What do you think?
Rate this book
Retrieval Practice: Research & Resources for Every Classroom
Retrieval practice may appear to be the latest buzzword in mainstream education – but in fact it is a very powerful learning strategy.
Retrieval Practice: Research and Resources for every classroom is a very practical book written by a teacher in the classroom for teachers and leaders in schools. This book combines educational research with examples of how retrieval practice can work inside and outside of the classroom.
Filled with evidence-informed ideas to support all teachers and leaders across Primary and Secondary. Retrieval practice is a vital element of the science of learning. Understanding how children learn is essential for all educators from NQTs to more experienced teachers and senior leaders.
The educational research is presented in a format which is accessible, useful and informative and will help inform educators about cutting-edge research in a comprehensive, clear and applicable way. The practical resources are adaptable and ready to be implemented in any classroom to support and enhance teaching, learning and long term memory.
Retrieval Practice: Research and Resources for every classroom is a very practical book written by a teacher in the classroom for teachers and leaders in schools. This book combines educational research with examples of how retrieval practice can work inside and outside of the classroom.
Filled with evidence-informed ideas to support all teachers and leaders across Primary and Secondary. Retrieval practice is a vital element of the science of learning. Understanding how children learn is essential for all educators from NQTs to more experienced teachers and senior leaders.
The educational research is presented in a format which is accessible, useful and informative and will help inform educators about cutting-edge research in a comprehensive, clear and applicable way. The practical resources are adaptable and ready to be implemented in any classroom to support and enhance teaching, learning and long term memory.
163 pages, Paperback
Published January 21, 2020
61 people are currently reading
309 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews
March 10, 2021
Words cannot describe how much I rate this book but I will give it a go. This fantastic book covers the theory behind retrieval practice, how to implement in the classroom and includes fantastic editable resources. It was already having an impact on my practice before I finished it. Buy it. Read it. You won’t regret it!
January 17, 2020
Great explanations of retrieval practice and guidance of how to implement it, along with fantastic resources to use in the classroom.
June 3, 2021
''Using your memory, shapes your memory' - this is a great description of retrieval from the distinguished and well-respected professor of psychology, Robert Bjork. The retrieval process cements the information in the long-term memory, which should enable to information to become easier to retrieve in the future. Retrieval practice focuses on recalling information from memory as a powerful learning tool, not an assessment tool. Therefore, it is regarded as essential classroom practice to support learning with the regular practice of retrieval.'
I have a combative history with this method of studying. As Kate Jones wonderfully describes in this book, retrieval practice is not a fad, and has garnered an empirical stamp of approval. I do believe that if misunderstood or superficially applied, it can be misused. I also think in its usual connotations, it is only part of the learning picture.
What is retrieval practice, then? Kate Jones sets the question by providing an example of her own life:
'What is retrieval practice and why does it matter? Here’s an example. Last year I became frustrated that, despite numerous visits to historical sites and reading various books over the years, my knowledge of Henry VIII’s six wives and their life stories was poor. I was forever forgetting the details; I got their names and their respective fates muddled up and I was unable to tell the story with any coherence. Why? I had been relying on fragments of knowledge ‘sinking in’ somehow but not really engaged in any attempt to retrieve the information in a coherent manner. ‘Sinking in’ is actually a terrible metaphor for learning. I decided to remedy the situation and engaged in a whole process of writing out timelines, re-telling the stories of each wife from memory, checking my recall for accuracy and trying again. Now, after a period of doing this, I’ve developed a really good sense of the story. When I read more about them, the knowledge seems to stick more easily and my Henry VIII’s Six Wives schema is now rich in narrative detail that helps me understand a range of more complex ideas in history, such as the changing link between the church and the state.'
Many of us can relate to the above story. There is a subject that we're fascinated about, that we even giddily book tickets to museums for, and our Goodreads list is a sizeable read tower of perspectives on the topic. Yet, that adherence of enthusiasm does not necessarily translate into internalising what we have learned. Enthusiasm is not enough. We should ask then, what should be the ideal end result of our learning? Well, in Kate's case, she wanted to have this knowledge to spring at her command - of King Henry VIII, his life and his wives. She wasn't content to have the books sparsely surrounding her, she wanted the timelines, the stories of each wife to become part of her. This result of learning corresponds to a widely quoted definition, from a paper co-authored by Paul Kirschner, 'The aim of all instruction is to alter long-term memory. If nothing has changed in long-term memory, nothing has been learned.' I partially agree with this definition, but I think it limits the scope of learning. For those interested, there is an alternative view of learning which I prefer, and was found in an article by Learning Spy, quoting Soderstrom and Bjork:
'The primary goal of instruction should be to facilitate long-term learning—that is, to create relatively permanent changes in comprehension, understanding, and skills of the types that will support long-term retention and transfer.'
