The Experts below are selected from a list of 17007 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Pooja K. Agarwal - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Retrieval Practice Consistently Benefits Student Learning: a Systematic Review of Applied Research in Schools and Classrooms
Educational Psychology Review, 2021Co-Authors: Pooja K. Agarwal, Ludmila D. Nunes, Janell R. BluntAbstract:Given the growing interest in Retrieval Practice among educators, it is valuable to know when Retrieval Practice does and does not improve student learning—particularly for educators who have limited classroom time and resources. In this literature review, we developed a narrow operational definition for “classroom research” compared to previous reviews of the literature. We screened nearly 2000 abstracts and systematically coded 50 experiments to establish a clearer picture of benefits from Retrieval Practice in real world educational settings. Our review yielded 49 effect sizes and a total n = 5374, the majority of which (57%) revealed medium or large benefits from Retrieval Practice. We found that Retrieval Practice improved learning for a variety of education levels, content areas, experimental designs, final test delays, Retrieval and final test formats, and timing of Retrieval Practice and feedback; however, only 6% of experiments were conducted in non-WEIRD countries. Based on our review of the literature, we make eight recommendations for future research and provide educators with a better understanding of the robust benefits of Retrieval Practice across a range of school and classroom settings.
-
Retrieval Practice bloom s taxonomy do students need fact knowledge before higher order learning
Journal of Educational Psychology, 2019Co-Authors: Pooja K. AgarwalAbstract:The development of students’ higher order learning is a critical component of education. For decades, educators and scientists have engaged in an ongoing debate about whether higher order learning can only be enhanced by building a base of factual knowledge (analogous to Bloom’s taxonomy) or whether higher order learning can be enhanced directly by engaging in complex questioning and materials. The relationship between fact learning and higher order learning is often speculated, but empirically unknown. In this study, middle school students and college students engaged in Retrieval Practice with fact questions, higher order questions, or a mix of question types to examine the optimal type of Retrieval Practice for enhancing higher order learning. In laboratory and K-12 settings, Retrieval Practice consistently increased delayed test performance, compared with rereading or no quizzes. Critically, higher order and mixed quizzes improved higher order test performance, but fact quizzes did not. Contrary to popular intuition about higher order learning and Bloom’s taxonomy, building a foundation of knowledge via fact-based Retrieval Practice may be less potent than engaging in higher order Retrieval Practice, a key finding for future research and classroom application. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
-
Retrieval Practice & Bloom’s taxonomy: Do students need fact knowledge before higher order learning?
Journal of Educational Psychology, 2019Co-Authors: Pooja K. AgarwalAbstract:The development of students’ higher order learning is a critical component of education. For decades, educators and scientists have engaged in an ongoing debate about whether higher order learning can only be enhanced by building a base of factual knowledge (analogous to Bloom’s taxonomy) or whether higher order learning can be enhanced directly by engaging in complex questioning and materials. The relationship between fact learning and higher order learning is often speculated, but empirically unknown. In this study, middle school students and college students engaged in Retrieval Practice with fact questions, higher order questions, or a mix of question types to examine the optimal type of Retrieval Practice for enhancing higher order learning. In laboratory and K-12 settings, Retrieval Practice consistently increased delayed test performance, compared with rereading or no quizzes. Critically, higher order and mixed quizzes improved higher order test performance, but fact quizzes did not. Contrary to popular intuition about higher order learning and Bloom’s taxonomy, building a foundation of knowledge via fact-based Retrieval Practice may be less potent than engaging in higher order Retrieval Practice, a key finding for future research and classroom application. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved)
-
Benefits from Retrieval Practice are greater for students with lower working memory capacity
Memory (Hove England), 2016Co-Authors: Pooja K. Agarwal, Jason R. Finley, Nathan S. Rose, Henry L. RoedigerAbstract:ABSTRACTWe examined the effects of Retrieval Practice for students who varied in working memory capacity as a function of the lag between study of material and its initial test, whether or not feedback was given after the test, and the retention interval of the final test. We sought to determine whether a blend of these conditions exists that maximises benefits from Retrieval Practice for lower and higher working memory capacity students. College students learned general knowledge facts and then restudied the facts or were tested on them (with or without feedback) at lags of 0–9 intervening items. Final cued recall performance was better for tested items than for restudied items after both 10 minutes and 2 days, particularly for longer study–test lags. Furthermore, on the 2-day delayed test the benefits from Retrieval Practice with feedback were significantly greater for students with lower working memory capacity than for students with higher working memory capacity (r = −.42). Retrieval Practice may be ...
