ACCURACY AND EFFICIENCY EFFECTS OF DELIBERATE PRACTICE : IMPLICATIONS FOR INITIAL LEARNING by CHRISTIAN S. LASEGUE B.A., University of Denver, 2018 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts Education and Human Development Program 2018
ii This thesis for the Master of Arts degree by Christi an S. Lasegue has been approved for the Education and Human Development Program b y Jung in Kim , Chair Krist e n Bjork Erica Henningsen Date: May 12 , 2018
iii Lasegue, Christian S. ( M.A., Education and Human Development Program ) Accuracy and Efficiency Effects of Deliberate Practice: Implications for Initial Learning Thesis directed by Associate Profes sor Jung in Kim ABSTRACT Accuracy and efficiency effects of de liberate practice were examined in context of initial learning. Subjects who received five minutes of deliberate practice instruction were more likely to answer test questions accurately and efficiently, as opposed to subjects who received no deliberate practice instruction, but were instead permitted to study test answers for five minutes in advance of testing. These findings suggest that deliberate practice facilitate s accurate and efficient acquisition of new k nowledge during initial, inceptive phases of learning. Keywords : deliberate practice, initial learning, learning accuracy, learning efficiency The form and content of this abstract are approved. I recommend its publication. Approved: Jung in Kim
iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ...................................................................................... ............................. iii CHAPTER I . INTRODUCTION . . .................... ... . 1 II . REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ..................... . . . 5 III . METHODS ................... . . . 1 3 IV . DATA RESULTS / ANALYSIS ................... . .. 20 V . DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH . ..................................... . 2 3 REFERENCES .. 2 6 APPENDIX A . P ages as Appeared in Test Booklet ............................................................................ 2 9 B . R aw Data : Answer Times for Expe rimental Group . . .................. ................... . ........ . . 39 C . R aw D ata : A nswer T imes for C ontrol G roup .. . .......................... .............................. 40 D . R aw D ata : A ccuracy S cores for A ll Groups . . 41 E . I nformed C onsent F orm ... ........................... . .... . 42 F . University of Colorado Denver COM IRB A pproval . .. .. .. . 43
1 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Overview In pursuit of understanding optimal learning and performance, much research has been conducted that focuses on the nature and acquisition of expertise ( e.g., Ericsson, Krampe, Tesch Romer, 1993) . Such research has led researchers to posit that development of experti se is best facilitated through deliberate practice ( e.g., Ericsson, 2008 ; Baker & Young ; 2014 ). Expanding upon the study of the link between deliberate practice and expertise, neuroscientists have investigated t he neuropsychological components of optimal lea rning and performance ( e.g., Bilalic, 2017). Research that seeks to investigate deliberate learning and practice strategies that facilitate accurate and efficient learning during initial phases of knowledge acquisition is of special importance to educators and researchers . However, little research of this nature has been conducted. Historically, deliberate practice has been conceptualized from a longitudinal perspective, often assessing its benefits for subject s who had protracted experience with deliberate practice (Ericsson, 2008) . On the other hand, Eiriksdottir & Catrambone (2015) performed a quantitative study that examined the relationship between detailed procedural instruction and learning accuracy , as measured in test performance. They f ound that detailed procedural instruction, administered during inceptive stages of learning, was a predictor of both learning accuracy and test performance.
2 Purpose of the Study The present research expands upon Ericsson (1993 ) study by integrating a new context : initial learning. As previous research has also revealed a relationship between deliberate practice and optimal learning and performance ( e.g., Baker & Young, 2014) , the current research seeks to discern whether deliberate practice can significantly enhance accuracy and efficiency of initial learning , thereby facilitating optimal performance. effects of deliberate practice manifest after a period of protracted effort , the current research seeks to study how those effects manifest during initial , inceptive phases of learning . Guiding Research Questions: This thesis proposes the following questions: 1. What is the relationship between deliberate practice and learning accuracy, in context of initial learning? 2. Do subjects who received 5 minutes of deliberate practice instruction subsequently answer test questions more e fficiently (quickly) than those who received no such instruction, but were instead allowed to study test answers for 5 minutes, in advance of testing (i.e., exposure to the domain)? Significance of the Study This study will aid in the expansion of existing research regarding optimal learning and performance by taking into consideration accuracy and efficiency effects of deliberate practice during initial learning. By elucidating the efficacy of administering deliberate practice procedures during inceptive phases of learning, this study seeks to help educators
3 and researchers design and employ methods of teaching that facilitate accurate and efficient acqu isition of new knowledge. Definitions and Terms Deliberate practice : a deliberate approach to learning and performance, accompanied by a teacher who provides real time feedback designed for production of effective mental representations that facilitate improvement. Initial learning: refers to learning that occurs during inception, at precisely the point when the learner is exposed to new knowledge (Ridderinkhof, Van den Wildenberg, Segalowitz, & Carter, 2004). Personal Identification of the Topic / Background Information My vocation as a music teacher, lasting well over two decades, inspired and informed my identification with this topic. In addition, my experiences as a non traditional student, returning to university, further informed and shap ed my identification with this topic. During the course of instructing thousand s of music students, I began to notice a theme regarding how students approach to learning greatly affected their chances of progressing beyond beginn ing levels of skill and knowledge . More specifically, I found that students who did not employ deliberate practice procedures during their initial phases of learning would very quickly arrive at a plateau and would not be able to progress beyond that point . Often, they would fe el that, if they just simply played their instrument for a period of time, they would automatically progress, without having to expend purposive effort. Ultimately, these students would become discouraged and quit, or they would realize the necessity to go back to the point where their knowledge and skills plateaued and apply deliberate practice principles. In effect, they were not able to scaffold new knowledge over a