The difference between these definitions is that the latter still centralises retention in long term memory, but in adding transfer, this rouses the creation of connections and developing a flexibility in one's knowledge. So, using the Henry VIII example, if we learned something of him and his wives, rather than just being able to recall his life and their stories, transfer allows us to be able to say something about other men and their wives. There is this flexibility, and making of connections between one's life, between one's world, that is possible by adding in 'transfer' to the definition. In particular, if one only attaches Henry VIII and his wives to their schema for history, then it is only until someone mentions Henry VIII or a related cue that this knowledge will be triggered. But if we transfer, and abstract out features which we can generalise to other settings: men who cheat, monarchs during the Tudor period, the founder of the Church that you visit every Sunday, etc. Then in that case, we are folding that knowledge of Henry VIII into diverse cues, and we are also building a deeper understanding than typical retrieval activities alone initiate. We are creating broader connections outwith the material, and we are letting our knowledge of history seep through the rest of our lives and through other schema. In her definition of its application, Kate tells us that for retrieval practice, 'The main aspect to remember is that this means no notes, textbooks or support is permitted as it prevents retrieval from taking place.' The activities in 'Chapter 2: Retrieval practice in the classroom' are an extension of that definition.
An example from my own life might illustrate a little better where I see the limitations of a misuse of retrieval practice. I am currently learning the very basics of music theory: accidentals, key signatures, scales, the circle of fifths and other Grade 1 things. If I just used retrieval practice, using Brain dumps or Cops and Robbers, none of those activities are encouraging me to think about connections to either my prior knowledge, connections within music theory or to other domains. When I incorporate this transfer definition of learning, I am encouraged to then think about when I went to London and saw the pianist Helene Grimaud in concert, and begin wondering what key signatures she must have been using or in what dynamic she was striking the keys. Similarly, retrieval practice (in its typical form) does not encourage me to think of connections for pp (which means pianissimo (very quiet) in music theory). If I choose to look for connections, within the confines of music theory or outside, I might think, 'Oh, like in the movie 'A Quiet Place', that must have been set in pp!' etc. As can be noticed, this searching for connections is still retrieval (I have no notes in front of me). I am not a teacher, but playing a modified game of Cops and Robbers, as Cops and Robbers and Suspects, where suspects are those connections which each student can uniquely bring to their learning, could help easily facilitate those connections. This allows students to be encouraged to, when studying Henry VIII, to then seek connections between him and their own lives. Another definition of learning from Sonke Ahren's 'How to take Smart Notes' indicates my point:
'Learned right, which means understanding, which means connecting in a meaningful way to previous knowledge, information almost cannot be forgotten anymore and will be reliably retrieved if triggered by the right cues.'
Even in Daniel Willingham's, 'Why Don't Students Like School?, he gives a definition of understanding that is ostensibly at odds with some forms of retrieval practice:
'What do cognitive scientists know about how students understand things? The answer is that they understand new ideas (things they don't know) by relating them to old ideas (things they do know)'
Clearly, understanding is technically distinct from learning. But retrieval practice exercises might implicitly assume that understanding has taken place. In a later point in his book, Willingham distinguishes between shallow knowledge and deep knowledge:
'We can contrast shallow knowledge with deep knowledge. A student with deep knowledge knows more about the subject, and the pieces of knowledge are more richly interconnected. The student understands not just theparts but also the whole. This understanding allows the student to apply the student to many different contexts, to talk about it in different ways, to imagine how the system as a whole would change if one part of it changed, and so forth.'
