N/A Post-Class Formative Retrieval Quizzes and Academic Performance in First-Year Higher Education: Pre–Post Changes and Heterogeneous Student Profiles.
Pre-Post Changes and Heterogeneous Student Profiles
Supporting Agencies
- The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article
Abstract
Introduction: Formative assessment may support learning through retrieval practice, feedback, and monitoring of academic progress, although students may respond differently to these strategies. This exploratory study examined temporal changes in academic performance following the implementation of post-class formative retrieval quizzes. Materials and methods: A retrospective single-cohort pre–post study was conducted at a Chilean university, including 46 students in the final analytical sample. Four formative retrieval quizzes were administered immediately after class, followed by immediate feedback. Pre- and post-implementation performance was calculated as the mean of Midterms 1–2 and Midterms 3–4, respectively. Analyses included a paired-samples t-test, Pearson correlation, simple linear regression, and exploratory K-means clustering. Results: Mean midterm performance increased from 3.79 (SD = 1.28) before implementation to 4.24 (SD = 1.44) afterward, corresponding to a mean difference of 0.45 points (p = 0.004, Cohen’s d = 0.45). The increase was statistically significant among female students (+0.56, p = 0.015), but not among male students. Formative quiz performance was positively associated with final course grade (r = 0.60, p < 0.001; R² = 0.365). Exploratory cluster analysis identified three academic performance profiles: Higher, Intermediate, and Lower Performance. The Intermediate Performance group showed the largest descriptive increase (+0.8 points), whereas the Lower Performance group showed virtually no change. Conclusions: Academic performance was higher after the implementation of post-class formative retrieval quizzes and immediate feedback, and exploratory analyses revealed heterogeneous academic trajectories. Given the absence of a control group, these temporal changes cannot be causally attributed to the intervention. The findings provide preliminary evidence to inform further research on formative retrieval assessment and differences in students’ academic performance trajectories.
Downloads
-
Abstract14
-
pdf12
References
1. Black P, Wiliam D. Assessment and Classroom Learning. Assess Educ Princ Policy Pract. 1998, 5, 7–74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102
2. Nicol DJ, Macfarlane‐Dick D. Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: a model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Stud High Educ. 2006, 31, 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090.
3. Morris R, Perry T, Wardle L. Formative assessment and feedback for learning in higher education: A systematic review. Rev Educ. 2021, 9, e3292. https://doi.org/10.1002/rev3.3292.
4. Solis-Trujillo BP, Velarde-Camaqui D, Gonzales Nuñez CA, et al. The current landscape of formative assessment and feedback in graduate studies: a systematic literature review. Front Educ. 2025, 10, 1509983. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2025.1509983.
5. Karpicke JD, Roediger HL. The Critical Importance of Retrieval for Learning. Science. 2008, 319, 966–968. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1152408.
6. Roediger HL, Karpicke JD. The Power of Testing Memory: Basic Research and Implications for Educational Practice. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2006, 1, 181–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00012.x.
7. Agarwal PK, Nunes LD, Blunt JR. Retrieval Practice Consistently Benefits Student Learning: A Systematic Review of Applied Research in Schools and Classrooms. Educ Psychol Rev. 2021, 33, 1409–1453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-021-09595-9.
8. Yang C, Luo L, Vadillo MA, et al. Testing (quizzing) boosts classroom learning: A systematic and meta-analytic review. Psychol Bull. 2021, 147, 399–435. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000309.
9. Serra MJ, Kaminske AN, Nebel C, et al. The Use of Retrieval Practice in the Health Professions: A State-of-the-Art Review. Behav Sci. 2025, 15, 974. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs15070974.
10. Yang BW, Razo J, Persky AM. Using Testing as a Learning Tool. Am J Pharm Educ. 2019, 83, 7324. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7324.
11. Fisher DP, Brotto G, Lim I, et al. The Impact of Timely Formative Feedback on University Student Motivation. Assess Eval High Educ. 2025, 50, 622–631. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2025.2449891.
12. Shinde SA, Joshi UU, Karanje NC, et al. Effectiveness of Structured Feedback Training on Student’s Performance in Formative Assessment of Physiology Practicals: A Comparative Study. Cureus. 2025, 17, e80176. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.80176.
13. Greving S, Richter T. Practicing retrieval in university teaching: short-answer questions are beneficial, whereas multiple-choice questions are not. J Cogn Psychol. 2022, 34, 657–674. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2022.2085281.
14. Bates LE, Myers SJ, DeLosh EL, et al. The Learning Benefits of Mastery Quizzing Versus Other Quizzing Methods. Psychol Lear Teach. 2024, 24, 74–91. https://doi.org/10.1177/14757257241301733.
15. Roelle J, Schweppe J, Endres T, et al. Combining Retrieval Practice and Generative Learning in Educational Contexts: Promises and Challenges. J Dev Psychol Educ Psychol. 2022, 54, 142–150. https://doi.org/10.1026/0049-8637/a000261.
16. Parmigiani D, Nicchia E, Murgia E, et al. Formative assessment in higher education: an exploratory study within programs for professionals in education. Front Educ. 2024, 9, 1366215. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1366215.
17. Bulut O, Gorgun G, Yildirim‐Erbasli SN. The impact of frequency and stakes of formative assessment on student achievement in higher education: A learning analytics study. Comput Assist Learn. 2025, 41, e13087. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcal.13087.
18. Tomlinson A, Simpson A, Killingback C. Student expectations of teaching and learning when starting university: A systematic review. J Furth High Educ. 2023, 47, 1054–1073. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2023.2212242.
19. Sirianansopa K. Evaluating students’ learning achievements using the formative assessment technique: a retrospective study. BMC Med Educ. 2024, 24, 1373. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-06347-5.
20. Wu J, Yu X. The influence of formative assessment on academic performance,8exploring the role of teachers’ emotional support. Front Psychol. 2025, 16, 1567615. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1567615.
21. Hattie J, Timperley H. The Power of Feedback. Rev Educ Res. 2007, 77, 31. https://doi.org/10.3102/003465430298487
22. Pérez MÁ, Urrejola-Contreras G, Tiemann P. Low-Stakes Quizzing as a Predictor of Academic Outcomes: The Role of Motivation in Undergraduate Health Sciences Education. Rev Esp Edu Med. 2025, 6, 10. https://doi.org/10.6018/edumed.680941.
Copyright (c) 2026 Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Murcia
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
The works published in this magazine are subject to the following terms:
1. The Publications Service of the University of Murcia (the publisher) preserves the economic rights (copyright) of the published works and favors and allows them to be reused under the use license indicated in point 2.
2. The works are published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivative 4.0 license.
3. Self-archiving conditions. Authors are allowed and encouraged to disseminate electronically the pre-print versions (version before being evaluated and sent to the journal) and / or post-print (version evaluated and accepted for publication) of their works before publication , since it favors its circulation and earlier diffusion and with it a possible increase in its citation and reach among the academic community.