4 poorly built foundation. Another example of this dynamic was demonstrated by the cases of students who were much older than I, and who had been playing their instruments for far much longer, but who had not progressed beyond their first couple of years of learning; they simply continued to repeat the same things they had learned early in their growth, for many years. In my estimation , this demonstrated that simple exposure to the domain is not enough to ensure progress. In contrast, I found that students who diligently applied deliberate practice procedures made quick and steady progre ss, often achieving advanced levels of knowledge and skills in an unusually short period of time. As a non traditional student, returning to university, I noticed similar dynamics occurring in my courses. I found that courses that were designed in suc h a manner as to facilitate scaffold ing of performance; making sure to allow for successful acquisition of knowledge, during initial learning phases, helped to avoid student confusion and frustrati on in advanced phases of knowledge acquisition . In contrast, courses whose instructors ascribed to the idea that exposing students to large quantities of material is an efficacious teaching method were often experienced by students as confusing, stressful , and chaotic. These experiences reinforced in me the understanding that exposure to the domain approach may not be the most efficacious approach to accurate and efficient acquisition of new knowledge. My exper iences, both as a teacher and a student, inspired in me a desire to better understand the role of DLP in initial learning, especially in facilitating accurate and efficient learning.
5 CHAPTER II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction The current research intends to examine the associations between deliberate practice and learning accuracy and efficiency, in the context of initial learning. This chapter will examine this relationship by firstly defining deliberate practice and discussi ng its defining characteristics, secondly by elucidating the connections between deliberate practice and learning accuracy and efficiency, and lastly by considering the current study and its contribution to the body of existing research. Deliberate Practi ce: Definitions and Characteristics Deliberate practice ter (Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch Romer, 1993, p.363). Ericsson & Pool (2016) expand upon that definition, noting that deliberate practice is effortful engagement in domain specific activity which intends to optimize learning an d performance (Ericsson et al., 1993). Ward, Hodges, Starkes, & Williams (2007) refer to it as employs carefully structured activities that are designed to elicit domain s pecific improvement ( Macnamara, Hambrick,& Oswald , 2014). Ericsson et al. (1993), Ericsson & Pool (2016), and Ericsson (2006) delineated several traits that characterize deliberate practice. First, they determined that deliberate practice requires the pr esence of a teacher who provides real time feedback in a one on one scenario; group or classroom settings were deemed not optimal for administration of real -
6 time, informative feedback to each individual learner. Elaborating on this component, Chen, Breslo w, & De Boer (2018) describe real time feedback as a construct that not only allows from current knowledge or abilities to desired states. This progression is f acilitated through (Ericsson et al., 1993, p. 367). Through real time assessment of performance, teachers are better able to design meaningful activities that effectiv accuracy of cognitive tasks (Ericsson & Pool, 2016). & Pool 2016 , p.100 ). Rapp & Kirby (2008) d or increase in effectiveness and detail, thereby setting the stage for fur ther improvement (Ericsson & Pool, 2016). Ericsson & Pool, 2016 elaborate further on the function of mental representations: Mental representations make it possible to monitor how one is doing, both in practice and in actual performance. They show the right way to do something and allow one to notice when doing something wrong and to correct it. (p.100) This illustrates the distinct nature of the relationship between feedback and the production of mental representations during deliberate practice: feedback stimulates production of representations which influence performance; in turn, those representations facilitate performance assessment, generating new feedback that cultivates further improvement. Such a process suggests the importance of employing deliberate practice methods during initial
7 learning for production of accurate and effective mental repres entations (Epstein, Lazarus, Calvano, Matthews, Hendel, Epstein, & Brosvic, 2002). Ericsson (2008) defines the third trait of deliberate practice as deliberate , in that the learner is required to devote full and conscious attention to the specific goal of the practice activity. In this scenario, the learner is discouraged from directing his/her attention to other conceptual or procedural constructs. The deliberate nature of this trait is distinct from exposure to the domain , in which learners engage in u ninformed repetition or experience that is not accompanied by procedural, informative feedback (Epstein et al. , 2002). Ericsson and colleagues be given explicit instructio ns about the best method and be supervised by a teacher to allow individualized 367). When efficiency and accuracy are the goals, mere repetition of an activity was not found to a utomatically result in improvement (Ericsson et al., 1993) . Instead, Ericsson and colleagues (1993) expound upon the relationship between those goals and deliberate, feedback based practice: In the absence of adequate feedback, efficient learning is imp ossible and improvement only minimal even for highly motivated subjects. Hence, mere repetition of an activity will not automatically lead to improvement in, especially, accuracy of performance. (p. 367) This illustrates that, during initial learning, deliberate practice is an efficacious approach to facilitating accurate and efficient learning and performance, not only through feedback based coaching, but through concentrated use of attentional resources. Such intensive utilization of attentional reso urces results in increased specificity of both the quality and quantity of what
