ABSTRACT
In the spring of 1989, I taught an upper-level psychology course on motivation. While the topics covered were quite traditional, I used the course to experiment with a new method of student evaluation. In place of objective exams, students wrote essays based on open-ended questions requiring both understanding of the theories and the ability to synthesize ideas in a creative fashion. The class was divided into “exam groups” of five to six students, and when the exam question was handed out in class, the students broke up into these groups to discuss the question and share their ideas. They then took the question home. Further consultation within (or even between) groups outside of class was permitted, but students were required to write their own papers without looking at what anyone else had written. The essays were evaluated using a customized feedback sheet, which I handed out with the test so that students would know what was expected of them. Because of the unfamiliarity of the procedure, students were told that the first of these tests was for practice and would not count toward their course grade. Students’ grades were based primarily on their own work, but, as indicated in the syllabus, a small component of the grade was also based on the performance of their group, to encourage cooperation rather than competition.
