semester, asking students to self-identify their exam preparation self-identify their exam preparation behaviors: Class attendance, weekly study behaviors: Class attendance, weekly study (h), cram study (h), total study (h), whether (h), cram study (h), total study (h), whether they had completed worksheets, had they had completed worksheets, had copies of old exams, used online copies of old exams, used online resources provided, or participated in a resources provided, or participated in a study groupstudy group

MethodsMethods Surveys were given to students when Surveys were given to students when

graded exams were returned during five graded exams were returned during five semesters of Soils, Spring 2003 through semesters of Soils, Spring 2003 through Spring 2005Spring 2005

Combined enrollment: 128 studentsCombined enrollment: 128 students Total surveys completed: 331 Total surveys completed: 331 Online resources listed on questionnaires Online resources listed on questionnaires

were tailored to exam materialwere tailored to exam material

AnalysisAnalysis Descriptive statistics by exam and Descriptive statistics by exam and

semestersemester Correlation analysisCorrelation analysis Stepwise regression analysis requiring p < Stepwise regression analysis requiring p <

0.15 for entry and retention of each 0.15 for entry and retention of each parameter in the modelparameter in the model

Exam ResultsExam ResultsExam TopicExam Topic

Semester Semester nn

Form & Form & ClassClass

Biol & Biol & ChemChem

Phys PropPhys Prop meanmean

Sp03, 25Sp03, 25 80.3 ± 13.780.3 ± 13.7 68.6 ± 10.768.6 ± 10.7 74.1 ± 12.574.1 ± 12.5 74.6 ± 13.274.6 ± 13.2

Fa03, 11Fa03, 11 81.3 ± 10.781.3 ± 10.7 64.4 ± 14.164.4 ± 14.1 59.5 ± 9.759.5 ± 9.7 68.7 ± 14.868.7 ± 14.8

Sp04, 21Sp04, 21 88.5 ± 13.888.5 ± 13.8 64.2 ± 17.664.2 ± 17.6 n/an/a 76.6 ± 19.976.6 ± 19.9

Fa04, 27Fa04, 27 77.2 ± 14.677.2 ± 14.6 70.6 ± 13.770.6 ± 13.7 70.6 ± 13.770.6 ± 13.7 72.9 ± 14.272.9 ± 14.2

Sp05, 32Sp05, 32 76.2 ± 13.676.2 ± 13.6 n/an/a 60.4 ± 13.760.4 ± 13.7 68.2 ± 15.768.2 ± 15.7

meanmean 80.7 ± 14.380.7 ± 14.3 67.3 ± 14.567.3 ± 14.5 66.7 ± 14.266.7 ± 14.2 72.6 ± 15.872.6 ± 15.8

ResultsResults Student performance varied by semesterStudent performance varied by semester Student performance by topic Student performance by topic

Students did the best on the Soil Formation Students did the best on the Soil Formation and Classification exam, which has no math, and Classification exam, which has no math, little chemistry, and a lab devoted to little chemistry, and a lab devoted to understanding how to use soil taxonomyunderstanding how to use soil taxonomy

Performance on the other two sections was Performance on the other two sections was much poorer. These exams have a significant much poorer. These exams have a significant amount of problem solving involving math amount of problem solving involving math (basic algebra) and or chemistry and physics(basic algebra) and or chemistry and physics

ResultsResultsSoil Formation and Classification Exam

Total Study Time, hours

0 5 10 15 20 25

Exa

m S

core

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

110

ResultsResultsSoil Biology and Chemistry Exam

Total Study Time, hours

0 5 10 15 20 25

Exa

m S

core

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

ResultsResultsSoil Physical Properties, Water and Erosion Exam

Total Study Time, hours

0 5 10 15 20 25

Exa

m S

core

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

ResultsResultsCombined Results for All Exams

Total Study Time, hours

0 5 10 15 20 25

Exa

m S

core

0

20

40

60

80

100

CorrelationsCorrelations Weak correlations (0.2 < r < 0.3) existed Weak correlations (0.2 < r < 0.3) existed

between semester and the amount of time between semester and the amount of time students studied, or whether they had students studied, or whether they had copies of old exams, or worked in study copies of old exams, or worked in study groups, or used online resources providedgroups, or used online resources provided

Study time, use of online resources, and Study time, use of online resources, and work in study groups had very weak work in study groups had very weak correlations (0.1 < r < 0.2) with scorescorrelations (0.1 < r < 0.2) with scores

Correlations existed between time and Correlations existed between time and activities that consumed time, e.g., using activities that consumed time, e.g., using online resources, etc.online resources, etc.

