Distributed versus massed practice

Student’s name

Institutional affiliation

Abstract

Memory is the core basis for ideally all cognitive brain functions. Hence, studies on functional memory systems are utilized to understand how learning takes place. Researchers are developing concepts and models to aid teachers and learners to retain the data for application in the practical field. There are two major types of learning that can be utilized in the learning process namely, distributed and mass practice. The two types have their pros and cons (Murray & Uderman, 2003). Distributed practice is better than mass practice. The purpose of this study is explain why distributed practice is better than massed practice.

Discussion

The study of human memory has been ongoing from the time of the Greek scholar, Aristotle. Aristotle made several contributions to the field of psychology. Aristotle believed that human beings are born devoid of knowledge and gather it over time and therefore their brain is a sum of experiences. The earlier scholars developed their hypothesis without conducting any research. It was not until the 1880s that a scientific approach was developed to study memory. Herman Ebbinghaus experimented on himself using nonsense syllables. He developed the concepts of the learning curve and the forgetting curve (Christophel, 2017). The concepts are still widely accepted in the world today. The other major findings of the study were on the types of memory. Herman’s concepts lay the foundation for future scientific studies on memory.

Distributed practice ensures a more conscious approach to learning. It recommends a more spaced out technique that allows one to study in intervals for a specified duration of time (Christophel, 2017). Students who depend on distributed practice are more likely to retain the knowledge beyond the exam which may facilitate a better understanding of those classes. Massed practice describes studies that are done occasionally but for prolonged periods. Massed practice is common in schools where the students study only a few days before the exam. Massed practice is quite efficient as many students often pass their exams. However, the massed practice encourages students to cram for the exam hence the increased propensity to forget the information once the exam is done. Consequently, if one needs to retain the information it is better to adopt distributed practice.

Some researches support the use of distributed practice among learners. According to the stimulus sampling theory, the human brain accepts repeated materials more than when a study is conducted just once. Repeated signals amplify memory retention (Scette et al., 2015). Learners can relate to this topic. For example, studying the first time immensely stimulates the brain regions responsible for learning and retention of information. When the learner studies the same notes the second time, their brain can remember the concept and now can begin to retrieve the stored information. If one learns effectively, they can easily remember even the page numbers and location of a concept. The distributed practice provides breaks between learning activities hence permitting a person to recognize the learning practices as those that form the mechanism of a twice-studied concept thus enhancing memorization. Reminding and association processes are stimulated that ensure a better understanding.

Distributed practice warrants an enhanced conceptual thoughtful understanding of the studied stuff. Distributed practice adopts a conscious approach to study all materials. Hence, this allows for better memorization of concepts and also for a prolonged time. A reduction of distributed practice decreases the student’s understanding of the learning materials and thus leads to errors in the knowledge accumulated.

Distributed practice excels also in sports and music. One study reports that longer breaks between music sittings increase the procedural memory of an individual (Scette et al., 2015). Essentially, the drilling of musicians illustrates that the performance precision of the musical skills is better elaborated using the memory consolidation theory. When a musician conducts multiple training sessions the motor skills are better encoded and refined and also less likely to be forgotten. If one decides to practice all the musical skills once and for prolonged periods as in massed practice they are likely to be forgotten. One may easily forget a particular musical skill due to the allocation of information. There are also fewer repetition scenes unlike with distributed practice.

Within a limited time frame, a teacher should utilize distributed practice to allow students to train their multiple abilities instead of concentrating on only one repetitive deed. Murray and Uderman demonstrated the efficiency of distributed practice by the method of a football training session (2003). The practice permitted learners to indulge in multiple skills within a specified duration of time instead of focusing on one ability. Massed practice is effective for distinct tasks and is ineffective for long-term constant drills. Motor skills require stages of rehearsal, drills, and practice. In both practices, all the mentioned events occur. However, in massed practice, the rest intervals between practice sessions are minimal if any. Massed practice activists defend it by saying that frequent repetition enhances the method and effectiveness. However, from a psychological stand massed practice does not accommodate the motivation of an individual. The short resting intervals are not enough to distract the learner completely from learning (Haq et al., 2015). Consequently, in massed practice, the learners are likely to be bored and tired unlike in distributed practice that distracts them and allows for retention.

Conclusion

In conclusion, distributed practice is more effective for both intellectual and motor purposes. The effectiveness stems from the major difference between the two namely, the more resting intervals and repeated actions as in distributed practice. Distributed practice is useful for the functional and mechanical human intelligence organization. It should be promoted in sports, music, and statistical exercise. This is because it adopts a more mindful style to specific actions by giving an improved conceptual consideration of the substances and greater motivation to intellectual and motor learning. Distributed practice avoids the mental, emotional, and emotional exhaustion that is predominates massed practice.References

Christophel, T. B., Klink, P. C., Spitzer, B., Roelfsema, P. R., & Haynes, J. D. (2017). The distributed nature of working memory. Trends in cognitive sciences, 21(2), 111-124.

Haq, S. S., Kodak, T., Kurtz‐Nelson, E., Porritt, M., Rush, K., & Cariveau, T. (2015). Comparing the effects of massed and distributed practice on skill acquisition for children with autism. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 48(2), 454-459.

Murray, S. R., and B. E. Udermann. “Massed versus distributed practice: which is better.” Cahperd journal 1 (2003): 19-22.

Schutte, G. M., Duhon, G. J., Solomon, B. G., Poncy, B. C., Moore, K., & Story, B. (2015). A comparative analysis of massed vs. distributed practice on basic math fact fluency growth rates. Journal of School Psychology, 53(2), 149-159.