Supplementary Material for Gjerde, V., Holst, B., & Kolstø, S
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Supplementary material for Gjerde, V., Holst, B., & Kolstø, S. D. Making stronger students: Retrieval practice of a hierarchical principle structure in university introductory physics. Figure 1 - The current version of the Hierarchical Principle Structure for Mechanics (HPSM). Figure 2 - Back side of the current version of the Hierarchical Principle Structure for Mechanics (HPSM), including elaborative encoding prompts. Figure 3 – The latest version of the retrieval sheets Graphs of relationships Figure 4 - Scatter plot of score on the declarative facts test vs. number of retrieval sessions attended before the test Figure 5 - Scatter plot of final exam score vs. score on the declarative facts test Figure 6 - Scatter plot of score on exam vs. number of retrieval sessions attended Advice for retrieval practice given to students in study 2 During the retrieval practice sessions, the students were presented with a list of advice projected on a screen. The references provided were the basis for including the advice. The advice we give to students during retrieval has changed after these experiments took place based on the experience gained and continued literature study. The ‘updated advice’ is also included below with references. List of retrieval advice (this study) - Fill in as much as you can remember (retrieve memories) [1] - First try to retrieve your weakest memories [1] - Reduce switching between retrieval and (re-)study by retrieving everything first [2-4] - Re-study when you go 15-30s without remembering more [1] - Place a checkmark where you have remembered a fact 3 times within the same session [5-7] - Retrieval is most effective when successful, re-study is most effective after retrieval failure [1, 8, 9] Updated advice for retrieval practice We include this updated advice for physics educators who wish to incorporate retrieval practice in their own lectures. The advice for retrieval practice has been changed based on feedback from students and continued reading of the retrieval practice literature, particularly the literature on the interplay between elaborative encoding and retrieval practice. We proposed in the discussion section of the article that retrieval practice may be potentiated through support for elaborative encoding. Therefore, we have included question prompts for elaborative encoding Retrieval advice - First, fill in as much as you can remember (retrieve memories) [1] o If you have remembered a whole HPSM-box in at least 4 retrieval sessions, and you feel confident for future retrievals, you can skip it this session and place a checkmark in that box. [5-7] - Retrieval is most effective when successful, re-study is most effective after retrieval failure [1, 8, 9] - When you go 15-30s without remembering more old items (previously studied) [1]: o 1. Restudy and mentally retrieve failed items) o 2. Write down the mentally retrieved items o 3. Repeat 1 and 2 until all the failed have been retrieved - Elaboratively encode one new HPSM-box at a time, and [9-16]: o 1. Do written retrieval of the new material o 2. Do mental retrieval+immediate feedback until successful o 3. Write down the items you didn’t remember in step 1 - Make time for rehearsal of the ‘new’ facts [1, 7] Elaborative encoding-questions The following elaborative encoding questions are visible during our current retrieval practice sessions. They are a subset of the elaborative encoding questions on the back of HPSM, see Figure 2 above. The questions are based on [10, 11, 17, 18], the structure of HPSM (see article), and a subjective assessment of relevant elaborations. These questions were not part of the study but are rather part of our continued attempt to help students memorize in a meaningful way: Start from the first question you are unable to answer and continue until you think you will be able to retrieve the principle/equation: Detail-level 1. Which concepts and units belong to its symbols? Principle&equation-level 1. What is its name and why? 2. What is its condition of application? 3. What happens if one of its variables change size? Hierarchy-level 1. What is the name of the row and the column it is placed in? 2. Which similarities or dissimilarities to the other principles do you notice? References 1. Pavlik, P.I. and J.R. Anderson, Using a model to compute the optimal schedule of practice. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Applied, 2008. 14(2): p. 101-117. 2. Davis, S.D. and J.C.K. Chan, Studying on borrowed time: How does testing impair new learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 2015. 41(6): p. 1741-1754. 3. Davis, S.D., J.C.K. Chan, and M.M. Wilford, The dark side of interpolated testing: Frequent switching between retrieval and encoding impairs new learning. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 2017. 6(4): p. 434-441. 4. Finn, B. and H.L. Roediger, Interfering effects of retrieval in learning new information. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 2013. 39(6): p. 1665-1681. 5. Bangertdrowns, R.L., J.A. Kulik, and C.L.C. Kulik, Effects of frequent classroom testing. Journal of Educational Research, 1991. 85(2): p. 89-99. 6. Pirolli, P.L. and J.R. Anderson, The role of practice in fact retrieval. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 1985. 11(1): p. 136-153. 7. Rawson, K.A. and J. Dunlosky, Optimizing schedules of retrieval practice for durable and efficient learning: How much is enough? Journal of Experimental Psychology-General, 2011. 140(3): p. 283-302. 8. Grimaldi, P.J. and J.D. Karpicke, When and why do retrieval attempts enhance subsequent encoding? Memory & Cognition, 2012. 40(4): p. 505-513. 9. Karpicke, J.D. and M.A. Smith, Separate mnemonic effects of retrieval practice and elaborative encoding. Journal of Memory and Language, 2012. 67(1): p. 17-29. 10. Anderson, J. and L. Reder, An elaborative processing explanation of depth processing. L.S. Cermak & F.I.M. Craik. (Eds.), Levels of Processing in Human Memory, 1979. 11. Bradshaw, G.L. and J.R. Anderson, Elaborative encoding as an explanation of levels of processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1982. 21(2): p. 165-174. 12. Jang, Y. and D.E. Huber, Context retrieval and context change in free recall: Recalling from long-term memory drives list isolation. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 2008. 34(1): p. 112-127. 13. Pastotter, B. and K.H. Bauml, Retrieval practice enhances new learning: The forward effect of testing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2014. 5. 14. Pastotter, B., K.H. Bauml, and S. Hanslmayr, Oscillatory brain activity before and after an internal context change - Evidence for a reset of encoding processes. Neuroimage, 2008. 43(1): p. 173-181. 15. Pastotter, B., et al., Retrieval during learning facilitates subsequent memory encoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 2011. 37(2): p. 287- 297. 16. Szpunar, K.K., K.B. McDermott, and H.L. Roediger, Testing during study insulates against the buildup of proactive interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 2008. 34(6): p. 1392-1399. 17. Stein, B.S. and J.D. Bransford, Constraints on effective elaboration - Effects of precision and subject generation. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 1979. 18(6): p. 769-777. 18. Stein, B.S., et al., Elaboration and knowledge acquisition. Memory & Cognition, 1984. 12(5): p. 522-529. .