The problem to my mind with an article like this is that it sets up a straw man in an attempt to bolster (political?) support for one specific practice. In this case, the straw man is the practice of 'rereading' in order to remember a body of content, as opposed to interval-based testing, a.k.a. 'retrieval practice'. I suppose testing will be the best option is (a) your only learning object is to remember a body of content, though not necessarily to understand it, and (b) you have no practical application in which to employ the content other than testing. So why is the drill-and-kill method being proposed here? The applications tell the story: compliance training, CRM-system training, 'quick hits'. Learning where there is no utility or agency on the part of the learner.
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
