Benefits of a Low-Stakes Write-to-Learn Assignment on Exam Performance

Abstract

This study examined whether a low-stakes write-to-learn (WTL) assignment improved exam performance. Students in one section of a child development course completed five assignments during a semester, whereby they identified 15 key concepts and related them to six themes (e.g., nature and nurture). Students in another section did not. Students who completed the WTL assignments performed significantly better in Exams 2 and 3 than students in the control condition. Within-group analyses indicated that only the students in the WTL condition improved exam performance and maintained that higher level of performance. Results suggest that WTL assignments that require students to review and apply course content produce modest benefits to learning and retention without unduly taxing instructors’ time.

Keywords

writing-to-learn student learning writing assignments

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bartoszewski

B. L.

Gurung

R. A. R.

(2015). Comparing the relationship of learning techniques and exam score. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology, 1, 219–228. doi:10.1037/stl0000036

Berry

Cook

Hill

Stevens

(2011). An exploratory analysis of textbook usage and study habits: Misperceptions and barriers to success. College Teaching, 59, 31–39. doi:10.1080/87567555.2010.509376

Carney

R. N.

Levin

J. R.

(1998). Coming to terms with the keyword method in introductory psychology: A “neuromnemonic” example. Teaching of Psychology, 25, 132–134. doi:10.1207/s15328023top2502_15

Craik

F. I. M.

(2002). Levels of processing: Past, present…and future? Memory, 10, 305–318. doi:10.1080/09658210244000135

Dickinson

D. J.

O’Connell

D. Q.

(1990). Effect of quality and quantity of study on student grades. Journal of Educational Research, 83, 227–231. doi:10.1080/00220671.1990.10885960

Drabick

D. A. G.

Weisberg

Paul

Bubier

J. L.

(2007). Keeping it short and sweet: Brief, ungraded writing assignments facilitate learning. Teaching of Psychology, 34, 172–176. doi:10.1080/00986280701498558

Dunlosky

Rawson

K. A.

Marsh

E. J.

Nathan

M. J.

Willingham

D. T.

(2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 4–58. doi:10.1177/1529100612453266

Dunn

D. S.

Saville

B. K.

Baker

S. C.

Marek

(2013). Evidence-based teaching: Tools and techniques that promote learning in the psychology classroom. Australian Journal of Psychology, 65, 5–13. doi:10.1111/ajpy.12004

Gingerich

K. J.

Bugg

J. M.

Doe

S. R.

Rowland

C. A.

Richards

T. L.

Tompkins

M. A.

McDaniel

M. A.

(2014). Active processing via write-to-learn assignments: Learning and retention benefits in introductory psychology. Teaching of Psychology, 41, 303–308. doi:10.1177/0098628314549701

10.

Gurung

R. A. R

. (2005). How do students really study (and does it matter)? Teaching of Psychology, 32(4), 239–241. doi:10.1207/s15328023top3204_8

11.

Gurung

R. A. R.

Weidert

Jeske

(2010). Focusing on how students study. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 10, 28–35. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=EJ882123

12.

Hautau

Turner

H. C.

Carroll

Jaspers

Krohn

Parker

Williams

R. L.

(2006). Differential daily writing conditions and performance of major multiple-choice exams. Journal of Behavioral Education, 15, 171–181. doi:10.1007/s10864-006-9014-x

13.

Marrs

Sigler

Hayes

(2009). Study strategy predictors of performance in introductory psychology. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 36, 125–133. Retrieved from http://www.projectinnovation.biz/jip_2006.html

14.

Nevid

J. S.

Ambrose

N. A.

Pyun

Y. S.

(2017). Effects of higher and lower level writing-to-learn assignments on higher and lower level examination questions. Teaching of Psychology, 44, 324–329. doi:10.1177/0098628317727645

15.

Nevid

J. S.

Pastva

McClelland

(2012). Writing-to-learn assignments in introductory psychology: Is there a learning benefit? Teaching of Psychology, 39, 272–275. doi:10.1177/0098628312456622

16.

Plant

A. E.

Ericsson

K. A.

Hill

Asberg

(2005). Why study time does not predict grade point average across college students: Implications of deliberate practice for academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 30, 96–116. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.06.001

17.

Schaap

Schmidt

H. G.

Verkoeijen

P. P. J. L.

(2012). Assessing knowledge growth in a psychology curriculum: Which students improve most? Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 37, 875–887. doi:10.1080/02602938.2011.581747

18.

Senzaki

Hackathorn

Appleby

D. C.

Gurung

R. A. R.

(2017). Reinventing flashcards to increase student learning. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 16, 353–368. doi:10.1177/1475725717719771

19.

Stewart

T. L.

Myers

A. C.

Culley

M. R.

(2010). Enhanced learning and retention through “writing to learn” in the psychology classroom. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 46–49. doi:10.1080/00986280903425813

20.

Zamary

Rawson

K. A.

Dunlosky

(2016). How accurately can students evaluate the quality of self-generated examples of declarative concepts? Not well, and feedback does not help. Learning and Instruction, 46, 12–20. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2016.08.002