-
Classroom-based programs of Retrieval Practice reduce middle school and high school students' test anxiety
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2014Co-Authors: Pooja K. Agarwal, Henry L. Roediger, Laura D’antonio, Kathleen B. Mcdermott, Mark A. McdanielAbstract:Abstract When Retrieval Practice is applied in classroom settings, do K-12 students experience changes in test anxiety? To answer this question frequently asked by educators, we surveyed 1408 middle school and high school students about their study strategy preferences and their reactions to a classroom-based program of Retrieval Practice. For classes in which Retrieval Practice occurred, 92% of students reported that Retrieval Practice helped them learn and 72% reported that Retrieval Practice made them less nervous for unit tests and exams. This study is the first to examine the relationship between Retrieval Practice and classroom test anxiety, and self-reported study strategy use in pre-college students. In light of our results, we encourage K-12 teachers to use Retrieval Practice in their classrooms to reduce test anxiety and improve learning.
Jeffrey D. Karpicke - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Improving self-regulated learning with a Retrieval Practice intervention.
Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 2017Co-Authors: Robert Ariel, Jeffrey D. KarpickeAbstract:Repeated Retrieval Practice is a powerful learning tool for promoting long-term retention, but students use this tool ineffectively when regulating their learning. The current experiments evaluated the efficacy of a minimal intervention aimed at improving students' self-regulated use of repeated Retrieval Practice. Across 2 experiments, students made decisions about when to study, engage in Retrieval Practice, or stop learning a set of foreign language word pairs. Some students received direct instruction about how to use repeated Retrieval Practice. These instructions emphasized the mnemonic benefits of Retrieval Practice over a less effective strategy (restudying) and told students how to use repeated Retrieval Practice to maximize their performance-specifically, that they should recall a translation correctly 3 times during learning. This minimal intervention promoted more effective self-regulated use of Retrieval Practice and better retention of the translations compared to a control group that received no instruction. Students who experienced this intervention also showed potential for long-term changes in self-regulated learning: They spontaneously used repeated Retrieval Practice 1 week later to learn new materials. These results provide a promising first step for developing guidelines for teaching students how to regulate their learning more effectively using repeated Retrieval Practice. (PsycINFO Database Record
-
Retrieval-Based Learning: Positive Effects of Retrieval Practice in Elementary School Children
Frontiers in psychology, 2016Co-Authors: Jeffrey D. Karpicke, Janell R. Blunt, Megan A. SmithAbstract:A wealth of research has demonstrated that practicing Retrieval is a powerful way to enhance learning. However, nearly all prior research has examined Retrieval Practice with college students. Little is known about Retrieval Practice in children, and even less is known about possible individual differences in Retrieval Practice. In three experiments, 88 children (mean age 10 years) studied a list of words and either restudied the items or Practiced retrieving them. They then took a final free recall test (Experiments 1 and 2) or recognition test (Experiment 3). In all experiments, children showed robust Retrieval Practice effects. Although a range of individual differences in reading comprehension and processing speed were observed among these children, the benefits of Retrieval Practice were independent of these factors. The results contribute to the growing body of research supporting the mnemonic benefits of Retrieval Practice and provide preliminary evidence that practicing Retrieval may be an effective learning strategy for children with varying levels of reading comprehension and processing speed.
-
Guided Retrieval Practice of Educational Materials Using Automated Scoring
Journal of Educational Psychology, 2014Co-Authors: Phillip J. Grimaldi, Jeffrey D. KarpickeAbstract:Retrieval Practice is a powerful way to promote long-term retention and meaningful learning. However, students do not frequently Practice Retrieval on their own, and when they do, they have difficulty evaluating the correctness of their responses and making effective study choices. To address these problems, we have developed a guided Retrieval Practice program that uses an automated scoring algorithm, called QuickScore, to evaluate responses during Retrieval Practice and make study choices based on student performance. In Experiments 1A and 1B, students learned human anatomy materials in either repeated Retrieval or repeated study conditions. Repeated Retrieval in the computer-based program produced large gains in retention on a delayed test. In Experiment 2, we examined the accuracy of QuickScore’s scoring relative to students’ self-scoring of their own responses. Students exhibited a dramatic bias to give partial or full credit to completely incorrect responses, while QuickScore was far less likely to score incorrect responses as correct. These results support the efficacy of computer guided Retrieval Practice for promoting long-term learning.
-
Covert Retrieval Practice benefits retention as much as overt Retrieval Practice.
