Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Concern that students in the United States are less proficient in mathematics, science, and reading than their peers in other countries has led some to question whether American students spend enough time in school. Instead of debating the amount of time that should be spent in school (and on schoolwork), this article addresses how the available instructional time might be optimally utilized via the scheduling of review or practice. Hundreds of studies in cognitive and educational psychology have demonstrated that spacing out repeated encounters with the material over time produces superior long-term learning, compared with repetitions that are massed together. Also, incorporating tests into spaced practice amplifies the benefits. Spaced review or practice enhances diverse forms of learning, including memory, problem solving, and generalization to new situations. Spaced practice is a feasible and cost-effective way to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of learning, and has tremendous potential to improve educational outcomes. The article also discusses barriers to adopting spaced practice, recent developments, and their possible implications.

Keywords

research-based instructional strategies spaced/distributed practice testing learning education

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

L. S.

Healy

A. F.

Kole

J. A.

Bourne

L. E.

(2013). The clicker technique: Cultivating efficient teaching and successful learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27, 222-234.

Arnold

K. M.

McDermott

K. B.

(2013). Free recall enhances subsequent learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20, 507-513.

Bahrick

H. P.

(1979). Maintenance of knowledge: Questions about memory we forgot to ask. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 108, 296-308.

Balota

D. A.

Duchek

J. M.

Logan

J. M.

(2007). Is expanded retrieval practice a superior form of spaced retrieval? A critical review of the extant literature. In Nairne

J. S.

(Ed.), The foundations of remembering: Essays in honor of Henry L. Roediger III (pp. 83-105). New York, NY: Psychological Press.

Barrett

(1990). The case for more school days. The Atlantic Monthly, 266(5), 78-106. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/past/politics/educatio/barr2f.htm

Benjamin

A. S.

Pashler

(2015). The value of standardized testing: A perspective from cognitive psychology. Policy Insights From the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2, 13-23.

Bird

(2010). Effects of distributed practice on the acquisition of second language English syntax. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 635-650.

Birnbaum

M. S.

Kornell

Bjork

E. L.

Bjork

R. A.

(2013). Why interleaving enhances inductive learning: The roles of discrimination and retrieval. Memory & Cognition, 41, 392-402.

Butler

A. C.

(2010). Repeated testing produces superior transfer of learning relative to repeated studying. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 36, 1118-1133.

10.

Butler

A. C.

Marsh

E. J.

Slavinsky

J. P.

Baraniuk

R. G.

(2014). Integrating cognitive science and technology improves learning in a STEM classroom. Educational Psychology Review, 26, 331-340.

11.

Carpenter

S. K.

(2012). Testing enhances the transfer of learning. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 279-283.

12.

Carpenter

S. K.

Cepeda

N. J.

Rohrer

Kang

S. H. K.

Pashler

(2012). Using spacing to enhance diverse forms of learning: Review of recent research and implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 369-378.

13.

Carpenter

S. K.

Pashler

Cepeda

N. J.

(2009). Using tests to enhance 8th grade students’ retention of U.S. history facts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 760-771.

14.

Carpenter

S. K.

Pashler

Wixted

J. T.

Vul

(2008). The effects of tests on learning and forgetting. Memory & Cognition, 36, 438-448.

15.

Carvalho

P. F.

Goldstone

R. L.

(2014). Putting category learning in order: Category structure and temporal arrangement affect the benefit of interleaved over blocked study. Memory & Cognition, 42, 481-495.

16.

Cepeda

N. J.

Coburn

Rohrer

Wixted

J. T.

Mozer

M. C.

Pashler

(2009). Optimizing distributed practice: Theoretical analysis and practical implications. Experimental Psychology, 56, 236-246.

17.

Cepeda

N. J.

Pashler

Vul

Wixted

J. T.

Rohrer

(2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354-380.

18.

Cepeda

N. J.

Vul

Rohrer

Wixted

J. T.

Pashler

(2008). Spacing effects in learning a temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychological Science, 19, 1095-1102.

19.

