Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching - National University

Csikszentmihalyi (1982) has written about such “optimal experiences” and argues that intense,
concentrated study leads to enhanced motivation and increased creativity. We do not yet know
whether accelerated education produces these desirable effects, but clearly the opportunity for
immersion in a topic or field is better when a class is taken in a short, intensive block without the
distraction from other classes. Advocates for immersion programs in foreign language learning
clearly believe that focused attention is the key to successful language acquisition, and there is
some research to support their claims (Powell, 1976).
Transfer of Learning
It can be argued that the primary goal of education is the transfer of learning. After all, what is
the point of education if it is never used and cannot be applied in other situations Learning for
learning’s sake is fine for some, but the vast majority of students want to be able to do something
with their education. According to Barnett and Ceci (2002), for over 100 years psychologists and
educators have debated the evidence for, and the theories of, transfer. In their review of the
transfer literature, Barnett and Ceci suggest that the ambiguity and controversy is, in part, a
function of not appropriately specifying the various dimensions along which transfer occurs.
They propose that transfer must be viewed in terms of the content (what is transferred) and the
context (when and where does transfer occur). Any comparison of accelerated and traditional
education needs to address both dimensions, of course, but perhaps context is more critical than
the content at this early stage of inquiry (e.g., knowing that some learned information got
transferred to the next assignment, the next class, the lab, or a job may be more meaningful than
knowing what specific bit of knowledge or skill got transferred).
It is probably premature to suggest that either accelerated or traditional models of
education fit better conceptually with what we know about transfer. Nevertheless, Serdyukov and
Wheeler (2002) have argued that, in the teaching of mathematics, physics, and second language
learning, students perform better when topics are presented sequentially and each unit builds and
expands on the previous one. Bruner (1960) calls this a “spiral curriculum,” or “[a] curriculum as
it develops should revisit these basis ideas repeatedly, building upon them until the student has
grasped the full formal apparatus that goes with them [so it] turns back on itself at higher levels”
(p. 13). It may be that classes that are offered sequentially in smaller units (accelerated classes)
are more likely to create these spiral or iterative transfer effects.
Incubation/Insight
Traditional wisdom maintains that some material and problems require an extended period of
time to “digest” or “simmer.” There is evidence in the psychological literature that setting a
problem aside for a while (a process labeled “incubation”) does help the learner and problem
solver. For difficult material and problems in which the learner can get stuck (and perhaps
require some special creative “insight”), the research suggests that an incubation period can be
useful (Smith, 1995). It would appear that for some courses in some disciplines, an accelerated
approach could be a disadvantage for the students because they are not given sufficient time to
ruminate over the course content or the homework problems. Although there is no research that
addresses this issue directly using real-world classes or programs, it is possible that accelerated
education may not be ideal for certain kinds of learning and problem solving.
37