Regression AnalysisRegression Analysis Stepwise regression was done in two Stepwise regression was done in two

phasesphases The first phase considered semester, The first phase considered semester,

topic, and all study methods. topic, and all study methods. Five variables met the criteria (p < 0.15) Five variables met the criteria (p < 0.15)

for entry and retention in the model: Topic, for entry and retention in the model: Topic, total time, online resource utilization, total time, online resource utilization, participation in a study group, and participation in a study group, and semester. However, the partial rsemester. However, the partial r22 for each for each parameter was less than 0.04, and the parameter was less than 0.04, and the model rmodel r22 was 0.10. was 0.10.

Regression AnalysisRegression Analysis The second phase omitted semester and The second phase omitted semester and

topic from the analysis to examine only topic from the analysis to examine only student study traits. student study traits.

Only two variables met the criteria (p < Only two variables met the criteria (p < 0.15) for entry and retention in the model: 0.15) for entry and retention in the model: Online resource utilization and Online resource utilization and participation in a study group. However, participation in a study group. However, the partial rthe partial r22 for each parameter was less for each parameter was less than 0.02, and the model rthan 0.02, and the model r22 was 0.04. was 0.04.

SummarySummary My suspicion that hours spent studying did My suspicion that hours spent studying did

not have a strong effect on exam scores not have a strong effect on exam scores was confirmed. (I would not want my was confirmed. (I would not want my students to hear that I said, “Studying will students to hear that I said, “Studying will not help you.”) not help you.”)

Maybe my courses are just an anomaly, Maybe my courses are just an anomaly, (Such things have been uttered about me (Such things have been uttered about me in the past.) or …in the past.) or …

SummarySummary It could be that the emphasis of application It could be that the emphasis of application

and analysis questions on the exam alters and analysis questions on the exam alters the applicability of the time relation others the applicability of the time relation others have found. Understanding how to apply have found. Understanding how to apply information requires time, but also more information requires time, but also more effort to grasp how to apply the concept - effort to grasp how to apply the concept - Memory is not enough.Memory is not enough.

Students were operating well short of the Students were operating well short of the Carnegie Rule (20 to 24 h examCarnegie Rule (20 to 24 h exam-1-1). Only ). Only 10% studied 10 h or more for each exam, 10% studied 10 h or more for each exam, and 50% spent less than 5 h examand 50% spent less than 5 h exam-1-1. .

SummarySummary So, I will encourage my students toSo, I will encourage my students to

Work in a study group – Others have noted Work in a study group – Others have noted the effectiveness of group learning and the effectiveness of group learning and student mentors.student mentors.

Use the online resources available, which Use the online resources available, which provide a different approach to the material.provide a different approach to the material.

Spend more time in reviewing the class Spend more time in reviewing the class material and in exam preparation (at least material and in exam preparation (at least move toward the 1.5 to 1.9 h hmove toward the 1.5 to 1.9 h h-1-1 rule noted by rule noted by Barbarick and Ippolito (2003).Barbarick and Ippolito (2003).

ReferencesReferences Barbarick, K.A., and J.A. Ippolito. 2003. Barbarick, K.A., and J.A. Ippolito. 2003.

Does the number of hours studied affect Does the number of hours studied affect exam performance? J. Nat. Res. Life Sci. exam performance? J. Nat. Res. Life Sci. Ed. 32:32-35.Ed. 32:32-35.

Savelyeva, T., J.R. McKenna, D.J. Savelyeva, T., J.R. McKenna, D.J. Minihan, K.J. Donnelly. 2004. Factors Minihan, K.J. Donnelly. 2004. Factors influencing undergraduate male and influencing undergraduate male and female students’ academic performance in female students’ academic performance in agricultural majors. Abstract 5233. ASA-agricultural majors. Abstract 5233. ASA-CSSA-SSSA-CSSS Annual Meetings, Oct CSSA-SSSA-CSSS Annual Meetings, Oct 31 – Nov 4, 2004. Seattle, WA. 31 – Nov 4, 2004. Seattle, WA.