Search

Abstract Background Undergraduate STEM instructors want to help students learn and retain knowledge for their future courses and careers. One promising evidence-based technique that is thought to increase long-term memory is spaced retrieval practice, or repeated testing over time. The beneficial effect of spacing has repeatedly been demonstrated in the laboratory as well as in undergraduate mathematics courses, but its generalizability across diverse STEM courses is unknown. We investigated the effect of spaced retrieval practice in nine introductory STEM courses. Retrieval practice opportunities were embedded in bi-weekly quizzes, either massed on a single quiz or spaced over multiple quizzes. Student performance on practice opportunities and a criterial test at the end of each course were examined as a function of massed or spaced practice. We also conducted a single-paper meta-analysis on criterial test scores to assess the generalizability of the effectiveness of spaced retrieval practice across introductory STEM courses. Results Significant positive effects of spacing on the criterial test were found in only two courses (Calculus I for Engineers and Chemistry for Health Professionals), although small positive effect sizes were observed in two other courses (General Chemistry and Diversity of Life). Meta-analyses revealed a significant spacing effect when all courses were included, but not when calculus was excluded. The generalizability of the spacing effect across STEM courses therefore remains unclear. Conclusions Although we could not clearly determine the generalizability of the benefits of spacing in STEM courses, our findings indicate that spaced retrieval practice could be a low-cost method of improving student performance in at least some STEM courses. More work is needed to determine when, how, and for whom spaced retrieval practice is most beneficial. The effect of spacing in classroom settings may depend on some design features such as the nature of retrieval practice activities (multiple-choice versus short answer) and/or feedback settings, as well as student actions (e.g., whether they look at feedback or study outside of practice opportunities). The evidence is promising, and further pragmatic research is encouraged.

IntroductionPaper folding and punched hole tests are used to measure spatial abilities in humans. These abilities are relevant since they are associated with success in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics). This study addresses the challenge of teaching spatial reasoning skills using an educational videogame, the Paper Folding Reasoning Game.MethodsThe Paper Folding Reasoning Game is an interactive game which presents activities intended to help users train and understand how to fold a paper to get a specific shape (Part I) and the consequence of punching a hole on a folded paper (Part II). This educational videogame can automatically generate paper-folding-and-punched-hole questions with varying degrees of difficulty depending on the number of folds and holes made, thus producing additional levels for training due to its embedded reasoning mechanisms (Part III).ResultsThis manuscript presents the results of analyzing the gameplay data gathered by the Paper Folding Reasoning Game in its three parts. For Parts I and II, the data provided by 225 anonymous unique players are analyzed. For Part III (Mastermode), the data obtained from 894 gameplays by 311 anonymous unique players are analyzed. In our analysis, we found out a significant difference in performance regarding the players who trained (i.e., played Parts I and II) before playing the Mastermode (Part III) vs. the group of players who did not train. We also found a significant difference in players' performance who used the visual help (i.e., re-watch the animated sequence of paper folds) vs. the group of players who did not use it, confirming the effectiveness of the Paper Folding Reasoning Game to train paper-folding-and-punched-hole reasoning skills. Statistically significant gender differences in performance were also found.

Women's health care has evolved significantly since it was first acknowledged as an integral part of internal medicine training more than two decades ago. To update and clarify core competencies in sex- and gender-based women's health for general internists, the Society of General Internal Medicine (SGIM) Women and Medicine Commission prepared the following Position Paper, approved by the SGIM council in 2023. Competencies were developed using several sources, including the 2021 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Program Requirements for Internal Medicine and the 2023 American Board of Internal Medicine Certification Examination Blueprint. These competencies are relevant to the care of patients who identify as women, as well as gender-diverse individuals to whom these principles apply. They align with pivotal advances in women's health and acknowledge the changing context of patients' lives, reaffirming the role of general internal medicine physicians in providing comprehensive care to women.

The widespread use of mobile devices and laptops has replaced traditional paper-based learning and the question of how the brain efficiency of digital tablet-based learning differs from that of paper-based learning remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the difference in brain efficiency for learning between paper-based and digital tablet-based learning by measuring activity in the prefrontal cortex (PFC) using functional near-infrared spectroscopy. Thirty-two subjects were randomly assigned to the paper-based learning or the digital tablet-based learning group. Subjects in each group performed a memory task that required memorizing a three-minute novel (encoding phase) on a paper or digital tablet, followed by a test in which they answered four multiple-choice questions based on the novel's content. To compare both groups, behavioral performance on the test (retrieval phase) and activity in the PFC were measured. As a result, no significant difference in behavioral performance between both groups was observed (p > 0.05). However, the paper-based learning group showed significantly lower activity in the PFC in the encoding phase than the digital tablet-based learning group (p < 0.05) but not in the retrieval phase. The current study demonstrated that brain efficiency in encoding is higher in subjects with paper-based learning than those with digital tablet-based learning. This finding has important implications for education, particularly in terms of the pros and cons of electronic document-based learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]