Learning how to learn: Can experiencing the outcome of different encoding strategies enhance subsequent encoding?

Bjork, Elizabeth Ligon; deWinstanley, Patricia A.; Storm, Benjamin C.

doi:10.3758/bf03194053

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies have now both replicated the phenomenon reported by deWinstanley and Bjork and tested possible explanations of it (Bjork, deWinstanley, & Storm, 2007;Bjork & Storm, 2011;Burnett & Bodner, 2014). One possibility, explored by Bjork and Storm (2011), which they referred to as an enhanced contextual-processing account, involved the following assumptions.…”

Section: Experiencing the Generation Effect Enhances Subsequent Encodingmentioning

confidence: 85%

Improving encoding strategies as a function of test knowledge and experience

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information that is produced or generated during learning is better remembered than information that is passively read, a phenomenon known as the generation effect. Prior research by deWinstanley and Bjork (Memory & Cognition, 32, 945-955, 2004) has shown that learners, after experiencing the memorial benefits of generation in the context of a fillin-the-blank test following the study of a text passage containing both to-be-read and to-be-generated items, become more effective encoders of to-be-read items on a second passage, thus eliminating the generation effect on a subsequent memory test. Current explanations of this phenomenon assume that learners need to actually experience the generation advantage on the test of the first passage to become more effective encoders of to-be-read items on the second passage. The results of the present research, however, suggest otherwise. Although experiencing a test of the first passage does appear to be critical for leading participants to become better encoders on the second passage, experiencing a generation advantage on the test for the first passage is not. More generally, these results shine new light on the generation effect as well as how and why taking tests has the potential to improve subsequent learning.

show abstract

Section: Experiencing the Generation Effect Enhances Subsequent Encodingmentioning

confidence: 85%

Improving encoding strategies as a function of test knowledge and experience

2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further research could determine whether giving participants experience with both test formats, as was done in Experiment 3, may provide them with the opportunity to even further adaptively employ different encoding strategies (cf. Bjork, DeWinstanley, & Storm, 2007; DeWinstanley & Bjork, 2004). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adaptive and qualitative changes in encoding strategy with experience: Evidence from the test-expectancy paradigm.

Finley¹,

Benjamin²

2012

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cogni

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three experiments demonstrated learners’ abilities to adaptively and qualitatively accommodate their encoding strategies to the demands of an upcoming test. Stimuli were word pairs. In Experiment 1, test expectancy was induced for either cued recall (of targets given cues) or free recall (of targets only) across 4 study–test cycles of the same test format, followed by a final critical cycle featuring either the expected or the unexpected test format. For final tests of both cued and free recall, participants who had expected that test format outperformed those who had not. This disordinal interaction, supported by recognition and self-report data, demonstrated not mere differences in effort based on anticipated test difficulty, but rather qualitative and appropriate differences in encoding strategies based on expected task demands. Participants also came to appropriately modulate metacognitive monitoring (Experiment 2) and study-time allocation (Experiment 3) across study–test cycles. Item and associative recognition performance, as well as self-report data, revealed shifts in encoding strategies across trials; these results were used to characterize and evaluate the different strategies that participants employed for cued versus free recall and to assess the optimality of participants’ metacognitive control of encoding strategies. Taken together, these data illustrate a sophisticated form of metacognitive control, in which learners qualitatively shift encoding strategies to match the demands of anticipated tests.

show abstract

“…33 'Encoding' strategies are aimed to develop both, but with a particular emphasis on developing retrieval strength. 34 Both groups of strategies invoke an investment in learning, and this involves 'the tendency to seek out, engage in, enjoy and continuously pursue opportunities for effortful cognitive activity. 35 Although some may not 'enjoy' this phase, it does involve a willingness to practice, to be curious and to explore again, and a willingness to tolerate ambiguity and uncertainty during this investment phase.…”

Section: Success Criteriamentioning

confidence: 99%

Learning strategies: a synthesis and conceptual model

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this article is to explore a model of learning that proposes that various learning strategies are powerful at certain stages in the learning cycle. The model describes three inputs and outcomes (skill, will and thrill), success criteria, three phases of learning (surface, deep and transfer) and an acquiring and consolidation phase within each of the surface and deep phases. A synthesis of 228 meta-analyses led to the identification of the most effective strategies. The results indicate that there is a subset of strategies that are effective, but this effectiveness depends on the phase of the model in which they are implemented. Further, it is best not to run separate sessions on learning strategies but to embed the various strategies within the content of the subject, to be clearer about developing both surface and deep learning, and promoting their associated optimal strategies and to teach the skills of transfer of learning. The article concludes with a discussion of questions raised by the model that need further research. There has been a long debate about the purpose of schooling. These debates include claims that schooling is about passing on core notions of humanity and civilisation (or at least one's own society's view of these matters). They include claims that schooling should prepare students to live pragmatically and immediately in their current environment, should prepare students for the work force, should equip students to live independently, to participate in the life of their community, to learn to 'give back', to develop personal growth. 1 In the past 30 years, however, the emphasis in many western systems of education has been more on enhancing academic achievement-in domains such as reading, mathematics, and science-as the primary purpose of schooling. 2 Such an emphasis has led to curricula being increasingly based on achievement in a few privileged domains, and 'great' students are deemed those who attain high levels of proficiency in these narrow domains.This has led to many countries aiming to be in the top echelon of worldwide achievement measures in a narrow range of subjects; for example, achievement measures such as PISA (tests of 15-year olds in mathematics, reading and science, across 65 countries in 2012) or PIRLS (Year-5 tests of mathematics, reading and science, across 57 countries in 2011). Indeed, within most school systems there is a plethora of achievement tests; many countries have introduced accountability pressures based on high levels of testing of achievement; and communities typically value high achievement or levels of knowledge. 3 The mantra underpinning these claims has been cast in terms of what students know and are able to do; the curriculum is compartmentalised into various disciplines of achievement; and students, teachers, parents and policy makers talk in terms of success in these achievement domains.Despite the recent emphasis on achievement, the day-to-day focus of schools has always been on learning-how to know, how to know more efficiently a...

show abstract

Learning how to learn: Can experiencing the outcome of different encoding strategies enhance subsequent encoding?

Cited by 15 publications

References 22 publications

Improving encoding strategies as a function of test knowledge and experience

Improving encoding strategies as a function of test knowledge and experience

Adaptive and qualitative changes in encoding strategy with experience: Evidence from the test-expectancy paradigm.

Learning strategies: a synthesis and conceptual model

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About