8 is attended to (Zimmerman, 200 6 ). This, in effect, biases the quality of mental representations produced (Nobre, Coull, Maquet, Frith, Vandenbergh, & Mesuulam, 2004), thereby illustrating the interplay between the aforementioned traits of deliberate practice. defined, specific goals and often involves some aspect of the target performance; it is not aimed at some vague overall & Pool, 2016, p. 99). This makes the distinction methods that rely on exposure to the domain, which, by their very nature, tend to be non specific and vague regarding goal accomplishment. On the other hand, definite, well defined goals help the learner direct his/her attentional resources toward the incremental steps that must be taken in order to effect a desired change (Posner & Rothbart, 2014). A set of well defined, specific goals, according to Ericsson & Pool ( 20 16), acts as a criterion set by which the learner can compare his/her performance and determine whether improvement has occurred as a result of the training. The fifth, and final, trait that Ericsson & Pool ( 2016) discusses requires learners to engage i information, learners will feel resistance to the perceived effort required to learn the i the process easier (Van Gog, Ericsson, Rikers, & Pass, 2005). On the other hand, deliberate practices recognizes the importance of avoiding the comfort zone; it is zone where opportunities for production of critical mental representations reside, as well as the potential to benefit from instructive feedback, both of which facilitate accurate and efficient learning (Ericsson & Pool, 2016).
9 The above section examines how deliberate practice is defined, as well how its various traits work synergistically to enhance accurate and efficient learning. However, the following section discusses how deliberate practice has been traditionally conceptualiz ed as a longitudinal construct. Deliberate p ractice from a l ongitudinal p er spective. Previous research regarding deliberate practice was primarily concerned with expertise, especially its nature and acquis ition. In this quest, Ericsson and colleagues (1993) wrote that the development of expertise, using deliberate practice, requires protracted effort: lived nor simple. It extends over a period of at least 10 years. (p. 368) This statement reflects Ericsson (1993) observations regarding the average length of time required to achieve expert levels of knowledge and performance. Following his landmark study, many studies have been conducted by other researchers that mirror Ericsson and (1993) research, in a wide range of domains, such as education , music, sports , games, and professions (e.g., see Charness, Tuffiash, Krampe, Reingold, & Vasyukova, 2005; Colvin, 2016; Gobet & Campitelli, 2007) . Even in the realm of popular me dia, author Malcom Gladwell, in his 2008 book Outliers: The Story of Success , and (1993) research regarding the length of time required to attain expertise. H owever, it is imperative to note that the aforementioned studies were primarily concerned with delineating the average length of time required to become an expert , thereby revealing their bias for conceptualizing deliberate practice in longitudinal terms; benefits of deliberate practice were measured following protracted effort. However, there is a paucity of
10 research that has been conducted that examines the immediate benefits of deliberate practice, following an initial learning period. The above sect ion discusses the various traits that comprise deliberate practice, as well as the various domains in which it has been studied , while the section below examines relationships between deliberate practice and learning accuracy and efficiency. Deliberate Practice: Efficiency and Accuracy efficient learning. Hoffman (2012) defined effi cient learning in terms of cognitive efficiency, referring to economic use of cognitive resources while in pursuit of a desired change or goal. Expanding on that definition, Scharfenberg & Bogner(2010) determined that efficiency is concerned with the pro portion of cognitive resources expended in relation to outcomes of learning accuracy and performance. Likewise, researchers further revealed the connection between efficient learning and deliberate practice, noting that feedback based deliberate practice facilitates cognitively efficient expenditure of resources (Kirschner, Paas, Kirschner, & Janssen, (2011). These studies support the findings of Ericsson and colleagues ce on Learning accuracy denotes acquisition of accurate, effective mental representations (Ericsson & Pool , 2006). Such acquisition, according to Blasing, Tenenbaum, & Schack (2009), facilitates select goals, effectively constructing the framework for strategic planning and action. Thiede,
11 Anderson, & Therriault (2003) describe the process of forming desired (accurate) mental representation s: the person monitors learning and compares the current state of learning with the desired state of learning. The person will continue to study until the perceived discrepancy between the current state of learning and the desired state of learning reaches zero . (p. 66) This is reflective of the deliberate practice process, in which the learner engages in feedback accompanied metacognitive monitoring that facilitates production and revision of mental representations until the desired change is achiev ed (Ericsson et al., 1993). Achievement of desired change goals reflects the accuracy and therefore the efficacy of the mental representations produced during deliberate practice, as well as how those representations serve to cultivate the framework f or strategic action that leads to improvement. The Current Study The preceding sections define the concept of deliberate practice, in addition to discussing the various traits of which it is comprised. The conversation was then expanded to explore defin itions of learning accuracy and efficiency and how they relate to deliberate practice. As previously discussed, prior research has exhibited the connections between deliberate practice (e.g., Ericsson et al., 1993) and learning accuracy and efficiency ( e. g., Ericsson et al., 1993 ; Ericsson & Pool, 2006; Ericsson, 2008; Kirschner, Paas, Kirschner, & Janssen , 2011; Blasing, Tenenbaum, & Schack , 2009 ). The current study intends to add to the body of research by expanding upon the Ericsson et al. (1993) study , which examined learning accuracy and efficiency effects of deliberate practice from a longitudinal perspective, referring to a period of protracted effort. In contrast, the current study will
12 consider learning accuracy and efficiency effects of delibera te practice from the perspective of initial, inceptive learning. Initial learning in the current study. The aforementioned literature delineated the strong relationship between deliberate practice and learning accuracy and efficiency, specifically from a longitudinal perspective (e.g., Ericsson et al., 1993; Ericsson & Pool, 2006; Ericsson, 2008 ). Thus, it follows that learning accuracy and efficiency effects of deliberate practice must also have a connection to initial, inceptive learning. Considering the fact that deliberate practice was found to be an efficacious approach to producing effective mental representations, thereby increasing learning accuracy and efficiency (Ericsson et al., 1993), it stands to reason that accuracy and efficiency effects o f deliberate practice can be measured immediately following initial learning. Therefore, it is important to understand and clarify how the relationship between deliberate practice and learning accuracy and efficiency connects with initial learning. Goals of the current study. By measuring accuracy and efficiency effects of deliberate practice within the context of initial learning, the current study intends to expand existing research that measures those effects from a longitudinal perspective. .
