The Testing Effect in the Lecture Hall: Does it Depend on Learner Prerequisites?

IF 1.9 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Julia Glaser, Tobias Richter
{"title":"The Testing Effect in the Lecture Hall: Does it Depend on Learner Prerequisites?","authors":"Julia Glaser, Tobias Richter","doi":"10.1177/14757257221136660","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The benefits of practice testing for long-term learning are well established in many contexts. However, little is known about learner characteristics that might moderate its effectiveness. The effects of practice tests might depend on individual prerequisites for learning, especially in real-world educational settings. We explored whether the effects of practice testing in a regular university lecture would depend on cognitive (e.g., prior knowledge), motivational (e.g., learning motivation), or emotional (test anxiety) dispositions. We implemented an experimental intervention design in psychology courses for teacher students (N  =  208). One week before the lecture, focal learner characteristics were assessed. Immediately after the lecture, participants completed an online review session with short-answer questions (practice testing with corrective feedback) or summarizing statements (restudy), alternating within each participant. One week later, retention of learning contents was assessed with a criterial test containing short-answer and multiple-choice questions. A testing effect emerged (ηp²  =  .07), with better retention for the tested compared with the restudied contents. Some learner characteristics affected learning outcomes, but no interactions with testing vs. restudy occurred. These results suggest that the testing effect in the university classroom is a robust phenomenon that benefits learning irrespective of primary individual learning prerequisites.","PeriodicalId":45061,"journal":{"name":"Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT","volume":"22 1","pages":"159 - 178"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257221136660","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The benefits of practice testing for long-term learning are well established in many contexts. However, little is known about learner characteristics that might moderate its effectiveness. The effects of practice tests might depend on individual prerequisites for learning, especially in real-world educational settings. We explored whether the effects of practice testing in a regular university lecture would depend on cognitive (e.g., prior knowledge), motivational (e.g., learning motivation), or emotional (test anxiety) dispositions. We implemented an experimental intervention design in psychology courses for teacher students (N  =  208). One week before the lecture, focal learner characteristics were assessed. Immediately after the lecture, participants completed an online review session with short-answer questions (practice testing with corrective feedback) or summarizing statements (restudy), alternating within each participant. One week later, retention of learning contents was assessed with a criterial test containing short-answer and multiple-choice questions. A testing effect emerged (ηp²  =  .07), with better retention for the tested compared with the restudied contents. Some learner characteristics affected learning outcomes, but no interactions with testing vs. restudy occurred. These results suggest that the testing effect in the university classroom is a robust phenomenon that benefits learning irrespective of primary individual learning prerequisites.
大讲堂的测试效果:它取决于学习者的先决条件吗?
实践测试对长期学习的好处在许多情况下都得到了很好的证实。然而,人们对可能调节其有效性的学习者特征知之甚少。实践测试的效果可能取决于学习的个人先决条件,尤其是在现实世界的教育环境中。我们探讨了在大学常规讲座中进行实践测试的效果是否取决于认知(如先验知识)、动机(如学习动机)或情绪(测试焦虑)倾向。我们在师范生心理学课程中实施了实验干预设计(N  =  208)。讲座前一周,对焦点学习者的特点进行了评估。讲座结束后,参与者立即完成一个在线复习环节,回答简短的问题(带纠正性反馈的练习测试)或总结陈述(重新学习),在每个参与者中交替进行。一周后,通过包含简答题和多项选择题的标准测试来评估学习内容的保留率。出现了测试效果(ηp²  =  .07),与重新研究的内容物相比,测试的内容物具有更好的保留性。一些学习者的特点影响了学习结果,但没有发生与测试和重新学习的互动。这些结果表明,大学课堂上的测试效果是一种强大的现象,无论个人的主要学习先决条件如何,都有利于学习。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT
Psychology Learning and Teaching-PLAT PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
9.10%
发文量
24
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信