Students frequently encounter challenging and complex concepts throughout their academic career. For example, organic chemistry courses often require students to learn how to identify different chemical compounds by their structure. Understanding these concepts is crucial for academic success. The present research explored practice testing as a strategy that could benefit this type of complex category learning. Prior research on practice testing and category learning has yielded mixed results. Jacoby and colleagues (2013) found that classification performance benefited from practice testing as compared to restudying categories. However, Babineau et al. (2022) did not find a benefit of practice testing for complex category learning. The current research explored the effect of practice testing on category learning to establish when practice testing benefits learning. Specifically, we examined two important components that may impact practice testing benefits; self-regulated study and the number of to-be learned categories. We manipulated the study strategy (practice testing versus study) and the learning context (experimenter-controlled versus self-regulated) between-participants during a complex category learning task. Throughout the task, participants learned to categorize organic chemistry compounds. Participants in the practice testing groups learned the chemical categories by classifying each exemplar into the correct category and received corrective feedback after each trial. Participants in the study groups studied the exemplars without practicing category classification nor did they get feedback on their learning. Participants were also assigned to a learning context condition. Participants in the experimenter-controlled groups learned the categories in a fixed interleaved order that was determined by the experimenter. Participants in the self-regulated group made their own decisions about which categories to study (compounds from the same category or compounds from different categories) after each trial. After completing the learning task, participants completed a novel classification test and a studied classification test on the categories they had just learned. To examine the impact of the number of categories, we also manipulated the number of to-be-learned categories (6 categories versus 3 categories; counterbalanced) within-participants. During one phase, participants learned to classify 6 chemical categories. During the other phase, participants learned to classify 3 different chemical categories. In this way, participants completed the learning phase and test phase twice, learning different chemical categories each time. The results revealed that practice testing can benefit complex category learning in some contexts. Practice testing was beneficial relative to studying when participants learned to classify 6 categories but not when participants learned to classify 3 categories. The benefit of practice testing on complex category learning was maintained for self-regulated learning and experimenter-controlled learning. The present results support the use of practice testing as an effective study strategy for complex categorical information. Specifically, students learning many categories at once are likely to see the biggest benefit of practice testing. Future research should examine ways in which practice testing could benefit learning fewer categories as well as additional boundary conditions for the effect of practice testing.

Introduction: The recovery capital model by David Best addresses personal and social resources that an individual possesses to bolster successful substance use treatment outcomes. The five dimensions of Best’s recovery capital model include: personal capital, social capital, community capital, unmet needs, and barriers. More recently, Best developed the REC-CAP assessment which attempts to measure all of the components to recovery capital. The REC-CAP tool serves as a longitudinal measure of recovery for clients. This study is interested in expanding the barriers domain of Best’s REC-CAP assessment to incorporate barriers that may not exist in the current assessment. Through investigation of barriers that clients might experience in recovery, the study will determine what barriers are not addressed in the current REC-CAP assessment and suggest amendments.

Methods: In this study, two focus groups will be held with 5-6 providers from two community partner locations. The focus groups will ask providers about the barriers their clients experience receiving substance use treatment. The focus groups will be recorded, transcribed, and qualitatively analyzed for reoccurring themes discussing barriers in treatment.

Results/Conclusion: Researchers hypothesize and anticipate discussion over medical mistrust of providers, stigma around treatment, and lack of perceived need of treatment as significant barriers mentioned by providers that are not currently addressed in the REC-CAP assessment.

Humans need to attend selectively to items currently in the environment that are most relevant for survival (Griffin & Nobre, 2003). The attentional and working memory processes supporting this behavior benefit from cues that reliably signal which items are most relevant. Previous research has found that 2D visual cues presented before (pre) or after (retro) to-be-remembered items (targets) improve the reaction time to identify the target and the accuracy of visual working memory; however, it is not clear if cues from other modalities (e.g., auditory) would lead to similar results. Given the closer proxy to a real-world visual working memory task, a virtual reality environment was used in the current study. TCU student participants were asked to make a same or different response based on the match (object features or spatial location) of a sample visual stimulus to a subsequently presented visual stimulus. Two independent variables were manipulated. The cue was given before (pre) or after (retro) the target, and the cue was either auditory or visual. We hypothesized that participants will perform better in the pre- and retro-cued trials compared to control, and that an auditory cue will be more effective than a visual. These findings are relevant to classrooms, where auditory and visual cues during a presentation may direct attention toward relevant visual information.

Many students evaluate their instructors at the end of the term to provide feedback to the instructor. These evaluations can be influenced by how effectively course content was delivered. Lecture fluency is the manner in which lecture is delivered and impacts how students view their instructors. Research has found that instructors who deliver fluent lectures (i.e., speak with enthusiastically and with confidence) typically garner higher evaluations from students compared to those who deliver disfluent lectures (i.e., speak unenthusiastically and without confidence). That is, even though lecture fluency may not affect student learning, how the lecture is conveyed influences how students rate their professors on items such as how knowledgeable and effective the instructor is (e.g., Carpenter et al., 2020). However, it remains an open question whether lecture fluency influences evaluations made by another in the instructor. Instructors may be able to relate and give better feedback for a disfluent lecture because they are experts in the field and are aware of the struggles other instructors may have. We evaluated how lecture fluency impacts instructors’ ratings of other instructor’s teaching effectiveness. We also explored if lecture fluency impacts the likeliness of being rated as a good colleague or receiving a promotion by other instructors. University students and college-level instructors were randomly assigned to watch either a fluent or disfluent lecture that contain the same content, then evaluate the instructor. When we compared scores on the evaluation items, we found that both students and instructors gave higher evaluations in the fluent group compared to the disfluent group. Thus, experienced instructors are also susceptible to lecture fluency when evaluating their peers.

The Impact of English as a Second Language to Healthcare Services in Tarrant County, Texas

Introduction: Overcoming language barriers pose a considerable challenge for multilingual individuals, particularly within the context of healthcare. Providers often lack adequate translator or interpreter resources to deliver quality care to people who do not use English as their primary language. Thus, the impact of having a language barrier or absence of a translator has the potential for health consequences and interferes with patient-informed care and decision-making.

Method: This study aimed at learning about the impact of language barriers on patient experiences with a healthcare receipt. Qualitative data were obtained with focus groups in both Spanish and Vietnamese, targeting some of the most common languages in the area outside of English. At each focus group, an interpreter was present based on the given language that was being targeted.

Conclusions: Results exhibited that participant healthcare experiences varied with regard to translator services and language barriers, with some participants encountering serious challenges with understanding their provider. These findings suggest a need for policy change to ensure equitable access to communication across cultures.

Future Implications: In furthering this research, reaching out to different ethnic groups to learn about their experiences is critical for change to occur. Additionally, partnering with healthcare providers to understand the impact of language barriers from their perspective, is necessary to create a shared understanding of need between patient and provider.