Writing Produces Better Calibrated Learners Than Rereading

In this study, we investigated how writing contributes to building knowledge and students’ awareness of their own knowledge. We focused on how explanatory and persuasive writing affects students’ subjective knowledge and confidence, and whether this alters the calibration between perceived knowledge and actual knowledge. Using a pretest-posttest repeated measures design, undergraduate students were assigned to either a writing or rereading condition after reading a text on research design. Participants completed a concept map as a pre- and posttest measure and an argumentative writing task as a transfer-test measure of objective knowledge. In addition, they rated their subjective knowledge and confidence at multiple points throughout the intervention. Exploratory factor analyses indicated that the subjective knowledge and confidence ratings needed to be combined into one factor (SKC). We subsequently compared students’ SKC factor scores with their standardized objective knowledge scores from pretest, posttest, and transfer test to calculate calibration scores using relative accuracy. A two-way, mixed ANOV A revealed that students in the persuasion condition were significantly better calibrated than students in the rereading condition. Multiple linear regression corroborated this finding, revealing that SKC ratings at posttest positively significantly predicted transfer-test knowledge scores for both the explanation and the persuasion conditions, indicating an improved relationship between confidence and actual knowledge levels. These findings suggest that writing can bridge the gap between what students think they know and what they actually know, guiding them in figuring out what learning strategies may be most effective and when to seek help from their educators. unknown unknown