In a culture that requires shortcuts to improving performance—microlearning, performance support, and getting quick answers from colleagues—we may forget that there is still a need to build long-term capabilities. From healthcare workers dealing with an emergency to front-line sales staff speaking with customers, there are many reasons why adult learners need to develop long-term retention of knowledge. And to reach competence as efficiently as possible.
Best Strategy for Long-term Retention
The traditional approach to long-term learning, which requires a person to recall and use knowledge, is repeated study. But studying the same information over and over again (known as massed study) has its limits. Fortunately, there is a more efficient approach.
Consistent research demonstrates that the missing ingredient to many study routines is practice with retrieval, also known as the testing effect (Karpicke, 2012). Repeated practice of recalling information is a more effective learning strategy for long-term retention than repeated study. This does not mean that studying is unimportant; it means that repeated study is less effective than repeated retrieval practice. (Listen to my interview with an educational researcher who discusses this or download the transcript.)
Encoding versus Retrieval
A little background first. Cognitive theory differentiates between two processes of human memory: encoding and retrieval. Encoding is the process of storing information in long-term memory, and retrieval is the process of accessing learned information. Retrieval starts with a retrieval cue, which is a query, experience, or event that activates associated knowledge.
Importance of the Retrieval Cue
Retrieval cues are important because they are the key that unlocks the information. Imagine a newly graduated class of firefighters. They all passed the test, but how many of them will be able to recall the specific knowledge required to handle a unique situation? Only those who have the appropriately fine-tuned retrieval cues available can recover the necessary information.
Is it really that simple?
Actually, no. Retrieval isn’t quite that simple. In his article, Retrieval-based Learning, associate professor Jeffrey Karpicke states, “People do not store static, exact copies of experiences that are reproduced verbatim at retrieval. Instead, knowledge is actively reconstructed on the basis of the present context and available retrieval cues.”
How Retrieval Enhances Learning and Retention
A memory is reconstructed in the moment, depending on interactions of context, retrieval cues, and memory processes themselves. This flexibility gives us the ability to apply our knowledge to a variety of situations.
It is this very act of reconstruction that makes retrieval so important. Retrieval appears to modify the memory in anticipation of how we might need it in the future. It seems to fine-tune the correspondence between cue and matching knowledge. Repeated retrieval may also limit the set of information that one sorts through to find an answer.
The Little Known Formula for Long-term Retention
Retrieval-based learning appears to be an underused strategy for long-term retention. It involves repeatedly recalling information across multiple study and recall sessions. Interestingly, this technique does not appear to take more time than re-studying material.
In one study of college students who were given a text to read, practicing retrieval one time doubled their long-term retention when compared to the group that simply read the text once with no recall. The group that practiced repeated retrieval increased retention to 80% (Karpicke, 2012; McDaniel, Howard, & Einstein, 2009).
Information is More Resilient This Way
Information that people acquire through repeated retrieval practice has different attributes when compared with that of repeated study. A summary of the research concludes:
- information is more resistant to interference
- shows a lower forgetting rate; and
- remains accessible in situations where a person must multitask when attentional processes are heavily loaded
(Racsmány, Szollosi, & Bencze, 2018).
Retrieval Practice in the Workplace
In the world of adult learning, there are many jobs that require remembering vast amounts of information. Retrieval-based learning could be an effective strategy. For example, consider all the job roles that involve quick decision-making, when there isn’t time to seek external support. Also, consider all the roles where there is simply no means of external support so that the person must remember everything.
Here are some strategies that learning experience designers can use to facilitate retrieval-based learning.
1. Enhance metacognition.
Many people predict that if they simply re-study material it will increase retention. This is not the most effective approach. Help learners see that a more effective strategy for enhancing learning and long-term retention is to repeatedly practice recalling the information one has studied (Karpicke, 2012).
2. Practice with real-world scenarios.
Studies show the importance of context in retrieval. When participants repeatedly retrieve knowledge in a testing environment, they perform better on the test. If the context of learning affects how we reconstruct knowledge, then practicing retrieval in a wide range of simulations will probably have a similar effect.
3. Provide multiple self-checks and exercises.
Since repeated recall increases long-term retention, provide multiple opportunities for learners to test themselves for critical information. You may need to inform learners about the effectiveness of retrieval-based learning to motivate them to complete a second self-check.
4. Spaced retrieval practice.
Spacing the retrieval practice over time is more effective than massed retrieval practice.
5. Provide opportunities for group discussions.
After a learning event, take advantage of discussions (either online or in-person) that facilitate the recall of critical knowledge. Do this with focused questioning.
For more on retrieval practice for long-term retention, see The Cognitive Science and Implementation of Retrieval Practice.
What has your experience been as a learner or designer with retrieval-based learning? Comment below.
References:
- Karpicke, Jeffrey D., Retrieval-Based Learning: Active Retrieval Promotes Meaningful Learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2012, 21: 157.
- Karpicke, J. D. & Roediger, H. L., Repeated retrieval during learning is the key to long-term retention. Journal of Memory and Language, 2007, 57: 151-162.
- McDaniel, M. A., Howard, D. C., & Einstein, G. O., The read-recite-review study strategy: Effective and portable. Psychological Science, 2009, 20, 516–522.
- Racsmány, M., Szollosi, A., & Bencze, D. Retrieval Practice Makes Procedure from Remembering: An Automatization Account of the Testing Effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 2018, v44 n1 p157-166.
- Roediger, H. L. Why retrieval is the key process in understanding human memory. In E. Tulving (Ed.), Memory, consciousness, and the brain: The Tallinn conference (pp. 52–75). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press, 2000.
Learning based on the reference and repeated of information remains formative and pedagogical..
Traditional approach to long-term learning, which requires a person to recall and use knowledge, is repeated study. But studying the same information over and over again (known as massed study) has its limits.
Retrieval practice is, indeed, powerful. It actually helps retention.
The advantage of CBI is I can freely grasp knowledge since there is sufficient reading material. the second advantage is that I can take the training in my convenient time. The disadvantage since there is no instructor and if I do not have the discipline, I might lag to take the training. Since CBI is not instructor based, there is no one to elaborate on the material and clarify queries if any.
Interesting article. One of the things I learned, and I’d love to mention is that the information can be easily kept and retrieved in my mind if I read or study just before I sleep, and then recite once I open my eyes in the morning. Not sure if this can be scientific !!
The article is very informative and important.
The traditional approach to long-term learning, which requires a person to recall and use knowledge, is repeated study which is a more effective learning strategy for long-term retention.
Retrieval-based learning works by assessing learning gaps in a learner’s memory and filling them with repeated exercise. A number of corporate organizations do not develop skills in employees for long-term retention. They assess learners after they’ve completed a digital learning course when the content is still fresh in their minds, but not after that. As a result, learners struggle to recall skills and information at the time of need. Although, with the rise of microlearning modules learners can look up a skill Just-In-Time and apply it, however, such dependence is not the mark of effective learning.
Practice makes perfect. One of the strategies to retain concepts is to practice and apply them in your day-to-day work. Some concepts can be better understood through interactive sessions and role-play. This creates a mental picture of the overall learning.
Interesting article. One of the things I learned, and I’d love to mention is that the information can be easily kept and retrieved in my mind if I read or study just before I sleep, and then recite once I open my eyes in the morning. Not sure if this can be scientific !!
Vision
Identifies strategic issues, opportunities and risks. Clearly communicates links between the
Organization’s strategy and the work unit’s goals. Generates and communicates broad and
compelling organizational direction, inspiring others to pursue that same direction. Conveys
enthusiasm about future possibilities.
eLearning should be supplemented with time for discussion, asking experts questions, etc. It is a fault of our industry to think that one learning intervention is sufficient. Instead, we should be thinking in terms of learning journey.
The advantage of CBI is I can freely grasp knowledge since there is sufficient reading material. the second advantage is that I can take the training in my convenient time. The disadvantage since there is no instructor and if I do not have the discipline, I might lag to take the training. Since CBI is not instructor based, there is no one to elaborate on the material and clarify queries if any.
I have founded UN leadership characteristics very important and informative. That will help me to adapt my behaviors in a position of management in the UN. For example I will I will build my work on skills, experiences and contribution from my team.
This module is very important for the whole community to know for awareness and understanding.
I am not familiar with these theories but I guess the retrieval based learning applying knowledge gained or skills acquired over time and correctly applying them to situations as required in order to achieve the desired goal or objective. It is simply application of knowledge in the right perspective.
I am not used to the theories but I think continuous learning also help in recalling ideas gained in the past. Some times people pass test or exams just for the marks or certificates but forget immediately. After the exam, they won’t remember or be able to apply such knowledge.
Actually, the article isn’t mentioned that study is bad to act, rather than it should be alternated with retrieval practice.
After the study could be a self-check or practice in the real world, discussion, interactions. The point course is facilitated retrieval work and this flexibility gives us the capability to practice knowledge and a variety of situations.
Thank you, Connie!
Thanks, Brandi. I always wondered what the assignment was. I think it’s strange to ask people to write essays on blog sites, on the other hand, I always make sure I approve them so people can get their credit. No harm done. Just odd 🙂 It looks like YOU worked very hard on yours and you were thorough. Best wishes on successful completion of your program!
