Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing the Impact of Testing Aids on Post-Secondary Student Performance: A Meta-Analytic Investigation

  • Research into Practice
  • Published:
Educational Psychology Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Testing aids, including student-prepared testing aids (a.k.a., cheat sheets or crib notes) and open-textbook exams, are common practice in post-secondary assessment. There is a considerable amount of published research that discusses and investigates the impact of these testing aids. However, the findings of this research are contradictory and inconclusive. The current meta-analytic investigation provides a general measure of the impact of both student-prepared testing aids and the use of open-textbook exams on student exam performance in post-secondary education, while examining variables that may moderate the effects of testing aids on student exam performance. The results indicate that, overall, testing aids can produce a moderate impact on student exam performance, with student-prepared testing aids associated with a larger effect (d=.402) relative to open-textbook exams (d = 0.257). The results are discussed in terms of their implications for college course instructors and for informing the broader debate about the role of testing aids in long-term student learning and mastery of course material.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

References marked with an asterisk indicate studies included in the meta-analysis.

  • Agarwal, P. K., & Roediger, H. L. (2011). Expectance of an open-book test decreases performance on a delayed closed-book test. Memory, 19(8), 836–852. doi:10.1080/09658211.2011.613840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agarwal, P. K., Karpicke, J. D., Kang, S. H. K., Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (2008). Examining the testing effect with open- and closed-book tests. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 861–876. doi:10.1002/acp.1391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boniface, D. (1985). Candidates’ use of notes and textbooks during an open book examination. Educational Research, 27, 201–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to Meta-Analysis. West Sussex, UK: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • *Broyles, I. L., Cyr, P. R., & Korsen, N. (2005). Open book tests: assessment of academic learning in clerkships. Medical Teacher, 27(5), 456–462. doi: 10.1080/01421590500097075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, D., & Crouch, N. (2011). Student experience of making and using cheat sheets in mathematical exams. Mathematics: Traditions and New Practices, 134–141.

  • Cherim, S. (1981). A philosophy of teaching preparatory chemistry. [Presentation]. Paper presented at the Annual Two-Year College Chemistry Conference. Atlanta, GA

  • Cnop, I., & Grandsard, F. (1994). An open-book exam for non-mathematics majors. International Journal of Mathematics Education Science and Technology, 25(1), 125–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1969). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. New York University. Retrieved December 18, 2012 from http://web.vu.lt/fsf/d.noreika/files/2011/10/Cohen-J-1992-A-power-primer-kokio-reikia-imties-dydžio.pdf

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Dickson, K. L., & Bauer, J. J. (2008). Do students learn course material during crib sheet construction? Teaching of Psychology, 35(2), 117–120. doi:10.1080/00986280801978343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Dickson, K. L., & Miller, M. D. (2005). Authorized crib cards do not improved exam performance. Teaching of Psychology, 32(4), 230–233. doi: 10.1207/s15328023top3204_6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickson, K. L., & Miller, M. D. (2006). Effect of crib card construction and use on exam performance. Teaching of Psychology, 33(1), 39–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dorsel, T., & Cundiff, G. (1979). The cheat-sheet: efficient coding device or indispensable crutch? The Journal of Experimental Education, 48, 39–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drake, V. K., Freed, P., & Hunter, J. M. (1998). Crib sheets or security blankets? Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 19, 291–300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Duncan, D.G. (2007). Student performance shows slight improvement when open notes are used during information system exams. Journal of Information Technology Education, 6, 361–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eilertsen, T. V., & Valdermo, O. (2000). Open-book assessment: a contribution to improved learning? Studies in Educational Evaluation, 26, 91–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erbe, B. (2007). Reducing test anxiety while increasing learning: the cheat sheet. UK Essays, 55(3), 96–97. doi:10.3200/CTCH.55.3.96-98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feldhusen, J. F. (1961). An evaluation of college students’ reactions to open book examinations. Educational Psychological Measurements, 21, 630–637. doi:10.1177/001316446102100310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Francis, J. (1982). A case for open-book examinations. Educational Review, 34(1), 13–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Funk, S.C., & Dickson, K.L. (2011). Crib card use during tests: helpful or crutch? Teaching of Psychology, 38(2), 114–117. doi: 10.1177?0098628311401584

    Google Scholar 

  • Glass, G. V., McGaw, B., & Smith, M. L. (1981). Meta-analysis in social research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Hamed, K. M. (2008). Do you prefer to have the text or a sheet with your physics exam? The Physics Teacher, 46, 290–293. doi: 10.1119/1.2909747

