Pooja K. Agarwal

Both Multiple-Choice and Short-Answer Quizzes Enhance Later Exam Performance in Middle and High School Classes

Practicing retrieval of recently studied information enhances the likelihood of the learner retrieving that information in the future. We examined whether short-answer and multiple-choice classroom quizzing could enhance retention of information on classroom exams taken for a grade. In seventh-grade science and high school history classes, students took intermittent quizzes (short-answer or multiple-choice, both with correct-answer feedback) on some information, whereas other information was not initially quizzed but received equivalent coverage in all other classroom activities. On the unit exams and on an end-of-semester exam, students performed better for information that had been quizzed than that not quizzed. An unanticipated and key finding is that the format of the quiz (multiple-choice or short-answer) did not need to match the format of the criterial test (e.g., unit exam) for this benefit to emerge. Further, intermittent quizzing cannot be attributed to intermittent reexposure to the target facts: A restudy condition produced less enhancement of later test performance than did quizzing with feedback. Frequent classroom quizzing with feedback improves student learning and retention, and multiple-choice quizzing is as effective as short-answer quizzing for this purpose.

Memorial consequences of multiple-choice testing on immediate and delayed tests

Multiple-choice testing has both positive and negative consequences for performance on later tests. Prior testing increases the number of questions answered correctly on a later test but also increases the likelihood that questions will be answered with lures from the previous multiple-choice test (Roediger & Marsh, 2005). Prior research has shown that the positive effects of testing persist over a delay, but no one has examined the durability of the negative effects of testing. To address this, subjects took multiple-choice and cued recall tests (on subsets of questions) both immediately and a week after studying. Although delay reduced both the positive and negative testing effects, both still occurred after 1 week, especially if the multiple-choice test had also been delayed. These results are consistent with the argument that recollection underlies both the positive and negative testing effects.

Expectancy of an open-book test decreases performance on a delayed closed-book test

Two experiments examined the influence of practice with, and the expectancy of, open-book tests (students viewed studied material while taking the test) versus closed-book tests (students completed the test without viewing the studied material) on delayed retention and transfer. Using GRE materials specifically designed for open-book testing, participants studied passages and then took initial open- or closed-book tests. Open-book testing led to better initial performance than closed-book testing, but on a delayed criterial (closed-book) test both types of testing produced similar retention after a two-day delay in Experiment 1. In Experiment 2 participants were informed in advance about the type of delayed criterial test to expect (open- or closed-book). Expecting an open-book test (relative to a closed-book test) decreased participants’ time spent studying and their delayed test performance on closed-book comprehension and transfer tests, demonstrating that test expectancy can influence long-term learning. Expectancy of open-book tests may impair long-term retention and transfer compared to closed-book tests, despite superior initial performance on open-book tests and students’ preference for open-book tests.

Benefits from retrieval practice are greater for students with lower working memory capacity

ABSTRACT We 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 an especially effective learning strategy for lower ability students.

Retrieval practice & Bloom’s taxonomy: Do students need fact knowledge before higher order learning?

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.