Distributed vs. Massed practice

Introduction

            Distributed practice is also referred to as spaced practice or repetition and is a learning strategy that involves break down of practice into various short sessions for a long time. People and animals find out about items more effectively in a list when they study in various sessions broken down for a long period of time (Seabrook, 2005). Massed practice on the other hand, is divided into fewer sessions that take a long period of time. It has minimal periods to rest with many trials to practice during the time. It can also be referred to as a continuous application with short or no time for rest compared to the work interval. The two are methods of learning that are used by students to study. The paper will argue that distributed practice is better than massed practice (Seabrook, 2005).

            One of the facts why distributed practice produces better learning is retrieval which means that every time an item is encountered during review, there is always an attempted recovery from memory. If the recovery is a success meaning that the mind is reminded of the past occurrence the memory gets stronger and does not forget easily (Arthur, 2010). In this method, gaps are placed between the occurrence of an item and this helps in making memory recovery effortful and it is a benefit to the memory. This is because the memory is allowed to rest for a while and when the learner goes back to studying and encounter the same thing then it is remembered easily. It is considered to be an effective method unlike the massed one where an item is seen only once and assumed to be still on the mind. It therefore does not require memory retrieval (Arthur, 2010).

            The other reason is background unpredictability which means that when data is programmed in memory, its presentation is also recorded. This data can serve later as an important reminder for recovering the information (Carpenter, 2012). This does not happen in massed practice as the circumstance that surrounds each successive incidence of an item is extremely possible to be alike. In distributed method, the circumstances are possibly more uneven because of the time passage that results in the recording of dissimilar related information which is more useful at prompting later recovery (Carpenter, 2012).

            The other reason why distributed practice yields better results is that there is resting time and therefore the same item is not encountered back to back. This become that the learner does not become familiar to the item which may lead to them paying less attention. It therefore produces best results because when the learner encounters the item after some time then the memory is recovered and they remember the details and pay more attention to it. It makes them perform well during exams because they remember it well. This is not the same with massed practice because the learner comes across the same item over and over again. It makes the learner used to it and therefore pays less attention. This means that during the exam, the student will not be able to remember anything (Gaspelin, 2013).

The other reason is the effect of spacing which makes it superior for continuing learning and withholding. It is clear that when the entire time spent on learning is compared, if the reviews are spaced apart instead of being massed then long-term learning is improved. This means that for each time that is used on review information is recorded if the review is spaced. It is a very effective practice especially for the study of the same information (James, 2014). Study shows that distributed practice encourages meaningful learning whereas massed practice encourages rote learning. In order for the student to have a long-term benefit they should choose to use distributed practice. This is because after a long college career, the student who applied this practice would be far ahead than the one who spent the massed technique as they would remember most of the things. This is not the case with massed practice because it is sometimes seen as cramming. It is not a good method of learning because the learner tends to forget everything during exams (James, 2014).

            The other reason is that distributed learning provides better responses to unlike circumstances especially in games. This is because an athlete must always decide on the skill to use in a competitive situation and must be recalled from the memory. The message must then be sent to the required muscles in order to perform. This practice is seen to be more game like because every repetition needs a decision and remembrance (Arthur, 2010). It also shows that the skills practiced with the application of this practice are better learned and remembered for a long time. This is because players performing various skills in a series are able to evaluate methods. It therefore produces the best understanding of the skills which in turn improves the performance.  The method is also effective because the learners are able to pay more attention by changing the tasks constantly. Massed practice on the other hand does not bring better reactions to various situations because the student may not remember the right decision to be made. It is not also possible for the comparison of results which is very crucial in understanding the skills and improving performance. Massed practice does not produce better results because it becomes boring to repeat the same item over and over which makes learners to pay less attention (Arthur, 2010).  

Conclusion

            The paper has argued that distributed practice produces better learning. It has defined distributed practice as spaced practice or repetition and is a learning strategy that involves break down of practice into various short sessions for a long time. It has also defined Massed practice as a method which is divided into fewer sessions that take a long period of time. The paper has argued five points why distributed practice produces better learning. One of them is memory recovery which means that when an item is encountered during review then it is remembered unlike massed practice.  The other point is that it provides some time to rest which refreshes the mind. The other point is background unpredictability which means that when data is programmed in memory, its presentation is also recorded. The other point is that it is spaced so it is not boring and makes it superior for continuing learning unlike massed practice. The other point is that provides better responses to unlike circumstances especially in games. This does not happen in massed practice the players are not able to remember past items. In conclusion distributed learning produces better learning.

 

 

 

 

References

Seabrook, R., Brown, G. A., & Solity, J. E. (2005). Distributed and massed practice: from laboratory to classroom. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(1), 107-122. doi:10.1002/acp.1066

Arthur, W., Day, E. A., Villado, A. J., Boatman, P. R., Kowollik, V., Bennett, W., & Bhupatkar, A. (2010). The Effect of Distributed Practice on Immediate Posttraining, and Long-Term Performance on a Complex Command-and-Control Simulation Task. Human Performance, 23(5), 428-445. doi:10.1080/08959285.2010.515277

Carpenter, S., Cepeda, N., Rohrer, D., Kang, S., & Pashler, H. (2012). Using Spacing to Enhance Diverse Forms of Learning: Review of Recent Research and Implications for Instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 369-378.

Gaspelin, N., Ruthruff, E., & Pashler, H. (2013). Divided attention: An undesirable difficulty in memory retention. Memory & Cognition, 41(7), 978-988. doi:10.3758/s13421-013-0326-5

James, E. G., & Conatser, P. (2014). Effects of Practice Variability on Unimanual Arm Rotation. Journal Of Motor Behavior, 46(4), 203-210. doi:10.1080/00222895.2014.881314