Journal of experimental psychology. Learning memory and cognition, 2013Co-Authors: Megan A. Smith, Henry L. Roediger, Jeffrey D. KarpickeAbstract:Many experiments provide evidence that practicing Retrieval benefits retention relative to conditions of no Retrieval Practice. Nearly all prior research has employed Retrieval Practice requiring overt responses, but a few experiments have shown that covert Retrieval also produces retention advantages relative to control conditions. However, direct comparisons between overt and covert Retrieval are scarce: Does covert Retrieval—thinking of but not producing responses—on a first test produce the same benefit as overt Retrieval on a criterial test given later? We report 4 experiments that address this issue by comparing retention on a second test following overt or covert Retrieval on a first test. In Experiment 1 we used a procedure designed to ensure that subjects would retrieve on covert as well as overt test trials and found equivalent testing effects in the 2 cases. In Experiment 2 we replicated these effects using a procedure that more closely mirrored natural Retrieval processes. In Experiment 3 we showed that overt and covert Retrieval produced equivalent testing effects after a 2-day delay. Finally, in Experiment 4 we showed that covert Retrieval benefits retention more than restudying. We conclude that covert Retrieval Practice is as effective as overt Retrieval Practice, a conclusion that contravenes hypotheses in the literature proposing that overt responding is better. This outcome has an important educational implication: Students can learn as much from covert self-testing as they would from overt responding.
-
separate mnemonic effects of Retrieval Practice and elaborative encoding
Journal of Memory and Language, 2012Co-Authors: Jeffrey D. Karpicke, Megan A. SmithAbstract:Does Retrieval Practice produce learning because it is an especially effective way to induce elaborative encoding? Four experiments examined this question. Subjects learned word pairs across alternating study and recall periods, and once an item was recalled it was dropped from further Practice, repeatedly studied, or repeatedly retrieved on repeated recall trials. In elaborative study conditions, subjects used an imagery-based keyword method (Experiments 1‐2) or a verbal elaboration method (Experiment 3) to encode items during repeated study trials. On a criterial test 1 week after the initial learning phase, repeated Retrieval produced better long-term retention than repeated study even under elaborative study conditions. Elaborative studying improved initial encoding when it occurred prior to the first correct recall of an item, but while repeated Retrieval enhanced long-term retention, elaboration produced no measurable learning when it occurred after successful Retrieval. Experiment 4 used identical item word pairs (e.g., castle‐castle) to reduce or eliminate verbal elaboration, and robust effects of repeated Retrieval were still observed with these materials. Retrieval Practice likely produces learning by virtue of mechanisms other than elaboration.
Sean H. K. Kang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Retrieval Practice Benefits Deductive Inference
Educational Psychology Review, 2016Co-Authors: Luke G. Eglington, Sean H. K. KangAbstract:Retrieval Practice has been shown to benefit learning. However, the benefit has sometimes been attenuated with more complex materials that require integrating multiple units of information. Critically, Tran et al. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 135–140 (2015) found that Retrieval Practice improves sentence memory but not the drawing of inferences from the same sentences. In three experiments, we investigated whether this lack of benefit of Retrieval Practice for inferential ability was due to the presentation format of the material. Participants studied four sets of seven to nine related sentences by practicing Retrieval for two sets and rereading the other two sets. A final test was given 2 days later. When sentences were presented one at a time during study/Practice as in Tran et al., we found no effect of Retrieval Practice on a test requiring inferential reasoning. When sentences in a set were presented simultaneously during study/Practice, Retrieval Practice in the form of fill-in-the-blank testing (experiments 1 and 2) and free recall (experiment 3) aided later deductive inference more than rereading. Our findings suggest that Retrieval Practice can improve deductive inference, but in order to optimize its utility, the format in which the material is presented during Practice must not hinder relational processing of the individual sentences.
-
Is the benefit of Retrieval Practice modulated by motivation
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2014Co-Authors: Sean H. K. Kang, Harold PashlerAbstract:Abstract Retrieval Practice tends to produce better long-term learning than rereading, but laboratory studies have typically used arbitrary material that subjects may not care to learn. The observed advantage of Retrieval Practice may be exaggerated because low motivation may result in deficient processing during (usually passive) rereading. Thus, when subjects are motivated to learn the material, the type of study strategy (whether Retrieval Practice or rereading) might be less important. To test this hypothesis, we conducted 3 experiments in which we manipulated the incentives (using monetary bonuses or time savings) for learning Swahili–English word pairs. Items that had undergone Retrieval Practice were better recalled than reread items on a final test 2 days later, but this effect did not interact with incentive level. These results provide some reassurance that lab findings from the testing effects literature likely generalize to real-world situations in which motivation to learn may be greater.