Connie
Hello Connie,
There is no recommended length, but we are encouraged to incorporate course research where we see fit and find a topic that is relevant to what we are studying in the course. In addition, we were to comment and propose a new thought rather than disagreeing or agreeing with the post.
Hi Brandi,
You put a lot of work into this!! I know that one or more of the professors at Walden make it an assignment to comment on a blog and you picked a great topic. Do they ask you to write an entire paper on the blog? I’m curious.
Connie
Hi Connie, what a great article on retrieval-based learning! Currently, I am an elementary school teacher and graduate student pursing a master’s degree in instructional design and technology. As this is my first contribution to an instructional design blog, I am excited to share what I have learned and experienced with retrieval-based learning from both a student and teacher perspective.
Cognitive processing is a complex concept that involves many different elements. According to the dual-memory model, outlined by Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler (2009), learners must follow a set of steps in order to turn working memory (WM) into long-term memory (LTM). First, the information enters the brain through a stimulus. Then, the sensory register holds on to that information, but only for a second. From there, meaning is connected to the input by aligning the new information with prior knowledge. After this step, the sensory register converts the information into short-term memory (STM). This step can be more simply defined as awareness and recognition. However, since WM or STM is limited in the amount of given material it can hold at one time, learners utilize control processes, such as rehearsal, visualizing information, organizing information, connecting meaning to the information, or implementing retrieval approaches, in order to convert that knowledge into LTM.
One of these control processes, called rehearsal, is similar to repeated study in that it involves repeating information over and over again until it can be recalled. However, when a learner repeats information without connecting any meaning to it, the information quickly gets lost once attention is no longer granted to it. Furthermore, the information then has to be reactivated in order to retrieve it. An example that comes to mind that I have witnessed in my own classroom is when students study for a spelling test. There have been many cases where my students would perform well on the test, spelling every word correctly, but then quickly forget how to spell that same words out of context when writing a story or participating in an independent writing activity. Since the students are not actively repeating the information in their working memory and because they have only memorized their spelling words in order to perform well on the test, they do not automatically remember how to spell the words under different circumstances. This idea is best explained by the activation level theory proposed by Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler (2009). The model states that memory is easily accessed as long as the user continuously practices retrieving that information. In contrast, if the user does not apply that information and practice retrieving it on a regular basis, the information may not be stored in LTM and would need to be reactivated by another memory related to that information. In this model, WM is the same as active memory.
The brain is a powerful tool. We can train our brains by rehearsing information in a way that allows us to briefly regurgitate all memorized material until it is no longer relevant or viewed as important. However, this is not the most effective way to really learn and understand such information.
While rehearsal may not be an effective control process, I believe organizing information and attaching meaningful context aid in the retrieval of information. That being said, I think the effectiveness of the retrieval strategy also depends on the type of knowledge being retrieved. For instance, Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler (2009) define two types of knowledge. The first is declarative knowledge, which is understanding facts, beliefs, story events, or that something is true (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009). The other type of knowledge considered here is procedural knowledge. Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler (2009) define procedural knowledge as information learners utilize to follow steps in a procedure, solve mathematical equations or problems, compose a summary of information, or anything that requires us to perform a cognitive exercise. In other words, it is knowledge of how to perform a task. For both types of knowledge, the mind relies on cues that trigger memories which activate knowledge to recall information.
While rehearsal may not be an effective control process, I believe organizing information and attaching meaningful context aid in the retrieval of information. That being said, I think the effectiveness of the retrieval strategy also depends on the type of knowledge being retrieved. For instance, Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler (2009) define two types of knowledge. The first is declarative knowledge, which is understanding facts, beliefs, story events, or that something is true (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009). The other type of knowledge considered here is procedural knowledge. Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler (2009) define procedural knowledge as information learners utilize to follow steps in a procedure, solve mathematical equations or problems, compose a summary of information, or anything that requires us to perform a cognitive exercise. In other words, it is knowledge of how to perform a task. Both types of knowledge are stored as “verbal codes and images” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p. 79) in LTM.
Although these two types of knowledge appear to be similar in terms of storing information, they have some notable differences related to the ways in which information is retrieved. For example, the retrieval of declarative knowledge involves active processing. Since the learner is aware of how long it can take to reproduce the information, it can happen much slower than with procedural knowledge. It may take the learner a minute or so to think about where they have stored the information before it can be accessed and retrieved. So, best practices for doing so with declarative information involve the use of “meaningfulness, elaboration, and organization” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p. 84) in order to reactivate what they have learned. On the other hand, retrieval of procedural knowledge is generally automatic. It does not require much active processing to regain. People do not have to consciously think about what they are doing. Therefore, repeated retrieval practice of procedural knowledge may not be necessary.
