Faster rate of learning may be negatively related to long-term retention (efficiency-effectiveness trade-off)¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · review r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? In short-term adaptation studies, slow adaptation processes are more robust over time than fast processes, and slower learners in sequence learning showed better retention, suggesting an efficiency-effectiveness trade-off. → Williams 2017

Evidence¶

Williams 2017¶

Williams, A. M., Fawver, B., & Hodges, N. J. (2017). Using the 'expert performance approach' as a framework for examining and enhancing skill learning: Improving understanding of how experts learn. Frontline Learning Research, 5(3), 139–154. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v5i3.267

q2 · i? · the article prints no effect size for this finding · review · r2

The review reports, citing Smith, Ghazizadeh and Shadmehr (2006), evidence from short-term adaptation studies of "both fast and slow adaptation processes, with the slow process being more robust over time". It also reports, citing Wadden et al. (2017), that slower learners who spent more time in the cognitive phase had better retention in sequence learning.

"in short -term adaptation studies, where individuals practice making novel aiming movements in visually -rotated conditions, there is evidence for both fast and slow adaptation processes, with the slow process being more robust over time and arguably predictive of better learning"

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Long-Term Memory — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
• Processing Speed — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Spaced Retrieval Improves Retention — related
• Interleaving category examples improves inductive category learning for visual and mathematical materials, but not for expository texts or word categories — related
• Spaced Repetition Improves Retention — related
• Retrieval practice and spaced retrieval improve achievement and retention by medium amounts, while interleaving helps category learning only for some materials and blocking beats it for words — related
• Retrieval practice improves long-term retention — related
• Desirable difficulty: harder-to-learn conditions yield enhanced long-term retention — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Educators did not perceive the iterative CTML review process as slowing them down, rating production efficiency at 4.26/5 — related
• Evidence suggests over-reliance on generative AI may negatively affect students' self-regulated learning behaviors, potentially harming retention and transfer to novel contexts — related
• The acquired strategy-selection knowledge did not make PROTO-TEG more efficient in terms of student performance — a narrower finding that bears on this claim
• The association between RT propensity and learning rate is moderated by prior proficiency: slower propensities predict greater learning efficiency for higher-proficiency students but are weakly negative for lower-proficiency students — related
• Direct instruction's advantages do not persist over the longer term — related
• Strategies that reduce fluency and increase perceived difficulty (e.g., self-testing, spaced practice) often yield superior long-term learning, contrary to student beliefs — related