Abstract:Given previous findings on test enhanced learning, the present study examined the implementation of this practice in terms of quizzing, during the progress of a course. After completing the university course, 88 Swedish teacher students were asked to answer an adapted Retrieval Practice and Test Anxiety Survey. The results showed that students perceived quizzing to improve learning, and reduce test anxiety. Nonetheless, based on students' misconceptions regarding why quizzing actually enhances learning, it is … Show more
“…Another laboratory study also found that learning situations including a short test (on mathematical concepts and materials) were evaluated as more negative and as more stress-and anxietyinducing than learning situations including a reading control task (these findings were also independent of participants' trait stress or trait anxiety; Wenzel and Reinhard, 2021). Interestingly, contrary results were also found (see, e.g., Agarwal et al, 2014;Nyroos et al, 2016) and even though these can be explained due to methodological differences, replications are still advantageous. Apart from that, it is furthermore possible that these effects of tests on stress perceptions do not arise for learners with higher intelligence and that intelligence might moderate these negative effects.…”
Section: Tests and Perceptions Of Stress Or Anxietymentioning
confidence: 96%
“…To further ensure that the test task would be without stakes or artificial stressors, we avoided using learning materials that might be stress-or anxiety inducing in themselves (like mathematical or statistical information; see, e.g., Wenzel and Reinhard, 2021 ) and applied a test in which participant did not even have to say their answers out loud in front of their peers (contrary to Wenzel and Reinhard, 2021 ; see also England et al, 2017 ). To adequately assess participants stress perceptions caused by the learning situation, we measured their state stress directly after they completed the respective learning task and explicitly instructed them to refer to their perceptions and experiences while learning (contrary to previous work where stress was assessed, for instance, before participants worked on the respective tests, after the tests but with a longer delay, or even retrospectively at the end of the academic year; see, e.g., Agarwal et al, 2014 ; Hinze and Rapp, 2014 ; Nyroos et al, 2016 ). Finally, we must note that our work was planned and conducted shortly before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.…”
It has often been shown that tests as intentionally hindered and difficult learning tasks increase long-term learning compared to easier tasks. Previous work additionally indicated that higher intelligence might serve as a prerequisite for such beneficial effects of tests. Nevertheless, despite their long-term learning effects, tests were also found to be evaluated as more negative and to lead to more stress and anxiety compared to easier control tasks. Stress and anxiety, in turn, often yield detrimental effects on learning outcomes. Hence, we hypothesized that tests increase later learning outcomes but simultaneously also lead to more stress perceptions. Such increased stress was, in turn, hypothesized to reduce later learning outcomes (thus, stress might serve as a mediator of the beneficial effects of tests on learning). All these assumed effects should further be moderated by intelligence, insofar as that higher intelligence should increase beneficial effects of tests on learning, should decrease stress perceptions caused by tests, and should reduce detrimental effects of stress on learning outcomes. Higher intelligence was also assumed to be generally associated with higher learning. We conducted a laboratory study (N=89) to test these hypotheses: Participants underwent an intelligence screening, then worked on either a test or a re-reading control task, and reported their immediate stress perceptions. Later learning outcomes were assessed after 1week. The results supported all assumed main effects but none of the assumed interactions. Thus, participants using tests had higher long-term learning outcomes compared to participants using re-reading tasks. However, participants using tests also perceived more immediate stress compared to participants that only re-read the materials. These stress perceptions in turn diminished the beneficial effects of tests. Stress was also generally related to lower learning, whereas higher intelligence was linked to higher learning and also to lower stress. Hence, our findings again support the often assumed benefits of tests—even when simultaneously considering learners’ intelligence and and when considering the by tests caused stress perceptions. Notably, controlling for stress further increases these long-term learning benefits. We then discuss some limitations and boundaries of our work as well as ideas for future studies.