Dempster

F. N.

(1988). The spacing effect: A case study in the failure to apply the results of psychological research. American Psychologist, 43, 627-634.

20.

Dunlosky

Rawson

K. A.

Marsh

E. J.

Nathan

M. J.

Willingham

D. T.

(2013). Improving students’ learning with effective learning techniques: Promising directions from cognitive and educational psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14, 4-58.

21.

Ebbinghaus

(1913). Memory ( Ruger

H. A.

Bussenius

C. E.

, Trans.). New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University. (Original work published 1885)

22.

Finn

Tauber

S. K.

(2015). When confidence is not a signal of knowing: How students’ experiences and beliefs about processing fluency can lead to miscalibrated confidence. Educational Psychology Review, 27, 567-586.

23.

Glenberg

A. M.

(1979). Component-levels theory of the effects of spacing of repetitions on recall and recognition. Memory & Cognition, 7, 95-112.

24.

Gluckman

Vlach

H. A.

Sandhofer

C. M.

(2014). Spacing simultaneously promotes multiple forms of learning in children’s science curriculum. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 28, 266-273.

25.

Gordon

(1925). Class results with spaced and unspaced memorizing. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 8, 337-343.

26.

Greene

J. A.

(2015). Serious challenges require serious scholarship: Integrating implementation science into the scholarly discourse. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 40, 112-120.

27.

Hartwig

M. K.

Dunlosky

(2012). Study strategies of college students: Are self-testing and scheduling related to achievement? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 126-134.

28.

James

(1899). Talks to teachers on psychology: And to students on some of life’s ideals. New York: Henry Holt.

29.

Jensen

Hunter

Sonnemann

Burns

(2012). Catching up: Learning from the best school systems in East Asia. Grattan Institute. Retrieved from http://grattan.edu.au/report/catching-up-learning-from-the-best-school-systems-in-east-asia/

30.

Kalyuga

(2007). Expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 19, 509-539.

31.

Kang

S. H. K.

(in press). The benefits of interleaved practice for learning. In Horvath

J. C.

Lodge

Hattie

J. A. C.

(Eds.), From the laboratory to the classroom: Translating the learning sciences for teachers. New York: Routledge.

32.

Kang

S. H. K.

Lindsey

R. V.

Mozer

M. C.

Pashler

(2014). Retrieval practice over the long term: Should spacing be expanding or equal-interval? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1544-1550.

33.

Kang

S. H. K.

McDaniel

M. A.

Pashler

(2011). Effects of testing on learning of functions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 998-1005.

34.

Kang

S. H. K.

McDermott

K. B.

Roediger

H. L.

(2007). Test format and corrective feedback modify the effect of testing on long-term retention. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 528-558.

35.

Kang

S. H. K.

Pashler

(2012). Learning painting styles: Spacing is advantageous when it promotes discriminative contrast. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 26, 97-103.

36.

Kapler

I. V.

Weston

Wiseheart

(2015). Spacing in a simulated undergraduate classroom: Long-term benefits for factual and higher-level learning. Learning and Instruction, 36, 38-45.

37.

Karpicke

J. D.

Grimaldi

P. J.

(2012). Retrieval-based learning: A perspective for enhancing meaningful learning. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 401-418.

38.

Kornell

(2009). Optimising learning using flashcards: Spacing is more effective than cramming. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1297-1317.

39.

Kornell

Bjork

R. A.

(2008). Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the “enemy of induction”? Psychological Science, 19, 585-592.

40.

Kornell

Castel

A. D.

Eich

T. S.

Bjork

R. A.

(2010). Spacing as the friend of both memory and induction in young and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 25, 498-503.

41.

Landauer

T. K.

Bjork

R. A.

(1978). Optimum rehearsal patterns and name learning. In Gruneberg

M. M.

Morris

P. E.

Sykes

R. N.

(Eds.), Practical aspects of memory (pp. 625-632). London, England: Academic Press.

42.