I could go on and on about other sources which make me feel that retrieval practice, in many of its activities, does not wholly equate to deep learning. I haven't even mentioned the absence of Bloom's Taxonomy or questions of a Socratic nature (Kenneth Kiewra's SOAR model might better represent the model I think encapsulates the above). A final point on this is the addition of Elaboration to retrieval practice. From the Learning Scientists website, '[When] we are talking about studying using elaboration, it involves explaining and describing ideas with many details. Elaboration also involves making connections among ideas you are trying to learn and connecting the material to your own experiences, memories, and day-to-day life.' This idea of elaboration as an extension of retrieval practice is expanded upon in Barbara Oakley and Olav Schewe's book, 'Learn Like A Pro', and best captures my main concern about the limitations of typical retrieval practice:
'To learn difficult concepts well, it isn’t enough to simply recall dates, definitions, and facts. You’ll need a deep understanding that allows you to explain, synthesize, analyze, and apply the concepts in novel situations. You cannot do this by simply memorizing. To develop a profound understanding of what you’re learning, it’s important to actively connect what you’re learning to other material you’re learning or already know. Your neural sets of links should be connected to as many other sets of links as possible, to form a web of learning.'
But returning solely to this book, Kate addresses the misconceptions that retrieval practice could be associated with rote learning. As all proponents of retrieval practice, she relies heavily on the research of Jeffrey Karpicke, who concludes that 'practicing retrieval does not merely produce rote, transient learning; it produces meaningful, long-term learning.' The gifts of retrieval practice, which are not limited to memorisation, come from the paper 'Ten Benefits of Testing and Their Applications to Educational Practice' by Henry L. Roediger III, Adam L. Putnam and Megan A. Sumeracki. Kate summarises these ten benefits, in which number 4 addresses some of my above concerns, 'Testing produces better organisation of knowledge.' In my view, I would prefer the forming of organisation to be more explicit in the activity. Much like Joseph Novak and his concept maps, who had built on the 'meaningful learning' work done by David Ausubel, I believe some of the activities should be embedded with those aims.
I apologise for veering so much from Kate's excellent book! Learning how to learn is so fascinating to me, and such an important subject, that my reviews on the topic tend to heavily reflect how I am growing in my understanding. In any case, for those interested in retrieval practice, Kate has written an excellent text combining both a good overview of the research and a useful catalogue of high impact, low effort activities.
I have a combative history with this method of studying. As Kate Jones wonderfully describes in this book, retrieval practice is not a fad, and has garnered an empirical stamp of approval. I do believe that if misunderstood or superficially applied, it can be misused. I also think in its usual connotations, it is only part of the learning picture.
What is retrieval practice, then? Kate Jones sets the question by providing an example of her own life:
'What is retrieval practice and why does it matter? Here’s an example. Last year I became frustrated that, despite numerous visits to historical sites and reading various books over the years, my knowledge of Henry VIII’s six wives and their life stories was poor. I was forever forgetting the details; I got their names and their respective fates muddled up and I was unable to tell the story with any coherence. Why? I had been relying on fragments of knowledge ‘sinking in’ somehow but not really engaged in any attempt to retrieve the information in a coherent manner. ‘Sinking in’ is actually a terrible metaphor for learning. I decided to remedy the situation and engaged in a whole process of writing out timelines, re-telling the stories of each wife from memory, checking my recall for accuracy and trying again. Now, after a period of doing this, I’ve developed a really good sense of the story. When I read more about them, the knowledge seems to stick more easily and my Henry VIII’s Six Wives schema is now rich in narrative detail that helps me understand a range of more complex ideas in history, such as the changing link between the church and the state.'
Many of us can relate to the above story. There is a subject that we're fascinated about, that we even giddily book tickets to museums for, and our Goodreads list is a sizeable read tower of perspectives on the topic. Yet, that adherence of enthusiasm does not necessarily translate into internalising what we have learned. Enthusiasm is not enough. We should ask then, what should be the ideal end result of our learning? Well, in Kate's case, she wanted to have this knowledge to spring at her command - of King Henry VIII, his life and his wives. She wasn't content to have the books sparsely surrounding her, she wanted the timelines, the stories of each wife to become part of her. This result of learning corresponds to a widely quoted definition, from a paper co-authored by Paul Kirschner, 'The aim of all instruction is to alter long-term memory. If nothing has changed in long-term memory, nothing has been learned.' I partially agree with this definition, but I think it limits the scope of learning. For those interested, there is an alternative view of learning which I prefer, and was found in an article by Learning Spy, quoting Soderstrom and Bjork:
'The primary goal of instruction should be to facilitate long-term learning—that is, to create relatively permanent changes in comprehension, understanding, and skills of the types that will support long-term retention and transfer.'