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Healy, P. C., Landbeck, R. C., & Hewson, M. G. (1985). The use of summary cards in chemistry examinations. Journal of Chemical Education, 62(9), 778–779.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V. (1986). Issues in meta-analysis. In E. Z. Zothkoph (Ed.), Review of Research in Education (Vol. 13, pp. 353–398). Washington, DC: American Education Research Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Vote-counting methods in research synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 359–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindman, C. D. (1980). Crib notes in the classroom: cheaters never win. Teaching of Psychology, 7, 166–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hunter, J. E., & Schmidt, F. L. (2004). Methods of meta-analysis: correcting error and bias in research findings. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Ioannidou, M.K. (1997). Testing and life-long learning: open book and closed book examination in a university course. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 23(2), 131–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jehu, D., Picton, C. J., & Futcher, S. (1970). The use of notes in examinations. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 40, 330–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, P. A., & Moore, R. (2009). Students perceptions of their grades throughout an introductory biology course: effect of open book tests. Journal of College Science Teaching, 58(3), 58–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Kalish, R.A. (1958). An experimental evaluation of the open book examination. Journal of Educational Psychology, 49(4), 200–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Krarup, N., Naerra, N., & Olsen, C. (1974). Open-book tests in a university course. Higher Education, 3, 157–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kumkale, G. T., & Albarracin, D. (2004). The sleeper effect in persuasion: a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 130(1), 143–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Larwin, K. H., & Larwin, D. A. (2009). The use of in-test mnemonic aids (a.k.a. cheat-sheets) in higher education to improve student learning and performance. [Presentation]. Paper presented at the American Evaluation Association Annual Conference. Orlando, FL.

  • Larwin, K. H., & Larwin, D. A. (2011). Meta-analysis examining the impact of computer-assisted instruction on post-secondary statistics education: 40 years of research. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43(3), 253–278.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipsey, M. W., & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical Meta-analysis. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penninga, M. H., Kuks, J. B., Hofman, W. H., & Cohen-Schotanus, J. (2008). Influence of open- and closed-book tests on medical students’ learning approaches. Medical Education, 42, 967–974. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2923.2008.03125.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, G. (2006). Using open-book test to strengthen the study skills of community-college biology students. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 49(7), 574–582. doi:10.1598/JAAL.49.7.3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1979). The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638–641.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Schumacher, C. F., Butzin, D. W., Finberg, L., & Burg, F. D. (1978). The effect of open vs. closed book testing on performance on a multiple choice examination in pediatrics. Pediatrics, 61, 256–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Skidmore, R. L., & Aagaard, L. (2004). The relationship between testing condition and student test scores. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31, 304–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Tanner, W. F. (1970). Performance on open-book tests. Journal of Geological Education, 18, 166–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Theophilides, C., & Koutselini, M. (2000). Study behavior in the closed-book and open-book examination: a comparative analysis. Education Research and Evaluation, 41, 379–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Trigwell, K. (1987). The crib card examination system. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 12, 56–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tussig, L. (1951). A consideration of the open-book examination. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 11, 597–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Upson, R. H. (1953). Open-book examinations. The Journal of Engineering, 43, 429–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vessey, J. K., & Woodbury, W. (1992). Crib sheets: use with caution. Teaching Professor, 6, 6–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Wachsman, Y. (2002). Should cheat sheets be used as study aids in economics tests? Economics Bulletin, 1, 1–11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Webber, L. J., McBee, J. K., & Krebs, J. E. (1983). Take home tests: an experimental study. Research in Higher Education, 18, 473–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • White, B., Ceglie, R., & Puopolo, D. (2001). Note sheets: a reliable predictor of success. Journal of College Science Teaching, 31, 188–193.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitley, B. E. (1996). Does “cheating” help? The effect of using authorized crib notes during examinations. College Student Journal, 30, 489–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitmer, J. (1983). A crib card for physical chemistry. Journal of Chemical Education, 60, 85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, F. M. (1986). Meta-analysis: quantitative methods for research synthesis. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Youngstown State University, Youngstown, OH, USA

    Karen H. Larwin

  2. College of Southern Nevada in Las Vegas, 6375 W Charleston Blvd, Las Vegas, NV, 89146, USA

    Jennifer Gorman

  3. Kent State University at Salem, Salem, OH, 44460, USA

    David A. Larwin

Authors
  1. Karen H. Larwin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jennifer Gorman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David A. Larwin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karen H. Larwin.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Larwin, K.H., Gorman, J. & Larwin, D.A. Assessing the Impact of Testing Aids on Post-Secondary Student Performance: A Meta-Analytic Investigation. Educ Psychol Rev 25, 429–443 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9227-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-013-9227-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation