Limits...
Teaching students how to study: a workshop on information processing and self-testing helps students learn.

Stanger-Hall KF, Shockley FW, Wilson RE - CBE Life Sci Educ (2011)

Bottom Line: Students rated the workshop activities highly and performed significantly better on workshop-related final exam questions than the control groups.Student achievement (i.e., grade point average) was significantly correlated with overall final exam performance but not with workshop outcomes.This long-term (10 wk) retention of a self-testing effect across question levels and student achievement is a promising endorsement for future large-scale implementation and further evaluation of this "how to study" workshop as a study support for introductory biology (and other science) students.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA. ksh@uga.edu

ABSTRACT
We implemented a "how to study" workshop for small groups of students (6-12) for N = 93 consenting students, randomly assigned from a large introductory biology class. The goal of this workshop was to teach students self-regulating techniques with visualization-based exercises as a foundation for learning and critical thinking in two areas: information processing and self-testing. During the workshop, students worked individually or in groups and received immediate feedback on their progress. Here, we describe two individual workshop exercises, report their immediate results, describe students' reactions (based on the workshop instructors' experience and student feedback), and report student performance on workshop-related questions on the final exam. Students rated the workshop activities highly and performed significantly better on workshop-related final exam questions than the control groups. This was the case for both lower- and higher-order thinking questions. Student achievement (i.e., grade point average) was significantly correlated with overall final exam performance but not with workshop outcomes. This long-term (10 wk) retention of a self-testing effect across question levels and student achievement is a promising endorsement for future large-scale implementation and further evaluation of this "how to study" workshop as a study support for introductory biology (and other science) students.

Show MeSH

Related in: MedlinePlus

Information-processing exercise. Student performance by processing instructions (auditory vs. visual). Students who processed information visually scored significantly higher on the recall test (N = 12 items) than did students who processed information auditorily only (visual mean ± SD = 10.23 ± 1.32; auditory mean ± SD = 5.4 ± 2.12; Mann-Whitney U-test for independent samples: U = 47, P < 0.001).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection


getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3105925&req=5

Figure 1: Information-processing exercise. Student performance by processing instructions (auditory vs. visual). Students who processed information visually scored significantly higher on the recall test (N = 12 items) than did students who processed information auditorily only (visual mean ± SD = 10.23 ± 1.32; auditory mean ± SD = 5.4 ± 2.12; Mann-Whitney U-test for independent samples: U = 47, P < 0.001).

Mentions: After reassuring students that memory does not equal intelligence, following the instructions by Irwin and Simons (1993), students reported their scores individually to the instructor, who recorded them on the board in separate columns for the two groups. The differences between the two groups were immediately obvious (Figure 1), with the students in the visual-processing group (mean ± SD = 10.23 ± 1.32) scoring significantly higher than those in the auditory-processing group (mean ± SD = 5.4 ± 2.12; Mann-Whitney U-test for independent samples: U = 47, P < 0.001). After looking at the reported scores on the board and averaging for each group, the instructor asked one student from each group to reveal their set of instructions by reading aloud their respective group's instructions. The students were generally surprised by the revelation of the difference in instructions and the improved performance of students using the visualization strategy for the processing of complex information.


Teaching students how to study: a workshop on information processing and self-testing helps students learn.

Stanger-Hall KF, Shockley FW, Wilson RE - CBE Life Sci Educ (2011)

Information-processing exercise. Student performance by processing instructions (auditory vs. visual). Students who processed information visually scored significantly higher on the recall test (N = 12 items) than did students who processed information auditorily only (visual mean ± SD = 10.23 ± 1.32; auditory mean ± SD = 5.4 ± 2.12; Mann-Whitney U-test for independent samples: U = 47, P < 0.001).
© Copyright Policy - creative-commons
Related In: Results  -  Collection

Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC3105925&req=5

Figure 1: Information-processing exercise. Student performance by processing instructions (auditory vs. visual). Students who processed information visually scored significantly higher on the recall test (N = 12 items) than did students who processed information auditorily only (visual mean ± SD = 10.23 ± 1.32; auditory mean ± SD = 5.4 ± 2.12; Mann-Whitney U-test for independent samples: U = 47, P < 0.001).
Mentions: After reassuring students that memory does not equal intelligence, following the instructions by Irwin and Simons (1993), students reported their scores individually to the instructor, who recorded them on the board in separate columns for the two groups. The differences between the two groups were immediately obvious (Figure 1), with the students in the visual-processing group (mean ± SD = 10.23 ± 1.32) scoring significantly higher than those in the auditory-processing group (mean ± SD = 5.4 ± 2.12; Mann-Whitney U-test for independent samples: U = 47, P < 0.001). After looking at the reported scores on the board and averaging for each group, the instructor asked one student from each group to reveal their set of instructions by reading aloud their respective group's instructions. The students were generally surprised by the revelation of the difference in instructions and the improved performance of students using the visualization strategy for the processing of complex information.

Bottom Line: Students rated the workshop activities highly and performed significantly better on workshop-related final exam questions than the control groups.Student achievement (i.e., grade point average) was significantly correlated with overall final exam performance but not with workshop outcomes.This long-term (10 wk) retention of a self-testing effect across question levels and student achievement is a promising endorsement for future large-scale implementation and further evaluation of this "how to study" workshop as a study support for introductory biology (and other science) students.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Plant Biology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA. ksh@uga.edu

ABSTRACT
We implemented a "how to study" workshop for small groups of students (6-12) for N = 93 consenting students, randomly assigned from a large introductory biology class. The goal of this workshop was to teach students self-regulating techniques with visualization-based exercises as a foundation for learning and critical thinking in two areas: information processing and self-testing. During the workshop, students worked individually or in groups and received immediate feedback on their progress. Here, we describe two individual workshop exercises, report their immediate results, describe students' reactions (based on the workshop instructors' experience and student feedback), and report student performance on workshop-related questions on the final exam. Students rated the workshop activities highly and performed significantly better on workshop-related final exam questions than the control groups. This was the case for both lower- and higher-order thinking questions. Student achievement (i.e., grade point average) was significantly correlated with overall final exam performance but not with workshop outcomes. This long-term (10 wk) retention of a self-testing effect across question levels and student achievement is a promising endorsement for future large-scale implementation and further evaluation of this "how to study" workshop as a study support for introductory biology (and other science) students.

Show MeSH
Related in: MedlinePlus