The Effect of Supervision and Instruction on Students’ Use of Retrieval Practice
By Carolina Kuepper-Tetzel
While there is clear evidence for the benefits of using retrieval practice as a learning strategy (1), we also know that students may not necessarily chose to use retrieval practice when studying on their own (2). A very recent experiment (3) investigated study choices in university students who were tasked with learning English-Swahili word pairs under different instructions and context conditions. Participants were either instructed about retrieval practice and how it is better than restudying repeatedly (instruction group) or they received no specific instruction (control group). Additionally, they created two context conditions: In one condition, participants completed the experiment in the laboratory setting whilst being supervised (supervised condition). In the other condition, participants completed the experiment on their own without supervision (unsupervised condition). The researchers also manipulated the task difficulty, but since this manipulation made no difference, I only mention it here for the sake of completeness, but it will not be further discussed.
During the learning phase of the experiment participants went through cycles of Choice Blocks and Practice Blocks:
During the Choice Block stage, they saw each word pair and had to decide for each whether they wanted to be tested on it, restudy it, or drop it from the following Practice Block.
After making these decisions, they continued with the Practice Block stage during which they were tested on the word pairs or restudied word pairs – depending on what they had indicated before.
Afterwards, they re-entered the Choice Block stage and again made choices on what to do with each word pair. This continued until all word pairs were categorized as done.
All participants took a final test 15 minutes after concluding their learning phase.
The researchers wanted to find out whether student’s choices to test themselves or restudy would be affected by whether they were instructed to use retrieval practice and whether it mattered if they were supervised or not.
Indeed, they found that participants were more likely to opt for retrieval practice for studying when they were instructed to do so compared to when they were left to their own devices. Furthermore, it made a difference whether students were supervised or not: When supervised, students decided to use retrieval practice more than restudying. When unsupervised, there was no difference how often students opted for retrieval practice versus restudying. When supervised, students also reported to put in more effort than when unsupervised. Finally (although not focus of the experiment), there was a positive relationship between using retrieval practice during studying and performance on the final test.
Image from Pexels
It seems that when left to their own devices and without supervision, students do not seem to opt for the more effective learning strategy – here: retrieval practice – as often as it would be beneficial. However, before running with this conclusion it is important to take it with a pinch of salt. The experiment ran under laboratory conditions with controlled material (foreign language word pairs). Even for the unsupervised group that did not go to the actual laboratory, it was an experiment they participated in that had no impact on their academic performance. It would be interesting to investigate study choices in authentic settings, where studying for an exam has real implications for their academic outcomes. It is possible that instructions on the benefits of retrieval practice could increase students’ uptake – even when they are not being supervised. However, it is also possible that a degree of accountability – through some kind of supervision or process (e.g., teachers, peers, assessments, in-class activities) – could motivate a further shift towards more self-regulated retrieval practice. The presented research opens interesting questions to investigate in this important field of self-regulated learning in students and highlights the complexities of it.
References
(1) 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
(2) Tullis, J. G., & Maddox, G. B. (2020). Self-reported use of retrieval practice varies across age and domain. Metacognition Learning, 15, 129–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11409-020-09223-x
(3) Simone, P.M., Whitfield, L.C., Bell, M.C., Kher, P., & Tamashiro, T. (2023). Shifting students toward testing: Impact of instruction and context on self-regulated learning. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 8. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00470-5
