Examining the Effectiveness of Retrieval-based Learning Strategies in First Generation College Students

Retrieval-based learning activities involve actively bringing information to mind. Previous research has shown this to be an effective way to produce meaningful learning. This research investigated the efficiency of this strategy amongst first-generation college students. Twenty-eight students were recruited from the Preparatory Enrollment Program (PEP) at Rhode Island College. In this within-subjects experiment, students participated in two learning activities, counterbalanced for order. Students learned two texts. With one text, they engaged in a retrieval-based learning activity by actively recalling as much information as they could remember and writing it down. With the other text, they simply read. Students completed reading comprehension and speed of processing tests. Then, they answered short-answer questions about the texts to assess how much they learned. Lastly, they filled out surveys to provide information about how they typically study. The results indicated that retrieval-based learning strategies did not produced any meaningful learning compared to the control. Additionally, speed-of-processing abilities have no interaction with the learning condition, however those who performed higher on the reading comprehension task did perform better in the final assessment. When making judgments about the learning activities, students found free recall to be more difficult than the control. Lastly, about half of the students report using retrieval in some way during their own studying, but they still report more use of rereading. RETRIEVAL-BASED LEARNING 4 Examining the Effectiveness of Retrieval-based Learning Strategies in First Generation College Students Retrieval practice, or actively bringing information to mind, has been shown to lead to improved long-term retention relative to other study strategies typically used by college students (repeated reading, see Roediger & Karpicke, 2006a for a review). Most importantly, retrieval practice has been shown to promote meaningful learning in addition to learning fact-based information (Smith, Blunt, Whiffen, & Karpicke, 2016). Most of the work on retrieval-based learning has been done with college students, and typically the students tested are from highperforming Research 1 institutions. With these students, simply requiring them to put their text materials away and write out everything they know (i.e., free recall) can be very helpful. This strategy also has the added benefit of being very easy to implement with students as instructions are minimal. However, does this strategy work for all students? More recent research has begun to investigate the effectiveness of retrieval-based learning strategies with elementary students. However, some research has found that standard retrieval-based learning activities, such as free recall, are not effective with these populations (Karpicke, Blunt, Smith, & Karpicke, 2014). With these students, the retrieval-based learning activity needed to be modified in order to ensure success. The purpose of the present research is to examine whether standard retrieval-based learning strategies, such as free recall, will help improve meaningful learning in college students who may not be as strong academically. For example, first-generation college students are often at a disadvantage when they enter college and may need more help to guide their independent learning. Before recommending that these students simply engage in free recall, we first need to know whether retrieval-based learning strategies that tend to work well with other college RETRIEVAL-BASED LEARNING 5 students, also improve learning with these students. We first review the literature on retrieval practice and meaningful learning, individual differences, and metacognition, and then report an experiment testing the effectiveness of retrieval-based learning, with first-generation college students. Retrieval Practice and Meaningful Learning Previous research has shown that actively recalling information improves learning. Roediger and Karpicke (2006b) investigated the effects of testing under an educational context. They compared students’ test performance when they either studied the material multiple times or did free-recall tests immediately after reading the passage. In their first experiment, students either took a test or studied again before the final test which occurred either five minutes, two days, or one week later. In Experiment 2, students did one of the following three: read a passage once and took three tests, studied three times and took one test or studied the passages four times and took a final test. Results showed that immediate testing after reading led to better long-term retention than repeatedly studying the passage. These results demonstrate that actively bringing information to mind improves long-term memory for that information. Based on this research and others, cognitive psychologists conclude that education should include many practice tests and quizzes. Furthermore, students can use retrieval practice, such as practice quizzes or simply writing out everything they can remember about a topic, to improve their own independent learning in their courses. When investigating the benefits of retrieval practice, some studies have also analyzed if testing format matters and which is more beneficial. Kang, McDermott and Roediger (2007), examined the effect of testing format on long-term retention by conducting two identical experiments; the only difference was that the second experiment included corrective feedback RETRIEVAL-BASED LEARNING 6 after testing. In the first session of both experiments, participants read four different passages and after each, they were given either an SA test, MC test, statements that included main ideas of the passage they had just read or a filler questionnaire. The second session occurred three days later during which students answered test questions in both MC and SA formats on the previously read passages. The results of the first experiment showed that regardless of the testing format of the final test, students scored higher when they had MC as an initial testing format. The second experiment was very similar to the first, but this time the students received corrective feedback after answering each question. The results showed that the SA initial tests had more of an effect on both of the final tests than the initial MC test; this indicates that there is a positive effect of SA tests when given corrective feedback. However, more recent research (McDermott, Agarwal, D’Antonio, Roediger & McDaniel, 2014; Smith & Karpicke, 2014) suggests that short-answer and multiple-choice questions both improve long-term retention, and differences between the effectiveness of the two formats are very small. This research points to the importance of actively retrieving information, achieving reasonable success, and providing feedback to correct errors to improve learning using any question format. The retrieval-based learning activities most typically studied involve practice tests or quizzes; however, what is important is the act of bringing information to mind, not the test per se. For example, Blunt and Karpicke (2014) investigated the effectiveness of concept mapping as a retrieval practice method as opposed to recalling in paragraph form. Concept mapping is a visual-spatial way to represent information, specifically focusing on the relationships between topics or ideas. To create a concept map, students draw circles with concepts or ideas in the center. They then draw links to connect the concepts and write the nature of the relationship on the link. For examples, see Blunt and Karpicke (2014). The study was composed of two RETRIEVAL-BASED LEARNING 7 experiments. In the first experiment, the undergraduate students were randomly assigned to groups and were either in the concept map retrieval condition or the paragraph retrieval condition. First, students read a text. Then, those in the concept map condition, had to retrieve the information from memory, in order to create the concept map. In the paragraph condition, the students brought the information to mind and wrote out what they could remember. They were then tested a week later, and the results showed that the two different strategies were equivalent in terms of learning. In the second experiment, the same procedure was applied except that there were two additional conditions creating a 2x2 factorial design. The students had to either create a concept map or write the information in paragraph form, and they either did this while they still had the text in front of them (copying) or without the text (retrieval conditions). All students were tested a week later. The results showed that there was a significant difference between the conditions with the text in front of them and without the text in front of them. Students learned more when they had to produce the information as opposed to being able to reference the text, thus showing that recalling information is the key to producing more learning. The format of the retrieval (paragraph or concept map from memory) did not matter. Other research has shown that the format of retrieval practice does not much matter as well, supporting the conclusion that bringing information to mind is what is important (Little, Bjork, Bjork, & Angello, 2012; Smith & Karpicke, 2014; Smith, Roediger, & Karpicke, 2013). Much research about retrieval-based learning strategies has been conducted with specifically undergraduate college students (Blunt & Karpicke, 2014; Karpicke & Blunt, 2011; Smith & Karpicke, 2014). The current research seeks to investigate the same questions but in a defined undergraduate student population. Utilizing the Preparatory Enrollment Program (PEP) at Rhode Island College, we get access to a population of academically disadvantaged RETRIEVAL-BASED LEARNING 8 undergraduate college students. Those students are first-gen