-
Don’t just repeat after me: Retrieval Practice is better than imitation for foreign vocabulary learning
Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2013Co-Authors: Sean H. K. Kang, Tamar H. Gollan, Harold PashlerAbstract:Second language (L2) instruction programs often ask learners to repeat aloud words spoken by a native speaker. However, recent research on Retrieval Practice has suggested that imitating native pronunciation might be less effective than drill instruction, wherein the learner is required to produce the L2 words from memory (and given feedback). We contrasted the effectiveness of imitation and Retrieval Practice drills on learning L2 spoken vocabulary. Learners viewed pictures of objects and heard their names; in the imitation condition, they heard and then repeated aloud each name, whereas in the Retrieval Practice condition, they tried to produce the name before hearing it. On a final test administered either immediately after training (Exp. 1) or after a 2-day delay (Exp. 2), Retrieval Practice produced better comprehension of the L2 words, better ability to produce the L2 words, and no loss of pronunciation quality.
-
don t just repeat after me Retrieval Practice is better than imitation for foreign vocabulary learning
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2013Co-Authors: Sean H. K. Kang, Tamar H. Gollan, Harold PashlerAbstract:Second language (L2) instruction programs often ask learners to repeat aloud words spoken by a native speaker. However, recent research on Retrieval Practice has suggested that imitating native pronunciation might be less effective than drill instruction, wherein the learner is required to produce the L2 words from memory (and given feedback). We contrasted the effectiveness of imitation and Retrieval Practice drills on learning L2 spoken vocabulary. Learners viewed pictures of objects and heard their names; in the imitation condition, they heard and then repeated aloud each name, whereas in the Retrieval Practice condition, they tried to produce the name before hearing it. On a final test administered either immediately after training (Exp. 1) or after a 2-day delay (Exp. 2), Retrieval Practice produced better comprehension of the L2 words, better ability to produce the L2 words, and no loss of pronunciation quality.
Mark A. Mcdaniel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Adding the keyword mnemonic to Retrieval Practice: A potent combination for foreign language vocabulary learning?
Memory & cognition, 2019Co-Authors: Toshiya Miyatsu, Mark A. McdanielAbstract:The keyword mnemonic and Retrieval Practice are two cognitive techniques that have each been identified to enhance foreign language vocabulary learning. However, little is known about the use of these techniques in combination. Previous demonstrations of Retrieval-Practice effects in foreign language vocabulary learning have tended to use several rounds of Retrieval Practice. In contrast, we focused on a situation in which Retrieval Practice was limited to twice per item. For this situation, it is unclear whether Retrieval Practice will be effective relative to restudying. We advance the view that the keyword mnemonic catalyzes the effectiveness of Retrieval Practice in this learning context. Experiment 1 (48-h delay) partially supported this view, such that there was no testing effect with Retrieval Practice alone, but the keyword-Retrieval combination did not promote better retention than keyword alone. Experiments 2 and 3 (1-week delay) supported the catalytic view by showing that the keyword-Retrieval combination was better than keyword alone, but in the absence of keyword encoding there was no Retrieval Practice effect (replicating Experiment 1). However, with four rounds of Retrieval Practice, a marginally significant testing effect emerged (Experiment 3). Moreover, the routes through which participants reached each answer were identified by asking Retrieval-route questions in Experiments 2 and 3. Keyword-mediated Retrieval, which was observed sometimes even in no-keyword instructed conditions, was shown to be more effective than unmediated Retrieval. Our findings suggest that incorporating effective encoding techniques prior to Retrieval Practice could augment the effectiveness of Retrieval Practice, at least for vocabulary learning.
-
Metamemory monitoring and control following Retrieval Practice for text
Memory & cognition, 2014Co-Authors: Jeri L. Little, Mark A. McdanielAbstract:Test-taking is assumed to help learners diagnose what they do and do not know, and by so doing improve the effectiveness of their subsequent study. Previous work has examined metamemory monitoring (e.g., predictions of future performance) and control (e.g., restudy decisions) following testing or Retrieval Practice with relatively simple materials (e.g., word pairs). There is reason to believe, however, that such monitoring and control decisions might be more difficult with text materials, even after Retrieval Practice, owing perhaps to difficulty in accurately assessing one’s performance on the Retrieval-Practice test. In two experiments, participants read texts about world regions, then engaged in Retrieval Practice or rereading of the information in those texts, made estimates about future performance, and then received an opportunity to restudy the texts before taking a final recall test, with self-paced restudy enabling an examination of control processes. Memory predictions were more accurate in the Retrieval-Practice than in the rereading condition, and learners in both conditions allocated restudy time on the basis of their predictions. Additionally, restudy provided a greater benefit following Retrieval Practice than following rereading. The present study has implications for how students can use Retrieval Practice with text to foster subsequent learning.
