Issue link: https://www.e-digitaleditions.com/i/56065
Faculty should avoid simple recall questions such as what or when; instead, they should pose thought- provoking questions built around why, how, and what if. With different subjects and different content, Karpicke and Roediger conducted multiple studies investigating reten- tion after different study and test sequences. These included study-test-restudy-retest, study-restudy-restudy-test, and study- test-retest-retest. They also altered what was studied. If stu- dents had demonstrated mastery of some content on an ear- lier test, they could exclude that content from further studying or subsequent testing. If learning were solely a function of studying, then we would expect that study-study-study-test would yield the best results, while study-test-test-test would have a neutral or detrimental effect. Furthermore, if there were no need to study material after it had been mastered, the traditional paradigm of studying something and then moving on would yield the same results as intensive studying interspersed with testing, or intensive studying followed by multiple tests. However, Karpicke and Roediger affirmed that testing is not a neutral event and that it is not a good idea to skip over mastered material when studying. Students who followed the study-test-test-test pattern had superior long-term recall of content when compared with students who had followed the study-study-study-test or study-test-study-test sequences. Furthermore, both study-test-study-test and study-test-test- test models yielded much better results than models where students studied and were tested, and then no longer had to study or be tested on content that already had been tested. In short, practice made perfect: Students who were repeat- edly tested on the full material did best of all. Testing Tips So how do faculty create tests that truly assess what students are learning? Research in testing, learning, and assessment suggests these nine strategies for improving learning— before and after a test. 1. Give frequent assignments. Before they even issue the first test, professors should give stu- dents meaningful assignments that require them to work with the material that will be covered in an exam. When students have to outline, apply, and synthesize information, they learn better than they do when they simply read or re-read mate- rial. For instance, in a statistics class, students might present case studies involving various techniques and the class might discuss new scenarios where the techniques would apply. 2. Emphasize practical applications. It's easier for students to remember concepts when they're related to practical applications than when they're presented 32 BizEd MARCH/APRIL 2010 as abstractions. Therefore, in most business courses, theory should be kept to a minimum, used only to help students understand key issues. Of course, this depends on the stu- dents' needs. In a terminal course for business students, such as statistics, much of the theory is irrelevant. But in a statistics class for math majors, students need to understand all the formulas and how to generalize from them. Once students understand one application, they can more readily see how it applies in similar instances, which allows them to transfer what they've learned to novel situations. Such transfer of knowledge, from generalized principles to specific situations, is at the heart of all learning. 3. Identify critical skills. Faculty should make it clear at all levels—from course and syllabus to chapter and classroom—what crucial skills they expect students to learn. For example, at the chapter level in a statistics class, a goal might be for students to understand problems that are addressed in designated books. At the course level, a specific goal might be for them to be able to explain the logic of significance testing. A more general objective might be for them to become critical consumers of scientific studies. 4. Carefully design the test. Frequent testing isn't beneficial if tests aren't well-designed. Professors should make sure that questions are worded clear- ly and that one question does not give away the answer to another. Constructing a test takes advanced skill, patience, and more time than many professors expect. Faculty need to plan their test content and questions just as carefully as they plan the outlines or frameworks they use for teaching. 5. Test relevant skills. A test is only valid if its questions are built around knowl- edge the professor has communicated to students and expects them to have mastered. It's easy to develop a poor test that has numerous questions addressing relatively obscure points, especially if the professor is drawing ques- tions from an item bank—but that doesn't help students with long-term retention of key concepts. 6. Prepare the right tests. Learning is enhanced when students must generate answers instead of simply recognizing answers that are provided. That's why essay tests with open-ended questions are better than most multiple-choice or true-false tests. Properly con- structed multiple-choice questions can assess skills almost as