What value is there in effective practice regimes if these same regimes do not, in themselves, engage the learner to continue to practice? This question was discussed in the context of two practice schedules that have been shown to be effective in studies of motor learning. But recent evidence has found these practice schedules to be either inefficient in their use of practice time (distributed practice), or results in metacognitive judgments of incompetence (random practice). We discuss these conundrums, possible ramifications relative to the law of practice, and potential resolutions of these issues by recent research efforts.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lee et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: