Retrieval practice is known to lead to better retention of a to-be-learned material than restudy (i.e., the testing effect). However, few studies have investigated retrieval practice in relation to working memory capacity (WMC) and personality characteristics such as grittiness (Grit) and need for cognition (NFC). In two experiments, we examined retrieval practice and restudy of Swahili–Swedish word pairs in relation to individual differences in Grit and NFC. In Experiment 1, using a between-subjects design, a significant main effect of retention interval was qualified by a Group × Retention Interval interaction. However, there were no effects of Grit or NFC. In Experiment 2, a within-subjects design was used, and a measure of WMC was included. The analyses revealed a testing effect; but again, WMC, Grit, and NFC were not significantly associated with performance. These results indicate that retrieval practice levels out the playing field regarding WMC, NFC, and Grit.

The testing effect, defined as the positive effect of retrieval practice (i.e., self-testing) on long-term memory retention relative to other ways to support learning, is a robust empirical phenomenon. Despite substantial scientific evidence for the testing effect, less is known about its effectiveness in relation to individual differences in cognitive ability. In the present study, we examine whether the effect of retrieval practice is beneficial independent of cognitive ability using behavioral and brain imaging data. In a within-subject design, upper-secondary students learned Swahili–Swedish word pairs through retrieval practice and study. The testing effects were assessed at a direct test and for a subsample after 1- and 4-weeks retention intervals, respectively. Another subsample performed the 1-week retention test during functional MRI (fMRI). Memory retention was analyzed in relation to an educationally relevant composite score dividing participants into low, intermediate, and high cognitive-ability groups. We provide behavioral evidence that the testing effect is independent of cognitive ability. The fMRI findings confirmed a general effectiveness of retrieval practice by showing that brain regions associated with successful retrieval of conceptual representations and semantic processing were more strongly engaged after retrieval practice in all cognitive-ability groups. It is argued that the advantages of retrieval practice should be conveyed to all teachers and students.

No abstract

This paper focuses on the factors that are likely to play a role in individual learning outcomes from group discussions, and it includes a comparison featuring test-enhanced learning. A between-groups design (N = 98) was used to examine the learning effects of feedback if provided to discussion groups, and to examine whether group discussions benefit learning when compared to test-enhanced learning over time. The results showed that feedback does not seem to have any effect if provided to a discussion group, and that test-enhanced learning leads to better learning than the discussion groups, independent of retention interval. Moreover, we examined whether memory and learning might be influenced by the participants’ need for cognition (NFC). The results showed that those scoring high on NFC remembered more than those who scored low. To conclude, testing trumps discussion groups from a learning perspective, and the discussion groups were also the least beneficial learning context for those scoring low on NFC.

The process of giving official acknowledgment to formal, informal and nonformal prior learning is commonly labelled as assessment, accreditation or recognition of prior learning (APL), representing a practice that is expanding in higher education in many countries. This paper focuses specifically on the assessment part of APL, which undoubtedly is central to the whole process, through a review of research in this area and an analysis of the reviewed studies from a validity perspective. The research reviewed (published 1990-2007) is categorised into empirical as well as more theoretically oriented publications, with a quantitative dominance of the latter. According to the validity analysis, a majority of the studies conducted in this area relate to the evidential basis of test interpretation and use, primarily providing theoretical rationales and theories for a variety of practices. The consequential basis of test interpretation and use has not been studied to any larger extent, resulting in a lack of both theoretical and empirical studies dealing with this aspect of validity.

umeå university, umeå, sweden; b department of Applied educational science, umeå university, umeå, sweden It is a desired feature of any testing program that test-takers' performance on the test is mainly affected by the content and difficulty of the test and the competencies of the test-takers. However, how test-takers behave, feel and respond to test situations might also contribute significantly to their performance. For example, to be successful when taking a test it is important to know and use appropriate test strategies, including adequate preparation (Bicak, 2013; Bond & Harman, 1994). Further, it is important to be motivated, and to be able to suppress test anxiety and other emotions which can interfere with test performance (Naylor, 1997; Sternberg, 1998). Test-taker behaviour, such as test-taking strategies, and emotional and motivational concerns related to test-taking, may introduce construct-irrelevant variance into the test scores (Haladyna & Downing, 2004). Thus, the test may measure more than the test developers intended (i.e. not only the proficiency of the test-taker, but also how he or she manages to cope with the test situation as such). As validity refers to 'the degree to which evidence and theory support the interpretations of test scores for proposed uses of tests'

This study examined whether practice testing with short-answer (SA) items benefits learning over time compared to practice testing with multiple-choice (MC) items, and rereading the material. More specifically, the aim was to test the hypotheses of retrieval effort and transfer appropriate processing by comparing retention tests with respect to practice testing format. To adequately compare SA and MC items, the MC items were corrected for random guessing. With a within-group design, 54 students (mean age = 16 years) first read a short text, and took four practice tests containing all three formats (SA, MC and statements to read) with feedback provided after each part. The results showed that both MC and SA formats improved short-and long-term memory compared to rereading. More importantly, practice testing with SA items is more beneficial for learning and long-term retention, providing support for retrieval effort hypothesis. Using corrections for guessing and educational implications are discussed.

To be successful in a high-stakes testing situation is desirable for any test taker. It has been found that, beside content knowledge, test-taking behavior, such as risktaking strategies, motivation, and test anxiety, is important for test performance. The purposes of the present study were to identify and group test takers with similar patterns of test-taking behavior and to explore how these groups differ in terms of background characteristics and test performance in a high-stakes achievement test context. A sample of the Swedish Scholastic Assessment Test test takers (N = 1891) completed a questionnaire measuring their motivation, test anxiety, and risk-taking behavior during the test, as well as background characteristics. A two-step cluster analysis revealed three clusters of test takers with significantly different test-taking behavior profiles: a moderate (n = 741), a calm risk taker (n = 637), and a test anxious risk averse (n = 513) profile. Group difference analyses showed that the calm risk taker profile (i.e., a high degree of risktaking together with relatively low levels of test anxiety and motivation during the test) was the most successful profile from a test performance perspective, while the test anxious risk averse profile (i.e., a low degree of risk-taking together with high levels of test anxiety and motivation) was the least successful. Informing prospective test takers about these insights can potentially lead to more valid interpretations and inferences based on the test scores. Eur J Psychol Educ (2018) shown that for a test taker to be successful when taking a test, it is important to be able to reduce anxiety and sustain motivation (Dodeen et al. 2014;Naylor 1997;Sternberg 1998), as well as using effective test-taking strategies, such as willingness to take risks (Bicak 2013;Bond and Harman 1994;Dodeen 2008). Studies in this area often compare groups of test takers and have for example found that high achievers tend to report using more effective testtaking strategies when compared to low achievers (Stenlund et al. 2017;Ellis and Ryan 2003;Hong et al. 2006;Kim and Goetz 1993), that males are more prone to taking risks when answering test items (see, e.g., Baldiga 2014), and that females and low achievers seem to experience higher levels of test anxiety than males and high achievers (Stenlund et al. 2017;Cassady and Johnson 2002;Naylor 1997). Findings like these can help understand and to some extent possibly explain performance differences that are often observed between manifest groups in achievement tests. Still, considering the consequences of successful test-taking behavior in high-stakes test situations, and assuming that test takers adopt different test-taking behavior, exploring differences across groups, in terms of profiles, and identifying patterns that seem associated with sucessful and less successful test-taking, respectively, might add important knowledge to this area. With this study, we therefore aim at identifying subgroups of test takers with similar patter...