Tests Are Magic | The Testing Effect

We live in a testing culture. And they’re bad, right? They cause anxiety, encourage cheating, and lead to “teaching to the test”.

But hold up! Tests can actually be amazing tools to help students learn. The testing effect describes what happens to our memories and our understanding of the material when we take tests.

00:00 Introduction
00:14 Testing vs Re-reading
01:31 What About Un-tested Items?
02:05 What About Future Material?

For more videos on learning, check out my learning community: www.benjaminkeep.com/community/

Sign up to my email newsletter, Avoiding Folly, here: www.benjaminkeep.com/

Big thanks to Debbie Molle on Unsplash for the Panda photo, Nguyen Dang Hoang Nhu on Unsplash for the photo of the test, and freestocks on Unsplash for the photo of the books.

The heart icon made by Freepik from www.flaticon.com.

References:

A meta-analysis that finds the effect size of frequent testing is .46.

Başol, G., & Johanson, G. (2009). Effectiveness of frequent testing over achievement: A meta analysis study. (currently available at www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article…)


This is a more recent meta-analysis finding essentially the same thing (estimated effect size .499).

Yang, C., Luo, L., Vadillo, M. A., Yu, R., & Shanks, D. R. (2021). Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin. (currently available at www.gwern.net/docs/spacedrepetition/2021-yang.pdf)


One of the earlier pieces on the forward effect of testing.

Pastötter, B., & Bäuml, K. H. T. (2014). Retrieval practice enhances new learning: the forward effect of testing. Frontiers in psychology, 5, 286. (currently available at www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00…)


On the testing effect for untested items.

Chan, J. C., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger III, H. L. (2006). Retrieval-induced facilitation: initially nontested material can benefit from prior testing of related material. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(4), 553. (currently available at citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.…)


A study looking at implementing frequent low-stakes quizzes in the sixth-grade classroom.

Agarwal, P. K., Bain, P. M., & Chamberlain, R. W. (2012). The value of applied research: Retrieval practice improves classroom learning and recommendations from a teacher, a principal, and a scientist. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 437-448. (currently available at pdf.retrievalpractice.org/guide/Agarwal_Bain_Chamb…)


An applied research piece exploring the application of tests in the classroom. They tested both short-answer and multiple-choice tests, finding that short answer tests outperformed multiple choice tests (though both outperformed additional reading).

McDaniel, M. A., Anderson, J. L., Derbish, M. H., & Morrisette, N. (2007). Testing the testing effect in the classroom. European journal of cognitive psychology, 19(4-5), 494-513. (currently available at citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.…)


A classic study demonstrating long-term benefits (1 month).

Butler, A. C., & Roediger III, H. L. (2007). Testing improves long-term retention in a simulated classroom setting. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19(4-5), 514-527. (currently available at psychnet.wustl.edu/memory/wp-content/uploads/2018/…)


An interesting exploration of using tests that require “higher-order thinking”. Students in the “higher-order thinking” condition, who took tests on higher order thinking, outperformed students who took “lower-order thinking” tests on both higher-order and lower-order questions.

Jensen, J. L., McDaniel, M. A., Woodard, S. M., & Kummer, T. A. (2014). Teaching to the test… or testing to teach: Exams requiring higher order thinking skills encourage greater conceptual understanding. Educational Psychology Review, 26(2), 307-329.


A short guide for using tests in the classroom.

Yang, B. W., Razo, J., & Persky, A. M. (2019). Using testing as a learning tool. American journal of pharmaceutical education, 83(9). (currently available at www.ajpe.org/content/ajpe/83/9/7324.full.pdf)


An older piece by one of the giants in the literature on memory, synthesizing some of the more foundational experiments. The upshot: when we remember something, we modify the memory; we don’t just access it again.

Bjork, R. A. (1975). 5 Retrieval as a Memory Modifier: An Interpretation of Negative Recency and Related Phenomena.