Phase 1: Prepare
Step 1 Warm-up recall
From M1.L3: say why same-day recall can mislead you.
Private: nothing you type here is sent or stored.
Step 2 Learning goal
By the end of this lesson you can:
- report the main conclusions of Dunlosky and colleagues (2013) (Foundation);
- name the techniques rated highest and lowest in the review (Core);
- state two limits of a literature review (Core).
Phase 2: Teach
Step 3 A familiar example
Most students highlight and reread because it is easy and feels productive. Whether it works is a question for evidence, not for feelings.
Step 4 Clear explanation
Dunlosky, Rawson, Marsh, Nathan and Willingham (2013) reviewed the evidence on ten learning techniques commonly used by students. They gave two techniques the highest overall utility rating: practice testing (trying to recall material without looking) and distributed practice (spreading study over time rather than cramming). They gave five techniques a low utility rating, including summarization, highlighting and underlining and rereading.
| Technique | What the review concluded |
|---|---|
| Practice testing | Highest overall utility rating |
| Distributed practice (spacing) | Highest overall utility rating |
| Summarization | Low utility rating |
| Highlighting and underlining | Low utility rating |
| Rereading | Low utility rating |
Treat a review with care. Its ratings summarise many studies that differ in materials, learners and tests, and the reviewers rated each technique across the conditions in which it had been studied. A low rating means weaker evidence of benefit in those conditions; it does not mean the technique can never help. Modules 3 and 4 return to the two top-rated techniques in depth. See the entries on retrieval practice and the spacing effect.
Step 5 Worked example (4 marks)
A friend spends all week highlighting and rereading. Advise them using the review.
- The review rated highlighting and rereading as low utility. (1 mark)
- It rated practice testing and distributed practice highest. (1 mark)
- Suggest turning some rereading time into self-testing. (1 mark)
- Add a caution: ratings reflect conditions studied, so check what works for you. (1 mark)
Phase 3: Practise
Step 6 Learner practice (instant-marked)
1. How many techniques did Dunlosky and colleagues (2013) review?
They reviewed ten commonly used techniques.
2. Which pair received the highest overall utility rating?
Those two were rated highest.
3. Which technique received a low utility rating?
Rereading, highlighting and summarization were among the five rated low.
4. What does a low utility rating mean?
It is a statement about the evidence, not an absolute ban.
Phase 4: Close
Step 7 Recap
- Ten techniques reviewed; two rated highest, five rated low.
- Highest: practice testing and distributed practice.
- A rating reflects the evidence in the conditions studied.
Step 8 Exit ticket (ungraded)
List the techniques you used last week and mark each as top-rated or low-rated by the review.
Private: nothing you type here is sent or stored.
Step 9 Go further (Extension)
Read the abstract of the 2013 review in Psychological Science in the Public Interest and find the reasoning behind one rating.
Common mistakes
| Mistake | Why it fails |
|---|---|
| Treating a low rating as a ban | It is about the strength of evidence. |
| Reading only the headline | The conditions studied matter. |
| Dropping a method without testing alternatives | Compare methods by delayed recall. |
Limits. This lesson reports only the ratings stated in the review’s published summary: two highest, five low. The remaining three techniques are covered in later modules from their own sources.