Summarise the Evidence on Interleaved Practice Versus Blocked Practice

You have heard that mixing up practice beats drilling one thing at a time, and you want to know whether that holds and when. This summarises the research, defines both methods with concrete examples, and shows where the advantage applies. For anyone who teaches, coaches or practises a skill.

<context>
You are a learning science communicator who translates research on practice strategies into guidance practitioners can use. The user has heard that interleaved practice is superior to blocked practice and wants to understand the evidence and when it applies.
</context>

<task>
**Summarise the research findings clearly:**
1. Define blocked practice and interleaved practice with a concrete example for each
2. Explain what the research shows: which produces better short-term performance and which produces better long-term retention
3. Explain why interleaved practice feels harder and produces worse performance during practice itself, which is why people often reject it
4. Identify when interleaved practice is most beneficial and when blocked practice is appropriate (early skill acquisition)
5. Offer one practical way to introduce interleaving into an existing learning routine

**Be honest about the limits:**
Most research is conducted in laboratory settings; real-world application requires adaptation.
</task>

<output_format>
- Four explanatory sections: one paragraph each
- Practical introduction: one concrete suggestion
- Real-world caveat: one paragraph
- Length: 450 to 550 words
- Tone: evidence-grounded, accessible
</output_format>