Research Proposal: Effective Methods to Implement Productive Study Habits in High Schoolers
Kailey Nichols | Honors Contract Winter 2019 | With Guidance from Professor Courtney Clark
Research Question
How do we get High School students to correctly implement effective study strategies in school?
Significance
Upon entering college, students may struggle with the increased course load and intensity of academics; one possible cause for this struggle is the practice of inefficient study habits and ineffective tactics to learn new material. Even when presented more efficient ways to study, students tend to not use these study methods or they don’t implement the study methods correctly, resulting in more inefficient and ineffective studying (McCabe, 2011). High School is a time in a students life right before they move on to college or the workforce. It is therefore the last time where they are still mostly dependent on their guardians/teachers. From personal experience as a first year college student, I definitely struggled with adjusting my study habits to be able to succeed in my classes. In high school I rarely studied for exams and when I did study, it would be the night before the exam, sometimes even the day of the exam. After taking a few tests in college I found that these study habits were ineffective in getting me a good grade on an exam; even if they did get me a good grade, much of my cramming as a form of studying did not help me for the final and other delayed tests. Instead I found myself having to do even more work to compensate for the information I had already forgotten between the last midterm and final, resulting in consequences other than having to spend more time studying, such as getting sick which could have been attributed to a lack of sleep. Therefore, from personal experience I can attest to the value of studying effectively. Being more effective and efficient with studying ultimately allows the student to perform better in school and gives them the tools to succeed in many other facets of life including building the skills necessary to work in any job.
Background
The following is a description of different effective study techniques that will be included in the study.
Retrieval
One study strategy is retrieval. Retrieval is the practice of “retrieving” or bringing up old knowledge. In a classroom setting this can mean quizzing oneself on material, filling out worksheets, or doing what is called free recall. Free recall is when the individual writes or verbally says everything about a topic that they can remember. In studies, both methods, quizzing and free recall, have been demonstrated as effective study strategies, even when facts are recalled incorrectly (Kang, 2007). These two study strategies can be most closely compared to the study strategy of rereading in which students will reread text as a means of studying. For this reason, studies often compare retrieval practice to restudying as a way to measure the effectiveness of retrieval practice.
Other benefits of retrieval practice include, reducing test anxiety, more successful application of knowledge in new situations, and when coupled with other study strategies, it can be even more effective at solidifying long-term memory of material. In one study, results yielded that testing students more often, in the form of low stake quizzes, reduced stress and anxiety when the final test was given for 72% of students (Agarwal, D’Antonio, Roediger, McDermott & McDaniel, 2014). In another study, students were presented information on the water cycle and one group was assigned to restudy the water cycle and the other group was assigned to practice retrieval by having to recall parts of the water cycle for the same amount of time. Towards the end of the study, both groups were tested with a few direct questions that asked about specific things the students had learned about the water cycle. The study also asked students a few more abstract questions such as what would happen if there was no gravity, would the water cycle still occur? Results of this study not only showed that students in the retrieval group scored higher on the direct water cycle questions, but the study also showed that these students performed better on the abstract questions that required them to apply concepts they had learned as opposed to relaying facts. Results like these hint that practicing retrieval may help students develop a deeper understanding of material (Sumeracki & Weinstein, 2017, September 6).
Another important emphasis is practicing retrieval correctly. One form of retrieval is the use of flashcards. However, many students to not use flashcards correctly. Some students tend to reread their flashcards (looking at one side and then looking at the other to study), this is an example of rereading and for reasons mentioned earlier, is not an effective method of studying. Studies also show that to use flashcards correctly, the individual should not merely put a flashcard away after correctly retrieving the information on the other side once, but rather they should practice retrieving that information multiple times, regardless of an initial success. These findings are further proved by a study conducted about learning Swahili with flashcards. In this study, two groups of students were compared; one group put down the card as soon as they got it right while the other group retested themselves. On a later date, both groups were tested and on average the students who tested themselves on card multiple times (of getting right answer) remember ~70% of words, while students who put card down as soon as they get it right once only remember ~30% of words after being retested at a later date (Sumeracki & Weinstein, 2017, September 6).
Spacing
Another strategy is spacing. Spacing refers to the practice of spreading out the individual instances in which a student studies; it is most commonly contrasted with cramming, or the practice of studying a dense amount of material very intensely for a short amount of time. Benefits to spacing include better long term memory in comparison to cramming (Cepeda, Vul, Rohrer, Wixted & Pashler, 2008). In one study, researchers tested spacing in the classroom in which they asked a 6 question quiz. Questions 1-3 were on recent material, question 4 was on material learned the prior week, questions 5 was based on the prior month, and question 6 required students to use information from all weeks of material. Students that were assigned to the spaced practice group out performed students assigned to the cramming group. More interestingly, students assigned to the spaced practice group scored significantly higher on the last two questions that required students to remember less recent material and be able to synthesize their knowledge of all the material they had learned (Sumeracki & Weinstein, 2017, October 4). These results show the importance of spaced practice, especially when contrasted with cramming as a mean of studying for students.