Although these two types of knowledge appear to be similar in terms of storing information, they have some notable differences related to the ways in which information is retrieved. For example, the retrieval of declarative knowledge involves active processing. Since the learner is aware of how long it can take to reproduce the information, it can happen much slower than with procedural knowledge. It may take the learner a minute or so to think about where they have stored the information before it can be accessed and retrieved. So, best practices for doing so with declarative information involve the use of “meaningfulness, elaboration, and organization” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p. 84) in order to reactivate what they have learned. On the other hand, retrieval of procedural knowledge is generally automatic. It does not require much active processing to regain. People do not have to consciously think about what they are doing. Therefore, repeated retrieval practice of procedural knowledge may not be necessary. These ideas are important to note because, in many instances, learners must activate both declarative and procedural knowledge together to perform tasks. Reading provides a great example of when this kind of work would be necessary. For instance, when a student is reading, they must use their procedural knowledge to decode unfamiliar words or monitor their comprehension and their declarative knowledge to recall what the different punctuation marks mean. As a teacher and future instructional designer, I think it is important to understand best practices for retrieving each type of knowledge in order to help students retain information so they can apply it within various contexts in the real world.
I also believe that repeated practice retrieval can be an effective recall strategy to remember episodic and semantic events. Episodic events, as Ormrod, Schunk, and Gredler (2009) define them, are connected to a specific time, place, or event that an individual perceives and experiences whereas semantic memories are those that include general information and concepts not attached to a specific context or situation. So, using cues to trigger episodic memory, such as describing the environment and people that were present during the event, may help spark that memory into recall. On the other hand, semantic memory triggers may involve the connection between concepts.
For educators, I believe it is vital to understand what type of knowledge students are struggling with in order to plan effective instruction. For instance, let’s say a student is struggling to learn their addition facts but is attempting to solve equal and not equal equations. Even though they may understand the procedural knowledge needed to determine equality, they will still arrive at the wrong answers due to their lack of declarative knowledge and fluency with addition facts. At the same time, a student may have a great deal of declarative knowledge about sight words but when they come to an unfamiliar word in a text, they may not know the process of how to decode it. In addition to this, I think the role of the educator and instructional designer involve not only being able to help students store information, but effectively and efficiently retrieve information to apply to new concepts. Stepich and Newby (2013, as cited in Ertmer & Newby, 2013) said it best as they state that designers and teachers must understand each individual’s unique learning experiences, determine the best way to structure and introduce new information that draws on prior background knowledge, abilities, and experiences, and guide learners through the construction of new knowledge while providing adequate feedback in order to impact life-long learning. With that said, I strongly believe that instructional designers and teachers need to design programs that allow for students to practice activating prior knowledge and make connections to previous learning in order to build on that knowledge and learn something new.
References
Ertmer, P.A., & Newby, T.J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism: Comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71. https://doi.org/10.1002/piq.21143
Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2009a). Learning theories and instruction. Cognitive processing information theory (pp. 48-97). Laureate Education Inc.
Good corner to find strategies for learning and get experience designers to facilitate retrieval-based learning.
Hi Dandrea — I agree many classroom teachers are implementing these strategies. Sometimes, it’s just helpful to get them validated by research! There’s a lot we can all learn from each other: K-12, higher ed and workplace learning. The I Do-We Do-You Do method seems to be used a lot as I keep hearing it mentioned. I think there is a lot of research showing that guidance and scaffolding to complete tasks is important–particularly for novices in a domain. Experts or those with competence in a domain have their own ways of doing things and too much guidance can hurt learning (the expertise reversal effect). It’s all fascinating! Thanks for your input.
Connie
Hi Connie, I’d like to respond to your question, as both a learner and as an instructional designer.
As a learner, I can say that just because I pass the test or study the material absolutely does not mean that I can retrieve it. The longer time passes since I have learned the material without using it, the less of a chance I have remembering. I had some professors on college that seemed like they really didn’t understand the material themselves. They would simply read the textbook to us every class, going through the equations verbatim, without any kind of real-world application. Yes, we had 3 tests in the semester, open-book tests, meaning 0 recall. Needless to say, I really don’t remember what I learned in the class, even though I spent time sitting in class, taking notes, going through equations, and preparing my “cheat sheet”. None of this mattered, I now realize, because we did not practice retrieval.
From the perspective of an instructional designer, I think it is important not to be the instructor that I just described. An instructor must never simply read material to the learner out of a book. Cognitive information processing theories tell us that people learn better when they can relate new learning to something meaningful — something they already know (Ormrod, 2009). Many teachers fall into the trap of teaching new material like it is in the book — vague and abstract. Effective instructors need to be able to relate the abstract material to something the students already know. The instructor should be engaging, they should know the material well enough to be able to include activities, practical applications, and closed-book quizzes that force the learner to retrieve the information.