“…Another laboratory study also found that learning situations including a short test (on mathematical concepts and materials) were evaluated as more negative and as more stress-and anxietyinducing than learning situations including a reading control task (these findings were also independent of participants' trait stress or trait anxiety; Wenzel and Reinhard, 2021). Interestingly, contrary results were also found (see, e.g., Agarwal et al, 2014;Nyroos et al, 2016) and even though these can be explained due to methodological differences, replications are still advantageous. Apart from that, it is furthermore possible that these effects of tests on stress perceptions do not arise for learners with higher intelligence and that intelligence might moderate these negative effects.…”
Section: Tests and Perceptions Of Stress Or Anxietymentioning
confidence: 96%
“…To further ensure that the test task would be without stakes or artificial stressors, we avoided using learning materials that might be stress-or anxiety inducing in themselves (like mathematical or statistical information; see, e.g., Wenzel and Reinhard, 2021 ) and applied a test in which participant did not even have to say their answers out loud in front of their peers (contrary to Wenzel and Reinhard, 2021 ; see also England et al, 2017 ). To adequately assess participants stress perceptions caused by the learning situation, we measured their state stress directly after they completed the respective learning task and explicitly instructed them to refer to their perceptions and experiences while learning (contrary to previous work where stress was assessed, for instance, before participants worked on the respective tests, after the tests but with a longer delay, or even retrospectively at the end of the academic year; see, e.g., Agarwal et al, 2014 ; Hinze and Rapp, 2014 ; Nyroos et al, 2016 ). Finally, we must note that our work was planned and conducted shortly before the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.…”
It has often been shown that tests as intentionally hindered and difficult learning tasks increase long-term learning compared to easier tasks. Previous work additionally indicated that higher intelligence might serve as a prerequisite for such beneficial effects of tests. Nevertheless, despite their long-term learning effects, tests were also found to be evaluated as more negative and to lead to more stress and anxiety compared to easier control tasks. Stress and anxiety, in turn, often yield detrimental effects on learning outcomes. Hence, we hypothesized that tests increase later learning outcomes but simultaneously also lead to more stress perceptions. Such increased stress was, in turn, hypothesized to reduce later learning outcomes (thus, stress might serve as a mediator of the beneficial effects of tests on learning). All these assumed effects should further be moderated by intelligence, insofar as that higher intelligence should increase beneficial effects of tests on learning, should decrease stress perceptions caused by tests, and should reduce detrimental effects of stress on learning outcomes. Higher intelligence was also assumed to be generally associated with higher learning. We conducted a laboratory study (N=89) to test these hypotheses: Participants underwent an intelligence screening, then worked on either a test or a re-reading control task, and reported their immediate stress perceptions. Later learning outcomes were assessed after 1week. The results supported all assumed main effects but none of the assumed interactions. Thus, participants using tests had higher long-term learning outcomes compared to participants using re-reading tasks. However, participants using tests also perceived more immediate stress compared to participants that only re-read the materials. These stress perceptions in turn diminished the beneficial effects of tests. Stress was also generally related to lower learning, whereas higher intelligence was linked to higher learning and also to lower stress. Hence, our findings again support the often assumed benefits of tests—even when simultaneously considering learners’ intelligence and and when considering the by tests caused stress perceptions. Notably, controlling for stress further increases these long-term learning benefits. We then discuss some limitations and boundaries of our work as well as ideas for future studies.
Objective
Pharmacy calculations is a course that can be challenging and is often associated with student anxiety about assessments and grades. This study was conducted to determine if student anxiety would be reduced in pharmacy calculations using self-paced, multiple-attempt assessments.
Materials and methods
Self-paced, multiple-attempt assessments were presented to students as graded practice modules and as examinations. Pre-post surveys were used to measure student anxiety in pharmacy calculations. Module performance indices and exam performance indices were correlated with course grade outcomes.
Results
Fifty-four students participated in pre-surveys and forty-eight students participated in post-surveys. Westside Test Anxiety Scale survey results indicated use of self-paced, multiple-attempt assessments reduced students’ perceived anxiety about pharmacy calculations. Student comments about assessment methods were predominately positive. Course grades strongly correlated with module mean scores and high scores, and strongly correlated with mean exam scores. A negative correlation between course grades and belated module attempts alluded to harmful association between student procrastination and course performance in weaker students.
Conclusions
Self-paced, multiple-attempt assessment was associated with improved perception of student test anxiety about pharmacy calculations. With care taken to limit student procrastination, use of these types of assessment could be an effective means of improving student comfort while promoting mastery of the subject.
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.