Interleaving
Interleaving involves the mixing the order in which one studies material. The contrasting study strategy to interleaving is blocking. Blocking involves studying one aspect of a subject at a time. For example, in math, an example of blocking would be practicing all addition problems for an hour and then practicing all subtraction problems for another hour whereas interleaving would be practicing a few addition problems, then switching to subtraction for a few minutes, then switching back to addition again. One study tested interleaving against blocking by having students study chemical structures. The researchers found that interleaving was more effective than blocking. In another study, the researchers tried to highlight main differences between chemical structures thinking that blocking my be more effective this way, however they still found interleaving to be more effective. In one final test, the researchers tested students on more complex, harder chemical structures. Although scores dropped, they dropped universally and interleaving was still the most effective (Sumeracki & Weinstein, 2017, December 20).
Elaborative interrogation
Elaborative interrogation involves asking how and why questions about a subject and then trying to answer those questions to develop a deeper understanding of it. In practice, students can conduct this study technique individually, in groups, or with teacher. Like other strategies mentioned in this paper, it is very important that when students are using this strategy that they actually use it correctly. This involves asking deep questions, not just factual one-word-answer ones. For example if students are learning about buoyancy and boats, a good example of a question could be, how does the shape of the bottom of the boat help it float? Whereas, an ineffective question may be, why does the boat have numbers on it’s side. This is an ineffective questions because the numbers on the side of the boat have nothing to do with why or how a boat can float in water. However any questions asked can be informative to how much a student understands about a subject. There are some issues that may arise when implementing elaborative interrogation such as the issue of students answering their own questions wrong. This can lead students to encode false facts, therefore this strategy is most effective if students use this method after already understanding concepts well. In one study on middle schoolers using elaborative interrogation for both consistent and inconsistent info (facts that made sense and facts that were surprising), researchers tested the effect of elaborative interrogation when compared to other study strategies. In the study one group used elaborative interrogation, and the other group got to pick a learning strategy. The last group just read info for understanding out loud. Learning assessed immediately and after 60 days and results found that Students who did elaborative interrogation did best (even after 60 days), students who picked their own study strategy did about the same as those that just read the info. This highlights that students not good at picking their own learning strategy and builds onto the emphasis to teach students how to use study effective study strategies (Sumeracki & Weinstein, 2017, November 15)
Dual Coding
Dual Coding involves using multiple methods of learning (ie. words and pictures) to learn material. While some people may believe in the Matching hypothesis, or the hypothesis that states that people should learn according to learning styles, research shows that this is impractical and not true. Recent studies conducted show that students benefit from learning material through different forms and multiple other studies show that it is not possible and in fact inefficient to learn everything using one learning style. For example, learning to drive a car just by reading about it.
The use of images along with words can make abstract ideas more concrete. Images can lead to retrieval or draw students attention to important details. In one study, researchers looked teaching Korean speakers English vocabulary words. In Korean, the same word may be two words in english; for example “to win” and “to beat” are the same word in Korean. This leads to common mistakes such as Korean speakers mixing the two words and saying things like “One team won another” instead of “One team beat another”. However, when visuals are used they may emphasize this important detail. In the experiment researchers tested learning styles (visual vs verbal) against optimal learning form (visual) using Korean to English translations with Korean speakers. Before the experiment they had students rate their learning style on a continuous scale between “visual” and “verbal”. Students were then assigned to groups in which they would either learn the Korean-English word pairs verbally or with visuals (the visual would show one team “winning” the other team and holding the team in comparison to one team “beating” the other team and holding a trophy for example). The researchers found that independent of whether students rated themselves as “visual” or “verbal” learners, they did better with the visual form, providing evidence against the Matching hypothesis and support for dual coding (Sumeracki & Weinstein, 2018).
A few important notes about dual coding include seductive detail and possible brain overload. Seductive detail is using forms that don’t directly apply to material. For example including pictures in a textbook that are just for “decoration” and are not informative. These type of forms can prove to be distracting. Possible brain overload applies to the fact that not everything a student learns should be learned through dual coding. There are definitely instances in which dual coding is proven to be helpful, but it can also make students more confused or overwhelmed when not used correctly or when students try to use too many forms to help them encode information.
Metacognitive Awareness
Metacognitive awareness is defined as being aware of one’s thinking and the strategies that they are implementing. Studies have shown that utilizing metacognitive awareness strategies is effective at convincing an individual to adopt and continue certain habits (Barry, 2002). Therefore, for most students who struggle to maintain a study schedule and implement effective study strategies despite already being educated on them, metacognitive awareness may serve as a method to help students adopt and maintain these study habits. For the purposes of this study, metacognitive awareness will be used as a routine assessment completed by the subject that requires them to record and reflect on their study habit in a given time period. It is hypothesized that through this form of self monitoring and reflecting, students will be more successful in implementing the effective study strategies they are taught. Another question that this study aims to answer is, if metacognitive awareness assessments are effective in convincing students to implement effective study strategies, will these assessments have long-term impacts on the student’s study habits? Or will the end of the assessments also be the end of the students’ implementation of effective study habits?
Methods
Participants
100 randomly selected UCLA first year students
Procedure
Prescreening, ask students how they normally study
Please indicate the percentage of time you allocate to the following study strategies:
Rereading book
Rereading notes
Practice questions
Writing down as much as you can remember
Flashcards
Drawing diagrams
Asking questions
Mixed studying (switching back and forth between studying one aspect of a topic and another i.e. studying mixed addition and subtraction practice together)
Studying right before an exam
Studying in spaced amounts of time before an exam
Part I:
Conditions:
Handout* and Short Lecture on effective ways to study (Lecture means reading the handout and answering any questions that students have on the handout) (control group)
Handout* and Short Lecture on effective ways to study (Lecture means reading the handout and answering any questions that students have on the handout) AND weekly metacognitive awareness assessment
Study Duration: 1 month
Implementation:
Students from this group will be given the handout and lecture on a particular effective way to study from the list above (in the background) and advised to implement it over the next month. They will be asked to choose their hardest class and implement the study strategies from the handout. At the end of the month they will complete a metacognitive assessment on how effective the study strategies were. They will also fill out the post screening questionnaire (same as the pre screening questionnaire).
Students from this group will be given the handout and lecture on a particular effective way to study from the list above (in the background) and advised to implement it over the next month. They will be asked to choose their hardest class and implement the study strategies from the handout. At the end of the month they will complete a metacognitive assessment on how effective the study strategies were. Students from this group will be given a metacognitive awareness assessment** at the end of each week during the month. At the end of the month they will take one last metacognitive awareness assessment and then complete an exam on material learned in the past month. They will also fill out a post screening questionnaire (same as the pre screening questionnaire).
Part 2:
Students will be given post screening questionnaire six months from time of exam given by the study.
Analysis of Data
Answers given in the pre screening questionnaire will be compared to the post screening questionnaire from both groups to determine if the implementation of metacognitive awareness assessments were effective in changing the study strategies of students.
Predictions
More students in the metacognitive awareness group will switch their study habits to emphasize the study strategies that they learned about
However, after the metacognitive awareness assessments end, it is expected that students will revert to their initial study habits given sufficient time (in this study six months)
Works Cited
Agarwal, P., D’Antonio, L., Roediger, H.L., McDermott, K.B., & McDaniel, M.A. (2014). Classroom-based programs of retrieval practice reduce middle school and high school students’ test anxiety. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 3, 131-139.
Barry J. Zimmerman (2002) Becoming a Self-Regulated Learner: An Overview, Theory Into Practice, 41:2, 64-70, DOI: 10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Cepeda, N. J., Vul, E., Rohrer, D.,Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. (2008).Spacing effects in learning: A temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychological Science, 11,1095–1102.
Kang, S. H. K., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger, H. L. (2007). Test format and corrective feedback modulate the effect of testing on memory retention. The European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 528-558.
McCabe, J. (2011). Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates. Memory & Cognition, 39, 462-476.
Sumeracki, M. & Weinstein, Y. (2017, December 20). Episode 9-Bite-Size Research on Interleaving Categories. The Learning Scientists Podcast. Podcast retrieved from http://www.learningscientists.org/learning-scientists-podcast/2017/12/20/episode-9-bite-size-research-on-interleaving-categories
Sumeracki, M. & Weinstein, Y. (2017, November 15). Episode 7-Episode 9-Bite-Size Research on Elaborative Interrogation. The Learning Scientists Podcast. Podcast retrieved from http://www.learningscientists.org/learning-scientists-podcast/2017/11/15/episode-7-bite-size-research-on-elaborative-interrogation-with-middle-school-students
Sumeracki, M. & Weinstein, Y. (2017, October 4). Episode 4-Spaced Practice. The Learning Scientists Podcast. Podcast retrieved from http://www.learningscientists.org/learning-scientists-podcast/2017/10/4/episode-4-spaced-practice
Sumeracki, M. & Weinstein, Y. (2017, September 6). Episode 2-Retrieval Practice. The Learning Scientists Podcast. Podcast retrieved from http://www.learningscientists.org/learning-scientists-podcast/2017/9/6/episode-2-retrieval-practice
Sumeracki, M. & Weinstein, Y. (2018, February 21). Episode 13-Bite-Size Research on Dual Coding vs Learning Styles. The Learning Scientists Podcast. Podcast retrieved from http://www.learningscientists.org/learning-scientists-podcast/2018/2/21/episode-13-bite-size-research-on-dual-coding-vs-learning-styles