Many of my classes had a lab element, which allowed us to use what we had learned in a controlled testing environment. At first glance, this teaching strategy seems to be in alignment with suggestions from learning research. Dr. Ormrod (2009) presents suggestions in Learning Theories and Instruction for maintaining student attention and focus — using different materials and teaching aids, using stimulating material that appeals to the student’s interest, and making the material relevant and engaging to the students, giving them erat-world applications to aid in retention. While labs look good on paper, the problem with these lab environments in my experience is that they were taught by teacher’s assistants, who would simply give us the correct answers because they did not want to spend time grading or explaining concepts. So, most students appreciated the “easy-A” at the time, but I remember we all talked about how we didn’t really remember anything we had learned in the class.
I think we need better ways to maintain standards for instructors, and keep instructors accountable for teaching with adequate retrieval practice. It’s too easy for instructors to cheat students of learning when the instructor is not passionate about the subject, or when they do not have enough experience. It is also a discussion of ethics. I think it is important for instructors to understand that giving students the answers and the “easy-A” ultimately wastes the student’s time and money. The invent of online learning makes it harder for students to get the “easy-A”, and easier for teachers to grade. I think this is a good start.
I am interested in exploring new ways to learn engineering STEM topics in a way that utilizes retrieval practice. I have read some comments, Mindy says that online discussions have increased her ability to recall and retain information. From my studies in an online Master’s program, I would say the discussions which require me to reference what I have read do help me remember the information later.
Brain-based research suggests there might be other ways to improve memory and recall new information that are less conventional in a typical college lecture hall, but might make learning more effective overall. Public schools have mostly cut physical education and multidisciplinary skills learned for arts and practical trades as unessential, but I think these disciplines are more essential for learning than educators may have thought. Eric P. Jensen (n.d.) of the Teacher.net Gazette compiled brain-based learning research to support that physical activity, low stress, and good nutrition strongly correlates to better functioning neurons — especially for cognition and memory. Jensen backs up his claim with the discovery from neuroscientists Gerd Kempermann and Fred Gage (2004) that the brain can and does grow new neurons, which are highly correlated with memory, mood and learning. He suggests incorporating voluntary physical activity in lessons (involuntary would lead to stress) which have some relevance to the material. This will enhance the memory capabilities of new neurons and help us with retrieval for all the reasons we’ve talked about already.
Safe to say, studying and reading alone is not enough to remember new information. Thanks Connie, for introducing me to the concept of retrieval-based learning.
References
Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2009). Learning theories and instruction (Laureate
custom edition). New York, NY: Pearson.
Eric P. Jensen: A Fresh Look at Brain-based Education – Teacher.Net Gazette. (n.d.). Retrieved
from https://www.teachers.net/gazette/OCT08/jensen/
Gerd Kempermann, Laurenz Wiskott, and Fred Gage, “Functional Significance of Adult
Neurogenesis,” Current Opinion in Neurobiology, April 2004, pp. 186-91
I think it is interesting to note that many of the retrieval strategies listed are also used in the classroom by teachers. An ID’s job is to re-create the classroom environment and ensure that learners are actually learning. When I taught Pre-K, I was told to not allow students to sing the alphabet, because rote memorization was not equivalent to learning. The same applies for adults. We have to be able to apply our learning a variety of settings. Conceptual understanding is a much better gauge of learning than memorization. It would also be important to note the importance of teachers delivering instruction in the “I Do”, “We Do”, “You Do” format as well. Learners must be guided to complete tasks that show their understanding independently.
Hi Sarah,
Thanks for your comment. I agree that there are more effective means of retrieval than repeated study/repeated retrieval and did not intend to imply that was the best approach. It would seem that many different types of practice are best, including solving all types of varied problems. There is evidence that interleaved practice in one sitting (different topics, different skills) is more effective than blocked practice (massed practice in one skill).
Connie
Retrieval-based learning makes sense as an effective means of boosting retention since it practices not just encoding, but also storage and retrieval. However, your approach appears to build on the traditional approach of repeated study and following it up with repeated retrieval. This seems to suggest encoding through rote memorization, and then supporting this poor learning practice through repeated retrieval exercises. A more effective means of applying retrieval-based learning may be to pair it with a problem-based learning technique that will allow students to discover new concepts for themselves. This will create more connections to prior knowledge which will boost the availability and effectiveness of retrieval cues. It will also push students to approach the information at different levels-of-processing, which may also boost retention. This in turn will make repeated retrieval easier and more effective.
