1. How What We Know About Human Memory Can Help All Students Learn Robert A. Bjork University of California, Los Angeles B IOLOGY L EADERSHIP C ONFERENCE C OMMUNITY W EBINAR October 26, 2011

2. The human memory system is characterized by … A remarkable symbiosis of forgetting, learning, and remembering Forgetting, rather than undoing learning, enables learning and focuses remembering; Remembering creates learning and produces forgetting; Learning begets remembering, contributes to forgetting, and enables new learning. Bjork (2011)

3. But human memory also characterized by equally remarkable misunderstandings of the system … By its users We carry around a flawed mental model of how we learn and remember, or fail to learn and remember Our judgments of whether we have learned and will remember later are unreliable; We are subject to illusions of comprehension; We manage our own learning in far-from-optimal ways And our misunderstandings are coupled with counterproductive societal attitudes and assumptions about how people learn We appear not, surprisingly, to be informed by the trials and errors of everyday living and learning

4. A fundamental problem we confront: Conditions of instruction that make performance improve rapidly often fail to support long-term retention and transfer, …whereas Conditions of instruction that appear to create difficulties for the learner, slowing the rate of apparent learning, often optimize long-term retention and transfer

5. Examples of manipulations that introduce “desirable difficulties” (Bjork, 1994) for the learner Varying the conditions of learning Distributing or spacing study or practice sessions Using tests (rather than presentations) as learning events Providing “contextual interference” during learning (e.g., interleaving rather than blocking practice)

6. The word desirable is important … M any difficulties are undesirable during learning, after learning, and forever after Desirable difficulties are desirable because r esponding to them (successfully) engages processes that support learning, comprehension, and remembering They become undesirable difficulties if the learner is not equipped to respond to them successfully. Generation effects as an example.

7. Variation example: Even varying the environmental context of learning matters (Smith, Glenberg, & Bjork, 1978)   Study in Room A Study in Room A Study in Room B Tested Room C Tested Room C Study in Room A Tested in Room A Tested in Room B

8. Distributing or spacing study or practice sessions: the spacing effect Example: Baddeley and Longman (1979) > P2 P1P2 P1 Test

9. Baddeley & Longman (1979) Training Schedule 1 x 1 hr2 x 1 hr1 x 2 hr2 x 2 hr Distributing/Spacing of Practice Hours to Learn Keyboard 34.942.643.249.7 Mean Satisfaction Rating 1 (Very Satisfactory) to 5 (Very Unsatisfactory ) 2.401.862.001.73

10. Tests versus presentations as learning events Testing as pedagogy versus testing as assessment Retrieving information or procedures is a learning event The information/procedures recalled become more recallable in the future than they would have been otherwise; It is substantially more powerful event than is being presented the information (inflatable life vest example) Tests provide far better feedback as to what has or has not been learned/understood (vs. presentations) Tests potentiate the effectiveness of subsequent study

11. Example of the power of tests as learning events Roediger and Karpicke (2006) To-be-learned text passage on the sun or on sea otters (about 30 idea units per passage) Three conditions SSSS: four consecutive 5-min study periods SSST: three study period plus a test of recall for the passage STTT: one study period plus four consecutive tests of recall for the passage

12. Roediger & Karpicke (2006)

15. Providing “contextual interference” during learning Interleaving rather than blocking practice Motor skills, such as hitting baseballs, serving in badminton (e.g., Simon and Bjork, 2001) Learning formulas: Rohrer and Taylor (2007) Children’s penmanship: Ste-Marie, Clark, Findlay, & Latimer (2004) Inducing categories and concepts (Kornell & Bjork, 2008)

16. Simon & Bjork (2001)

17. Error score High Low Practice24hrs Random Blocked Actual Simon & Bjork (2001)

18. Error score High Low Practice24hrsPractice24hrs Random Blocked ActualPredicted Retention Random

19. Error High Low Practice24hrsPractice24hrs Random Blocked ActualPredicted Retention Blocked Random

20. Wedge V= Spheroid V= Spherical Cone V= Half Cone V= Rohrer & Taylor (2007)

21. Mixed Blocked PracticeFinal Test

22. Blocked versus interleaved practice Ste-Marie, Clark, Findlay, & Latimer (2004)

23. Optimizing induction The ability to generalize concepts and categories through exposure to multiple exemplars.

24. Gentoo

25. Where’s the Gentoo?

26. Hypothesis (Kornell & Bjork, 2008): Induction is one situation where massing is superior to spacing Blocking/massing allows the learner to notice characteristics that unify a category Interleaving/spacing makes doing so difficult Gentoo LachesisReinhardGentoo

27. Lewis

33. PessaniStratulatSchlorffWexlerJurasMylreaPessaniStratulatSchlorffWexlerJurasMylreaHawkins M S S M M S S M M S S M

34. Feedback Test

36. Results ActualResponses

37. Differentiation hypothesis Original hypothesis: Blocking/massing highlights similarities New hypothesis: Interleaving/spacing highlights differences Lewis SchlorffHawkins Lewis

38. Desirable-difficulties findings: Implications for the design of instruction? Variation? Interleaving? Spacing? Using tests/generation as learning events?

39. Desirable-difficulties findings: Implications for the evaluation of instruction? Students’ evaluation of teaching? Trainees completing “happy” or “smile” sheets in industry? Students expectations as to how courses should be taught?

40. Finally, what do college students know and not know about how to study? Survey of 472 introductory-psychology students at UCLA The Promise and Perils of Self-regulated Study (Kornell & Bjork, 2007)

41. How do you decide what to study next? 59%Whatever's due soonest/overdue 4%Whatever I haven't studied for the longest time 4%Whatever I find interesting 22%Whatever I feel I'm doing the worst in 11%I plan my study schedule ahead of time, and I study whatever I've scheduled

42. If you quiz yourself while you study (either using a quiz at the end of a chapter, or a practice quiz, or flashcards, or something else), why do you do so? 18%I learn more that way than I would through rereading 68%To figure out how well I have learned the information I’m studying 4%I find quizzing more enjoyable than rereading 9%I usually do not quiz myself

43. Do you usually return to course material to review it after a course has ended? 14%Yes 86%No

44. When you study, do you typically read a textbook/article/other source material more than once? 16%Yes, I re-read whole chapters/articles 60%Yes, I re-read sections that I underlined or highlighted or marked 23%Not usually

45. Would you say that you study the way you do because a teacher (or teachers) taught you to study that way? 20%Yes 80%No

46. Enhancing education If students do not tend to engage in the learning activities that produce durable and flexible learning, the fault is primarily ours; who among us, during our student days, would have answered those survey questions differently? We need to structure courses, curricula, requirements, and activities to engage the processes that enhance learning, comprehension, and knowledge integration Doing so requires, among other things, adopting the student’s perspective Newton (1990) as a parable of teaching

49. Piaget (1962) “Every beginning instructor discovers sooner or later that his first lectures were incomprehensible because he was talking to himself, so to say, mindful only of his point of view. He realizes only gradually and with difficulty that it is not easy to place one’s self in the shoes of students who do not yet know about the subject matter of the course.”

50. Attitudes, assumptions, and misconceptions that impede effective learning Misunderstanding the meaning and role of errors Errors, rather than being viewed as an essential component of effective training, are assumed to reflect inadequacies of the instructor, the student, or both Over-attributing differences in performance to innate differences in ability Aptitude is over-appreciated; The power of training, practice, and experience is under- appreciated Assuming that efficient learning is easy learning The styles-of-learning idea

51. Parents Of Nasal Learners Demand Odor-Based Curriculum March 15, 2000 | Issue 3609 COLUMBUS, OH–Backed by olfactory-education experts, parents of nasal learners are demanding that U.S. public schools provide odor-based curricula for their academically struggling children. A nasal learner struggles with an odorless textbook. … "My child is not stupid," Delia Weber, president of Parents Of Nasal Learners, said. "There simply is no way for him to thrive in a school that only caters to traditional students who absorb educational concepts by hearing, reading, seeing, discussing, drawing, building, or acting out."

