People feel they understand complex phenomena with far greater precision, coherence, and depth than they really do; they are subject to an illusion—an illusion of explanatory depth. The illusion is far stronger for explanatory knowledge than many other kinds of knowledge, such as that for facts, procedures or narratives. The illusion for explanatory knowledge is most robust where the environment supports real-time explanations with visible mechanisms. We demonstrate the illusion of depth with explanatory knowledge in Studies 1–6. Then we show differences in overconfidence about knowledge across different knowledge domains in Studies 7–10. Finally, we explore the mechanisms behind the initial confidence and behind overconfidence in Studies 11 and 12, and discuss the implications of our findings for the roles of intuitive theories in concepts and cognition.

A powerful way of improving one’s memory for material is to be tested on that material. Tests enhance later retention more than additional study of the material, even when tests are given without feedback. This surprising phenomenon is called the testing effect, and although it has been studied by cognitive psychologists sporadically over the years, today there is a renewed effort to learn why testing is effective and to apply testing in educational settings. In this article, we selectively review laboratory studies that reveal the power of testing in improving retention and then turn to studies that demonstrate the basic effects in educational settings. We also consider the related concepts of dynamic testing and formative assessment as other means of using tests to improve learning. Finally, we consider some negative consequences of testing that may occur in certain circumstances, though these negative effects are often small and do not cancel out the large positive effects of testing. Frequent testing in the classroom may boost educational achievement at all levels of education.

ABSTRACT. The authors describe the effects of practice conditions in motor learning (e.g., contextual interference, knowledge of results) within the constraints of 2 experimental variables: skill level and task difficulty. They use a research framework to conceptualize the interaction of those variables on the basis of concepts from information theory and information processing. The fundamental idea is that motor tasks represent different challenges for performers of different abilities. The authors propose that learning is related to the information arising from performance, which should be optimized along functions relating the difficulty of the task to the skill level of the performer. Specific testable hypotheses arising from the framework are also described. Key words: augmented feedback, contextual interference, motor learning P ractice is generally considered to be the single most important factor responsible for the permanent improvement in the ability to perform a motor skill (i.e.,

Performance during a learning event is frequently used as a measure of learning; however, basic cognitive research suggests that this may be an unreliable predictor of long-term learning and transfer. Rather, in some training paradigms, higher error rates during training may predict greater retention and generalization of learning. One such paradigm is training in which learners generate, rather than read, during study opportunities. A second is training in which study for two sets of information is interleaved rather than grouped into separate blocks. Educationally relevant learning requires retention and the capacity to generalize information across contexts, leading to the hypothesis that these paradigms may have important implications for educational practice. An experiment is described in which the effects of generation and interleaving are

The ability to work as an effective member of a development team is a primary goal of engineering education and one of the ABET student learning outcomes. As such, teaming has received increased attention in both the classroom and the literature over the past several years.

ter verkrijging van de graad van doctor aan de Open Universiteit Nederland op gezag van de rector magnificus prof. dr. ir. F. Mulder ten overstaan van een door het College voor promoties ingestelde commissie in het openbaar te verdedigen op vrijdag 22 april 2005 te Heerlen om 16:00 uur precies door

The Operations Evaluation Department (OED) is an independent unit within the World Bank; it reports directly to the Bank’s Board of Executive Directors. OED assesses what works, and what does not; how a borrower plans to run and maintain a project; and the lasting contribution of the Bank to a country’s overall development. The goals of evaluation are to learn from experience, to provide an objective basis for assessing the results of the Bank’s work, and to provide accountability in the achievement of its objectives. It also improves Bank work by identifying and disseminating the lessons learned from experience and by framing recommendations drawn from evaluation findings. OED Working Papers are an informal series to disseminate the findings of work in progress to encourage the exchange of ideas about development effectiveness through evaluation. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed here are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Board of Executive Directors of the World Bank or the governments they represent. The World Bank cannot guarantee the accuracy of the data included in this work. The boundaries, colors, denominations, and other information shown on any map in this work do not imply on the part of the World Bank any judgment of the legal status of any territory or the endorsement or acceptance of such boundaries. Contact:

For self-regulated learning to be effective, students need to be able to accurately assess their own performance on a learning task, and to select an appropriate new learning task in response to that self-assessment. This study investigated the use of video-based modeling examples to teach selfassessment and task-selection skills. Students in both the experimental and control condition observed the model performing a problem solving task; students in the experimental condition additionally observed the model engaging in self-assessment and task selection. Results show that students in both conditions acquired problem-solving skills from the examples, as indicated by a substantial pretest to posttest knowledge gain. Moreover, students in the experimental condition also acquired self-assessment and task-selection skills from the examples: they demonstrated higher self-assessment and task-selection accuracy on the posttest than students in the control condition. Keywords: Example-based learning; self-assessment; task selection; self-regulated learning. The Role of Self-Assessment and Task-Selection Skills in Self-Regulated Learning A major aim of many contemporary educational programs is to foster students ’ self-regulation skills. It is often assumed that this aim can be achieved by providing learners with the opportunity to self-regulate their learning processes. In the Netherlands, for example, a nationwide innovation was implemented in secondary education in 1999 that relies heavily on self-regulated learning (i.e., the ‘study house’;

ABSTRACT—Taking a memory test not only assesses what one knows, but also enhances later retention, a phenomenon known as the testing effect. We studied this effect with educationally relevant materials and investigated whether testing facilitates learning only because tests offer an opportunity to restudy material. In two experiments, students studied prose passages and took one or three immediate free-recall tests, without feedback, or restudied the material the same number of times as the students who received tests. Students then took a final retention test 5 min, 2 days, or 1 week later. When the final test was given after 5 min, repeated studying improved recall relative to repeated testing. However, on the delayed tests, prior testing produced substantially greater retention than studying, even though repeated studying increased students ’ confidence in their ability to remember the material. Testing is a powerful means of improving learning, not just assessing it. In educational settings, tests are usually considered devices of assessment. Students take tests in class to assess what they have learned and take standardized tests like the SAT to assess their knowledge and aptitude. In many circumstances, such as university lecture courses, tests are given infrequently (often just two or three times a semester) and are generally perceived as a bother by faculty and students alike. We believe that the neglect of testing in all levels of education is misguided. To state an obvious point, if students know they will be tested regularly (say, once a week, or even every class period), they will study more and will space their studying throughout the semester rather than concentrating it just before exams (see Bangert-Drowns, Kulik, & Kulik, 1991; Leeming, 2002). However, more important for present purposes, testing has a powerful positive effect on future retention. If students are tested on material and successfully recall or recognize it, they will remember it better in