We carried out 4 semester-long studies of student performance in a college research methods course (total N ϭ 588). Two sections of it were taught each semester with systematic and controlled differences between them. Key manipulations were repeated (with some variation) across the 4 terms, allowing assessment of replicability of effects. Variables studied included frequency of tests (e.g., 2 vs. 8 in-class exams), the repetition of some and not other exam items (i.e., the testing effect), and variation of test items between the in-class exams and the final exam (e.g., identical items vs. controlled changes in items). Some studies also manipulated presence or absence of low-stakes quizzes. The repetition of test items generally led to better performance. However, we did not observe consistent superiority for items that were repeated exactly over those that were repeated in modified form; the reverse was more often the case. The effect of the low-stakes quizzes was minimal at best. Results are discussed in terms of memory and transfer of training models. Educational Impact and Implications StatementCan we find inexpensive and easily adaptable modifications to teaching methods that positively impact student outcomes? These studies provide a positive answer to that question. The work is based on laboratory findings that frequent tests and frequent attempts to recall the same material (1) aid learning and memory, and (2) help students apply what they've learned to new problems. The present studies took place in large-enrollment college classes across four semesters. Within each semester two sections of an undergraduate course were taught in a highly similar fashion, primarily differing in the number of tests given and whether items that appeared on an earlier test were repeated on the final exam. In addition, some of the repeated items were identically so, while other 'repeated' items tested the same concepts but with different wording. We found evidence that frequent testing and repetition of tested items can improve course performance up to about 10%, though the results varied across the studies so further work is needed to clarify why. We also observed that under some circumstances students did as well or even better on re-worded test items as they did when the item was repeated in exactly the same words.
Ethical approval and consent. This study was approved by the Human Subjects Committee of the Yale University Institutional Review Board (Protocol #0410000155). The study was performed in accordance with the ethical standards as laid down in the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Written and signed informed consents were collected from all participants; informed consent for children's participation was received from their parents/caregivers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.