---
title: "Retrieval Practice in Primary School (Franzoi 2025)"
description: "A 2025 classroom study with 33 Italian 10\u201311 year olds: fill-the-gap self-testing beat rereading on a test a week later; spacing made no clear difference."
canonical: https://research.askpoppy.ai/papers/franzoi-2025-retrieval-practice-primary-school-history/
last_updated: 2026-11-05
---

[Retrieval practice (the testing effect)](/topics/retrieval-practice/) [Spaced repetition](/topics/spaced-repetition/)

# Fifth graders remembered more history a week later after quizzing themselves than after rereading

In two fifth-grade classes in Italy, children read short history texts and then either reread them or filled in gaps from memory, checking and correcting their answers until all were right. A week later, in a surprise open-question test, the self-testing children remembered clearly more. Spreading the study session four days after the first reading, instead of one day, made no measurable difference.

|  |  |
| --- | --- |
| Paper | [Retrieval practice enhances learning in real primary school settings, whether distributed or not](https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206) |
| Authors | Laura Franzoi, Veronica Cembrani, Claudio Mulatti, Barbara Treccani |
| Published | 8 August 2025 · Frontiers in Psychology 16:1632206 (Brief Research Report) |
| Study type | Quasi-experimental classroom study (two intact classes) · Peer-reviewed |
| What we read | Full text read. We read the open-access full text. |
| Summarized | 5 November 2026 |

## What they did

Over about seven weeks of normal history lessons, the classes went through four phases, each with a new 590 to 660-word text on ancient history. After a first reading, children studied again either 1 or 4 days later, for up to 30 minutes, by rereading or by a fill-in-the-gap test with feedback until 100% correct. Seven days later they had 10 minutes for an unannounced open-question test that did not count towards grades.

## Who took part

33 children aged 10 to 11 in two fifth-grade classes (15 and 18 pupils) at one primary school in Italy, taught by their usual teachers.

## What they found

- Self-testing beat rereading in phases 1 and 2: 67.0% vs 48.6% correct on the final test (F(1, 25) = 41.42, p < .001).
- Phase 3 confirmed it with the same spacing for both: 67.7% for testing vs 41.3% for rereading (η² = .254).
- Spacing on its own made no significant difference: 45.9% after a 4-day gap vs 44.6% after a 1-day gap (F < 1).

**Effect size:** Testing vs rereading: η² = .154 (phases 1–2) and .254 (phase 3). Spacing: not significant.

## Limitations

- Small sample from one school, with no power analysis.
- Classes, not individual children, were assigned to conditions, and phases 3 and 4 were not counterbalanced.
- Only a one-week delay; the spacing contrast (1 vs 4 days) was modest, and other spacing studies do find benefits.
- Testing included feedback until every answer was right, so the benefit combines retrieval with correction.

## What this means for learners and parents

- For 10 year olds, a short "fill in what you remember, then check" round beats reading the page again.
- Getting every answer right in the end, with feedback, is part of what made it work.
- Don't read the null spacing result as "spacing doesn't matter"; it is one small study with a small gap. Little-and-often remains well supported overall.

## Put it into practice (free tools)

- [Times tables out loud (free tool)](https://learn.askpoppy.ai/times-tables/)
- [Active recall flashcards from your notes](https://learn.askpoppy.ai/recall/)
- [Blurting method tool](https://learn.askpoppy.ai/blurt/)

## Citation

Laura Franzoi, Veronica Cembrani, Claudio Mulatti, Barbara Treccani (2025). Retrieval practice enhances learning in real primary school settings, whether distributed or not. *Frontiers in Psychology 16:1632206 (Brief Research Report)*. <https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206>

## Related summaries

- [Quizzing boosts classroom learning: a meta-analysis of 222 studies](/papers/yang-2021-testing-boosts-classroom-learning-meta-analysis/) · Chunliang Yang et al., 2021 · Systematic review and meta-analysis
- [The classic study: testing yourself beats rereading after a week](/papers/roediger-karpicke-2006-test-enhanced-learning/) · Henry L. Roediger III et al., 2006 · Lab experiments
- [Spacing beats cramming: the classic review of 317 experiments](/papers/cepeda-2006-distributed-practice-meta-analysis/) · Nicholas J. Cepeda et al., 2006 · Review and meta-analysis

Summary by the Ask Poppy team, AI-assisted and checked against the paper. Summarized 21 October 2026. Spotted an error? [simon@askpoppy.ai](mailto:simon@askpoppy.ai) · [Editorial policy](/about/)

```json
{"@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "Article", "headline": "Retrieval Practice in Primary School (Franzoi 2025)", "alternativeHeadline": "Fifth graders remembered more history a week later after quizzing themselves than after rereading", "description": "A 2025 classroom study with 33 Italian 10–11 year olds: fill-the-gap self-testing beat rereading on a test a week later; spacing made no clear difference.", "url": "https://research.askpoppy.ai/papers/franzoi-2025-retrieval-practice-primary-school-history/", "mainEntityOfPage": "https://research.askpoppy.ai/papers/franzoi-2025-retrieval-practice-primary-school-history/", "author": {"@type": "Organization", "name": "Ask Poppy team", "url": "https://research.askpoppy.ai/about/", "parentOrganization": {"@id": "https://askpoppy.ai/#org"}}, "publisher": {"@id": "https://askpoppy.ai/#org"}, "datePublished": "2026-10-21", "dateModified": "2026-11-05", "inLanguage": "en", "about": [{"@id": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206"}, {"@type": "Thing", "name": "Retrieval practice (the testing effect)"}, {"@type": "Thing", "name": "Spaced repetition"}], "citation": {"@id": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206"}, "isBasedOn": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206", "image": "https://research.askpoppy.ai/og/franzoi-2025-retrieval-practice-primary-school-history.png", "isAccessibleForFree": true}
{"@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "@id": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206", "headline": "Retrieval practice enhances learning in real primary school settings, whether distributed or not", "name": "Retrieval practice enhances learning in real primary school settings, whether distributed or not", "author": [{"@type": "Person", "name": "Laura Franzoi"}, {"@type": "Person", "name": "Veronica Cembrani"}, {"@type": "Person", "name": "Claudio Mulatti"}, {"@type": "Person", "name": "Barbara Treccani"}], "datePublished": "2025-08-08", "isPartOf": {"@type": "Periodical", "name": "Frontiers in Psychology"}, "identifier": {"@type": "PropertyValue", "propertyID": "DOI", "value": "10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206"}, "sameAs": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206", "url": "https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1632206"}
{"@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [{"@type": "ListItem", "position": 1, "name": "Home", "item": "https://research.askpoppy.ai/"}, {"@type": "ListItem", "position": 2, "name": "Summaries", "item": "https://research.askpoppy.ai/papers/"}, {"@type": "ListItem", "position": 3, "name": "Retrieval Practice in Primary School (Franzoi 20", "item": "https://research.askpoppy.ai/papers/franzoi-2025-retrieval-practice-primary-school-history/"}]}
{"@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "Organization", "@id": "https://askpoppy.ai/#org", "name": "Ask Poppy", "legalName": "Poppy Labs AS", "url": "https://askpoppy.ai/", "logo": "https://askpoppy.ai/poppy-mark.png", "email": "hello@askpoppy.ai", "foundingLocation": "Oslo, Norway", "address": {"@type": "PostalAddress", "addressLocality": "Oslo", "addressCountry": "NO"}, "founder": {"@type": "Person", "name": "Simon Dreyer"}}
```