Does retrieval activate related words more than presentation?

2017 Summer.Includes bibliographical references.Retrieving information enhances learning more than restudying. One explanation of this effect is based on the role of mediators (e.g., sand-castle can be mediated by beach). Retrieval is hypothesized to activate mediators more than restudying, but existing tests of this hypothesis have had mixed results (Carpenter, 2011; Lehman & Karpicke, 2016). The present experiments explored different explanations of the conflicting results. The pilot experiment tested—and found no evidence—that the results depended on whether a conceptual or perceptual measure of mediator activation was used. Experiments 1 and 2 tested whether mediator activation during a retrieval attempt depends on the accessibility of the target information. A target was considered less versus more accessible when fewer retrieval versus more cues were given during retrieval practice (Experiment 1), when the target had been studied once versus three times initially (Experiment 2), or when the target could not be recalled versus could be recalled during retrieval practice (Experiments 1 and 2). Although there was a trend for retrieval to activate mediators more than presentation, mediator activation was not reliably related to target accessibility. Thus, Experiments 1 and 2 neither strongly supported, nor disconfirmed, the role of mediators in enhancing learning from retrieval

Improvement Research Carried Out Through Networked Communities: Accelerating Learning about Practices that Support More Productive Student Mindsets

The research on academic mindsets shows significant promise for addressing important problems facing educators. However, the history of educational reform is replete with good ideas for improvement that fail to realize the promises that accompany their introduction. As a field, we are quick to implement new ideas but slow to learn how to execute well on them. If we continue to implement reform as we always have, we will continue to get what we have always gotten. Accelerating the field's capacity to learn in and through practice to improve is one key to transforming the good ideas discussed at the White House meeting into tools, interventions, and professional development initiatives that achieve effectiveness reliably at scale. Toward this end, this paper discusses the function of networked communities engaged in improvement research and illustrates the application of these ideas in promoting greater student success in community colleges. Specifically, this white paper:* Introduces improvement research and networked communities as ideas that we believe can enhance educators' capacities to advance positive change. * Explains why improvement research requires a different kind of measures -- what we call practical measurement -- that are distinct from those commonly used by schools for accountability or by researchers for theory development.* Illustrates through a case study how systematic improvement work to promote student mindsets can be carried out. The case is based on the Carnegie Foundation's effort to address the poor success rates for students in developmental math at community colleges.Specifically, this case details:- How a practical theory and set of practical measures were created to assess the causes of "productive persistence" -- the set of "non-cognitive factors" thought to powerfully affect community college student success. In doing this work, a broad set of potential factors was distilled into a digestible framework that was useful topractitioners working with researchers, and a large set of potential measures was reduced to a practical (3-minute) set of assessments.- How these measures were used by researchers and practitioners for practical purposes -- specifically, to assess changes, predict which students were at-risk for course failure, and set priorities for improvement work.-How we organized researchersto work with practitioners to accelerate field-based experimentation on everyday practices that promote academic mindsets(what we call alpha labs), and how we organized practitioners to work with researchers to test, revise, refine, and iteratively improve their everyday practices (using plando-study-act cycles).While significant progress has already occurred, robust, practical, reliable efforts to improve students' mindsets remains at an early formative stage. We hope the ideas presented here are an instructive starting point for new efforts that might attempt to address other problems facing educators, most notably issues of inequality and underperformance in K-12 settings

A global experiment on motivating social distancing during the COVID-19 pandemic

Finding communication strategies that effectively motivate social distancing continues to be a global public health priority during the COVID-19 pandemic. This cross-country, preregistered experiment (n = 25,718 from 89 countries) tested hypotheses concerning generalizable positive and negative outcomes of social distancing messages that promoted personal agency and reflective choices (i.e., an autonomy-supportive message) or were restrictive and shaming (i.e., a controlling message) compared with no message at all. Results partially supported experimental hypotheses in that the controlling message increased controlled motivation (a poorly internalized form of motivation relying on shame, guilt, and fear of social consequences) relative to no message. On the other hand, the autonomy-supportive message lowered feelings of defiance compared with the controlling message, but the controlling message did not differ from receiving no message at all. Unexpectedly, messages did not influence autonomous motivation (a highly internalized form of motivation relying on one’s core values) or behavioral intentions. Results supported hypothesized associations between people’s existing autonomous and controlled motivations and self-reported behavioral intentions to engage in social distancing. Controlled motivation was associated with more defiance and less long-term behavioral intention to engage in social distancing, whereas autonomous motivation was associated with less defiance and more short- and long-term intentions to social distance. Overall, this work highlights the potential harm of using shaming and pressuring language in public health communication, with implications for the current and future global health challenges

Proceedings of the 3rd Biennial Conference of the Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) 2015: advancing efficient methodologies through community partnerships and team science