David! Thank you so much for sharing the results of your retrieval practice strategy with third graders. Not to mention that the work you are doing is commendable, it is really helpful to hear how it’s being used in education. Even though I understand the class average is low, imagine if every teach in every grade was using this strategy for mathematics retention.
Connie
Thanks for this summary. Retrieval practice is, indeed, powerful. Joe Mills, Jr (another retired teacher) and I have been using it to support the math instruction of an elementary teacher at a high-needs inner-city school. We implemented a simple retrieval practice program: just a few math questions; self-scored by the student; individual errors immediately addressed via peer tutors; takes less than 20 minutes; repeated every day. Many students find this fun because it includes social interaction and doesn’t count toward their grade.
Does this retrieval practice actually help retention (as indicated by the PARCC math exam)? After 1.5 years of working with the grade 3 teacher, we see her current math students’ scores are about 3x better than students of her earlier years; and 2x better than students in the following grades. Unfortunately these results are not as good as they sound because the class average is still far too low.
You said “Retrieval isn’t quite that simple” and that’s certainly true. We’re finding it’s almost a full-time job to write hundreds of questions each matching a skill standard, compose quizzes with proper topic spacing, deliver quizzes on time. It’s not a task for a solo teacher, but we strongly agree with your statement that “Retrieval-based learning appears to be an underused strategy for long-term retention.”
I recently wrote about improving knowledge retrieval on my blog at http://www.teachingandlearningguru.com/improving-knowledge-retrieval . I’ve given a brief analysis of what works in a classroom setting, but it applies equally to online courses too.
Hi Nicola,
That’s a really good question and it would be best to rely on research evidence for the answer. Unfortunately, I don’t know of studies, but there might be some. I do know that how content is presented, in terms of media, can affect the way it is encoded, so I wouldn’t be surprised if the device affects encoding too. Let us know if you find anything.
Connie
Hi Connie,
What your thoughts are on how the type of device (e.g. smartphone, tablet) the learner was using could impact encoding and retrieval?
Hi Taffy,
I am fascinated by the “teach one” concept coming after “do one.” I think it’s a brilliant way to increase retention, as long as the new teacher has straightened out any misconceptions. Thanks for your comment and kind words.
Best,
Connie
In the nursing world, we can break retrieval and retention down to it’s simplest form: see one, do one, teach one. With well placed questions/assessment, one can determine how high up Bloom’s pyramid the person has risen. It is challenging to move from face 2 face to elearning.
P.S. As a nurse starting to move into the instructional design realm, this site has great content! Thank you.
It makes sense, doesn’t it, Richard? We could probably have intuited many of these findings!
I read somewhere that understanding the material before you, rather than just blind memorization helps in better retrieval of concepts. Another great post by you, Connie!
This is in response to Mr/Ms. N. Pomeroy.
Hello N. Pomeroy,
I am an IDT student and this is my first time responding to a blog. This blog on cognition is of particular interest to me both as a learner and a teacher. My reading assignments for this week covered this topic in great detail and this blog actually gives me an opportunity to share what I have learned. In a way, your response to “Debunking The Study, Study, Study Myth” has kick-started my retrieval process into action! I also read the related blogs in this site and the one you have of Jeffrey Karpicke. I would like to break down your post so that I can respond to each of them separately. You wrote:
1. I’m wondering if there could be a real benefit to making explicit the organization the content to aid in the retrieval of the content.
I don’t know if this is a rhetorical question, a statement or a real question that you are seeking to answer. But, my understanding of organization as a learning principle does not come from learning theories per se but from my knowledge of structuralism. Though, a bit out-dated for our times, for me, it still holds the rudimentary tenets of language and thought. A French structuralist Ferdinand de Saussure posited that human beings understand the world in binary oppositions. Our brain tends to retain knowledge when it organizes everything as polar opposites. The Gestalt theory states that the information is retained better if the material is well organized. At the same time, memory research has shown that “even when items to be learned are not organized, people often impose organization on the material, which facilitates recall” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p. 70). I suppose automatic organizational capacity in the human brain is how we make sense of this world.
2. However, I think adding the additional retrieval cue of explicit organization or chunking may be able to aid learners for each additional retrieval.
You have given a very good example of acronyms as mnemonic device. In my opinion, retrieval of any information is possible only if it is meaningful. According to the encoding specificity hypothesis, “the manner in which knowledge is encoded determines which retrieval cues will effectively activate knowledge” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p. 83). Most information gets lost in the countless matrices of our brain because they do not relate to the existing knowledge. The information a learner receives must thus activate the schemata. A schema organizes large chunks of information into meaningful system (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p.72). This also can function as a retrieval cue. Let me illustrate this by giving an example. Say in a Fairy Tale study group, the instructor asks the students to write a piece with a contemporary touch. The schema that the students have acquired either in their childhood by listening to fairy tales or through literature courses they have taken, would be activated at the time of writing. Even without an explicit prompt of how the fairy tale is organized, the students will immediately retrieve a mental picture of the fairy tale beginning and ending as “once upon a time” and “they lived happily ever after”. In this case, the cue would be “Fairy Tale” and does not need an explicit organization.
