Study efficacy and the region of proximal learning framework.

Kornell, Nate; Metcalfe, Janet

doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.3.609

Cited by 198 publications

(232 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

218

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, Kornell and Metcalfe (2006) asked participants to choose which half Forward testing effect 7 of a set of word pairs they preferred to restudy later. In the honouring condition, participants reviewed the pairs which were selected to be restudied.…”

Section: Self-regulated Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

The forward testing effect on self-regulated study time allocation and metamemory monitoring.

Yang¹,

Potts²,

Shanks³

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The forward testing effect describes the finding that testing of previously studied information potentiates learning and retention of new information. Here we asked whether interim testing boosts self-regulated study time allocation when learning new information and explored its effect on metamemory monitoring. Participants had unlimited time to study five lists of Euskara-English word pairs (Experiment 1) or four lists of face-name pairs (Experiment 2). In a No Interim Test group which was only tested on the final list, study time decreased across successive lists. In contrast, in an Interim Test group, which completed a recall test after each list, no such decrease was observed.Experiments 3 and 4 were designed to investigate the forward testing effect on metamemory monitoring and found that this effect is associated with metacognitive insight. Overall, the current study reveals that interim tests prevent the reduction of study time across lists and that people's metamemory monitoring is sensitive to the forward benefit of interim testing. Moreover across all four experiments, the Interim Test group was less affected by proactive interference in the final list interim test than the No Interim Test group. The results suggest that variations in both encoding and retrieval processes contribute to the forward benefit of interim testing.Keywords: forward testing effect; self-regulated learning; encoding; retrieval; metamemory monitoring Forward testing effect 3With the increasing popularity and availability of free online courses and learning aids, selfregulated learning is taking place more and more outside of the formal classroom (Bjork, Dunlosky, & Kornell, 2013). To use these opportunities effectively, learners must understand how to regulate their behaviour to optimize learning, comprehension, and knowledge transfer. However, recent studies reveal that we are far from being sophisticated learners (for a review, see Bjork et al., 2013).Therefore, self-regulated learning has become a significant focus of theoretical and empirical research for both psychologists and educators.A few studies have been conducted employing interim tests to optimize self-regulated learning of previously studied or tested information (Karpicke, 2009;Soderstrom & Bjork, 2014). But no research has yet been undertaken employing interim tests to optimize self-regulated learning of new information. One aim of the current study is to fill this gap. Specifically, we explored how interim tests influence subsequent self-regulated study time allocation when learning new information. Backward testing effectIn educational settings, testing is usually regarded as an evaluative instrument to assess learning and comprehension. A large body of research has supplied convincing evidence that testing is also an effective instrument to facilitate long term retention (for a review, see Roediger & Karpicke, 2006a). The common finding that retrieval of previously studied information enhances its retention by comparison with restudying that informat...

show abstract

Section: Self-regulated Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

The forward testing effect on self-regulated study time allocation and metamemory monitoring.

Yang¹,

Potts²,

Shanks³

2017

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To be considered temporarily learned a word had to be answered correctly, on the first try, on two separate occasions. In this way, the focus was put on the words that the participant had not learned, and time and effort were not wasted on words they already knew (see Kornell & Metcalfe, 2006;Metcalfe & Kornell, 2005, for more details concerning the efficacy of this strategy).…”

Section: Training (Sessions 2-5)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting

Metcalfe

Kornell

Son

2007

European Journal of Cognitive Psychology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In three experiments, learning performance in a 6-or 7-week cognitive-science based computer-study programme was compared to equal time spent self-studying on paper. The first two experiments were conducted with grade 6 and 7 children in a high risk educational setting, the third with Columbia University undergraduates. The principles the programme implemented included (1) deep, meaningful, elaborative, multimodal processing, (2) transfer-appropriate processing, (3) selfgeneration and multiple testing of responses, and (4) spaced practice. The programme was also designed to thwart metacognitive illusions that would otherwise lead to inappropriate study patterns. All three experiments showed a distinct advantage in final test performance for the cognitive-science based programme, but this advantage was particularly prominent in the children.A basic foundation for school accomplishment is the availability of higher order cognitive and metacognitive competencies to realistically assess one's knowledge, to allocate and organise study time and effort optimally, to apply cognitive principles (such as deep, elaborative rehearsal, self-generation, testing, and spacing of practice, to name just a few) that effectively enhance learning, and to resist the distractions that could undermine even the most sincerely endorsed intentions. In the population that we targeted in this research, a population of middle school children in an at-risk school setting, these competencies were strikingly limited. Their enhancement was the primary objective of this research. In addition, even among sophisticated learners, specific limitations exist in the use of certain metacognitive strategies. Children and adults often think they know things when they do not (see Metcalfe, 1998;Rawson & Dunlosky, 2007 this issue), and hence inappropriately terminate self-controlled study efforts, or otherwise study in a manner that fails to optimise learning (Bjork, 1994). We sought to devise a computerassisted study programme, based on principles of cognitive science, that would allow such metacognitive illusions to be overcome.The project reported here focused on memory enhancing principles derived from experimental studies in cognitive science. Most of these principles, because they have been studied primarily with a focus on understanding the mechanisms underlying memory and cognition, rather than on efforts to facilitate children's academic success, have been investigated in single-session experiments with scholastically irrelevant materials with college-student participants. Despite the apparent lack of connection of this cognitive science literature to real problems that children Correspondence should be addressed to Janet Metcalfe,

show abstract

“…According to the agenda-based regulation framework (Ariel, Dunlosky, & Bailey, 2009), students are developing an agenda-or simple plan-to help them maximize performance. This particular agenda has been called using a region of proximal learning (RPL; Metcalfe, 2002), and using it can improve learning (Kornell & Metcalfe, 2006). Recently, however, Dunlosky and Ariel (in press) reported that how materials were presented influenced students' item selections and undermined their use of an RPL agenda.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Habitual reading biases in the allocation of study time

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Item order can bias learners' study decisions and undermine the use of more effective allocation strategies, such as allocating study time to items in one's region of proximal learning. In two experiments, we evaluated whether the influence of item order on study decisions reflects habitual responding based on a reading bias. We manipulated the order in which relatively easy, moderately difficult, and difficult items were presented from left to right on a computer screen and examined selection preference as a function of item order and item difficulty. Experiment 1a was conducted with native Arabic readers and in Arabic, and Experiment 1b was conducted with native English readers and in English. Students from both cultures prioritized items for study in the reading order of their native language: Arabic readers selected items for study in a right-to-left fashion, whereas English readers largely selected items from left to right. In Experiment 2, native English readers completed the same task as participants in Experiment 1b, but for some participants, lines of text were rotated upside down to encourage them to read from right to left. Participants who read upsidedown text were more likely to first select items on the right side of an array than were participants who studied right-side-up text. These results indicate that reading habits can bias learners' study decisions and can undermine agenda-based regulation.Keywords Self-regulated study . MetacognitionResearch on the allocation of study time has demonstrated that the difficulty of materials influences how long students study them and which are selected for study (for reviews, see Dunlosky & Ariel, 2011;Son & Kornell, 2009). For instance, when students have limited time for study, they often first select the easiest unlearned materials to study and then transition to progressively more difficult ones (Metcalfe, 2009). According to the agenda-based regulation framework (Ariel, Dunlosky, & Bailey, 2009), students are developing an agenda-or simple plan-to help them maximize performance. This particular agenda has been called using a region of proximal learning (RPL; Metcalfe, 2002), and using it can improve learning (Kornell & Metcalfe, 2006). Recently, however, Dunlosky and Ariel (in press) reported that how materials were presented influenced students' item selections and undermined their use of an RPL agenda.In particular, Dunlosky and Ariel (in press) examined the influence of the presentation order of items on studytime allocation for relatively easy, moderately difficult, and difficult English-Spanish translations. On each trial, three English words were presented side by side in a row, and participants chose translations to study by clicking a button below each English word. Item difficulty (i.e., easy, moderate, or difficult) was presented above each English word. Items were ordered from left to right either from the easiest to the most difficult item or from the most difficult to the easiest item. Learners often chose to study the easier items...

show abstract

Study efficacy and the region of proximal learning framework.

Cited by 198 publications

References 54 publications

The forward testing effect on self-regulated study time allocation and metamemory monitoring.

The forward testing effect on self-regulated study time allocation and metamemory monitoring.

A cognitive-science based programme to enhance study efficacy in a high and low risk setting

Habitual reading biases in the allocation of study time

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About