Scheduling and Learning

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)10006-1Get rights and content

Publisher Summary

This chapter summarizes of some of the ways in which scheduling affects learning. Practice and experience are impacted not only by the amount or frequency of presentation but also by how these presentations are arranged—the learning schedule. Closely related to the total time hypothesis is the commonly held belief that repetition is the key to success in learning. However, most people have also been frustrated by the fact that simple repetition, in and of itself, does not always lead to success in remembering. It is important to recognize the distinction between factors that impact immediate performance and those that impact learning as demonstrated by a lasting change in performance capability. It has long been recognized that changes in the capability of a learner to display that learning may not be reflected in immediate performance, but may show up in a different context or at a different time. Clearly, good knowledge about the impact of various kinds of scheduling on the learning processes is crucial to the appropriate design and implementation of learning interventions of all kinds. The chapter describes “transfer appropriate” processing, a useful principle of the effects. The core idea behind this principle is that performance will benefit to the degree that the cognitive processes induced by the conditions of study match those under which that learning will be later tested. Another variation of scheduling that has been shown to differentially impact on learning concerns contextual variety during study or practice.

Section snippets

Learning is More than Just Practice

Closely related to the total time hypothesis is the commonly held belief that repetition is key to success in learning. However, most people have also been frustrated by the fact that simple repetition, in and of itself, does not always lead to success in remembering. A good demonstration of this phenomenon comes from a study by Craik and Watkins (1973). Participants were presented with a list of words and told that during list presentation they should be prepared to report at any time what the

Spacing

There is considerable work in various domains examining the impact of spacing of learning trials on later memory. Herman Ebbinghaus (1885/1964), a pioneer of experimental methodology for the study of learning and memory, investigated the effects of repeated study at various lags before repetition and found a clear advantage for more widely distributed study opportunities; these effects have been replicated many times since.

In a now classic analysis, Crowder (1976, p. 274, based on data from

Contextual Variety

Another variation of scheduling that has been shown to differentially impact on learning concerns contextual variety during study or practice. Practice that involves intermingling of operations or materials, often called random practice, has been shown across a wide variety of settings and materials to yield generally superior learning to situations in which the same operation or materials are repeated in close succession, often referred to as blocked practice. As an example, if three

Tests as Learning Events

As a teacher, one of the most surprising aspects of students’ study habits that I observe is their failure to adequately assess their preparedness for quizzes and tests. This failure owes perhaps to a lack of appreciation of the distinction between recall, which is usually relatively difficult (e.g., What is the name of the current Attorney General?) and recognition, which is usually somewhat easier (e.g., Was William Rehnquist a Supreme Court justice?). Students assume that looking at

Summary and Conclusion

Though the specifics vary, the most important conclusion to be drawn from the various studies outlined above is that scheduling of study/practice opportunities matters: simple number of accumulated study opportunities is often less important than the organizational structure of those opportunities. Learners often appear to be unaware of the kinds of scheduling phenomena described in this chapter and thus fail to capitalize on the potential benefits of study to the extent that they might. Part

References (51)

  • S.A. Madigan

    Intraserial repetition and coding processes in free recall

    Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behaviour

    (1969)
  • C.D. Morris et al.

    Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing

    Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior

    (1977)
  • J.B. Shea et al.

    Context Effects in Memory and Learning Movement Information

  • J.B. Shea et al.

    Knowledge incorporation in motor representation

  • A.D. Baddeley
  • A.D. Baddeley et al.

    The influence of length and frequency of training session on the rate of learning to type

    Ergonomics

    (1978)
  • H.P. Bahrick et al.

    Maintenance of foreign language vocabulary and the spacing effect

    Psychological Science

    (1993)
  • W.F. Battig

    Facilitation and interference

  • W.F. Battig

    Intratask interference as a source of facilitation on transfer and retention

  • A.S. Benjamin

    Memory is more than just remembering: Strategic control of encoding, accessing memory, and making decisions

  • A.S. Benjamin et al.

    Parallel effects of aging and time pressure on memory for source: Evidence from the spacing effect

    Memory Cognition

    (2001)
  • R.A. Bjork

    Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings

  • R.A. Bjork et al.

    On the puzzling relationship between environmental context and human memory

  • H.C. Blodgett

    The effect of the introduction of reward upon the maze performance of rats

    University of California Publications in Psychology

    (1929)
  • R.A. Carlson et al.

    Practice schedules and the use of component skills in problem solving

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition

    (1990)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text