There is a lot of cognitive science research that proves what revision strategies work best for embedding information into the long term memory – which is our goal in relation to exam success. Some of it is common sense, but other aspects may surprise you or challenge your thinking.
There are many time-consuming revision strategies that actually fool us into thinking we have embedded the knowledge into our long term memory. For example, simply re-reading texts or notes has been seen to have a low impact with regard to memory retention, especially considering how much time this can take, but students are happy because this is a relatively undemanding task that takes little mental effort and it feels like effective revision. Re-reading ‘Of Mice and Men’ for an English Literature exam doesn’t have the impact we need, especially given how time consuming it is as a revision activity, therefore other, better, strategies should be undertaken. Other edu-myths also cloud effective planning for exam revision. There is an old adage abound in education that: “We learn: 10 percent of what we read; 20 percent of what we hear; 30 percent of what we both see and hear; 50 percent of what we discussed with others; 80 percent of what we experience personally; 95 percent of what we teach to someone else.” This is a myth based on no evidence. It has become perpetuated because it is an easily reductive formula, but it is unfounded. David Didau lances this particularly boil to good effect here. We must go beyond these simplifications and seek answers from more reputable research to judge against our experience.
The following strategies are underpinned by more reputable scientific research and evidence:
– Information retrieval over re-reading: It may prove more challenging in the short term, but getting students to try to remember the content of a given topic is more effective than making revision notes based on their original content, textbooks etc. ‘Concept mapping’ is an ideal teaching tool for this (think of its popular branding, image and colour laden brother ‘mind-mapping’!). At the end of each week for example, have students attempt to retrieve the information, without their notes or books. They create a hierarchy of connections that they can attempt to organise conceptually.
Research: http://learninglab.psych.purdue.edu/downloads/2012_Karpicke_CDPS.pdf. Thank you to @websofsubstance whose excellent blog post of retrieval helped me source this research: http://websofsubstance.wordpress.com/2013/04/06/golden-retrievers/
– Collaborative retrieval: Typically we associate revision activities and memory as requiring individual focus. Indeed, there is some evidence that group work can inhibit some learning, but there is evidence that students working in groups can have a positive effect, where students work together ‘cross cueing’ the information they are recalling. Put simply, they help one another remember and retrieve aspects of key information they would not have remembered individually. Also, the social nature of working together can create memory cues that help individuals recall well over time. Of course, any errors in retrieval, either individually or collaboratively, need teacher correction.
– ‘Spacing’ versus ‘massed’ practice: This finding is common sense really. ‘Spacing‘ is when revising the same information two or three times across a few days improves the likelihood of retaining information in the long term memory (Nuttall, 1999). This may include revising a poem and making connections with another poem, then revisiting the key aspects of that poem in the subsequent lesson, before finally doing a ‘concept map’ at the end of the week to revise the learning from the lessons that week. ‘Massed‘ practice, or ‘cramming‘, can have a good short term effect on memory recall, but it fails in the long term in comparison to ‘spacing’ out revision. There is no exact time or number of days concerning how much ‘spaced’ time should be allocated; however, the research indicted the number of days ‘spacing’ is shorter the nearer the exam. In practical terms, over a half-term, we could revisit a concept after a couple of weeks, but nearer they exam we would cluster a couple more ‘revisions’ of the concept/information.
David Didau has written an excellent blog explaining spacing etc. and the implications for curriculum planning, and what ‘progress’ in learning may look like here.
Research: http://psi.sagepub.com/content/14/1/4.full.pdf?ijkey=Z10jaVH/60XQM&keytype=ref&siteid=sppsi and for an in-depth focus on ‘spacing’: http://uweb.cas.usf.edu/~drohrer/pdfs/Carpenter_et_al_2012EPR.pdf
– Using ‘worked examples’: This is the common method of using past exemplars or creating your own through ‘shared writing‘ strategies. It gives students a working template for their revision and reduces obstacles that stops them learning more knowledge. Ideally, teachers should lead model worked examples of exam questions, thereby giving students a clear idea of an excellent answer, before fading back and letting students tackle exam questions independently. Of course, once more, quality feedback is key in this process.