52. The bottom line … Individual differences do matter, but Optimizing learning and teaching rests on understanding what we all share: A unique functional architecture as learners and A remarkable capacity to learn.

53. The end Thanks to the James S. McDonnell Foundation

55. References Baddeley, A.D., & Longman, D.J.A. (1978). The influence of length and frequency of training session on the rate of learning to type. Ergonomics, 21, 627-635. Bjork, R.A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe and A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing. (pp.185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Bjork, R. A. (2011). On the symbiosis of learning, remembering, and forgetting. In A. S. Benjamin (Ed.), Successful remembering and successful forgetting: A Festschrift in honor of Robert A. Bjork (pp. 1-22). London, UK: Psychology Press. Bjork, R. A., & Bjork, E. L. (1992). A new theory of disuse and an old theory of stimulus fluctuation. In A. Healy, S. Kosslyn, & R. Shiffrin (Eds.), From learning processes to cognitive processes: Essays in honor of William K. Estes (Vol. 2, pp. 35-67). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Hull, C. L. (1943). The principles of behavior. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2007). The promise and perils of self-regulated study. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 219–224. Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the "enemy of induction"? Psychological Science, 19, 585-592. Newton, L. (1990). Overconfidence in the Communication of Intent: Heard and Unheard Melodies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Department of Psychology, Stanford University. Piaget, J. (1962). Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood. New York: Norton.

56. References (continued) Roediger, H.L. & Karpicke, J.D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17, 249-255. Rohrer, D., & Taylor, K. (2007). The shuffling of mathematics practice problems improves learning. Instructional Science, 35, 481-498. Simon, D. A., & Bjork, R. A. (2001). Metacognition in motor learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 907-912. Smith, S. M, Glenberg, A. M., & Bjork, R. A. (1978). Environmental context and human memory. Memory & Cognition, 6, 342-353. Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323, 122-124. Ste-Marie, D. M., Clark, S. E., Findlay, L. C. & Latimer A. E. (2004). High levels of contextual interference enhance handwriting skill acquisition. Journal of Motor Behavior, 36, 115-126.

57. McCabe’s (in press) web-based survey  N = 255 undergraduates from a variety of institutions  50% Psychology majors / 50% Non-Psych;  78% female  Age: M = 24.5;  Education level: M = 3.72 yrs of college  Self-reported GPA: M = 3.25  Six learning scenarios, followed by two rating scales:  for ‘typical college students,’ and  for ‘yourself’  Scenarios adapted from published experiments, including:  Testing versus restudying (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006)  Spacing versus massing (Kornell & Bjork, 2008)

58. Finally, what do college students already know and not know about the activities that do and do not enhance learning? McCabe (2011). Metacognitive awareness of learning strategies in undergraduates. Memory & Cognition. Kornell and Bjork (2007). The promise and perils of self-regulated study. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.

59. “In two different classes, a 275-word prose passage about a specific topic is presented. In Class A, students first study the passage for 7 minutes, and then are asked to study the passage again for another 7 minutes (i.e., they RESTUDY). In Class B, students first study the passage for 7 minutes, and then are asked to write down from memory as much of the material from the passage as they can (i.e., they take a TEST). After 1 week, all students are asked to recall as much of the passage as they can remember.” Predict the outcome of the test: 1. Class A (RESTUDY) would result in much higher test scores 2. Class A (RESTUDY) would result in moderately higher test scores 3. Class A (RESTUDY) would result in slightly higher test scores 4. Test scores for Classes A and B would be about EQUAL 5. Class B (TEST) would result in slightly higher test scores 6. Class B (TEST) would result in moderately higher test scores 7. Class B (TEST) would result in much higher test scores McCabe (2011) example scenario: The testing effect

60. McCabe (2011): Results “Typical College Students”“Yourself” Learning Scenario M % Endorsement M % Endorsement Testing vs. Restudying 3.38**29.9%3.37**32.7% Spacing vs. Massing 2.00** 6.7%1.90**9.8%