That said, even though I agree with your argument that making explicit the organization of the content will aid in the retrieval of the content, I think the lack thereof would actually instigate the learners to use metacognitive strategies. This is important when learners need to retrieve and use the knowledge in a situation different than when they acquired it. This is called as “Far transfer” (Lang, 2013). James Lang uses Susan Ambrose’s book, How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, to illustrate his point. I have given the reference for this very interesting article, which really made me rethink course design from the cognitive and metacognitive perspective. Hopefully, it helps the future readers of this blog.
References:
Lang, J. M. (2013). Why don’t they apply what they have learned Part I. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Dont-They-Apply-What/136753/
Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2009). Learning theories and instruction (Laureate custom edition). New York: Pearson.
Saussure, Ferdinand de (1916) Cours de linguistique générale. Ed. C. Bally and A. Sechehaye, with the collaboration of A. Riedlinger, Lausanne and Paris: Payot; trans. W. Baskin, Course in General Linguistics, Glasgow: Fontana/Collins, 1977.
Hello N. Pomeroy,
I am an IDT student and this is my first time responding to a blog. This blog on cognition is of particular interest to me both as a learner and a teacher. My reading assignments for this week covered this topic in great detail and this blog actually gives me an opportunity to share what I have learned. In a way, your response to “Debunking The Study, Study, Study Myth” has kick-started my retrieval process into action! I also read the related blogs in this site and the one you have of Jeffrey Karpicke. I would like to break down your post so that I can respond to each of them separately. You wrote:
1. I’m wondering if there could be a real benefit to making explicit the organization the content to aid in the retrieval of the content.
I don’t know if this is a rhetorical question, a statement or a real question that you are seeking to answer. But, my understanding of organization as a learning principle does not come from learning theories per se but from my knowledge of structuralism. Though, a bit out-dated for our times, for me, it still holds the rudimentary tenets of language and thought. A French structuralist Ferdinand de Saussure posited that human beings understand the world in binary oppositions. Our brain tends to retain knowledge when it organizes everything as polar opposites. The Gestalt theory states that the information is retained better if the material is well organized. At the same time, memory research has shown that “even when items to be learned are not organized, people often impose organization on the material, which facilitates recall” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p. 70). I suppose automatic organizational capacity in the human brain is how we make sense of this world.
2. However, I think adding the additional retrieval cue of explicit organization or chunking may be able to aid learners for each additional retrieval.
You have given a very good example of acronyms as mnemonic device. In my opinion, retrieval of any information is possible only if it is meaningful. According to the encoding specificity hypothesis, “the manner in which knowledge is encoded determines which retrieval cues will effectively activate knowledge” (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p. 83). Most information gets lost in the countless matrices of our brain because they do not relate to the existing knowledge. The information a learner receives must thus activate the schemata. A schema organizes large chunks of information into meaningful system (Ormrod, Schunk, & Gredler, 2009, p.72). This also can function as a retrieval cue. Let me illustrate this by giving an example. Say in a Fairy Tale study group, the instructor asks the students to write a piece with a contemporary touch. The schema that the students have acquired either in their childhood by listening to fairy tales or through literature courses they have taken, would be activated at the time of writing. Even without an explicit prompt of how the fairy tale is organized, the students will immediately retrieve a mental picture of the fairy tale beginning and ending as “once upon a time” and “they lived happily ever after”. In this case, the cue would be “Fairy Tale” and does not need an explicit organization.
That said, even though I agree with your argument that making explicit the organization of the content will aid in the retrieval of the content, I think the lack thereof would actually instigate the learners to use metacognitive strategies. This is important when learners need to retrieve and use the knowledge in a situation different than when they acquired it. This is called as “Far transfer” (Lang, 2013). James Lang uses Susan Ambrose’s book, How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principles for Smart Teaching, to illustrate his point. I have given the reference for this very interesting article, which really made me rethink course design from the cognitive and metacognitive perspective. Hopefully, it helps the future readers of this blog.
References:
Lang, J. M. (2013). Why don’t they apply what they have learned Part I. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from http://chronicle.com/article/Why-Dont-They-Apply-What/136753/
Ormrod, J., Schunk, D., & Gredler, M. (2009). Learning theories and instruction (Laureate custom edition). New York: Pearson.
