3 ms·
I don't think there's anything in that article that suggests that the techniques only improved memorizing and not your specific definition of studying. Also, t
by wikyd 16y ago
I don't think there's anything in that article that suggests that the techniques only improved memorizing and not your specific definition of studying. Also, there are definitely things that I have learned and since forgotten that I had to think critically about and understand. I think this article is about techniques to improve the retention of knowledge.
Take, for example, the math students who had to apply formulas to find different properties of prisms. The students who learned and practiced all of the formulas at once (which most likely requires critical thinking to determine what each problem is asking for) did much better than the students who just practiced sets of problems for each formula sequentially (which is more like memorization).
I thought the most interesting part of the article wasn't the findings on varied environments or multiple shorter study sessions, but that studying multiple things in one session improved retention. Speculating as to why, the brain subconsciously makes connections between the different topics, strengthening each concept.
- tkahn6 16y agoI'm not saying memorization has no purpose. On the contrary, it's pretty much required if you don't want to have to re-derive everything every time you go to use it. Also FTA: In one classic 1978 experiment, psychologists found that college students who studied a list of 40 vocabulary words in two different rooms — one windowless and cluttered, the other modern, with a view on a courtyard — did far better on a test than students who studied the words twice, in the same room. This says nothing about studying in the way I defined it.