Retrieval practice can improve classroom review despite low practice test performance

Abstract. Planning interactions with the physical world requires knowledge about operations; in short, mental operators. Abstractness of content and directionality of access are two important properties to characterize the representational units of this kind of knowledge. Combining these properties allows four classes of knowledge units to be distinguished that can be found in the literature: (a) rules, (b) mental models or schemata, (c) instances, and (d) episodes or chunks. The influence of practicing alphabet-arithmetic operators in a prognostic, diagnostic, or retrognostic way (A + 2 = ?, A? = C, or ? + 2 = C, respectively) on the use of that knowledge in a subsequent test was used to assess the importance of these dimensions. At the beginning, the retrognostic use of knowledge was worse than the prognostic use, although identical operations were involved (A + 2 = ? vs. ? - 2 = A). This disadvantage was reduced with increased practice. Test performance was best if the task and the letter pairs were the same as in the acquisition phase. Overall, the findings support theories proposing multiple representational units of mental operators. The disadvantage for the retrognosis task was recovered in the test phase, and may be evidence for the importance of the order of events independent of the order of experience.

Download Full-text

Pan and Rickard (2018) Transfer of test-enhanced learning meta-analysis (preprint)

10.31234/osf.io/4qpyn ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Steven C. Pan

Keyword(s):

Test Performance ◽

Retrieval Practice ◽

Worked Examples ◽

Positive Transfer ◽

Effect Sizes ◽

Moderator Effect ◽

Medical Diagnoses ◽

Analytic Review ◽

Test Enhanced Learning ◽

Enhanced Learning

Attempting recall of information from memory, as occurs when taking a practice test, is one of the most potent training techniques known to learning science. However, does testing yield learning that transfers to different contexts? In the present article, we report the findings of the first comprehensive meta-analytic review into that question. Our review encompassed 192 transfer effect sizes extracted from 122 experiments and 67 published and unpublished articles (N = 10,382) comprising over 40 years of research. A random-effects model revealed that testing can yield transferrable learning as measured relative to a non-testing reexposure control condition (d = 0.40, 95% CI [0.31, 0.50]). That transfer of learning is greatest across test formats, to application and inference questions, to problems involving medical diagnoses, and to mediator and related word cues; it is weakest to rearranged stimulus-response items, to untested materials seen during initial study, and to problems involving worked examples. Moderator analyses further indicated that response congruency and elaborated retrieval practice, as well as initial test performance, strongly influence the likelihood of positive transfer. In two assessments for publication bias (using PET-PEESE and various selection methods), the moderator effect sizes were minimally affected. However, the intercept predictions were substantially reduced, often indicating no positive transfer when none of the aforementioned moderators are present. Overall, our results motivate a three-factor framework for transfer of test-enhanced learning and have practical implications for the effective use of practice testing in educational and other training contexts.

Download Full-text

Pan and Sana (2021) Pretesting vs. posttesting: Errorful generation, prequestions, and retrieval practice

10.31234/osf.io/un87v ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Steven C. Pan ◽

Faria Sana

Keyword(s):

Retrieval Practice ◽

Expository Text ◽

Cued Recall ◽

Practice Test ◽

Practice Tests ◽

Text Passage ◽

Test Enhanced Learning ◽

Retention Intervals ◽

Enhanced Learning ◽

And Training

The use of practice tests to enhance learning, or test-enhanced learning, ranks among the most effective of all pedagogical techniques. We investigated the relative efficacy of pretesting (i.e., errorful generation) and posttesting (i.e., retrieval practice), two of the most prominent practice test types in the literature to date. Pretesting involves taking tests before to-be-learned information is studied, whereas posttesting involves taking tests after information is studied. In five experiments (combined n = 1,573), participants studied expository text passages, each paired with a pretest or a posttest. The tests involved multiple-choice (Experiments 1-5) or cued recall format (Experiments 2-4) and were administered with or without correct answer feedback (Experiments 3-4). On a criterial test administered 5 minutes or 48 hours later, both test types enhanced memory relative to a no-test control, but pretesting yielded higher overall scores. That advantage held across test formats, in the presence or absence of feedback, at different retention intervals, and appeared to stem from enhanced processing of text passage content (Experiment 5). Thus, although the benefits of posttesting are more well-established in the literature, pretesting is highly competitive with posttesting and can yield similar, if not greater, pedagogical benefits. These findings have important implications for the incorporation of practice tests in education and training contexts.

