Retention – Center for Teaching and Learning /ctl Wed, 15 Apr 2026 15:46:41 +0000 en-US hourly 1 /ctl/wp-content/uploads/sites/88/2024/01/cropped-android-chrome-512x512-1-32x32.png Retention – Center for Teaching and Learning /ctl 32 32 Generative and retrieval tasks: Does the sequence matter and do sequence effects depend on learning task delay? /ctl/generative-and-retrieval-tasks-does-the-sequence-matter-and-do-sequence-effects-depend-on-learning-task-delay/ Wed, 15 Apr 2026 15:46:41 +0000 /ctl/?p=5829 This 2026 study investigated whether the order in which students complete generative tasks (like generating their own examples of concepts) and retrieval tasks (like cued recall) affects learning outcomes. Using a 3×2 experimental design with 208 university students, the researchers compared three task sequences — generative-before-retrieval, retrieval-before-generative, and restudy-before-generative — under two timing conditions: completing tasks immediately after an initial study phase or completing them two days later. Students were tested one week after finishing the learning tasks on both retention and comprehension of four psychology concepts.

]]> This 2026 study investigated whether the order in which students complete generative tasks (like generating their own examples of concepts) and retrieval tasks (like cued recall) affects learning outcomes. Using a 3×2 experimental design with 208 university students, the researchers compared three task sequences — generative-before-retrieval, retrieval-before-generative, and restudy-before-generative — under two timing conditions: completing tasks immediately after an initial study phase or completing them two days later. Students were tested one week after finishing the learning tasks on both retention and comprehension of four psychology concepts.

The study found that the order of generative and retrieval tasks generally made little difference to learning outcomes. The one notable exception was that retrieval task performance was significantly better for the generative-before-retrieval group when a two-day delay was involved, likely because those students used the open-book generative task as an opportunity to re-engage with the material first.

Key Takeaways

  • Order of activities matters less than you might think. You can feel free to sequence generative activities (discussions, example-generation, concept mapping) and retrieval activities (quizzes, recall prompts) in whatever order suits your course design.
  • Retrieval practice still outperforms restudy for retention. Replacing quizzes or recall activities with simply re-reading course material is ineffective. Students who only reread retained significantly less after one week. Low-stakes quizzes and retrieval activities remain worth keeping.
  • Task design quality matters more than sequence. The authors note that earlier research finding sequence effects likely reflected a poorly designed generative task (no feedback, no revision opportunity). When both task types are well-designed with feedback built in, sequence effects largely disappear. This is a reminder that how activities are designed is more important than their order.

Read the full article here:

Obergassel, N., Renkl, A., Endres, T., Nückles, M., Carpenter, S. K., & Roelle, J. (2026). Generative and retrieval tasks: Does the sequence matter and do sequence effects depend on learning task delay? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 40(2), e70188. 

]]> Last Chance for Retrieval /ctl/last-chance-for-retrieval/ Wed, 15 Apr 2026 15:45:12 +0000 /ctl/?p=5818 As the semester winds down, resist the urge to fill every remaining class session with new content. Instead, dedicate at least one class period to a low-stakes retrieval activity such as asking students to recall key concepts, work through application problems from memory, or generate their own examples of course ideas without their notes.

]]> As the semester winds down, resist the urge to fill every remaining class session with new content. Instead, dedicate at least one class period to a low-stakes retrieval activity such as asking students to recall key concepts, work through application problems from memory, or generate their own examples of course ideas without their notes. Research consistently shows that the act of retrieving information (rather than simply reviewing it) is one of the most powerful things students can do to consolidate what they’ve learned before the course ends. Even a 15-minute ungraded recall exercise at the start of your last few classes can meaningfully strengthen long-term retention. Bonus: it also helps students self-diagnose gaps in their understanding while there’s still time to address them.

]]> Learning with concept maps: the effect of activity structure and the type of task /ctl/learning-with-concept-maps-the-effect-of-activity-structure-and-the-type-of-task/ Fri, 10 Apr 2026 15:51:40 +0000 /ctl/?p=5791 This research examined how 226 undergraduate students learned using concept maps under different conditions, comparing task types (fill-in-the-blanks, shuffled concepts, self-constructed, and summaries) with activity structures (individual only, individual-then-collaborative, and collaborative-then-individual). The study measured learning outcomes through comprehension and recall tests while analyzing nearly 4,200 verbal exchanges during collaborative activities. Results revealed a significant interaction between task type and activity structure: students who individually self-constructed concept maps and then discussed them collaboratively (I+C) achieved the strongest learning outcomes, particularly for delayed recall.

]]> This research examined how 226 undergraduate students learned using concept maps under different conditions, comparing task types (fill-in-the-blanks, shuffled concepts, self-constructed, and summaries) with activity structures (individual only, individual-then-collaborative, and collaborative-then-individual). The study measured learning outcomes through comprehension and recall tests while analyzing nearly 4,200 verbal exchanges during collaborative activities. Results revealed a significant interaction between task type and activity structure: students who individually self-constructed concept maps and then discussed them collaboratively (I+C) achieved the strongest learning outcomes, particularly for delayed recall.

The analysis of dialogue quality showed that self-constructed maps triggered deeper, more dialogic conversations characterized by reasoned justification, mutual engagement, and co-construction of knowledge. In contrast, simpler tasks (completing or ordering pre-made maps) produced more superficial exploratory talk with minimal argumentation. Summary-writing generated the least dialogic interaction overall, with patterns of one student dictating while the other transcribed. These findings suggest that task complexity paired with structured collaboration—allowing individual work before peer discussion—creates optimal conditions for both learning and high-quality dialogue.

Key Takeaways:

  • Prioritize self-construction over passive consumption: Have students create concept maps from scratch rather than completing or organizing pre-made maps. The cognitive demand of self-construction, when paired with collaboration, activates deeper reasoning and argumentation. However, you might consider providing more support for learners who are completely new to the content or might otherwise struggle with the task.
  • Use the I+C structure: Assign individual concept map creation as homework or in-class work first, then facilitate 15-30 minute pair discussions where students negotiate a shared map. This sequence generates more exploratory dialogue and better learning than jumping directly into group work or keeping work entirely individual.
  • Avoid summary writing as the primary task: While summaries are common, this study found they produced the weakest learning outcomes and the least meaningful peer dialogue. If summaries are required, pair them with concept mapping activities or ensure they include structured peer review to increase dialogic engagement.

Read the full article here:

Read the full article here: Amante, C., Lucero, M., & Montanero, M. (2026). Learning with concept maps: The effect of activity structure and the type of task. Instructional Science, 54, Article 12. 

]]>