A great blog by Joe Kirby goes into great depth about the ‘why’ of using ‘worked examples’ here.
– Regular in-class testing: Drilling answers to tests, under test conditions, can improve both short term and long term memory to boost revision (Roediger et al 2011). Like the retrieval practice of ‘concept mapping’, the very act of retrieval without resources to support proves more memorable than any ‘re-study’ activity. Taking a test can lead to students becoming less confident, therefore quick and accurate feedback is key to making testing highly effective and building confidence. There is research to say that teachers often drastically overestimate what they believe their students to know (Kelly, 1999) so repeated testing is a practical necessity. In terms of learning, there is much research that testing revision material has a positive impact on long term memory in comparison with simply revisiting material.
Another important consideration is that students naturally revise in a ‘massed’ learning style i.e. last minute cramming! It is labelled the ‘procrastination scallop‘ by Jack Michael here. This led to a recommended ‘exam a day’ approach, which forces students to distribute their revision more evenly, rather than just cramming. It may seem excessive, but getting students to do challenging retrieval that informs the teacher what they know and don’t know (and invariably if they have revised or not) regularly, like quizzes etc. could do the job.
Research: http://people.duke.edu/~ab259/pubs/Roediger&Butler(2010).pdf and the ‘exam a day’ research: http://www.teachpsych.com/ebooks/tips2011/I-07-01Leeming2002.pdf
A lot less scientific, but a fun revision strategy that works for many:
– Building a ‘palace of memory’ is a much less scientific way of improving memory recall, but it is apparently thousands of years old, originating with the Greek poet, Simonides of Ceos, in the fifth century BC. See this Guardian article for an excellent example of the method in action: http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/jan/15/memory-palaces-lists
How does this equate to a revision programme?
I am now avoiding revision activities or homework revision tasks that recommend simply revisiting information. I will plan to interleave different topics each week, to create the necessary ‘spacing’ between topics (in my English GCSE class this will mean studying poetry for English Literature at the start of the week, the novel and short stories in the middle of the week, ending the week with English Language revision). I will give regular mini-tests, drilling individual answers, with ‘worked examples’ in the first instance to model a good answer. The feedback on their answers will be timely and regular. I want to undertake weekly retrieval activities that reflect upon what they have learnt that week (combining ‘spacing’ and ‘retrieval’)
It is clear that the process of revision happens inside and outside the classroom. Students who possess the grit and resilience to persist with the humdrum nature of revision tasks will have a greater chance at success, but teachers must also identify and plan revision strategies that work. Of course, our experience and intuition about what will work best for our students is important, but we should challenge our assumptions with the wider research that is easily accessible on the web.
Many people hear the term ‘flipped learning’ and their hackles rise, expecting some evangelical heralding of technology unceremoniously replacing the humble teacher. I have written before about the concept of ‘flipped learning’ before in this blog post and I am still fascinated by its potential and a firm believer in its importance, both here and now, but crucially in our future and for the future of our students and our schools. Now, once you get past the glossy veneer and the potential technological wizardry, ‘flipped learning’ starts to sound suspiciously like mainstays in education – homework, or revision, or even reading for pleasure outside of school! Perhaps the original flipped learning experiment didn’t begin with ‘Project Gutenberg‘ but with Johannes Gutenberg, whose printing presses revolution changed the western world and brought reading to the masses. I am an English teacher and we are currently guiding our students through their crucial final steps of revision for their January English exam. What is crucial is that those students in my school, and around the country, who will be flipping their learning over the course of Christmas and the New Year have a much better chance of excelling in January the those who do not. Revision…flipped learning – same difference!
