Search

Although there has been much published research on the benefits of distributed practice (Cepeda, Pashler, Vul, Wixted, & Rohrer, 2006) and the testing effect (Eisenkraemer, Jaeger, & Stein, 2013), very few studies are available regarding cumulative testing in college courses. Those available show a benefit to cumulative testing (Lawrence, 2014; Rohm, Sparzo, & Bennett, 1986; Szpunar, McDermott, & Roediger, 2007). As baseline information for a future study of cumulative testing, the current study investigated how well 150 college students recalled previous material when given unannounced cumulative items on a final exam. (Cumulative items were not counted toward students' grades.) Four sections of an undergraduate human development class formed the sample. Two professors taught two sections each and administered separately-developed exams throughout the semester. For the final exam, each professor chose ten multiple-choice items from each of the first and second tests of the semester to include on the final exam. The number of students missing the items on the final was compared to the number missing the same items earlier in the semester. A paired t-test showed a statistically significant increase in the overall number of students missing the items on the final exam. The size of the difference did not depend on whether the items were from Test 1 or Test 2, although it did differ by professor, with an effect size of 0.38 for Professor A and 1.15 for Professor B. A Pearson's correlation between the overall number of students missing each item before and on the final was 0.51, indicating that items previously missed by larger numbers of students were not necessarily the ones missed by the most students on the final exam. This correlation differed by professor, as well (0.65 for Professor A; 0.45 for Professor B).

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between academic self-efficacy and preferences regarding the use of text materials and in-class activities of college students at a university that serves one of the highest-poverty regions in the United States. A convenient cluster sample of 105 students taking summer classes at a regional university in the mid-south were administered a self-efficacy scale and a survey of textbook use and preferences for in-class activities. Frequency tables of study survey items by self-efficacy group (above vs. below the sample average) were produced and visually inspected for effect size prior to statistical testing. Subsequently, three chi-square tests were conducted with a Bonferroni correction to alpha, lowering it from 0.05 to 0.0167. The data collected supported the idea that students from high-poverty areas enter college with reduced academic self-efficacy, as the average for the entire sample was lower than other published data. Those evidencing below-average academic self-efficacy in this sample were significantly less likely to engage in the strategies that would help them be successful (such as reading their textbooks).

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between academic self-efficacy, dispositional optimism/pessimism, and preferences regarding the use of text materials and in-class activities of college students at a university that serves one of the highest-poverty regions in the United States. A sample of 105 students was surveyed. Results indicated that sample students who had below-average self-efficacy were less likely to engage in learning strategies that would lead to academic success, such as reading the textbook assignments, but dispositional pessimism within self-efficacy groups seemed to be related to a higher likelihood of reading the text. Preferences for in-class instructional strategies differed depending upon students' self-efficacy and disposition. Results imply that a variety of instructional practices should be employed that would encourage all students to implement successful learning strategies. Three appendices include: (1) Textbook and Use of Class Time Survey; (2) Self-Efficacy for Learning Form (Self); and (3) Life Orientation Test-Revised. (Contains 20 tables.)

Dispositional optimism is an adopted orientation in which one believes that goals will generally be attained and that tasks can generally be successfully completed, whereas pessimists orient toward less belief in successful task or goal completion. A related concept, individuals with high self-efficacy believe they will be successful at particular tasks. The type of self-efficacy related to learning tasks is termed "Academic self-efficacy" and it, along with generalized optimism/pessimism, appear to influence motivation and engagement decisions pertaining to completion of goal-oriented tasks. A cluster sample (n = 105) of undergraduate students at a regional university in the midsouth was administered two instruments. The 19-item "Self-Efficacy for Learning Form--Abridged" (SELF-A) was employed to gauge student academic self-efficacy. Participants also completed the Revised Life Orientation Test, an instrument designed to measure outcome expectancies and dispositional optimism/pessimism. Students that reported higher self-efficacy reported significantly lower pessimism whereas participants with reported lower self-efficacy displayed significantly higher levels of pessimism. Questions still remain, but educators desiring students to attain successful outcomes in class should employ instructional strategies that orient learners toward optimism and higher rates of self-efficacy. The following are appended: (1) Self-Efficacy for Learning Form (Self); and (2) Life Orientation Test-Revised.

Self-efficacy is a personal belief in one's ability to accomplish particular tasks. Academic self-efficacy relates to one's belief in ability to accomplish learning activities. A convenient cluster sample (n = 105) of undergraduate students at a regional university in the midsouth was administered a survey that measured student academic self-efficacy and other student characteristics. This sample's SELF-A scores were nearly a standard deviation below the original sample. Freshman were more likely than sophomores or seniors to say they could not motivate themselves to keep good notes during a boring lecture, could not motivate themselves to do well on tests in which they felt depressed, and could not motivate themselves to study for an exam early enough to prevent cramming. A/B students were more likely to report keeping up with studying despite personal conflicts. Educators should structure instruction in ways that support development of increasing higher levels of self-efficacy to promote student belief of academic abilities.

It has been reported (Lei, Barlett, Gorney, & Herschbach, 2010; Sikorski et al., 2002) that only a minority of college students actually read the course textbook or other assigned readings in preparation for examinations. Suggested strategies to remedy this situation include quizzes (Ruscio, 2001; Ryan, 2006), study worksheets (Aagaard & Skidmore, 2009; Ryan, 2006), shorter reading assignments and use of the textbook during class time (Aagaard & Skidmore, 2009). A convenient cluster sample of 105 undergraduate students at a regional university in the midsouth completed a survey regarding their use of college textbooks, what strategies might increase the likelihood of their reading textbook assignments, and their preference for how class time was used. Participants were 60% female and fairly evenly distributed across the four years of college experience. Chi-square was run on 25 selected comparisons, with a Bonferroni correction of the resulting alphas. A majority of students (52%) reported that they do read the assigned textbook readings. Freshmen were significantly more likely to report that outside reading should not be required, and less likely to report having used or known about e-textbooks. Strategies reported to most likely prompt reading the textbook included in-class quizzes over text material (73% overall, but females were significantly more likely to read because of quizzes), assigning graded study-guides to complete while reading (77%); testing over material found in the textbook but not covered in class (81%); and assigning shorter reading assignments (77%). Sixty-four percent of respondents overall preferred group presentations, but sophomores and seniors opted for individual work, while juniors preferred groups. Additionally, students reported preferring the use of PowerPoint lectures to notes on the chalkboard, and generally preferred the use of group discussion and application of material to real-life rather than just lecture over textbook content. Textbook and Use of Class Time Survey results are appended.