Skip to main content

A Mastery Approach to Flashcard-Based Adaptive Training

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Adaptive Instructional Systems (HCII 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 12214))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Students often use flashcards to study but they do not always use them effectively. In this experiment, we explored different methods of dropping flashcards to inform the development of an adaptive flashcard-based trainer. Forty-seven U.S. Marine Corps students were randomly assigned to one of three groups in an armored vehicle training task. In the Mastery Drop condition, cards were dropped from training based on objective criteria (i.e., accuracy and reaction time). In the Learner Drop condition, cards were dropped based on the learner’s choice. In the No Drop condition, cards were not dropped during training, which served as a control group. Using a pre-test post-test design, results showed that the Learner Drop condition had the lowest learning gains on the immediate post-test and the delayed post-test (two days after training), perhaps because participants were unsuccessful at self-regulating their learning and completed training too quickly. Although the No Drop condition had the highest learning gains on the immediate post-test, the gains significantly decreased on the delayed post-test. In contrast, the Mastery Drop condition maintained consistent learning gains from immediate to delayed post-test. Although the No Drop condition completed more training trials than the Mastery Drop condition, this additional practice did not significantly aid long-term retention. Finally, the No Drop condition had the highest immediate transfer test scores, which involved identifying images of real-world vehicles, but there were no group differences on the delayed transfer test. These results suggest that adaptive flashcard training should incorporate mastery criteria, rather than learner-driven decisions about when to drop flashcards from the deck.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Burke, R.P.: (2018). https://www.usni.org/magazines/proceedings/2018/march/sailor-2025-navys-strategy-people

  2. Landsberg, C.R., Van Buskirk, W.L., Astwood, R.S., Mercado, A.D., Aakre, A.J.: Adaptive training considerations for simulation-based training. Special report No 2010-001, NAWCTSD. Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division, Orlando (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kornell, N., Bjork, R.A.: Optimising self-regulated study: the benefits—and costs—of dropping flashcards. Memory 16, 125–136 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Karpicke, J.D., Roediger, H.L.: The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science 319(5865), 966–968 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Oxford, R., Crookall, D.: Vocabulary learning: a critical analysis of techniques. TESL Canada J. 7, 9–30 (1990)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Oxford, R.L., Scarcella, R.C.: Second language vocabulary learning among adults: state of the art in vocabulary instruction. System 22(2), 231–243 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wissman, K.T., Rawson, K.A., Pyc, M.A.: How and when do students use flashcards? Memory 20(6), 568–579 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Bjork, R.A., Dunlosky, J., Kornell, N.: Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 64, 417–444 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Karpicke, J.D., Butler, A.C., Roediger, H.L.: Metacognitive strategies in student learning: do students practise retrieval when they study on their own? Memory 17, 471–479 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Pyc, M.A., Rawson, K.A., Aschenbrenner, A.J.: Metacognitive monitoring during criterion learning: when and why are judgments accurate? Mem. Cogn. 42(6), 886–897 (2014). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-014-0403-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Scheiter, K., Gerjets, P.: Learner control in hypermedia environments. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 19(3), 285–307 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dunlosky, J., Serra, M., Baker, J.M.C.: Metamemory applied. In: Durso, F.T., Nickerson, R.S., Dumais, S.T., Lewandowsky, S., Perfect, T.J. (eds.) Handbook of Applied Cognition, 2nd edn, pp. 137–159. Wiley, New York (2007)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. Nelson, T.O., Narens, L.: Metamemory: a theoretical framework and new findings. In: Bower, G.H. (ed.) The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, vol. 26, pp. 125–173. Academic Press, New York (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Karpicke, J.D.: Metacognitive control and strategy selection: deciding when to practice retriecal during learning. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 1238(4), 469–486 (2009)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Marraffino, M.D., Johnson, C.I., Whitmer, D.E., Steinhauser, N.B., Clement, A.: Advise when ready for game plan: adaptive training for JTACs. In: Proceedings of the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation & Education Conference (I/ITSEC). National Training Systems Association, Orlando (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Peirce, N., Wade, V.: Personalised learning for casual games: the ‘language trap’ online language learning game. In: Leading Issues in Games Based Learning, vol. 159–170 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  17. VanLehn, K., et al.: The Andes physics tutoring system: lessons learned. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 15(3), 147–204 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Landsberg, C.R., Mercado, A.D., Van Buskirk, W.L., Lineberry, M., Steinhauser, N.: Evaluation of an adaptive training system for submarine periscope operations. In: 56th International Proceedings on Human Factors and Ergonomics, vol. 56(1), pp. 2422–2426. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Durlach, P.J., Ray, J.M.: Designing adaptive instructional environments: insights from empirical evidence. Technical report No. 1297, ARI. U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Arlington (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Andrieux, M., Danna, J., Thon, B.: Self-control of task difficulty during training enhances motor learning of a complex coincidence-anticipation task. Res. Q. Exerc. Sport 83(1), 27–35 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Durlach, P.J.: Fundamentals, flavors, and foibles of adaptive instructional systems. In: Sottilare, R.A., Schwarz, J. (eds.) HCII 2019. LNCS, vol. 11597, pp. 76–95. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22341-0_7

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Guadagnoli, M.A., Lee, T.D.: Challenge point: a framework for conceptualizing the effects of various practice conditions in motor learning. J. Mot. Behav. 36(2), 212–224 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Lintern, G., Gopher, D.: Adaptive training of perceptual-motor skills: issues, results, and future directions. Int. J. Man Mach. Stud. 10(5), 521–551 (1978)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mayer, R.E.: Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning. Cambridge University Press, New York (2014)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Sweller, J.: Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In: Mayer, R.E. (ed.) The Cambridge Handbook of Multimedia Learning, 1st edn, pp. 19–30. Cambridge University Press, New York (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  26. Vygotsky, L.S.: Interaction between learning and development. In: Gauvain, M., Cole, M. (eds.) Readings on the Development of Children, 4th edn, pp. 34–40. Worth, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Roediger, H.L., Karpicke, J.D.: Test-enhanced learning: taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychol. Sci. 17(3), 249–255 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Mettler, E., Massey, C.M., Kellman, P.J.: Improving adaptive learning technology through the use of response times. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 2532–2537. Cognitive Sciences Society, Boston (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Mettler, E., Massey, C.M., Kellman, P.J.: A comparison of adaptive and fixed schedules of practice. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 145(7), 897–917 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. van Merriënboer, J.J., Sweller, J.: Cognitive load theory and complex learning: recent developments and future directions. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 17(2), 147–177 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Atkinson, R.C.: Optimizing the learning of a second-language vocabulary. J. Exp. Psychol. 96(1), 124–129 (1972)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Settles, B., Meeder, B.: A trainable spaced repetition model for language learning. In: Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, pp. 1848–1858. Association for Computational Linguistics, Germany (2016)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We gratefully acknowledge Dr. Peter Squire and the Office of Naval Research who sponsored this work (Funding Doc# N0001419WX00633). We would also like to thank the Marine Corps Intelligence School for their enthusiastic support and help with participant recruitment. Presentation of this material does not constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Navy or Department of Defense (DoD). The opinions of the authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the U.S. Navy or DoD.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daphne E. Whitmer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Whitmer, D.E., Johnson, C.I., Marraffino, M.D., Pharmer, R.L., Blalock, L.D. (2020). A Mastery Approach to Flashcard-Based Adaptive Training. In: Sottilare, R.A., Schwarz, J. (eds) Adaptive Instructional Systems. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12214. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50788-6_41

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50788-6_41

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-50787-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-50788-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics