A critical Review of Hackarthorn and associates (2012), Examining exam

reviews: A comparison of exam scores and attitudes, Journal of the

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, vol.12, No.3, pp. 78-87, by Nurul

Ain Hawaji.

Jana Hackathorn and associates (2012) states that majority of the

literature regarding exam reviews has been either anecdotal, or has

mainly focused on students attitudes. Due to that, they conducted a

journal that compared the effects of traditional, trivia, and practice-test-

based exam reviews on actual exam scores, as well as students attitudes

toward each attitudes. Findings suggested that students exam scores

were higher when they have undergone both traditional review and trivia

review before exam compares to exam following the practice test reviews.

Following after the review, three attitudes measures (confidence, feeling

prepared, and helpfulness of review) were reported higher after trivia

review and lowest after traditional review. This study is significantly

throughout in the way it actually closed a loophole of other study like

Middlecamp (2003) who measures students perceptions of a review game

for only on abnormal psychology course but failed to measure the actually

effectiveness on exam scores.

In summary, Hackathorn and associates used 78 undergraduate

participants enrolled in two separate sections of a social psychology

course. They were given each a difference instructor, at a Midwestern

university. The participants involved in trivia game prior to the first exam

which was set up so that the instructors created a series of questions prior
to the class. Then prior to the second exam, the students participated in a

traditional exam review then lastly, participated on practice test exam

review prior to the third exam. mmediately after, the students were given

three single item surveys assessing their exam confidence with them

responding using a 7-point Likert scale. Then another revised survey after

they completed the exam.

The study actually used quantitative approach by inputing data

gotten from exam scores and survey and which the researcher measured

using ANOVA (Analysis of Variation) measure. This method by no means

less significant to use in research study but it can be less meaningful to

rely on number data given based only on exam score as there a lot more

factors to be thought in term of education such as students doing personal

review at home. Due to this, the researcher should do a qualitative

approach in their study such as in depth interview or observation. In

contrast, this study did try to resolved the question of how the exam

review practice affected students exam scores both in term of knowledge

and abnormal psychology by analysis the survey given before practice

exam review, after practice exam review and the exam scores itself.

Overall, this study is a great attempt on covering both students

emotional effect and knowledge input after using exam review. It is by no

means perfect, but it can be a base for other study to give more in depth

input that can cover other factors in students learning as merely using

data on surveys can be merely on surface only.