Two routes to the same place: learning from quick closed-book essays versus open-book essays

Abstract

Knowing when and how to most effectively use writing as a learning tool requires understanding the cognitive processes driving learning. Writing is a generative activity that often requires students to elaborate upon and organise information. Here we examine what happens when a standard short writing task is (or is not) combined with a known mnemonic, retrieval practice. In two studies, we compared learning from writing short open-book versus closed-book essays. Despite closed-book essays being shorter and taking less time, students learned just as much as from writing longer and more time intensive open-book essays. These results differ from students’ own perceptions that they learned more from writing open-book essays. Analyses of the essays themselves suggested a trade-off in cognitive processes; closed-book essays required the retrieval of information but resulted in lower quality essays as judged by naïve readers. Implications for educational practice and possible roles for individual differences are discussed.