Chronotype, sleep quality and sleep duration in adult distance education: Not related to study progress

Research in traditional education shows chronotype, sleep duration and sleep quality to be related to learning performance. Research in adult students participating in distance education (DE) is scarce. This study aims to provide knowledge on these relationships in this educational setting. In an observational longitudinal study, chronotype, sleep duration (i.e., for work and free days separately) and sleep quality of 894 students were analyzed in a multiple regression analyses. Students provided information on sleep-relatedmeasures and important covariates at the start of their study and study progress was evaluated after 14 months (i.e., the number of successfully completed modules). In linewith previous research, chronotype did not predict study progress. Further, sleep duration did not predict study progress, neither as a linear nor as a polynomial term. Third, sleep quality did not predict study progress. Concluding, these results are in linewith previous research that DE provides a solution to the asynchrony problem. Findings regarding sleep duration and sleep quality are new and unexpected, asking for attention and further research. Despite the study's observational nature, findings suggest that students participating in DE may benefit from this type of education as the asynchrony problem appears not to apply here, as students can choose their own study schedule.

Testing After Worked Example Study Does Not Enhance Delayed Problem-Solving Performance Compared to Restudy

Four experiments investigated whether the testing effect also applies to the acquisition of problem-solving skills from worked examples. Experiment 1 (n=120) showed no beneficial effects of testing consisting of isomorphic problem solving or example recall on final test performance, which consisted of isomorphic problem solving, compared to continued study of isomorphic examples. Experiment 2 (n=124) showed no beneficial effects of testing consisting of identical problem solving compared to restudying an identical example. Interestingly, participants who took both an immediate and a delayed final test outperformed those taking only a delayed test. This finding suggested that testing might become beneficial for retention but only after a certain level of schema acquisition has taken place through restudying several examples. However, experiment 2 had no control condition restudying examples instead of taking the immediate test. Experiment 3 (n=129) included such a restudy condition, and there was no evidence that testing after studying four examples was more effective for final delayed test performance than restudying, regardless of whether restudied/tested problems were isomorphic or identical. Experiment 4 (n=75) used a similar design as experiment 3 (i.e., testing/restudy after four examples), but with examples on a different topic and with a different participant population. Again, no evidence of a testing effect was found. Thus, across four experiments, with different types of initial tests, different problem-solving domains, and different participant populations, we found no evidence that testing enhanced delayed test performance compared to restudy. These findings suggest that the testing effect might not apply to acquiring problem-solving skills from worked examples