The difference between these definitions is that the latter still centralises retention in long term memory, but in adding transfer, this rouses the creation of connections and developing a flexibility in one's knowledge. So, using the Henry VIII example, if we learned something of him and his wives, rather than just being able to recall his life and their stories, transfer allows us to be able to say something about other men and their wives. There is this flexibility, and making of connections between one's life, between one's world, that is possible by adding in 'transfer' to the definition. In particular, if one only attaches Henry VIII and his wives to their schema for history, then it is only until someone mentions Henry VIII or a related cue that this knowledge will be triggered. But if we transfer, and abstract out features which we can generalise to other settings: men who cheat, monarchs during the Tudor period, the founder of the Church that you visit every Sunday, etc. Then in that case, we are folding that knowledge of Henry VIII into diverse cues, and we are also building a deeper understanding than typical retrieval activities alone initiate. We are creating broader connections outwith the material, and we are letting our knowledge of history seep through the rest of our lives and through other schema. In her definition of its application, Kate tells us that for retrieval practice, 'The main aspect to remember is that this means no notes, textbooks or support is permitted as it prevents retrieval from taking place.' The activities in 'Chapter 2: Retrieval practice in the classroom' are an extension of that definition.
An example from my own life might illustrate a little better where I see the limitations of a misuse of retrieval practice. I am currently learning the very basics of music theory: accidentals, key signatures, scales, the circle of fifths and other Grade 1 things. If I just used retrieval practice, using Brain dumps or Cops and Robbers, none of those activities are encouraging me to think about connections to either my prior knowledge, connections within music theory or to other domains. When I incorporate this transfer definition of learning, I am encouraged to then think about when I went to London and saw the pianist Helene Grimaud in concert, and begin wondering what key signatures she must have been using or in what dynamic she was striking the keys. Similarly, retrieval practice (in its typical form) does not encourage me to think of connections for pp (which means pianissimo (very quiet) in music theory). If I choose to look for connections, within the confines of music theory or outside, I might think, 'Oh, like in the movie 'A Quiet Place', that must have been set in pp!' etc. As can be noticed, this searching for connections is still retrieval (I have no notes in front of me). I am not a teacher, but playing a modified game of Cops and Robbers, as Cops and Robbers and Suspects, where suspects are those connections which each student can uniquely bring to their learning, could help easily facilitate those connections. This allows students to be encouraged to, when studying Henry VIII, to then seek connections between him and their own lives. Another definition of learning from Sonke Ahren's 'How to take Smart Notes' indicates my point:
'Learned right, which means understanding, which means connecting in a meaningful way to previous knowledge, information almost cannot be forgotten anymore and will be reliably retrieved if triggered by the right cues.'
Even in Daniel Willingham's, 'Why Don't Students Like School?, he gives a definition of understanding that is ostensibly at odds with some forms of retrieval practice:
'What do cognitive scientists know about how students understand things? The answer is that they understand new ideas (things they don't know) by relating them to old ideas (things they do know)'
Clearly, understanding is technically distinct from learning. But retrieval practice exercises might implicitly assume that understanding has taken place. In a later point in his book, Willingham distinguishes between shallow knowledge and deep knowledge:
'We can contrast shallow knowledge with deep knowledge. A student with deep knowledge knows more about the subject, and the pieces of knowledge are more richly interconnected. The student understands not just theparts but also the whole. This understanding allows the student to apply the student to many different contexts, to talk about it in different ways, to imagine how the system as a whole would change if one part of it changed, and so forth.'
I could go on and on about other sources which make me feel that retrieval practice, in many of its activities, does not wholly equate to deep learning. I haven't even mentioned the absence of Bloom's Taxonomy or questions of a Socratic nature (Kenneth Kiewra's SOAR model might better represent the model I think encapsulates the above). A final point on this is the addition of Elaboration to retrieval practice. From the Learning Scientists website, '[When] we are talking about studying using elaboration, it involves explaining and describing ideas with many details. Elaboration also involves making connections among ideas you are trying to learn and connecting the material to your own experiences, memories, and day-to-day life.' This idea of elaboration as an extension of retrieval practice is expanded upon in Barbara Oakley and Olav Schewe's book, 'Learn Like A Pro', and best captures my main concern about the limitations of typical retrieval practice:
'To learn difficult concepts well, it isn’t enough to simply recall dates, definitions, and facts. You’ll need a deep understanding that allows you to explain, synthesize, analyze, and apply the concepts in novel situations. You cannot do this by simply memorizing. To develop a profound understanding of what you’re learning, it’s important to actively connect what you’re learning to other material you’re learning or already know. Your neural sets of links should be connected to as many other sets of links as possible, to form a web of learning.'
