Ed, the studies were conducted in vitro (i.e., lab conditions with random assignment to conditions).
I agree that it would be desirable to have Nevid's work carried out in the in vivo manner you describe. However, it seems to me that the logical approach is to test these interventions first under laboratory conditions so that we can determine if the intervention itself is the one responsible for the expected outcome. A more critical issue with respect to that research is the one raised by Mike Scoles. My recollection is that the outcome measures used were either multiple choice or true/false items. If so, then we really don't know if similar effects can be obtained when the more effective, essay-type assessments are used. I think this question is very important and worth pursuing. Again, I find myself in agreement with Ed's impressions regarding the extent to which students study. Even if I could verify that they have studied, say, triple the number of hours reported by Ed's student, I can understand why little learning is taking place. Too many students multi-task while studying. Just the other day, I found one of mine 'studying' for an exam in the cafeteria; his book in his lap, his laptop on the table with 3 or 4 windows opened, including ITunes (he did have his headset on to mask the cafeteria noise), Instant Messaging with an active screen, and who knows what else was opened. I should note that in General Psychology I now spend the most time on the chapter on memory to discuss proper study skills in the context of what is known about the retention and recall of information. What else can we do as instructors to make students recognize the importance of good study habits? Miguel -----Original Message----- From: Pollak, Edward [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2007 8:11 PM To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Subject: [tips] Tension between enabling understanding and good grades with Miguel wrote Ed, I tend to agree with the general tone of your post. However, my colleague, Jeff Nevid, has published evidence that at least one of those learning aids, concept signaling, (when short definitions/explanatory notes appear in the margins of the page) can enhance student performance. Also modular presentation of text, particularly if the students prefer such formats, appears to enhance their exam performance. On the other hand, other research cited by Nevid and Lampmann (see below) indicates that students rarely use some of the gimmicks you mention." I only wonder if the studies were conducted "in vivo or "in vitro." Too many of these studies give the students a chapter to read. One group gets a chapter with the gimmicks and the other group gets it without the gimmicks. This is what I mean by testing the gimmicks "in vitro." To do it right (in vivo) I'd want to compare students studying for a REAL EXAM using a textbook that lacks the gimmicks and compare that with other students studying for an exam with a standard text (that includes the gimmicks). And I would like to see that books be used the entire semester to avoid any sort of Hawthorne effect. Until that's done, I remain unconvinced. Ed Edward I. Pollak, Ph.D. Department of Psychology West Chester University of Pennsylvania http://mywebpages.comcast.net/epollak/home.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Husband, father, grandfather, biopsychologist, bluegrass fiddler and herpetoculturist...... in approximate order of importance. --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=engl ish --- To make changes to your subscription go to: http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