13 CHAPTER III METHODS Research Design This post test only control group study utilized a n experimental method which included a test booklet designed to provide supporting data. The paper formatted test booklets were distributed to each subjec t during his/her scheduled meeting period. Participants The current research recruited undergraduate level students attending Arapahoe Community College in Littleton, Colorado. A total of 30 subjects participated in the study. No data was , in accordance with the informed consent form distributed to each subject (see A PPENDIX E ), no identifying information was req uested, collected, or recorded. Concurrent with subjects number between 1 and 30. Random assignment was accomplished by assigning odd numbered subjects to the experimental group, while even numbered subjects were assigned to the control group. Prior to participation, each subject was screened in order to confirm that he or she had no prior experience with, or no knowledge of, music notation. Each participating subject was paid ten dollars. Instrumentation The current research was conducted using a test booklet (see APPENDIX A), developed by this researcher, which was distributed to each subject during his/her designated meeting time. Consisting of 18 pages, the test booklet was configured in such a way as to
14 feature one notated musical note per p age, under which subjects were required to write in a letter name they thought best corresponded with the displayed note. Each of the 9 questions (notated music notes) were tested for twice, resulting in a total of 18 test questions/pages. Identical test booklets were administered to subjects in both the experimental and control groups. Procedures Experimental Group. Each subject in the experimental group received deliberate practice instruction during a 5 minute initial learning period. Deliberate p ractice was characterized as a deliberate approach to learning, accompanied by a teacher who provides real time feedback and procedural instruction that facilitates production of effective mental representations (Ericsson et al., 1993). Using that definiti on as a guide, the researcher utilized deliberate practice procedures for the experimental group, in the manner described below. As a first step , subjects were presented with Figure 3.1 : Figure 3.1 Upon presentation of this diagram, the subject was instructed to notice that music notes are situated either on one of the five lines or one of the four spaces which occur between the lines. Subjects were then directed to notice that the letter names , cor responding with the note positions, occur in alphabetical order , from left to right. At this point, the researcher revealed
15 that the strategy of learning the notes in alphabetical order, from left to right, might not be the most efficacious approach to learning the material accurately and efficiently. The second step was to present to subjects Figure 3.2 : FA CE Figure 3. 2 While subject s studied figure 3. 2, the researcher brought to their attention the fact that the note names of the four spaces, if observed from the bottom space and in an upward direction, Su bjects were then prompted to repeat verbally 4 times what they had just learned, each repetition being accompanied by the time feedback and procedural instruction. Progressing to s tep three , subjects were presented with Figure 3.3 , as shown below.