It is well documented that the majority of adults, children and families in need of evidence-based behavioral health interventionsi do not receive them [1, 2] and that few robust empirically supported methods for implementing evidence-based practices (EBPs) exist. The Society for Implementation Research Collaboration (SIRC) represents a burgeoning effort to advance the innovation and rigor of implementation research and is uniquely focused on bringing together researchers and stakeholders committed to evaluating the implementation of complex evidence-based behavioral health interventions. Through its diverse activities and membership, SIRC aims to foster the promise of implementation research to better serve the behavioral health needs of the population by identifying rigorous, relevant, and efficient strategies that successfully transfer scientific evidence to clinical knowledge for use in real world settings [3]. SIRC began as a National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)-funded conference series in 2010 (previously titled the “Seattle Implementation Research Conference”; $150,000 USD for 3 conferences in 2011, 2013, and 2015) with the recognition that there were multiple researchers and stakeholdersi working in parallel on innovative implementation science projects in behavioral health, but that formal channels for communicating and collaborating with one another were relatively unavailable. There was a significant need for a forum within which implementation researchers and stakeholders could learn from one another, refine approaches to science and practice, and develop an implementation research agenda using common measures, methods, and research principles to improve both the frequency and quality with which behavioral health treatment implementation is evaluated. SIRC’s membership growth is a testament to this identified need with more than 1000 members from 2011 to the present.ii SIRC’s primary objectives are to: (1) foster communication and collaboration across diverse groups, including implementation researchers, intermediariesi, as well as community stakeholders (SIRC uses the term “EBP champions” for these groups) – and to do so across multiple career levels (e.g., students, early career faculty, established investigators); and (2) enhance and disseminate rigorous measures and methodologies for implementing EBPs and evaluating EBP implementation efforts. These objectives are well aligned with Glasgow and colleagues’ [4] five core tenets deemed critical for advancing implementation science: collaboration, efficiency and speed, rigor and relevance, improved capacity, and cumulative knowledge. SIRC advances these objectives and tenets through in-person conferences, which bring together multidisciplinary implementation researchers and those implementing evidence-based behavioral health interventions in the community to share their work and create professional connections and collaborations

A multi-country test of brief reappraisal interventions on emotions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The COVID-19 pandemic has increased negative emotions and decreased positive emotions globally. Left unchecked, these emotional changes might have a wide array of adverse impacts. To reduce negative emotions and increase positive emotions, we tested the effectiveness of reappraisal, an emotion-regulation strategy that modifies how one thinks about a situation. Participants from 87 countries and regions (n = 21,644) were randomly assigned to one of two brief reappraisal interventions (reconstrual or repurposing) or one of two control conditions (active or passive). Results revealed that both reappraisal interventions (vesus both control conditions) consistently reduced negative emotions and increased positive emotions across different measures. Reconstrual and repurposing interventions had similar effects. Importantly, planned exploratory analyses indicated that reappraisal interventions did not reduce intentions to practice preventive health behaviours. The findings demonstrate the viability of creating scalable, low-cost interventions for use around the world

Strategic encoding and episodic discrimination (SEED) model of error correction

Includes bibliographical references.2020 Summer.Despite what many students and teachers believe, making errors while learning can improve long-term learning of correct information. This paper proposes the Strategic Encoding and Episodic Discrimination (SEED) model of error correction, which proposes that in comparison to errorless learning, making errors while learning enables individuals to effectively adapt how they encode the correct answer and then, on a later memory test, use episodic memory to discriminate between the correct answer and other information that may be retrieved. Experiment 1 tested the strategic encoding component of SEED and found that errorful learning enhanced memory relative to errorless learning, but the benefits of errorful learning could not be explained by strategic adaptations in study times. Experiment 2 tested both the strategic encoding and episodic discrimination components of SEED and contrasted SEED with other accounts of error correction. The results of Experiment 2 were largely consistent with SEED and revealed that errorful learning enhanced memory by both increasing the likelihood that the correct answer was retrieved on the final test and improving participants' ability to distinguish between correct and incorrect answers

Do the Best Teachers Get the Best Ratings?

We review recent studies that asked: Do college students learn relatively more from teachers whom they rate highly on student evaluation forms? Recent studies measured learning at two time points. When learning was measured with a test at the end of the course, the teachers who got the highest ratings were the ones who contributed the most to learning. But when learning was measured as performance in subsequent related courses, the teachers who had received relatively low ratings appeared to have been most effective. We speculate about why these effects occurred: Making a course difficult in productive ways may decrease ratings but enhance learning. Despite their limitations, we do not suggest abandoning student ratings, but do recommend that student evaluation scores should not be the sole basis for evaluating college teaching and they should be recognized for what they are

Improving Metacognition in the Classroom

Abstract. Students are often overconfident in educational settings and struggle to differentiate between well-learned and poorly-learned concepts. The present article reviews current research on strategies that help students assess their understanding, with a focus on research using authentic educational tasks and materials. We propose a framework for these strategies that we refer to as wait-generate-validate. The wait-generate-validate strategies can give students a more objective measure of their learning from lectures, understanding of course concepts, text comprehension, problem-solving ability, and test preparedness. These strategies have been shown to lead to more effective study decisions and greater learning. Lastly, we translate the reviewed research into practical tips for students and teachers and conclude with recommendations for future research regarding how students judge their learning in diverse educational contexts

Extreme divorce: the managerial revolution in UK companies before 1914

We present the first broadly representative study for any early twentieth-century economy of the extent to which quoted company ownership was already divorced from managerial control. In the 337 largest, independent, UK companies in the Investor's year book (those with £1 million or more quoted share capital in 1911), the generality of public shareholders were a narrower group than today, but directors personally owned only 3.4 per cent of the shares. This indicates a lower level of personal ownership (and board voting control) in the largest securities market of the early twentieth century than in any of the world's major securities markets toward the end of that century. Berle, Means, Gordon, and others subsequently quantified the US's later and (on this dimension) less advanced managerial 'revolution'. Their evidence was widely misinterpreted: some erroneously concluded that the US pioneered this aspect of 'modernity' and that the 'divorce' of ownership from control, globally, was a new and continuing trend