Costs and Benefits of Dropout Schedules of Test-Restudy Practice: Implications for Student Learning

Summary: Almost all previous studies examining the benefits of testing for promoting student learning have used fixed schedules of practice. However, students more often report utilizing a dropout schedule of practice, in which items are dropped from practice once they are known. Two experiments investigated the costs and benefits of utilizing a dropout schedule of test‐restudy practice. Participants learned Swahili‐English paired associates using a dropout schedule or a fixed schedule. In the dropout schedule, items received test‐restudy practice until each item was correctly recalled once. In the fixed schedule, all items received three tests‐restudy practice trials regardless of whether they were correctly recalled, as in previous research. Experiment 2 also included a second learning session. In both experiments, a final cued recall test was administered several days later. Results indicated that the benefits of the dropout schedule (fewer practice trials used overall and all items correctly recalled once during practice) need to be considered in light of the costs (lower levels of final test performance). Copyright # 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Previous research has shown that multiple distributed test– restudy trials are effective for promoting memory (e.g. Carpenter & DeLosh, 2005; Cull, 2000; Cull, Shaughnessy, & Zechmeister, 1996; see also Roediger & Karpicke, 2006 for a recent review). However, most previous research on schedules of test–restudy practice has used fixed schedules of practice in which all items are practiced a predetermined number of times (usually three test–restudy trials for each item), regardless of whether they are correctly or incorrectly recalled during practice. In contrast, students more often report usingdropout schedules of practice, in which items are dropped from practice after a variable number of practice trials at different times throughout practice (e.g. Kornell & Bjork, 2007, 2008). In a survey study by Kornell and Bjork (2008), 56% of students reported using flashcards to study (akin to the laboratory method in which students are prompted with a cue and attempt to retrieve a target). Of those students, approximately 75% reported using a dropout method, in which they placed flashcards to the side once an item was correctly recalled during practice. Furthermore, nearly all previous research on testing effects has involved only one learning session (but see Cepeda, Vul, Rohrer, Wixted, & Pashler, 2008), and no previous study evaluating the efficacy of dropout versus fixed schedules has involved more than one learning session. However, students presumably study during more than one learning session, particularly when using flashcards. How might the efficacy of dropout schedules of test– restudy practice compare to the fixed schedules examined in previous research, particularly with more than one learning session? The main goal of the present research was twofold. The first goal was to understand the costs and benefits of the dropout method of test–restudy practice that is more commonly used by students than the fixed practice schedules that have been examined in previous research. The second goal was to understand the costs and benefits of dropout versus fixed schedules of practice when learning occurs during more than one session. Concerning the potential benefits of dropout schedules of practice, consider the time demands on college students