-
Classroom-based programs of Retrieval Practice reduce middle school and high school students' test anxiety
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2014Co-Authors: Pooja K. Agarwal, Henry L. Roediger, Laura D’antonio, Kathleen B. Mcdermott, Mark A. McdanielAbstract:Abstract When Retrieval Practice is applied in classroom settings, do K-12 students experience changes in test anxiety? To answer this question frequently asked by educators, we surveyed 1408 middle school and high school students about their study strategy preferences and their reactions to a classroom-based program of Retrieval Practice. For classes in which Retrieval Practice occurred, 92% of students reported that Retrieval Practice helped them learn and 72% reported that Retrieval Practice made them less nervous for unit tests and exams. This study is the first to examine the relationship between Retrieval Practice and classroom test anxiety, and self-reported study strategy use in pre-college students. In light of our results, we encourage K-12 teachers to use Retrieval Practice in their classrooms to reduce test anxiety and improve learning.
Harold Pashler - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Retrieval Practice: the lack of transfer to deductive inferences.
Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2014Co-Authors: Randy Tran, Doug Rohrer, Harold PashlerAbstract:Retrieval Practice has been shown to enhance later recall of information reviewed through testing, whereas final-test measures involving making inferences from the learned information have produced mixed results. In four experiments, we examined whether the benefits of Retrieval Practice could transfer to deductive inferences. Participants studied a set of related premises and then reviewed these premises either by rereading or by taking fill-in-the-blank tests. As was expected, the testing condition produced better final-test recall of the premises. However, performance on multiple-choice inference questions showed no enhancement from Retrieval Practice.
-
Is the benefit of Retrieval Practice modulated by motivation
Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2014Co-Authors: Sean H. K. Kang, Harold PashlerAbstract:Abstract Retrieval Practice tends to produce better long-term learning than rereading, but laboratory studies have typically used arbitrary material that subjects may not care to learn. The observed advantage of Retrieval Practice may be exaggerated because low motivation may result in deficient processing during (usually passive) rereading. Thus, when subjects are motivated to learn the material, the type of study strategy (whether Retrieval Practice or rereading) might be less important. To test this hypothesis, we conducted 3 experiments in which we manipulated the incentives (using monetary bonuses or time savings) for learning Swahili–English word pairs. Items that had undergone Retrieval Practice were better recalled than reread items on a final test 2 days later, but this effect did not interact with incentive level. These results provide some reassurance that lab findings from the testing effects literature likely generalize to real-world situations in which motivation to learn may be greater.
-
Don’t just repeat after me: Retrieval Practice is better than imitation for foreign vocabulary learning
Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2013Co-Authors: Sean H. K. Kang, Tamar H. Gollan, Harold PashlerAbstract:Second language (L2) instruction programs often ask learners to repeat aloud words spoken by a native speaker. However, recent research on Retrieval Practice has suggested that imitating native pronunciation might be less effective than drill instruction, wherein the learner is required to produce the L2 words from memory (and given feedback). We contrasted the effectiveness of imitation and Retrieval Practice drills on learning L2 spoken vocabulary. Learners viewed pictures of objects and heard their names; in the imitation condition, they heard and then repeated aloud each name, whereas in the Retrieval Practice condition, they tried to produce the name before hearing it. On a final test administered either immediately after training (Exp. 1) or after a 2-day delay (Exp. 2), Retrieval Practice produced better comprehension of the L2 words, better ability to produce the L2 words, and no loss of pronunciation quality.
-
don t just repeat after me Retrieval Practice is better than imitation for foreign vocabulary learning
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2013Co-Authors: Sean H. K. Kang, Tamar H. Gollan, Harold PashlerAbstract:Second language (L2) instruction programs often ask learners to repeat aloud words spoken by a native speaker. However, recent research on Retrieval Practice has suggested that imitating native pronunciation might be less effective than drill instruction, wherein the learner is required to produce the L2 words from memory (and given feedback). We contrasted the effectiveness of imitation and Retrieval Practice drills on learning L2 spoken vocabulary. Learners viewed pictures of objects and heard their names; in the imitation condition, they heard and then repeated aloud each name, whereas in the Retrieval Practice condition, they tried to produce the name before hearing it. On a final test administered either immediately after training (Exp. 1) or after a 2-day delay (Exp. 2), Retrieval Practice produced better comprehension of the L2 words, better ability to produce the L2 words, and no loss of pronunciation quality.
