Block practice is basically the same thing over and over again.
Randomized practice includes switching it up and adding more variables.
Block practice is the best way to master skill. But randomize practice is the best way to get a skill to actually transfer over to a game.
Blocked practice alone is not going to transfer to a game. But if you move to randomize practice too early in the program you end up becoming really good at transferring skills that aren’t yet maximized.
Taking multiple-choice practice tests with competitive incorrect alternatives can enhance performance on related but different questions appearing on a later cued-recall test https://t.co/OJqjHUln1tpic.twitter.com/nyOMFy0xJs
This study shows that MCQ tests with competitive incorrect choices can improve performance on related but different questions appearing on a later cued recall test.
This benefit of MCQ testing, which does not occur when the practice test is a cued recall test, appears attributable to participants attempting to retrieve not only why the correct alternative is correct but also why the other alternatives are incorrect.(Bjork Study)
Thus they get to learn WHAT IS and WHAT IS NOT
Example: The city known as the “IT capital” of India is: Bangalore Mumbai Delhi Hyderabad
From this question learners are also able to learn the following connected information.
Which of the following are not the “IT capital” of India : Bangalore Mumbai Delhi Hyderabad
The concept of cued recall used in this paper means the retrieval of memory with the help of cues. For instance, in remembering the word feather, the word bird may be used as a cued recall.
This study results point to ways to make MSQ testing a more powerful tool for learning.
Most successful founders I’ve noticed are totally focused on two things:
1) Building their product and making something people want.. and.. 2) Talking to their users.
They do not let themselves get distracted by anything else and that seems so obvious but what’s not obvious is how easily distracted founders can be by lots of other things go and the most successful startups are like hyper focused on their product.
So Marshmallow test, Learning styles, and Growth mindset
New studies this year called into question earlier findings in three major areas of research: learning styles, growth mindset, and Mischel’s experiments on self-control (better known as the marshmallow test).
Learning styles:
Growth mindset:
Meta-analysis spanning more than 150 studies found that growth mindset interventions have “weak” effects on student achievement, although low-income and academically at-risk students did show improvements, meaning that a growth mindset may end up helping those who need it most.
The Stanford marshmallow experiment was a study on delayed gratification in 1972 led by psychologist Walter Mischel, a professor at Stanford University.
The test found evidence to the idea that being able to delay gratification leads to better outcomes in life.
1) You have to be in a world that is regular where there are rules to be picked up. Because if you’re in a chaotic world where there are no rules, then you are not going to develop expertise.
2)Then you must have an opportunity to learn the rules and that takes a long time.That takes many instances and you need feedback from reality about whether your guesses were correct or wrong.And, that feedback has to be rapid. 3)If the feedback is delayed, you’re not going to learn. Now, if you’re in a regular world and you have many opportunities to learn about that world with immediate feedback, you will eventually develop expert intuition.
Regular world+ Many opportunities to learn about that world + Immediate feedback
According to Stanford Behavioral Scientist BJ Fogg, Design Crushes Willpower has 2 meanings.
1st (the good one) is that design wins. If U can design your life & behaviors well, U don’t need to rely on willpower.
2nd is dark: Others design things that overwhelm your willpower. (You take back control via design).
Fogg in his tiny habit design model points out that, doing something you don’t enjoy and failing to make it habitual is actually more detrimental to a mission for change than doing nothing at all.
According to him to create a lifelong habit, the focus should be on training your brain to succeed at small adjustments, then gaining confidence from that success.
To do that, one needs to design behavior changes that are both easy to do and can be positioned into the existing routine.
(more powerful if it’s biological routine).
BJ Fogg design method is comprised of three key steps.
1) Identifying your specific desired outcome: Eg Lose 10% of your body weight?
2) Identify the easy-win behaviors “tiny habits” that will put you on the path to that goal.
Finally,
3) Find a trigger, something that you already do as a habit and graft the new habit onto it.
That might mean putting out a salad on the counter every time you start the coffeemaker in the morning,
Or sleep in Gym cloths.
Tiny Habits works by design. Its made to avoid the trap of willpower-based decisions which are huge psychological toll if failed.
Motivational levels come and go with the wind, but flossing a single tooth is achievable no matter the emotional weather.
Fogg’s design perspective of habit change can be further expanded( or supplemented) by using another powerful model i recently came across, ie “Six Sources of Influence model by Al Switzler ( TED Video )”.
In this perspective Al Switzler added new levels of analysis by bringing the macro Social and Structural elements in the design to habits and behaviors.
He argues against the sole dependence on willpower as a reliable source of behavioral change or creating powerful persistent habits.
According to him there are Six Sources of Influence.( watch ted video for explanation)
Source 1 – Personal Motivation – whether you want to do it. Source 2 – Personal Ability – whether you can do it. Source 3 – Social Motivation – whether other people encourage the right behaviors. Source 4 – Social Ability – whether other people provide help, information or resources. Source 5 – Structural Motivation – whether the environment encourages the right behaviors. Source 6 – Structural Ability – whether the environment supports the right behaviors.
Each of which are complimented by other power sources.
The network effect is a phenomenon whereby increased numbers of people or participants improve the value of a good or service. This is particulary true in information technology industries where “winner-take-all is a norm.
A product displays positive network effects when more usage of the product by any user increases the product’s value for other users (and sometimes all users).
Good examples are Facebook, Twitter, Watsaap etc. The more people uses it the incentive for using it grows.
He writes “Network effects almost always create the opportunity for learning effects, as they involve the generation of ever more data in the form of new network members and interactions.”
