Online and Clicker Quizzing on Jargon Terms Enhances Definition-Focused but Not Conceptually Focused Biology Exam Performance

Abstract

Mastery of jargon terms is an important part of student learning in biology and other science, technology, engineering, and mathematics domains. In two experiments, we investigated whether prelecture quizzes enhance memory for jargon terms, and whether that enhanced familiarity can facilitate learning of related concepts that are encountered during subsequent lectures and readings. Undergraduate students enrolled in neuroanatomy and physiology courses completed 10-minute low-stakes quizzes with feedback on jargon terms either online (experiment 1) or using in-class clickers (experiment 2). Quizzes occurred before conventional course instruction in which the terms were used. On exams occurring up to 12 weeks later, we observed improved student performance on questions that targeted memory of previously quizzed jargon terms and their definitions relative to questions on terms that were not quizzed. This pattern occurred whether those questions were identical (experiment 1) or different (experiment 2) from those used during quizzing. Benefits of jargon quizzing did not consistently generalize, however, to exam questions that assessed conceptual knowledge but not necessarily jargon knowledge. Overall, this research demonstrates that a brief and easily implemented jargon-quizzing intervention, deliverable via Internet or in-class platforms, can yield substantial improvements in students’ course-relevant scientific lexica, but does not necessarily impact conceptual learning.

Using digital formative assessments to improve learning in physics education

“…In line with other studies (e.g. Mayer et al, 2009;Pan et al, 2019), the teachers taught both conditions identically:…”

Testing Effect on High-Level Cognitive Skills

“…It may also suggest that Bloom's taxonomy may not be as hierarchical as originally proposed (Anderson et al, 2001;Krathwohl, 2002). In a recent study (Pan et al, 2019), a lack of a connection was shown: researchers found that, even explicit testing on low-level terminology that resulted in a clear testing effect did not lead to an increase in conceptual learning on higher-level items. Alternatively, it is also possible that Bloom's is hierarchical but without explicit testing, the testing effect fails to come through.…”

“…, 2001 ; Krathwohl, 2002 ). In a recent study ( Pan et al. , 2019 ), a lack of a connection was shown: researchers found that, even explicit testing on low-level terminology that resulted in a clear testing effect did not lead to an increase in conceptual learning on higher-level items.…”

Pretesting versus posttesting: Comparing the pedagogical benefits of errorful generation and retrieval practice.

“…A meta-analysis by Rowland (2014; see also Adesope et al, 2017) found that the typical effect size of that improvement, which is also known as the testing effect , is g = 0.50, 95% CI [0.42, 0.58]. Testing effects have been successfully demonstrated across a considerable range of materials (Rawson & Dunlosky, 2011), in a variety of authentic educational settings (e.g., McDaniel et al, 2011; Pan, Cooke, et al, 2019), and when posttesting is implemented in a variety of test formats (Rowland, 2014). Further, a meta-analysis by Pan and Rickard (2018) found that the typical size of a transfer effect following posttesting (that is, the ability to apply learning to new contexts, such as to solve application and inference questions, or to recall information on a criterial test that uses a different format) is d = 0.40, 95% CI [0.31, 0.50].…”