Studying like a nerd: Spacing, self-testing, and explanatory questioning in principles of microeconomics

Abstract

Ineffective study strategies breed overconfidence, bad grades, misplaced blame, and little long-term learning. The psychological learning-science literature suggests that pedagogies based on spacing, self-testing, and explanatory questioning push back against these tendencies and improve learning. This hypothesis was tested by comparing the results in “Chalk-and-Talk” versus “Active Learning” microeconomics courses that used learning science insights. In the latter, the better students were more likely to earn As and middle students’ grades averaged about a letter grade higher. Weaker students’ failures and Bs were both more frequent. The quality of comments on the readings and lecture completion were highly significant predictors of over-performance for above-median students. Required practice exams and preparation time were significant predictors of over-performance for below-median students.