Lindsey

R. V.

Shroyer

J. D.

Pashler

Mozer

M. C.

(2014). Improving students’ long-term knowledge retention through personalized review. Psychological Science, 25, 639-647.

43.

Lortie

D. C.

(1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

44.

Magliero

(1983). Pupil dilations following pairs of identical and related to-be-remembered words. Memory & Cognition, 11, 609-615.

45.

Mayer

R. E.

(1977). The sequencing of instruction and the concept of assimilation-to-schema. Instructional Science, 6, 369-388.

46.

Mayer

R. E.

(2002). Rote versus meaningful learning. Theory Into Practice, 41, 226-232.

47.

Metcalfe

(in press). People mind wander more during massed than spaced inductive learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. Advanced online publication. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000216

48.

Morehead

Rhodes

M. G.

DeLozier

(2016). Instructor and student knowledge of study strategies. Memory, 24, 257-271.

49.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2014). Education at a glance 2014. Paris, France: Author. Retrieved from doi:10.1787/eag-2014-en

50.

Pearson. (2012). The learning curve: Lessons in country performance in education. Retrieved from http://thelearningcurve.pearson.com/reports/the-learning-curve-report-2012

51.

Rawson

K. A.

Kintsch

(2005). Rereading effects depend on time of test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 70-80.

52.

Rea

C. P.

Modigliani

(1985). The effect of expanded versus massed practice on the retention of multiplication facts and spelling lists. Human Learning: Journal of Practical Research & Applications, 4, 11-18.

53.

Rickard

T. C.

Lau

J. S. H.

Pashler

(2008). Spacing and the transition from calculation to retrieval. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 656-661.

54.

Roediger

H. L.

Butler

A. C.

(2011). The critical role of retrieval practice in long-term retention. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15, 20-27.

55.

Rohrer

(2009). The effects of spacing and mixing practice problems. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40, 4-17.

56.

Rohrer

(2012). Interleaving helps students distinguish among similar concepts. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 355-367.

57.

Rohrer

Dedrick

R. F.

Burgess

(2014). The benefit of interleaved mathematics practice is not limited to superficially similar kinds of problems. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1323-1330.

58.

Rohrer

Dedrick

R. F.

Stershic

(2015). Interleaved practice improves mathematics learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 107, 900-908.

59.

Rohrer

Taylor

(2006). The effects of overlearning and distributed practice on the retention of mathematics knowledge. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 1209-1224.

60.

Rohrer

Taylor

(2007). The shuffling of mathematics practice problems improves learning. Instructional Science, 35, 481-498.

61.

Siegler

R. S.

(1988). Strategy choice procedures and the development of multiplication skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 258-275.

62.

Sobel

H. S.

Cepeda

N. J.

Kapler

I. V.

(2011). Spacing effects in real-world classroom vocabulary learning. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 763-767.

63.

Soderstrom

N. C.

Bjork

R. A.

(2014). Testing facilitates the regulation of subsequent study time. Journal of Memory and Language, 73, 99-115.

64.

Storm

B. C.

Bjork

R. A.

Storm

J. C.

(2010). Optimizing retrieval as a learning event: When and why expanding retrieval practice enhances long-term retention. Memory & Cognition, 38, 244-253.

65.

Susser

J. A.

McCabe

(2013). From the lab to the dorm room: Metacognitive awareness and use of spaced study. Instructional Science, 41, 345-363.

66.

Taylor

Rohrer

(2010). The effects of interleaving practice. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24, 837-848.

67.

Toppino

T. C.

Gerbier

(2014). About practice: Repetition, spacing, and abstraction. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 60, 113-189.

68.

Vlach

H. A.

Sandhofer

C. M.

(2012). Distributing learning over time: The spacing effect in children’s acquisition and generalization of science concepts. Child Development, 83, 1137-1144.

69.

Wahlheim

C. N.

Maddox

G. B.

Jacoby

L. L.

(2014). The role of reminding in the effects of spaced repetitions on cued recall: Sufficient but not necessary. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40, 94-105.

Spaced Repetition Promotes Efficient and Effective Learning

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References