16 E very G ood B oy D oes F ine Figure 3 .3 Upon presentation of the diagram, subjects were directed to focus their attention on the fact that this figure displayed the notes occurring on the five lines of the music staff. The researcher revealed that the letter names of the notes located on the five lines do not spell an actual word . Therefore, it was indicated that the use of a mnemonic device would facilitate learning them efficiently and accurately. By directing the subjec E very G ood B oy D oes F the researcher revealed that the first letter of each word of the sentence corresponds to the letter names of the notes located on the five lines. As in step two, subjects were then directed to rep eat this mnemonic device out loud 4 times , time feedback and procedural instruction. The fourth, and final step, consisted of two phases . For both phases , the diagram labeled Figure 3.1 was utilized , although the le tter names below the notes were covered, in order to ensure the answers were not visible to the subject. During the first phase , subjects were instructed to verbally recite the letter name that corresponded with each note that th e researcher pointed at . This process was conducted randomly, in such a manner that each of the nine notes on the chart was practiced two times, for a total of eighteen repetitions. Each time subject s made a mistake, the researcher provided real time feedback and procedural
17 in struction, reminding them to utilize procedures learned during the previous steps. The second phase consisted of the researcher reciting verbally letter name s, prompting the subject s to point to the corresponding note s after each letter name was recited . T his process was repeated randomly in such a fashion as to ensure each note was practiced 4 times . As in the previous phase, subjects who made mistakes received real time feedback and procedural instruction, while being reminded to utilize procedures lear ned during the previous steps. Once this process was completed, the testing process, described below, was commenced. Control Group . Subjects in the control group received no deliberate practice instruction from the researcher. Instead, subjects were al lotted 5 minutes to study , on their own, a diagram ( see Figure 3.1). Ericsson and colleagues (1993) refer to this type of experience, unaccompanied by a teacher who provides real time feedback and procedural instruction, as exposure to the domain . It shou ld be noted that, during each 5 minute initial learning period , subjects were allowed and th eir corresponding letter names. Additionally, subjects were not provided access to the other charts utiliz ed for the experimental group (See Figures 3.2 and 3.3). Prior to the five minute initial learning period , subjects were instructed to simply learn and memorize as much as they could , utilizing any strategies they could devise. Once the initial learning period commenced, the researcher exited the room, in order to minimize the possibility of distraction. After five minutes had elapsed, the researcher returned to the room, informed subjects that their time was up, and proceeded with the testing procedure, which is discussed in the following section. Testing Procedure . The testing procedure , immediately following the 5 minute initial learning period, was the same for both the experimental group and the control group.
18 Subjects were presented with the test booklet described above (see APPENDIX A). As subjects wrote in their answer for each question, the researcher recorded the time required to complete the process, notating the time score in the upper right hand corner of each page . This process w as repeated for each of the eighteen pages of the test. Hypotheses The current study intends to better understand accuracy and efficiency effects of deliberate practice, specifically within the context of initial learning. Research Question 1. What is the relationship between deliberate practice and learning accuracy, in context of initial learning? Hypothesis 1. It was hypothesized that, during an initial period of learning, deliberate practice would be a significant predictor of learning accuracy. Rationale. Ericsson and colleagues (1993) found that learning accuracy can be enhanced through deliberate practice. Their findings indicate that deliberate practice facilitates production of effective mental representations, manifesting as accurate perfo rmance (Ericsson et al., 1993). (1993) research investigated accuracy effects of deliberate practice from a longitudinal viewpoint; however, t he current research seeks to expand upon that research by examining those effects from the pers pective of initial learning. Method of Analysis . The current study used a t Test analysis, examining mean difference s between the experimental group, who received deliberate practice instruction, and the control group, who received no deliberate pract ice instruction. In this context, the predictor variable was deliberate practice, while the dependent variable was learning
19 questions answered correctly. Research Que stion 2. D o subjects who received 5 minutes of deliberate practice instruction subsequently answer test questions more efficiently (quickly) than those who received no such instruction , but were instead allowed to study test answers for 5 minutes, in adva nce of testing (i.e., exposure to the domain)? Hypothesis 2. It was hypothesized that subjects who received 5 minutes of deliberate practice instruction would subsequently answer test questions more efficiently (quickly) than those who received no such instruction, but were instead allowed to study test answers for 5 minutes, in advance of testing (i.e., exposure to the domain) . Rationale. Ericsson and colleagues (1993) found that deliberate practice increases the efficiency of learning and performance , writing that deliberate practice improves research is in alignment with those findings. However, while Ericsson and colleagues (1993) measured efficiency effects after pro tracted deliberate practice, the current research seeks to determine those effects in context of initial learning. Method of Analysis. This study performed a t Test analysis to analyze the mean difference between the experimental group, who received 5 mi nutes of deliberate practice instruction, and the control group, who received no such instruction, but were instead allowed to study test answers for 5 minutes, in advance of testing (i.e., exposure to the domain) . The predictor variable was deliberate pr actice, while the dependent variable was
20 CHAPTER IV RESULTS Quantitative data was collected in the test. Results of the quantitative measures are reported below. IBM SPSS Statistics Version 24 software was used to perform all tests and analyses. Hypothesis 1: Deliberate practice and learning accuracy. In order to test the relationship between Deliberate Practice and Learning Accuracy, the researcher performed a t Test analysis. Results of this analysis are displayed below in Table 4.1. T able 4.1 t Test analysis summary predicting Learning Accuracy from Deliberate Practice (N=30) ___________________________________________________________________________ Variable Number of Cases Mean SD SE of Mean ___________________________________________________________________________ Accuracy Exp. Group 15 17.8667 0.3518 .090 Control Group 15 14.8 2.1111 .545 ___________________________________________________________________________ Mean Difference = 3.066 F = 14.439, p = 0.001 _________________________ __________________________________________________ t Test for Equality of Means ________________________________________________ Variances t Value df 2 tail Sig SE of Diff ________________________________________________ Equal 5.549 28 .000 . 55263 Unequal 5.549 14.777 .000 .55263 ________________________________________________________________ ___________ As can be seen in Table 4.1, there were significant effects of Deliberate Practice on Learning Accuracy, t (14.777) = 5.549, p < .01.
21 To view obtained raw data used to perform this test, see APPENDIX D. Hypothesis 2: Deliberate practice and efficiency. In order to test the connection between Deliberate Practice and Efficiency, a t Test was performed. Results of this analysis can be seen below in Table 4.2. TABLE 4.2 t Test analysis summary predicting Efficiency from Deliberate Practice (N=30) ___________________________________________________________________________ Variable Number of Cases Mean SD SE of Mean __________________________ _________________________________________________ Efficiency Exp. Group 15 1.2948 0.46285 .11951 Control Group 15 4.3350 1.16662 .30122 __________________________________________________________________________ Mean Difference = 3.04026 F = 4.914, p = .035 ___________________________________________________________________________ t Test for Equality of Means ______________________________________ ___________ Variances t Value df 2 tail Sig SE of Diff _________________________________________________ Equal 9.382 28 .000 .32406 Unequal 9.382 18.301 .000 .32406 ___________________________________________________________________________ As can be seen in Table 4.2, Deliberate Practice was shown to be a significant predictor of Efficiency, t (18.301) = 9.382, p < .01. To view obtained r aw data used to perform this test, see APPENDIX B (Experimental Group) and APPENDIX C (Control Group).
22 CHAPTER V DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH Discussion The current study was a quantitative experimental method which utilized a test. The moti ve was to determine the connections between deliberate practice and learning accuracy and efficiency, in context of initial learning. Deliberate practice was found to be a significant predictor of both learning accuracy and efficiency in the initial learn ing context. Interpretation of Results Research question 1: Deliberate practice and learning accuracy. Confirming the hypothesis, Deliberate Practice, administered during a period of initial learning, was found to be a predictor of Learning Accuracy. This is in agreement with prior research findings (e.g., Ericsson et al, 1993), adding support to the claim that deliberate practice facilitates learning and performance accuracy. (1993) findings were concerned with accuracy effects of deliberate practice from a longitudinal perspective, the current study extended that research by delineating those effects in context of initial learning. Research question 2: Deliberate practice and effic iency. Deliberate Practice was found to be a significant predictor of Efficiency, thereby corroborating the hypothesis. This adds support to findings of previous research (e.g., Ericsson, 1993), in which the claim was made that deliberate practice facili tates efficiency of learning and performance. The current study extends that research by delineating efficiency effects of deliberate practice in context of initial learni (1993) study, which examined thos e effects within a longitudinal context.
23 Limitations of the Study There were several limitations to this study. Firstly, the sample size was relatively small, making it more difficult to make generalization claims regarding the population, as well as to observe significant results in the analyses. Secondly, the age group was relatively narrow; subjects were estimated to range from 18 to 25 years of age; it is possible that significantly different results would have been obtained if the sample had include d a broader age range, thereby representing more closely the overall population. Thirdly, the sample was limited to undergraduate students at Arapahoe Community College; significantly different results might have been obtained if the sample was more repres entative of the overall population, in terms of personal experience, education, and age. Additionally, regarding test content, a limiting factor was that only notated music notes were used in the test; it is possible that significantly different results might have been obtained if the test had included information from other domains . Strengths of the Study A major strength of this study is that it expands upon the current body of deliberate practice research by extending its scope to include the construc t of initial learning, while delineating accuracy and efficiency effects of deliberate practice in context of that construct. Future Research This study presents several unanswered questions which could be the basis for further research. While deliberate practice was found to be a significant predictor of learning accuracy and efficiency, this study did not investigate the relationship between monetary research is needed which examines such a relationship.
24 Future research is needed which examines accuracy and efficiency effects of deliberate practice, in context of initial learning, but with regard to information from varying domains (e.g., language, mathematical, symbol ic, motoric). Finally, future studies are needed that seek to investigate these questions, but with a larger sample size, in order to better represent the overall population, in regard to age, education, gender, and personal experience. Implications and Conclusion This study has broad implications for the fields of cognitive psychology and educational psychology, as well as professions concerned with optimal learning and performance, where the question of how best to facilitate accuracy and efficiency du ring initial learning is an ongoing pursuit, albeit inadequately answered. The main question of whether deliberate practice predicts accuracy and efficiency of initial learning was supported by this study. This corroborates findings of previous research regarding the relationship between deliberate practice and learning accuracy and efficiency (e.g., Ericsson et al., 1993), while addressing the paucity of research regarding that relationship in context of initial learning. It is explicit that deliberate practice facilitates accuracy and efficiency during initial, inceptive learning; such findings suggest the importance to cognitive psychologists, educational psychologists, learning scientists, as well as those concerned with optimal learning and performan ce, of the necessity to investigate further into how new knowledge is best acquired and how to translate those findings into practical terms.