Download Full-text

The effect of practice test modality on perceived mental effort and delayed final test performance

Journal of Cognitive Psychology ◽

10.1080/20445911.2020.1822366 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 32 (8) ◽

pp. 764-770

Author(s):

Leonora Coppens ◽

Mario de Jonge ◽

Tamara van Gog ◽

Liesbeth Kester

Keyword(s):

Test Performance ◽

Mental Effort ◽

Final Test ◽

Practice Test

Download Full-text

Achieving Testing Effects in an Authentic College Classroom

Teaching of Psychology ◽

10.1177/00986283211015669 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 009862832110156

Author(s):

Elizabeth Shobe

Keyword(s):

Classroom Environment ◽

Test Performance ◽

Testing Effect ◽

Retrieval Practice ◽

Current Method ◽

Multiple Choice Questions ◽

Testing Effects ◽

Authentic Classroom ◽

Practice Questions ◽

Effect Literature

Background: Findings from the testing effect literature suggest several ways to achieve testing effects in an authentic classroom, but few consider instructor workload, equity, and resources that determine feasibility and sustainability of testing effect methods in practice. Objective: To determine elements and procedures from the testing effect literature for practical application, devise a method for feasibly and sustainably implementing testing effect methods in practice, and determine if a simple way to incorporate retrieval practice into an existing introduction to psychology course was sufficient to observe testing effects. Method: Quiz scores of Introductory Psychology sections with and without retrieval practice were compared. Sections with retrieval practice also compared the effects of repeated and new questions on quiz performance. Results: Students with retrieval practice performed significantly better on quizzes than those without. Repeated and new retrieval practice were equally superior. Conclusion: Retrieval practices can successfully be implemented, feasibly and sustainably, in an authentic classroom environment. Retrieval practice questions can be related to delayed practice questions, rather than exact repeats, to achieve a testing effect. Teaching Implications: Distributing low stakes multiple-choice questions throughout lectures is effective for increasing test performance. The current method was neither burdensome to workload, content, or resources.

Download Full-text

Retrieval Practice Facilitates Judgments of Learning Through Multiple Mechanisms

10.1101/550731 ◽

2019 ◽

Author(s):

Xi Chen ◽

Mengting Zhang ◽

Xiaonan L. Liu

Keyword(s):

Retrieval Practice ◽

Judgments Of Learning ◽

Cued Recall ◽

Practice Trial ◽

Sources Of Information ◽

Multiple Sources ◽

Practice Test ◽

Mediation Analyses ◽

Subsequent Performance ◽

Practice Tests

AbstractPrior studies have shown that predictions of subsequent performance (i.e., Judgments of Learning, JoLs) following practice tests are more accurate than those following re-study. The majority of studies have suggested that retrieval practice allows people to base their predictions on the current retrieval outcomes so that they assign a higher likelihood of remembering the answers with high confidence. We speculated that other information made available through retrieval practice might also be important for JoLs. In the present study, we asked participants to study word pairs and undergo either a practice test or re-study. Two testing formats (cued-recall and multiple choice) were administrated for practice tests in two separate experiments. After each practice trial, participants rated their confidence in the current retrieval accuracy (test) or confidence in acquisition (re-study), followed by a JoL rating where participants predicted their performance in the final test one day later. The results of both experiments showed that the correlation between JoL ratings and the final accuracy was higher for trials practiced with testing. Moreover, using mediation analyses, we found that this high correspondence was only partially mediated by participants’ confidence in practice tests. More importantly, the reaction time of retrieval also significantly mediated the correspondence between JoLs and the final accuracy, suggesting that participants were able to correctly base their JoLs on multiple sources of information that is made available through retrieval practice. We conclude that practice testing benefits JoLs through multiple mechanisms.

Download Full-text

Re-designing A Practice Test Into A Game

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting ◽

10.1177/1541931213601790 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 61 (1) ◽

pp. 1234-1236

Author(s):

Hung-Tao Chen ◽

Michael Lee

Keyword(s):

Test Anxiety ◽

Test Performance ◽

Learning Strategy ◽

Student Participation ◽

Participation Rate ◽

Voluntary Participation ◽

Practice Test ◽

Effective Learning

Practice testing is an effective learning strategy, but it can lead to increased test anxiety and often has low voluntary participation rate. This paper describes a case study on the effects of a re-designed practice test using game-like elements. The results indicate that the gamified practice test had a high student participation rate and showed improved test performance.

Download Full-text

Using Day and Night – Scheduling Retrieval Practice and Sleep

Psychology Learning & Teaching ◽

10.1177/1475725720965363 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. 147572572096536

Author(s):

Meike Kroneisen ◽

Carolina E. Kuepper-Tetzel

Keyword(s):

Foreign Language ◽

Retrieval Practice ◽

Current Work ◽

Final Test ◽

Practice Test ◽

New Material ◽

Practical Recommendations

Sleep right after studying new material is more conducive to memory than a period of wakefulness. Another way to counteract forgetting is to practice retrieval: taking a test strengthens memory more effectively than restudying the material. The current work aims at investigating the interaction between sleep and testing by asking if testing adds to, neutralizes, or decreases the effect of sleep on memory? We tested this in one pilot and one experiment by manipulating the timing of the practice test as well as whether practice was followed by sleep or wakefulness when learning foreign language vocabulary. Taking a delayed practice test significantly reduces forgetting for both the sleep and the wakefulness group. An immediate practice test, in contrast, had no such effect; here we find the standard beneficial sleep effect. However, the immediate practice test leads to higher recall in the final test in comparison to a delayed practice test, but only for the sleep group. Practical recommendations imply two things: first, if students study in the evening, they should test themselves immediately after learning. Second, if students study during the day the practice test should be delayed in order to reinforce memory and reduce forgetting of the material.

