I think we’d all agree that some ways of learning are better than others. I’d much rather learn from someone that uses visuals and can tell a good story to keep me engaged. I know, that’s obvious, but have you thought about the affects and benefits of spacing out your training versus doing it all at once? Most often the timing question is driven by urgency and people’s availability (convenience) rather than what will be most effective. The challenge we face here is that there is a direct cost incurred by organizations when they train so logically it make sense to find the most cost effective way to carry out the training. The part that is over looked is that there is incremental benefit of more effective training which isn’t always easy to calculate. It comes down to this question that I pose to my clients every time they are looking at making improvements to their training programs.
What is the incremental and long term value of the improvement and does that “incremental value” outweigh the cost to making the change?
The answer is simple, if the making the improvement means that they will learn more, faster and be able to implement what they learned to increase productivity, decrease costs or increase revenue, then absolutely YES! If not, then the answer is simple…”no”.
Developing the right kind of training to maximize the return is not an over night solution. Like anything of value, it takes time and usually involves a lot of change.
I found this short article in the Science Daily that sheds some light on the affects of training “distributed over time” vs. “massed training”.
ScienceDaily (Oct. 2, 2009) — A new study from the Montreal Neurological Institute and Hospital (The Neuro) of McGill University reveals that different patterns of training and learning lead to different types of memory formation. The significance of the study, published in the Journal of Neuroscience, is that it identifies the molecular differences between spaced training (distributed over time) and massed training (at very short intervals), shedding light on brain function and guiding learning and training principles.
In every organism studied, results have shown that memory formation is highly sensitive not only to the total amount of training, but also to the pattern of trials used during training. In particular, trials distributed over time are superior at generating long-term memories than trials presented at very short intervals.
“It is a well known psychological principle that learning is better when training trials are spaced out than when given all together,” says Dr. Wayne Sossin, neuroscientist at The Neuro and lead investigator of the study. “However, there are very few, if any studies that identify, at the molecular level, differences between the two types of training.”
WARNING! Scientist mumbo jumbo – just keep reading – I’m right here with you.
“In this study, using Aplysia, a type of mollusk often used as a model of learning in which the difference between spaced and massed training has been well established, we identify an event, the activation of the enzyme called Protein kinase C Apl II (PKC Apl II), which is very different under the two training paradigms and could explain the differences in learning.
The process of strengthening communication between nerve cells (neurons), called synaptic facilitation, represents learning and is the basis of change in learning in Aplysia. This process is controlled by the release of a neurotransmitter called serotonin. Four to five spaced applications of serotonin generate long-term changes in the strength of the synapse – the junction between two neurons – but in this study lead to less activation of PKC Apl II. This leads to stronger connections between neurons and therefore increased learning and memory.
RENE’S BREAKDOWN: When our neurons communicate, or shoot the neurotransmitter “serotonin” across the synapse to another neuron the connection between those two neurons become stronger and…we learn something. They are saying if the training is spaced, it spaces the serotonin secretion which leads to a stronger connection and increases our ability to retain more information.
In contrast, if the application of serotonin is continuous, as would be the case in massed learning/training, the researchers found that there was much more activation of PKC Apl II, suggesting that activation of this enzyme may block the mechanisms for generating long-term memory, while retaining mechanisms for short-term memory.
RENE’S BREAKDOWN: Too much consistant training (or serotonin) can block the mechanisms for “long term memory” causing less retention.
This study shows that the enzyme PKC Apl II is regulated differently by spaced versus massed applications of serotonin and that the difference in activation of PKC Apl II can explain some of the distinction between spaced and massed training.
This work is supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR).
McGill University. “Why One Way Of Learning Is Better Than Another.” ScienceDaily 2 October 2009. 4 November 2009 <http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2009/10/091001163730.htm>.
Rene F. Rodriguez