On many days as a teacher I have faith that my daily dose of teaching can make the ultimate difference for my students, that the time and effort has a transformative purpose. That may be true – I certainly need that belief to nourish me through difficult times; however, my rational self tells me that all the other factors impacting upon our students are just as important, if not more so. As an English teacher, I have a good deal of knowledge about the impact of early years literacy and the impact of reading and oracy in the first years of the growth of a child. I know the powerful impact of parents and the impact simply having a bookshelf in the home can have. Then the importance of reading for pleasure rears up in sight (this Literacy Trust report, although slightly dated now, is illuminating: report). Other factors, like social deprivation, genetic and emotional predispositions expand the list further. Suddenly, making the key difference with our students feels a bit like King Cnut holding back tempestuous waves! Still, of course, we must try. We must try to help them learn better, for us to learn better, inside the classroom and out.
I am deeply interested in the motivation to learn (teachers as well as students!). I think that intrinsic motivation should be the ultimate aim for all learning and an end goal for educators, but I also have the realistic understanding that this is not our natural state for thinking and learning. That boredom and a deep rooted neurological desire to save mental energy, as well as a plain dislike of certain subjects, can put pay to idylls of intrinsically motivated students! What is clear is that to really enhance student motivation in a transformative way we must simply communicate as effectively as we can – despite any factors that we challenge us. This often requires good old-fashioned direct instruction, but what increasingly strikes me is that in our changing world we must harness technology to communicate with our students and with their parents. We must communicate with students using the tools where their expertise resides. I am not advocating the gamification of education, but a digital literacy that harnesses good old fashioned literacy and builds learning power.
Students only spend a relatively small amount of their time in the classroom, so the learning that is undertaken outside of the classroom obviously has a crucial importance. John Hattie’s research about homework has questioned the validity of its impact, but the data is different for older students – the older the student, the greater the impact. The link between spending time on homework, learning beyond the classroom and enjoyment is being researched with interest – see here. What is common sense is that if students enjoy learning and school, and they have developed a capacity to learn with resilience and a strong sense of motivation, then they will undertake more productive homework and revision – or simply read more for pleasure for its own sake. What we can do is harness their love for technology, gaming, social media and the web, to enhance this enjoyment, to spark more reading for pleasure. What I see as key is that technology can smooth the pathway for students, it can provide key support mechanisms outside the classroom and it promotes interdependence we simply haven’t had in the past.
Independence is rightly celebrated as a valid goal for learners at all levels. Perhaps though we are making an error, perhaps simply a semantic error. For me, interdependence is the true condition of effective learning in our modern world, not independent learning. We almost never learn in splendid isolation and for our students, and their generation and for future generations, this is particularly so because of technology. How many careers will see our students work individually and not in teams? Of those jobs, how many jobs will be essentially connected through technology? How many careers will require a flexible digital literacy to source answers and support learning? Therefore, perhaps the answer to revision is fostering that interdependence – connecting students, teachers and the knowledge we seek to impart.
In the past week we have begun shaping revision support over the crucial Christmas holiday to be shared on our faculty blog: http://huntemf.wordpress.com/. It is only in its infancy, and our ‘advent‘ of revision resources, tips and ideas, will really kick off at the start of the holiday, but the principal of ‘flipping the learning’ for revision is clearly key. We are able to share knowledge, direct students through the minefield of the web, answer questions and connect peers to one another through technology. Should they simply switch off their computer and hit the books? Perhaps? Would it work better than the ‘flipped technological model’? Perhaps. Will it promote digital literacy? No. It is a realistic state of affairs over the Christmas holiday? No.
What am I trying to argue? Well, ‘flipped learning’, or what ever you want to label it, or relabel it, is here to stay. We should harness technology and harness the expertise of our students, not switch it off and hope it will go away (Perhaps if we embraced the mobile phone as a tool for learning, putting it on the desk and not under it, then students wouldn’t feel the need to seemingly stare at their crotch so much. Even better, perhaps we could replace the mobile with a better, flexible learning tool, like a tablet, that we can mediate for great multi-modal learning?…I digress!). We should promote interdependence and connectedness for homework and revision…sorry, flipped learning!
Please watch this outstanding lecture by Dr Eric Mazur, arguing more articulately about ‘flipped learning’ than I ever could. Please take the time to watch it, it will make you think about learning, it is funny, wise and perceptive, and it will make you think: