Interleaving multiple graphical representations of fractions gave a qualified advantage over blocked practice, mainly on delayed conceptual transfer and for low-prior-knowledge students¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r? · q3 · i1 small · n=230
Currency · newest study 2014 · checked against its sources 2026-10-28 (automated, 1 of 1 entry) · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i1 Across four practice schedules there was no significant main effect of schedule; the fully interleaved schedule significantly outperformed the other three on delayed conceptual transfer (d=0.33), the increasingly interleaved schedule had a marginal advantage on reproduction with area models (p<0.10, d=0.30), and the fully interleaved schedule beat the blocked one for students with low prior knowledge. → Rau 2014

Evidence¶

Rau 2014¶

Rau, M. A., Aleven, V., Rummel, N., & Pardos, Z. (2014). How Should Intelligent Tutoring Systems Sequence Multiple Graphical Representations of Fractions? A Multi-Methods Study. Int J Artif Intell Educ. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40593-013-0011-7

q3 · randomised classroom experiment · i1 · small effect (d=0.33, delayed conceptual transfer) · n=230 · causal · r?

A classroom experiment with the Fractions Tutor randomly assigned 230 analysed 4th- and 5th-grade students to four practice schedules of multiple graphical representations (blocked, moderately, fully and increasingly interleaved). The authors call their results "qualified support" for interleaving: there was "no significant main effect of practice schedules on any knowledge type"; the fully interleaved condition significantly outperformed the other three conditions together "only on conceptual transfer at the delayed posttest" (p<0.05, d=0.33); the increasingly interleaved condition had a marginally significant advantage on reproduction with area models (p<0.10, d=0.30); and for students with low prior knowledge the fully interleaved condition did significantly better than the blocked one, with no differences for high prior knowledge students. The blocked condition never outperformed an interleaved one. The abstract's "on a number of measures" summarises this pattern, not several significant between-condition differences.

"Based on data from 230 4th and 5th-grade students, we found that interleaved practice leads to better learning outcomes than blocked practice on a number of measures."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Interleaved practice outperformed blocked practice across eight STEM classrooms — a broader claim this one bears on
• Interleaved practice yields better category learning than blocked practice, and students who choose interleaved practice outperform those who choose blocked practice on novel materials — a broader claim this one bears on
• Interleaving benefits transfer to novel items from a learned category, with effect sizes of up to 0.66 — a broader claim this one bears on
• Interleaving Improves Discrimination — a broader claim this one bears on
• Productive failure students demonstrated greater representation flexibility in working with graphical representations than students in the other two conditions — related
• The effect of practice schedules depends on the type of target knowledge, with increasingly interleaved practice most effective for area models. — related
• In an experimenter-controlled task, interleaved practice yields better classification performance than blocked practice (d = 1.05) — a broader claim this one bears on
• When exemplars are already interleaved, larger temporal spacing between same-category exemplars yields better inductive learning than smaller spacing — related