A comparison of two college classroom testing procedures: required remediation versus no remediation.

Garcia et al. (1973) split two college classes into two test groups. One group took short remedial quizzes after each unit and could earn extra credit. The other group took the same unit tests but never saw the quiz questions again.

Both groups sat for the same big final exam at the end of the term. The researchers wanted to know if forced review helped students remember more later.

The forced-remediation group scored about half a letter grade higher on the final. That means a solid B instead of a C+.

Students who never revisited missed items did worse on the same material months later.

Parry‐Cruwys et al. (2022) ran a similar college study online. They gave grad students short practice modules on APA citations with instant feedback. Scores jumped to 90 % fast, echoing the 1973 boost.

Falakfarsa et al. (2023) warn that even after students "know" a skill, small fidelity slips hurt performance. Their lab work backs the 1973 idea: keep checking and fixing errors, or skill drops.

Sarber et al. (1983) seems to disagree. They showed that hard probe trials can make learners look like they failed when they really learned. The 1973 paper avoids this trap by using easy review quizzes tied to credit—no surprise hard probes, just safe reps.

If you teach staff, parents, or older students, build in quick, rewarded reviews of missed items. A five-question quiz that students can retake for points is cheap and lifts final scores. Try it next inservice or parent class—give one point back for each corrected answer and watch retention grow.