This is a follow-up on an old post from 2016, Tests help us remember. What we remember helps us think. Here’s what I wrote then:
Using practice tests as a teaching tool has been criticized for emphasizing memorization over reasoning and for being narrowly focused on knowledge goals rather than the learning process. No doubt practice tests can be misused, overused, or poorly designed. But they are also one of the most effective ways to reinforce knowledge and improve our ability to think about that knowledge.
Various studies have found that retrieval practice beats other methods of learning. For instance, in one study, two groups of students read a text for about 5 minutes. After reading the passage, one group had to write down everything they remembered, reread it and then write down everything they could remember again. The other group drew conceptual maps after reading the passage, organizing the information, making connections and forming ideas about the material. A week later the two groups were evaluated on what they had retained from the reading. Unsurprisingly, the retrieval practice group recalled more of what they had read than the conceptual mappers– but they also demonstrated superior conceptual understanding of the material. Besides that irony, when queried the week before, the retrieval practice group had been less optimistic than the conceptual mappers about how they would do on the evaluation.
How to explain these effects? Here are some possibilities:
1. Accessing memory strengthens memory of the thing accessed
2. The more accessed, the more robust the memory (up to a point, of course)
3. Knowledge triggers thinking about knowledge
4. Lack of confidence puts in play cognitive processes that improve memory and understanding.
References and Links:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/science/21memory.html Accessed on 12/6/16
J. D. Karpicke, J. R. Blunt Retrieval Practice Produces More Learning than Elaborative Studying with Concept Mapping Published Online20 Jan 2011 DOI: 10.1126/science.1199327 DOI: 10.1126/science.1199327
M. Smith, V. A. Floerke, A. K. Thomas. Retrieval practice protects memory against acute stress. Science, 2016; 354 (6315): 1046 DOI: 10.1126/science.aah5067
-
As of June 29, 2022, the Karpicke and Blunt paper has garnered 1187 citations. Here are excerpts from three meta-analyses that cite the paper and confirm the benefits of “test-enhanced” and “retrieval-based” learning:
1. Pan, S. C., & Rickard, T. C. (2018). Transfer of test-enhanced learning: Meta-analytic review and synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 144(7), 710–756. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000151
Attempting recall of information from memory, as occurs when taking a practice test, is one of the most potent training techniques known to learning science. However, does testing yield learning that transfers to different contexts? In the present article, we report the findings of the first comprehensive meta-analytic review into that question. Our review encompassed 192 transfer effect sizes extracted from 122 experiments and 67 published and unpublished articles (N = 10,382) that together comprise more than 40 years of research. [The results] revealed that testing can yield transferrable learning as measured relative to a control condition. Transfer of learning is greatest across test formats, to application and inference questions…
2. Rowland, C. A. (2014). The effect of testing versus restudy on retention: A meta-analytic review of the testing effect. Psychological Bulletin, 140(6), 1432–1463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037559
Engaging in a test over previously studied information can serve as a potent learning event, a phenomenon referred to as the testing effect. Despite a surge of research in the past decade, existing theories have not yet provided a cohesive account of testing phenomena. The present study uses meta-analysis to examine the effects of testing versus restudy on retention. Key results indicate support for the role of effortful processing as a contributor to the testing effect, with initial recall tests yielding larger testing benefits than recognition tests.
3. Yang, C., Luo, L., Vadillo, M. A., Yu, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2021). Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 147(4), 399–435. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000309
Over the last century hundreds of studies have demonstrated that testing is an effective intervention to enhance long-term retention of studied knowledge and facilitate mastery of new information, compared with restudying and many other learning strategies (e.g., concept mapping), a phenomenon termed the testing effect. How robust is this effect in applied settings beyond the laboratory? The current review integrated 48,478 students’ data, extracted from 222 independent studies, to investigate the magnitude, boundary conditions, and psychological underpinnings of test-enhanced learning in the classroom. The results show that overall testing (quizzing) raises student academic achievement….
Finally, this from JD Karpicke, co-author of the original paper, explaining why trying to memorize key facts for tests (what used to be call “regurgitation” by the skeptics) can produce meaningful, long-term learning:
Retrieval is the key process for understanding learning and for promoting learning, yet retrieval is not often granted the central role it deserves. Learning is typically identified with the encoding or construction of knowledge, and retrieval is considered merely the assessment of learning that occurred in a prior experience. The retrieval-based learning perspective outlined here is grounded in the fact that all expressions of knowledge involve retrieval and depend on the retrieval cues available in a given context. Further, every time a person retrieves knowledge, that knowledge is changed, because retrieving knowledge improves one’s ability to retrieve it again in the future. Practicing retrieval does not merely produce rote, transient learning; it produces meaningful, long-term learning. - Karpicke JD. Retrieval-Based Learning: Active Retrieval Promotes Meaningful Learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2012;21(3):157-163. doi:10.1177/0963721412443552