scholarly journals Planning Education for Long-Term Retention: The Cognitive Science and Implementation of Retrieval Practice

2018 ◽  
Vol 38 (04) ◽  
pp. 449-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas Larsen

AbstractEducational systems are rarely designed for long-term retention of information. Strong evidence has emerged from cognitive psychology and applied education studies that repeated retrieval of information significantly improves retention compared to repeated studying. This effect likely emerges from the processes of memory consolidation and reconsolidation. Consolidation and reconsolidation are the means by which memories are organized into associational networks or schemas that are created and recreated as memories are formed and recalled. As educators implement retrieval practice, they should consider how various test formats lead to different degrees of schema activation. Repeated acts of retrieval provide opportunities for schemas to be updated and strengthened. Spacing of retrieval allows more consolidated schemas to be reactivated. Feedback provides metacognitive monitoring to ensure retrieval accuracy and can lead to shifts from ineffective to effective retrieval strategies. By using the principles of retrieval practice, educators can improve the likelihood that learners will retain information for longer periods of time.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
alice latimier ◽  
Arnaud Rierget ◽  
Son Thierry Ly ◽  
Franck Ramus

The current study aimed at comparing the effect of three placements of the re-exposure episodes on memory retention (interpolated-small, interpolated-medium, postponed), depending on whether retrieval practice or re-reading was used, and on retention interval (one week vs one month).


2018 ◽  
Vol 72 (4) ◽  
pp. 858-871 ◽  
Author(s):  
Autumn B Hostetter ◽  
Elizabeth A Penix ◽  
Mackenzie Z Norman ◽  
W Robert Batsell ◽  
Thomas H Carr

Retrieval practice (e.g., testing) has been shown to facilitate long-term retention of information. In two experiments, we examine whether retrieval practice also facilitates use of the practised information when it is needed to solve analogous problems. When retrieval practice was not limited to the information most relevant to the problems (Experiment 1), it improved memory for the information a week later compared with copying or rereading the information, although we found no evidence that it improved participants’ ability to apply the information to the problems. In contrast, when retrieval practice was limited to only the information most relevant to the problems (Experiment 2), we found that retrieval practice enhanced memory for the critical information, the ability to identify the schematic similarities between the two sources of information, and the ability to apply that information to solve an analogous problem after a hint was given to do so. These results suggest that retrieval practice, through its effect on memory, can facilitate application of information to solve novel problems but has minimal effects on spontaneous realisation that the information is relevant.


2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alice Latimier ◽  
Arnaud Riegert ◽  
Hugo Peyre ◽  
Son Thierry Ly ◽  
Roberto Casati ◽  
...  

Abstract Compared with other learning strategies, retrieval practice seems to promote superior long-term retention. This has been found mostly in conditions where learners take tests after being exposed to learning content. However, a pre-testing effect has also been demonstrated, with promising results. This raises the question, for a given amount of time dedicated to retrieval practice, whether learners should be tested before or after an initial exposure to learning content. Our experiment directly compares the benefits of post-testing and pre-testing relative to an extended reading condition, on a retention test 7 days later. We replicated both post-testing (d = 0.74) and pre-testing effects (d = 0.35), with significantly better retention in the former condition. Post-testing also promoted knowledge transfer to previously untested questions, whereas pre-testing did not. Our results thus suggest that it may be more fruitful to test students after than before exposure to learning content.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 277-295 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keith B. Lyle ◽  
Campbell R. Bego ◽  
Robin F. Hopkins ◽  
Jeffrey L. Hieb ◽  
Patricia A. S. Ralston

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document