In class we have talked about self-testing as a method of studying. This study specifically examines the testing effect and the extent to which different forms of quizzing improve test scores.

The purpose of the research conducted in this article was to experimentally examine the testing effect for content presented throughout the semester in a college course. They wondered if positive testing effects would emerge in the context of a standard course. One central issue raised by the testing effect findings is the extent to which the repeated exposure of the material stimulated by tests plays a role in the positive impact of intervening tests on final test performance. 

They were interested in the degree to which testing effects in the classroom reflect mnemonic processes that are more than just additional exposure of the content. They hypothesized that testing effects would emerge (quizzes with feedback would produce better performance on final tests than not tested/read facts), and they expected that testing (quizzing with feedback) would be superior to the reading content only condition in terms of increasing final test scores. They also predicted that short answer quizzes would produce greater gains in performance on unit exams than would multiple choice quizzes. Performance was generally better for facts exposed in the quiz condition than for facts that were not exposed. 

They found that the advantage of multiple choice performance over short answer performance is consistent with the idea that recognition is a less demanding retrieval task than recall. There was also a main effect of quiz type such that facts assigned to the Short Answer quiz conditions (exposed and non-exposed) were more accurately learned and retained than facts assigned to either the Multiple Choice or Read Only questions. There was a significant advantage of short answer quizzing over multiple choice quizzing and read only questions, but no significant advantage of multiple choice quizzing relative to reading. Those results seemed consistent with findings in the basic memory literature, used very different materials, and showed that recall promotes retrieval processing that is more mnemonically potent than does recognition. 

They also showed that cued recall quizzes enhanced performance significantly more than did recognition quizzes on a subsequent test in which the retrieval cues had been altered. Clearly, learning and retention were better when students were given feedback after missing a short answer question than reading the fact (twice) without being quizzed. Thus, it appears that giving feedback to items that were not recalled promoted integrated learning of the elements comprising the tested items. The findings suggest that feedback for missed multiple choice facts did not benefit learning more so than additional exposure (RO). 

Quizzing improved performance on two unit exams and a cumulative final exam for content covered in a college course relative to content that was not quizzed. Consistent with basic research on the testing effect, the benefit for short answer quizzing was more robust than the benefit for multiple choice quizzing. Quizzing that required recall of target information (short answer quizzes), but not quizzing that required recognition (multiple choice quizzes), was more effective than presenting the target information for reading. 

These findings support what we have discussed in class, that testing is a verified way of improving scores and the deeper the form of processing that you engage in (like short answer versus multiple choice) and the more frequently you engage in these kinds of testing, the more test scores seem to improve.

Sources:

McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, J. L., Derbish, M. H., & Morrisette, N. (2007). Testing the testing effect in the classroom. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(4-5), 494–513. https://doi-org.umw.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/09541440701326154

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-learning-secret-don-t-take-notes-with-a-laptop/

A rising freshmen is visiting a college they are interested in. They sit in on a class, look around and notice something about the students. Much like the way movies portray college students, the majority of the ones in class seem to be on their laptops taking notes. There is only a small portion of students who are jotting down notes in their notebooks, as the teacher is lecturing. Recent findings have shown that people who take the time to physically write notes on a paper tend to be able to recall information better than those who take notes electronically. Guess the old fashioned way of taking notes throughout history beats new ways of taking notes on technology! People who take notes on a computer typically has more notes, in comparison to those who write.

Can it be arguably supported that students who write notes down with a paper and pen actually get more out of class lectures? In cognitive psychology, acts such as writing notes down transfers to the hippocampus, which is where information will be encoded, stored and eventually retrieved during test time. There are two different types of memories, implicit and explicit, which both work differently. Implicit memory focuses more on perception of the world around. On the other hand, explicit memory focuses on the meaning, concepts and stays in long-term memory. In a study that Mueller and Oppenheimer conducted, the notes that people on laptops took showed higher amounts of verbatim, which shows that there is a lower level of retaining the information in their memory. Both students who took notes on paper and on their laptop took a test after sitting in a lecture, for the experiment. The results showed that people who took notes by hand had more conceptual understanding and therefore learned more. The increase in conceptual comprehension in people who write notes show that they store material in their explicit memory, which is where long term memory stores information as well. Hence, there is a better chance for theses students to recall information better on tests.

Why do so many students take notes on their laptops then? People deem the use of technology as a new efficient way of recording notes. They are also able to record notes faster than by hand.  Henceforth are able to record more notes in detail. The answer may seem convincing, but overall it is best not to fall for these reasons and it is better to just switch to writing notes down.

Students who take notes by hand write slower, thereby forcing them to efficiently and mentally summarize key points of information into concise sentences or bullets. There are less levels of verbatim in their notes as a result. They are then able to encode information better and in a more meaningful way, summarizing information in their own words or chunk information in a way that is more memorable. When information is encoded with meaning, there is a better chance of later recalling the information.

With ever advancing technology in our generation today, it is most likely to be expected that not as many people will revert back to taking notes by hand. However, there is hope that people may switch from typing up notes to writing them out on their tablets or computers with a stylus. Students will still have the opportunity to write down notes, not necessarily on paper, but the effect will be the same. By handwriting notes, students can better avoid excessive information and have a higher chance in recalling information on tests.