Download Full-text

PLAT 20(1) 2021: Enhancing Student Learning in Research and Educational Practice: The Power of Retrieval Practice and Feedback

Psychology Learning & Teaching ◽

10.1177/1475725720976462 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 20 (1) ◽

pp. 1-20

Author(s):

Veit Kubik ◽

Robert Gaschler ◽

Hannah Hausman

Keyword(s):

Testing Effect ◽

Retrieval Practice ◽

Educational Practice ◽

Study Strategies ◽

Digital Learning ◽

Special Issue ◽

Practice Test ◽

Learning And Teaching ◽

Digital Learning Environments ◽

Current Special Issue

Students and instructors are looking for effective study and instructional strategies that enhance student achievement across a range of content and conditions. The current Special Issue features seven articles and one report, which used varied methodologies to investigate the benefits of practising retrieval and providing feedback for learning. This editorial serves as an introduction and conceptual framework for these papers. Consistent with trends in the broader literature, the research in this Special Issue goes beyond asking whether retrieval practice and feedback enhance learning, but rather, when, for whom, and under what conditions. The first set of articles examined the benefits of retrieval practice compared to restudy (i.e., the testing effect) and various moderators of the testing effect, including participants’ cognitive and personality characteristics ( Bertilsson et al., 2021 ) as well as the timing of the practice test and sleep ( Kroneisen & Kuepper-Tetzel, 2021 ). The second set of articles examined the efficacy of different types of feedback, including complex versus simple feedback ( Enders et al., 2021 ; Pieper et al., 2021 ) and positively or negatively valenced feedback ( Jones et al., 2021 ). Finally, the third set of articles to this Special Issue examined practical considerations of implementing both retrieval practice and feedback with educationally relevant materials and contexts. Some of the practical issues examined included when students should search the web to look for answers to practice problems ( Giebl et al., 2021 ), whether review quizzes should be required and contribute to students’ final grades ( den Boer et al., 2021 ), and how digital learning environments should be designed to teach students to use effective study strategies such as retrieval practice ( Endres et al., 2021 ). In short, retrieval and feedback practices are effective and robust tools to enhance learning and teaching, and the papers in the current Special Issue provide insight into ways for students and teachers to implement these strategies.

Download Full-text

Effects of Preparation and Use of Keyword Lists on a Classroom Story-Retelling Test

JALT Journal - JALT Journal 24.1 ◽

10.37546/jaltjj39.1-1 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 39 (1) ◽

pp. 5

Author(s):

Hidetoshi Saito

Keyword(s):

Test Performance ◽

Test Session ◽

Practice Test ◽

Story Retelling ◽

Japanese University ◽

Quasi Experimental ◽

Test Practice ◽

Group 2 ◽

Keyword List ◽

Group 1

The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to explore the effects of test practice and keyword use on story-retelling test performance under four conditions. Eighty-two beginning and intermediate Japanese university students enrolled in English courses were required to practice orally summarizing two passages using a keyword list and also instructed to orally summarize one of two previously unseen passages without preparation. In the test session, two groups experienced two conditions that were identical and one that was different. Both groups retold one practiced passage with keywords at hand and a new passage without a keyword list. Group 1 retold another practiced passage with the keyword list withheld, whereas Group 2 read an additional new passage, made a keyword list, and retold it with the keyword list but without practice. Test practice was found to improve performance, but keyword list use induced better performance only when used with practice. テスト準備とキーワードリストは口頭要約テストに役立つか。この研究はテスト準備とキーワードリストの使用が口頭での要約テストに役立つかを調査することを目的とした。日本人大学生（初中級者）2グループ（計82名）が二つの同一条件と一つの異なる条件でそれぞれ英文要約を行った（計三条件づつ）。参加者は予め二種の英文が渡され、キーワードリストを作って練習をするように指示された。また、その場で新しい英文の要約を行うことも指示された。試験当日、両グループともまず練習した英文をリストとともに要約し、その後新しい英文の要約も行った。グループ1はさらに、準備したキーワードリストなしで練習した英文の要約を行った。グループ2はその場で新しい英文を読み、キーワードリストを作って要約を行った。結果として、練習したほうが、練習をしていない場合より良いが、キーワードリストは練習した場合のみに有効であることがわかった。

Download Full-text