Require Retakes¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 8 studies (5 quant-synthesis, 2 causal, 1 review), q2–q4 · 4 of 8 report an effect size

Description¶

Requiring retakes means that when a learner's initial performance on an assessment falls below the proficiency standard, they must engage in targeted remediation and then reassess until they demonstrate the intended learning. The grade recorded reflects eventual mastery rather than first-attempt performance, and the retake is paired with a required corrective activity — not simply a second attempt at the same test.

Design Implications¶

Retakes shift the function of assessment from sorting to learning: they treat a low score as diagnostic information that triggers further instruction rather than a terminal verdict Assessment that feeds forward into further learning improves achievement. [+S]. This aligns with mastery learning research, in which corrective instruction followed by reassessment produces meaningful achievement gains over conventional one-shot testing Mastery learning with formative testing and corrective instruction improves achievement. [+S]. The critical design decision is that retakes must be earned through remediation — a retake without intervening corrective work mostly measures re-testing effects, not new learning.

Context¶

Requirements¶

• A clear proficiency standard for each assessment, so "ready to retake" is defined rather than negotiated
• Targeted remediation activities tied to specific missed objectives (Practice with feedback)
• A reassessment mechanism — parallel forms or item variants, not the identical instrument
• A grade-recording policy (replace, average, or cap) decided in advance and communicated

Constraints¶

• Without required remediation, retakes reward cramming and test-taking persistence rather than learning [-M] — students retake immediately with no study and scores rarely improve
• Unlimited retakes on low-stakes quizzes can encourage minimal first effort [~M]; some first-attempt accountability (e.g., a minimum preparation requirement) preserves effort
• Resource-intensive: parallel assessment forms, remediation materials, and scheduling burden fall on the instructor
• Poorly suited to assessments measuring fluency or automaticity under time pressure, where the first-attempt condition is itself part of the construct [~M]

Implementation Variability¶

• Required vs. optional: mandatory retakes below a threshold (e.g., below 80% in a competency-based course) versus student-initiated retakes
• Full vs. targeted: reassess only the missed objectives rather than the entire instrument, reducing burden and focusing study
• Grade policy: full replacement (strongest mastery signal), best-of, or capped replacement (e.g., 90% maximum on retake)
• Remediation gate: retake unlocked by completing corrective work, attending a help session, or explaining errors

Target Learners¶

• Students who perform poorly on timed, high-stakes first attempts but can reach standard with additional time and instruction Mastery learning benefits lower-achieving students most. [+S]
• Anxious test-takers, for whom a single-attempt structure confounds knowledge with test anxiety
• High achievers benefit less and may disengage if retake logistics slow course pace [~W]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Mastery of foundational skills and knowledge where a fixed proficiency standard exists (procedures, prerequisite concepts)
• Long-term retention — spaced reassessment acts as distributed retrieval practice Distributed practice improves retention. [+S]
• Self-regulated learning: interpreting feedback and planning corrective study

Instructions¶

1. Define the proficiency standard and retake policy before the assessment; communicate that grades reflect eventual mastery.
2. Administer the initial assessment and diagnose which objectives were missed (Assessment).
3. Require targeted corrective work — error analysis plus practice on missed objectives — before the retake is unlocked.
4. Provide a parallel reassessment covering the same objectives.
5. Record the grade per the announced policy and track improvement across attempts as evidence of learning, not just compliance.

Related Strategies¶

• Mastery grading / standards-based grading — the grading system that makes retakes coherent, since grades report standards met rather than points accumulated
• Test corrections — a lighter-weight variant where students earn partial credit by analyzing and correcting errors
• Spaced retrieval practice — reassessment scheduling can double as distributed review
• Negotiate learning contracts at the start of term and allow test retakes until mastery

Examples¶

• Competency-based courses (e.g., Western Governors University) require students to reassess on any competency not yet demonstrated at standard; the recorded result is mastery, not attempt count.
• Mandatory retake threshold: a math teacher requires any student scoring below 80% on a unit test to complete error analysis and targeted practice, then reassess only the missed standards; the retake score replaces the original.
• AP classroom reassessment: teachers using AP Classroom progress checks assign reteaching on missed topics before re-administering parallel question sets.

Key Sources¶

• Kulik, C.-L. C., Kulik, J. A., & Bangert-Drowns, R. L. (1990). Effectiveness of mastery learning programs: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 60(2), 265–299. doi:10.3102/00346543060002265
• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102
• Guskey, T. R. (2007). Closing achievement gaps: Revisiting Benjamin S. Bloom's "Learning for Mastery." Journal of Advanced Academics, 19(1), 8–31. doi:10.4219/jaa-2007-704
• Dweck, C. S. (2006). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Random House.
• Roediger, H. L., & Karpicke, J. D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249–255. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01693.x