25 REFERENCES Anders Ericsson, K. (2008). Deliberate Practice and Acquisition of Expert Performance: A General Overview. Academic Emergency Medicine , 15 (11), 988 994. doi:10.1111/j.1553 2712.2008.00227.x Baker, J., & Young, B. (2014). 20 years later: deliberate practice and the development of expertise in sport. International Review of Sport and Exercise Psychology , 7 (1), 135 157. doi:10.1080/1750984x.2014.896024 M. (2017). The Neuroscience of Expertise . West Nyack, United K ingdom: Cambridge University Press. BlÃ¤sing, B., Tenenbaum, G., & Schack, T. (2009). The cognitive structure of movements in classical dance. Psychology of Sport and Exercise , 10 (3), 350 360. doi:10.1016/j.psychsport.2008.10.001 Charness, N., Tuffiash, M., Krampe, R., Reingold, E., & Vasyukova, E. (2005). The role of deliberate practice in chess expertise. Applied Cognitive Psychology , 19 (2), 151 165. doi:10.1002/acp.1106 Chen, X., Breslow, L., & DeBoer, J. (2018). Analyzing productive learning behaviors for students using immediate corrective feedback in a blended learning environment. Computers & Education , 117 , 59 74. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2017.09.013 Colvin, G. (2016). Talent is overrated: What really separates world class performers from ev erybody else . Eiriksdottir, E., & Catrambone, R. (2015). The effects of timing of exposure to principles and procedural instruction specificity on learning an electrical troubleshooting skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied , 21 (4), 383 394. d oi:10.1037/xap0000065 Epstein, M. L., Lazarus, A. D., Calvano, T. B., Matthews, K. A., Hendel, R. A., Epstein, B. B., & Brosvic, G. M. (2002). Immediate Feedback Assessment Technique Promotes Learning and Corrects Inaccurate first Responses. The Psycholog ical Record , 52 (2), 187 201. doi:10.1007/bf03395423 Ericsson, K. A. (2006). The Influence of Experience and Deliberate Practice on the Development of Superior Expert Performance. The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance , 683 704. doi:10. 1017/cbo9780511816796.038
26 Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch RÃ¶mer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review , 100 (3), 363 406. doi:10.1037//0033 295x.100.3.363 Ericsson, K. A. (2008). Deliberate Practice and Acquisition of Expert Performance: A General Overview. Academic Emergency Medicine , 15 (11), 988 994. doi:10.1111/j.1553 2712.2008.00227.x Ericsson, K. A., & Pool, R. (2016). Peak: Secrets from the new science of expertise . Boston, MS: Marine Gladwell, M. (2013). Outliers: The story of success . New York, NY: Back Bay Books. Gobet, F., & Campitelli, G. (2007). The role of domain specific practice, handedness, and starting age in chess. Developmental Psychology , 43 (1), 159 172. doi:10.1037/0012 16184.108.40.206 Hoffman, B. (2012). Cognitive efficiency: A conceptual and methodological comparison. Learning and Instruction , 22 (2), 133 144. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.09.001 Kirschner, F., Paas, F., Kirschner, P., & Janssen, J. (2011). Differential effects of problem solving demands on individual and collaborative learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction , 21 (4), 587 599. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.01.001 Macnamara, B. N., Hambrick, D. Z., & Oswald, F. L. (201 4). Deliberate Practice and Performance in Music, Games, Sports, Education, and Professions: A Meta Analysis. Psychological Science , 25 (8), 1608 1618. doi:10.1177/0956797614535810 Nobre, A. C., Coull, J. T., Maquet, P., Frith, C. D., Vandenberghe, R., & M esulam, M. M. (2004). Orienting Attention to Locations in Perceptual Versus Mental Representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience , 16 (3), 363 373. doi:10.1162/089892904322926700 Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (2014). Attention to learning of school subjects. Trends in Neuroscience and Education , 3 (1), 14 17. doi:10.1016/j.tine.2014.02.003 Rapp, D., & Kurby, C. (2008). Visualization: Theory and practice in science education . J. Gilbert, M. Reiner, & M. Nakleh (Eds.). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Science+Business Media BV.
27 Ridderinkhof, K. R., Van den Wildenberg, W. P., Segalowitz, S. J., & Carter, C. S. (2004). Neurocognitive mechanisms of cognitive control: The role of prefrontal cortex in action selection, response inhibition, performance monitoring, and reward based learning. Brain and Cognition , 56 (2), 129 140. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2004. 09.016 Scharfenberg, F., & Bogner, F. X. (2010). Instructional Efficiency of Changing Cognitive International Journal of Science Education , 32 (6), 829 844. doi:10.1080/09500690902948862 Thiede, K., Anderson, M., & The rriault, D. (2003). Accuracy of metacognitive monitoring affects learning of texts. Journal of Educational Psychology , 95 (1), 66 73. doi:10.1037//0022 06220.127.116.11 Van Gog, T., Ericsson, K. A., Rikers, R. M., & Paas, F. (2005). Instructional design for ad vanced learners: Establishing connections between the theoretical frameworks of cognitive load and deliberate practice. Educational Technology Research and Development , 53 (3), 73 81. doi:10.1007/bf02504799 Ward, P., Hodges, N. J., Starkes, J. L., & Williams, M. A. (2007). The road to excellence: deliberate practice and the development of expertise. High Ability Studies , 18 (2), 119 153. doi:10.1080/13598130701709715 Wilkinson, L., Tai, Y. F., Lin, C. S., Lagnado, D. A., Brooks, D. J., Piccini, P., & Jahanshahi, M. (2014). Probabilistic classification learning with corrective feedback is associated with in vivo striatal dopamine release in the ventral striatum, while learning without feedback is not. Human Brain Mapping , 35 (10), 5106 5115. doi:10.1002/ hbm.22536 Zimmerman, B. (2006). Development and Adaptation of Expertise: The Role of Self Regulatory Processes and Beliefs. In K. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. Feltovitch, & R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 70 5 742). Cambridge [England, NY: Cambridge University Press.
29 APPENDIX A Pages A s A ppeared I n T est B ooklet ACCURACY AND EFFICIENCY EFFECTS OF DELIBERATE PRACTICE: IMPLICATIONS FOR INITIAL LEARNING Protocol number: 17 2170 Principal Investigator: Christian Lasegue University of Colorado Denver Participant # _____________
39 APPENDIX B R aw D ata: A nswer T imes for E xperimental G roup
40 APPENDIX C R aw D ata: A nswer T imes for C ontrol G roup
41 APPENDIX D R aw D ata: A ccuracy S cores for A ll G roups
42 APPENDIX E I nformed C onsent F orm Investigator: Christian Lasegue Protocol number: 17 2170 Informed Consent Title: Accuracy and Efficiency Effects of Deliberate Learning and Practice: Implications for Initial Learning Principal Investigator: Christian Lasegue Department: School of Education and Human Development (University of Colorado Denver) Telephone: ( withheld for thesis publication) You are invited to participate in a research study investigating the effects of deliberate learning / practice on accuracy of learning and recall. In this study, you will be asked to identify new knowledge / symbols . Participants will be allowed five minut es to learn/study, followed immediately by a testing period that lasts approximately two and a half minutes. In its entirety, the study will take no more than ten minutes. Each participant will be paid $10.00 for their participation. While there may be n o benefits of participating in this study, the test we will give you will help us to understand the effects of deliberate learning/practice strategies and application during initial phases of learning. There are no risks from participating in this st udy. No identifying information about you will be requested or required. If you have any questions about this study, please feel free to contact Christian Lasegue (principal researcher) at (withheld for thesis publication) or the Director of Institutiona l Effectiveness at (withheld for thesis publication) . Agreement to Participate in Research By agreeing to participate in this study, I acknowledge that I understand the study described above and have been given a copy of the description as outlined above . I agree to participate.
43 APPENDIX F University of Colorado Denver COM IRB A pproval Colorado Multiple Institutional Review Board, CB F490 University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus 13001 E. 17th Place, Building 500, Room N3214 Aurora, Colorado 80045 303.724.1055 [Phone] 303.724.0990 [Fax] COMIRB Home Page [Web] email@example.com [E Mail] FWA00005070 [FWA] University of Colorado Hospital Denver Health Medical Center Veteran's Administration Medical Center Children's Hospital Colorado University of Colorado Denver Colorado Prevention Center Certificate of Exemption 08 Dec 2017 Investigator: Christian Lasegue Subject: COMIRB Protocol 17 2170 Initial Application Review Date: 08 Dec 2017 Effective Date: 08 Dec 2017 Anticipated Completion Date: 07 Dec 2020 Sponsor(s): No Sponsor~ Title: Effects of Deliberate Learning/Practice on Accuracy and Efficiency During Initial Learning Exempt Category: 1 Submission ID: Exempt
44 APPENDIX F CONTINUED IRB APPROVAL SUBMISSION DESCRIPTION: confirmation of exemption Your COMIRB Initial submission Exempt has been APPROVED FOR EXEMPTION. Periodic continuing review is not required. For the duration of your protocol, any change in the experimental design/content/personnel of this study must be approved by COMIRB before implementation of the changes. The anticipated completion date of this protocol is 07 Dec 2020. COMIRB will administratively close this project on this date unless otherwise instructed by e mail to COMIRB@ucdenver.edu. If the project is completed prior to t his date, please notify the COMIRB office in writing or by e mail once the project has been closed. Study personnel are approved to conduct the research as described in the documents approved by COMIRB, which are listed below the REVIEW DETAILS section. Please carefully review the REVIEW DETAILS section because COMIRB may have made red line changes (i.e. revisions) to the submitted documents prior to approving them. The investigator can submit an amendment to revise the documents i f the investigator does not agree with the red line changes. The REVIEW DETAILS section may also include important information from the reviewer(s) and COMIRB staff. Click here for instructions on how to retrieve stamped documents. Information on how to submit changes (amendments) to your study and reports of unanticipated problems to COMIRB can be found on the COMIRB website http://www.ucdenver.edu/COMIRB . Contact COMIRB with questions at 303 724 1055 or COMIRB@ucdenver.edu . REVIEW DETAILS: This activity meets the criteria for exemption, category 1. The study will have participants in the experimental group will receive deliberate learning/practice coaching, whereas those in the control group will not. Finally, each participant will be tested (after 5 minutes of exposure/learning). The mean scores from each group will be compared in order to measure the difference. The goal is to measure the difference between the group receiving delibera te learning/practice coaching and the group who did not receive such training. Sincerely, UCD Panel S Please provide Feedback on Your Experience with the COMIRB Process