http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/papers/misapplied.html http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/papers/misapplied.html tl;dr: The drill work is fine, as long as its motivated. Though

http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/papers/misapplied.html http://act-r.psy.cmu.edu/papers/misapplied.html tl;dr: The drill work is fine, as long as its motivated. Though it's obviously much more nuanced than that. "An extension of this argument is that excessive practice will also drive out understanding. This criticism of practice (called "drill and kill," as if this phrase constituted empirical evaluation) is prominent in constructivist writings. Nothing flies more in the face of the last 20 years of research than the assertion that practice is bad. All evidence, from the laboratory and from extensive case studies of professionals, indicates that real competence only comes with extensive practice (e.g., Hayes, 1985; Ericsson, Krampe, Tesche-Romer, 1993). In denying the critical role of practice one is denying children the very thing they need to achieve real competence. The instructional task is not to "kill" motivation by demanding drill, but to find tasks that provide practice while at the same time sustaining interest. Substantial evidence shows that there are a number of ways to do this; "learning-from-examples," a method we will discuss presently, is one such procedure that has been extensively and successfully tested in school situations." ... "Real competence only comes with extensive practice. The instructional task is not to "kill" motivation by demanding drill, but to find tasks that provide practice while at the same time sustaining interest. There are a number of ways to do this, for instance, by "learning-from-examples.""