Advertisement

Educational Psychology Review

, Volume 27, Issue 4, pp 635–643 | Cite as

Student Instruction Should Be Distributed Over Long Time Periods

  • Doug RohrerEmail author
Review Article

Abstract

In many academic courses, students encounter a particular fact or concept many times over a period of a few weeks and then do not see it again during the remainder of the course. Are these brief instructional periods sufficient, or should the same amount of instruction be distributed over longer periods of time? This question was the focus of several recent studies in which a fixed amount of instruction was distributed over time periods of varying duration and followed by a delayed posttest. With few exceptions, the results showed that longer instructional periods produced greater posttest scores if the posttest was delayed by at least a month or so. Notably, the search criteria for this review excluded several oft-cited studies favoring short foreign language courses over longer ones, but a closer look at these studies reveals limitations (e.g., no delayed posttest or confounding variables). In brief, the best reading of the data is that long-term learning is best achieved when the exposures to a concept are distributed over time periods that are longer rather than shorter.

Keywords

Distributed Spaced Learning Foreign L2 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305A110517. The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Department of Education. I thank Kelli Taylor Zarate, Andrew Butler, Shana Carpenter, and three anonymous reviewers for their suggestions.

References

  1. Bahrick, H. P., & Phelps, E. (1987). Retention of Spanish vocabulary over eight years. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 13, 344–349.Google Scholar
  2. Benjamin, A. S., & Tullis, J. (2010). What makes distributed practice effective? Cognitive Psychology, 61, 228–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bird, S. (2010). Effects of distributed practice on the acquisition of second language English syntax. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 635–650.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bjork, E. L., & Bjork, R. A. (2011). Making things hard on yourself, but in a good way: Creating desirable difficulties to enhance learning. In M. A. Gernsbacher, R. W. Pew, L. M. Hough, & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.), Psychology and the real world: essays illustrating fundamental contributions to society (pp. 56–64). New York: Worth Publishers.Google Scholar
  5. Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 417–444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bloom, K. C., & Shuell, T. J. (1981). Effects of massed and distributed practice on the learning and retention of second-language vocabulary. Journal of Educational Research, 74, 245–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carpenter, S. K., Pashler, H., & Cepeda, N. J. (2009). Using tests to enhance 8th grade students’ retention of U. S. history facts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 760–771.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carpenter, S. K., Cepeda, N. J., Rohrer, D., Kang, S. H. K., & Pashler, H. (2012). Using spacing toenhance diverse forms of learning: review of recent research and implications for instruction. Educational Psychology Review, 24, 369–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354–380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cepeda, N. J., Vul, E., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. (2008). Spacing effects in learning: a temporal ridgeline of optimal retention. Psychological Science, 11, 1095–1102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cepeda, N. J., Mozer, M. C., Coburn, N., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., & Pashler, H. (2009). Optimizing distributed practice: theoretical analysis and practical implications. Experimental Psychology, 56, 236–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Collins, L., Halter, R. H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1999). Time and the distribution of time in L2 instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 33(4), 655–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Delaney, P. F., Verkoeijen, P. P., & Spirgel, A. (2010). Spacing and testing effects: a deeply critical, lengthy, and at times discursive review of the literature. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 53, 63–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Donovan, J. J., & Radosevich, D. J. (1999). A meta-analytic review of the distribution of practice effect: Now you see it, now you don’t. Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 795–805.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dunlosky, J. (2013). Strengthening the student toolbox: Study strategies to boost learning (pp. 12–21). Fall: American Educator.Google Scholar
  16. Dunlosky, J., 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(1), 4–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gay, L. R. (1973). Temporal position of reviews and its effect on the retention of mathematical rules. Journal of Educational Psychology, 64, 171–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kapler, I. V., Weston, T., & Wiseheart, M. (2015). Spacing in a simulated undergraduate classroom: Long-term benefits for factual and higher-level learning. Learning and Instruction, 36, 38–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Küpper-Tetzel, C. E., & Erdfelder, E. (2012). Encoding, maintenance, and retrieval processes in the lag effect: a multinomial processing tree analysis. Memory, 20(1), 37–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Küpper-Tetzel, C. E., Erdfelder, E., & Dickhäuser, O. (2014). The lag effect in secondary school classrooms: Enhancing students’ memory for vocabulary. Instructional Science, 42(3), 373–388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Rawson, K. A., & Kintsch, W. (2005). Rereading effects depend on time of test. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, 70–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Reynolds, J. H., & Glaser, R. (1964). Effects of repetition and spaced review upon retention of a complex learning task. Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 297–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Roediger, H. L., & Pyc, M. A. (2012). Inexpensive techniques to improve education: applying cognitive psychology to enhance educational practice. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, 1(4), 242–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rohrer, D., Dedrick, R. F., & Stershic, S. (2015). Interleaved practice improves mathematics learning. Journal of Educational Psychology Google Scholar
  25. Schwartz, B. L., Son, L. K., Kornell, N., & Finn, B. (2011). Four principles of memory improvement: a guide to improving learning efficiency. International Journal of Creativity and Problem Solving, 21, 7–15.Google Scholar
  26. Seabrook, R., Brown, G. D. A., & Solity, J. E. (2005). Distributed and massed practice: from laboratory to classroom. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 107–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Serrano, R. (2011). The time factor in EFL classroom practice. Language Learning, 61(1), 117–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Serrano, R., & Muñoz, C. (2007). Same hours, different time distribution: any difference in EFL? System, 35, 305–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Smith, S. M., & Rothkopf, E. Z. (1984). Contextual enrichment and distribution of practice in the classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 1, 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Son, L. K., & Simon, D. A. (2012). Distributed learning: data, metacognition, and educational implications. Educational Psychology Review, 24(3), 379–399.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Toppino, T. C., & Gerbier, E. (2014). About practice: repetition, spacing, and abstraction. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 60, 113–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Verkoeijen, P. P. J. L., Rikers, R. M. J. P., & Özsoy, B. (2008). Distributed rereading can hurt the spacing effect in text memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22, 685–695.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Willingham, D. T. (2014). Strategies that make learning last. Educational Leadership, 72(2), 10–15.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of South FloridaTampaUSA

Personalised recommendations