Saussure, Ferdinand de (1916) Cours de linguistique générale. Ed. C. Bally and A. Sechehaye, with the collaboration of A. Riedlinger, Lausanne and Paris: Payot; trans. W. Baskin, Course in General Linguistics, Glasgow: Fontana/Collins, 1977.
Great comment here. I agree that this type of mnemonic device could be quite useful, and it’s also based on organization of content, which is another important aspect of encoding. Thanks for pulling all of this together, N.
Connie
Hi Emma,
Actually, this article isn’t saying that study is a bad thing to do, rather that it should be alternated with retrieval practice. Thanks for your comment.
Connie
I’m a distance learning tutor, however I don’t feel that there is a replacement for good old fashioned studying. In my experience, when students can work and study at their own pace, they generate far better results on average.
I’m new to reading this blog, so please forgive me if this has been covered elsewhere.
I’ve read this post and the related ones, and I’m wondering if there could be a real benefit to making explicit the organization the content to aid in the retrieval of the content.
I agree with Karpicke (2012, p.158) when he notes, “instructional practices have placed a premium on identifying the best ways to encode knowledge and experiences…There seems to be a tacit assumption that successful encoding or construction of knowledge, in itself, is sufficient to ensure learning.” However, I think adding the additional retrieval cue of explicit organization or chunking may be able to aid learners for each additional retrieval.
I’ll give a simple example: if I’ve been told that I need to memorize a procedure that requires 3 sequential steps, and the three steps are “alphabetical” in that the main action of each step is in order alphabetically, I have one more cure for remembering the procedure, and a place to start reconstructing the list if I get lost. I think certain mnemonic devices do this implicitly (like acronyms, for example, give an explicit predetermined order to keywords), but I can’t remember a time that I’ve seen the content organization explicitly called out in the instruction.
That aside, I find it fascinating that Karpicke’s article takes to task the idea of “meaningful” learning as a description of the artificiality (or lack thereof) of retrieval methods.
–
Karpicke, Jeffrey D., (2012) Retrieval-Based Learning: Active Retrieval Promotes Meaningful Learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21(3) 157–163
You have lots of great points here, Mindy. It’s good to hear how well discussions (and thus elaboration) helps you with retrieval. I have had the same experience. Thanks for adding your insights. Please comment again.
Best,
Connie
My experience with learners has been that they are able to best retrieve information when they have been able to use verbal and visual clues to assist in the retrieval. Traditional classrooms offer easy access to presenting new content in multiple ways and in personal experiences with online learning, instructors have forgotten the importance of presenting information in a variety of ways. Online discussions have greatly increased my ability to recall and retain the information that has been presented through readings. While reading course materials, I have often found that I can visualize and relate what I am reading to a proper experience or moment in time; however, I can easily forget the pictures and content that were going through my head. Discussions have been a great benefits because they allow me to make those connections multiple times and to think about and answer questions based upon course content. The questions that are then posed by my classmates assist in elaborating upon the experience and I have found that I am able to better remember and recall the course content that has been presented. While creating courses, developers should remember the benefits that discussion boards can create; however, they must ensure that instructors are willing to put the time into facilitating and monitoring discussion board posts.
Thank you for sharing the information you have presented in your blog!
Hi Rahul,
It sounds like you’re really thinking things through. It’s good to also remember that retrieval can occur in other ways than through assessments (in case you want to mix it up). Interactive exercises, learning games, online and face-to-face discussions and real world practice should promote retrieval too. Thanks for your comment.
Best,
Connie
Kapil, In here, we factor the duration of a course when deciding where the assessment should come. If a segment runs for 30min, we would have assessment / summary after 15min and one in the end to wrap things up.
Cons?: some of our technical topics runs long and finding a logical break becomes difficult to insert assessment.
Sounds like you have the answer too!
I was refering to (‘ memory is reconstructed in the moment, depending on interactions of context, retrieval cues, and memory processes themselves. This flexibility gives us the ability to apply our knowledge to a variety of situations’) for my second question
Hi Rahul,
Yes, it can be a self-check after study. Or it can be practice in the real world, discussion, interactions. The point is anything that facilitates retrieval should work. I don’t understand your second question. As far as testing it out, you’ll have to come up with your own experiment for that.
Connie
1. This seems a fancy term for q/a after a session.
2. is the retrieval auto modified by the person’s brain depending on the context/situation? How can I test this?
Thanks
Most eLearning I have developed has the structure as follows –
Intro – Topic 1 – Topic 2 – Interactivity – Game – Topics … Summary – Assessment
From what you are saying … I am thinking it might be a good idea to do away with the assessment at the end .. i never figured that out? why is it always at the end … after every 1 – 2 topics covered one can have 4 – 5 assessment questions … will work as recall (if feedback is given) and also test attention …
What could be the pros and cons?
Has anyone developed such courses?