But returning solely to this book, Kate addresses the misconceptions that retrieval practice could be associated with rote learning. As all proponents of retrieval practice, she relies heavily on the research of Jeffrey Karpicke, who concludes that 'practicing retrieval does not merely produce rote, transient learning; it produces meaningful, long-term learning.' The gifts of retrieval practice, which are not limited to memorisation, come from the paper 'Ten Benefits of Testing and Their Applications to Educational Practice' by Henry L. Roediger III, Adam L. Putnam and Megan A. Sumeracki. Kate summarises these ten benefits, in which number 4 addresses some of my above concerns, 'Testing produces better organisation of knowledge.' In my view, I would prefer the forming of organisation to be more explicit in the activity. Much like Joseph Novak and his concept maps, who had built on the 'meaningful learning' work done by David Ausubel, I believe some of the activities should be embedded with those aims.
I apologise for veering so much from Kate's excellent book! Learning how to learn is so fascinating to me, and such an important subject, that my reviews on the topic tend to heavily reflect how I am growing in my understanding. In any case, for those interested in retrieval practice, Kate has written an excellent text combining both a good overview of the research and a useful catalogue of high impact, low effort activities.
August 21, 2020
Yet another excellent 20 page booklet hiding inside a larger 164 page book. The enthusiasm, knowledge and principles of the writer - all praiseworthy and helpful in themselves - are drowned out by the lack of style, the fluffy structure and the 'stuffing'. I'm sorry to sound so harsh when the author is not a professional writer nor even an English teacher. John Catt Publications needs an editor.
August 28, 2020
Aimed well at teachers looking for things they can do now to improve their use of retrieval in their teaching. Summarises research from various sources for the teacher who might not have time to carry out all that academic reading themselves. Very clear and points you in the direction of some excellent templates and resources that make starting improving this aspect of your teaching immediately.
September 24, 2020
A bit like being reminded that round is the best shape for a wheel, but the resources are clear and cover a fairly decent range of subjects rather than just being given one subject's view and told to adapt it.
March 17, 2021
Great book. Does everything a book about education should: gives a brief introduction to the rationale, supports it with research, provides plenty of examples for in-classroom use, then stands out of the way and lets classroom teachers determine what's best for them. Excellent.
June 19, 2021
Quick and easy to read and full of great strategies to employ in school. I found it especially great as a new subject leader as I can recommend history specific ideas to my colleagues.
June 23, 2021
Helpful intro to this very important aspect of teaching. A bit disorganized, but very down-to-earth and helpful.
February 4, 2022
An interesting read with lots of retrieval ideas, particularly for secondary teachers. Would be great if there was a primary version with more accessible resources for primary pupils.
July 7, 2022
Learning how to learn is paramount for students and teachers alike. This volume has practicable ideas for immediate use and will make almost any student better at their "job."
September 11, 2022
Simple but good resource on retrieval practice. Half the book is theory, the other is examples how to put the theory into practice. A helpful book on an educator's shelf.
September 25, 2022
A great read for all us teachers.
This book had lots of food for thought on the topic and plenty practical solutions and activities you can you in your class room.
This book had lots of food for thought on the topic and plenty practical solutions and activities you can you in your class room.
July 10, 2023
Must read for teachers wanting to bridge the gap between theory and practice
February 17, 2024
Superb
Really useful resource for teachers just beginning or who have been in the profession for far longer - an absolute must read!
Really useful resource for teachers just beginning or who have been in the profession for far longer - an absolute must read!
April 21, 2020
A great book about cognitive science, memory and the research surrounding retrieval practice. Brilliant examples of tasks, resources that incorporate retrieval practice and also links to other books, studies and even student youtubers to learn from and seek further information. The ideas in this book also made me think more about the activities I plan for students and the amount of low-stakes testing I do in lessons.
April 21, 2020
Excellent, well written book with lots of good ideas based on research. Will be feeding back to department on this one.
Displaying 1 - 17 of 17 reviews