On-line spaced education can generate improvements in learning that are retained 2 years later. Although the effect size is modest, the persistence of detectable knowledge differences between educational interventions after such a long duration is exceedingly unusual.

<em>Purpose</em> – <it>The purpose of this paper is to compare the impact of a long-term (13-week, spaced learning) with a short-term (two-day, block intensive) coaching skills training programme on participants' coaching skills and emotional intelligence.</it>

<em>Findings</em> – <it>Participation in the 13-week training course was associated with increases in both goal-focused coaching skills and emotional intelligence, whereas the two-day block intensive training was associated with increased goal-focused coaching skills, but not emotional intelligence. Further, the magnitude of the increase in goal-focused coaching skills was less for the two-day programme than for the 13-week programme.</it>

Spaced learning usually leads to better recognition memory as compared with massed learning, yet the underlying neural mechanisms remain elusive.

Recognition memory tests afterward revealed a significant spacing effect: Participants recognized more items learnt under the spaced learning condition than under the massed learning condition.

The Modified Low-First Method is an optimal spaced learning method which was derived from a reactivation theory of spacing effects and was designed to be effective by setting as advantageous spaces as possible for all items and for any learners with various working memory capacities. It consists of three principles; the first is to sort all items by their probabilities of recall in ascending order at the end of each learning session for the subsequent session, and the second is to omit items whose probabilities of recall have reached a certain level, and the third is to transit to a new learning session when the number of unrecalled items in a session have reached a certain number.

<b>Conclusion </b> Spaced education consisting of clinical scenarios and questions distributed weekly via e-mail can significantly improve students' retention of medical knowledge.

So how often should information be boostered? We recommend that you send boosters out in three phases. You can keep this in mind by remembering 2+2+2. Send out boosters after two days, two weeks, and two months.

This first set of boosters should be “recognition boosters.” The strategy here is just to get people to try to recognize the right answer from a list of options.

The second phase of boosters should be sent about two weeks after the training and at this time you should send out “generative boosters.” In a generative booster, the learner does not just recognize the right answer from a list. Instead, they have to think about the topic and then create an answer out of their head.

The third phase of boosters should be sent about two months after the training, and at this time you should send out “integrative boosters.” An integrative booster again prompts the learner to retrieve the information, but this question specifically asks them to provide concrete examples of how they have made use of this information in their job.