Drawing for Memory and Learning¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 2 claims (1 for, 1 mixed) · 7 studies (2 causal, 2 quant-synthesis, 2 review, 1 associational), q2–q4 · 1 of 7 report an effect size

Description¶

Drawing for memory and learning asks learners to create their own pictures of to-be-learned content — sketching a concept, process, or relationship — rather than only reading, writing, or viewing provided images. The learner must translate verbal information into a spatial, pictorial representation, which requires elaborative processing of meaning. The strategy is distinct from being shown a diagram: the generative act of drawing is what drives the benefit.

Design Implications¶

Drawing combines verbal and visual codes and forces generative processing, producing a reliable memory advantage over writing definitions or listing properties — the "drawing effect" [~S]. The effect is robust across materials, ages, and drawing skill, but it is strongest for concrete, imageable content and when learners draw from meaning rather than copying [~S]. Because drawing consumes working memory, it can hurt learning when the material is complex or the drawing task is poorly constrained Drawing imposes extraneous load when content is complex. [~M].

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Content that can be meaningfully depicted (objects, processes, spatial relations, causal chains)
• Sufficient time — drawing is slower than writing, so tasks must budget for it
• Clear prompts specifying what to depict (e.g., "draw how X causes Y"), not just "draw this"
• For complex content: partial templates, provided elements, or Analogies that scaffold what to draw

Constraints¶

• Drawing abstract, non-imageable content (e.g., abstract definitions, syntax rules) yields little or no benefit and can impair performance by adding extraneous load [~M]
• Copying or tracing provided images does not produce the effect — the benefit comes from generative translation, not the motor act [~S]
• Under severe time pressure, drawing can underperform writing because learners spend effort on the picture rather than the meaning [-M]
• For learners already using effective elaborative strategies, drawing may add little beyond Self-Explanation-style processing [~W]

Implementation Variability¶

• Free-form sketching vs. structured drawing (fill in a partially drawn diagram, connect provided elements)
• Drawing from text vs. drawing from observation vs. drawing a predicted process
• Individual drawing vs. collaborative drawing with discussion of what to include
• Digital sketch tools (e.g., whiteboard apps) vs. paper — evidence suggests the effect holds across media [~W]

Target Learners¶

• Learners across a wide age range, including young children and older adults — the effect is unusually age-robust [~S]
• Novices studying concrete science and vocabulary content
• Learners with weaker verbal encoding who benefit from a second representational channel Drawing recruits dual verbal and visual codes. [+M]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Retention of concrete facts, vocabulary, and labeled structures
• Understanding of processes and causal sequences (e.g., life cycles, mechanisms)
• Integration of verbal and pictorial representations of the same content

Instructions¶

1. Present the to-be-learned content in verbal form (text, explanation, or Annotating source material).
2. Prompt learners to draw a picture that captures the meaning — instruct them to depict relationships and processes, not decorate.
3. Require learners to label or briefly explain their drawing, connecting pictorial elements back to the verbal content Requiring explanation of the drawing deepens processing. [+M].
4. For complex material, provide a partial template or key elements so drawing effort goes to meaning rather than composition.
5. Follow with retrieval practice: learners redraw from memory or explain their drawing without looking.

Related Strategies¶

• Annotating — a lighter-weight generative encoding strategy; drawing is the pictorial extension
• Activating Prior Knowledge — drawing from memory of prior experience combines both strategies
• Self-Explanation — pairing drawn representations with verbal explanation compounds the generative benefit

Examples¶

• Wammes et al.'s drawing paradigm — participants studied word lists by drawing each item versus writing it; drawing produced consistently higher free recall and recognition across dozens of experiments (Wammes, Meade & Fernandes, 2016).
• Fiorella & Mayer's generative drawing — students reading about how a bicycle pump works who drew annotated diagrams of each step outperformed students who only read or studied provided diagrams.
• Science sketching curricula — programs such as the Science Sketches initiative and university "sketch your science" activities ask students to draw and narrate scientific concepts for peers, combining drawing with explanation.

Key Sources¶

• Wammes, J. D., Meade, M. E., & Fernandes, M. A. (2016). Learning concepts by drawing: The benefit of drawing as a study strategy. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(9), 1759–1773.
• Fiorella, L., & Mayer, R. E. (2016). Eight ways to promote generative learning. Educational Psychology Review, 28(4), 717–741. doi:10.1007/s10648-015-9348-9
• Paivio, A. (1990). Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195066661.001.0001
• Van Meter, P., & Garner, J. (2005). The promise and challenge of advancing visual literacy through learner-generated drawing. Educational Psychology Review, 17(4), 285–325. doi:10.1007/s10648-005-8134-3
• Scheiter, K., Schubert, C., & Schüler, A. (2017). Self-generated drawing: A help or hindrance to learning from animation? Learning and Instruction, 47, 13–25.