The art of learning

[VetLegion]

Eveyone can follow their own whims. It is efficiency and obedience that has to be learned.

[General Ludd]

Efficiency is better learned through experience and an understanding of what is being done than direction, and obedience is better not learned at all.

And not everyone can "follow their own whims", actually, when they are wrung through an education system that trains them to conform. But regardless of that, an education shouldn't have to teach you to "act on your own whims" but should give you a foundation that encompases a broad scope of aproaches and perspectives, and gives you the resources to act with understanding, knowledge, and experience in whatever it is that you want to do.

[civman2000]

Re: Re: The art of learning

Originally posted by General Ludd
I never take notes. It distracts me from what's going on. For me, the best thing is to first be taking a course that I find interesting, and then to listen attentively and (if possible) participate.

I find taking notes to be extremely valuable in math classes. That's because I write everything down in my own words, sometimes using different notation than the professor is using, sometimes working out the proofs before he finishes them, etc. It forces me to understand the material more.

[Tattila the Hun]

I once tried sleep-learning. Teacher wasn't impressed, at all.

[Pekka]

One thing I'd like to see more in Universities, at least in Finland, is feedback. Usually, with exams etc.. you don't get feedback, none, nada, zip... you just get a grade. So you really might not have any idea as to why you didn't score this much or this much.. It is OK if there is some kind of general feedback, as in you are given few points you were supposed to bring out in a good answer. But if it's nothing, you get nothing back individually or in general, then I think that's just not good.

Few times I've had those situations where I thought I'd score high and only got an average grade. So I was left wondering why my paper wasn't in the level I thought it was. Then again, I've had papers where I was expecting average results but got excellent remarks, but that's ok because you knwo what you wrote, and that was then excellent, so you know what you did do instead of what you didn't do.

[MORON]

For some, this works. Then the best part is, when I'm curious as to what people write down, because the lecturer said nothing of importance, they give this 'why aren'y YOU writing this down' look. There's an instant eye battle.

Well, what I write down depends on what is presented on the blackboard.

There is a few reasons why it makes sense sometimes to take down notes, and why I always make a set of notes unless there is a comprehensive set provided somewhere by the lecturer already. They are:

1. It forces you to pay at least some attention to boring classes, as opposed to drifting off thinking about how to move your armor/artillery stack in conjunction with a bomber attack.

2. In class material is a clear indication of what the course is about and tell you what is "fair game" on an exam. For courses that have clear guidelines and conforms to past exams/problem sets, this is not a major issue. However for courses where such material is not avaible, this is important in narrowing the topic beyond what usually over detailed textbooks does. Since anything not written down is something forgotten, it helps to write things down as opposed to guessing section of the text at the end of the term.

3. It is not that much effort if done in a reasonable manner. Not word for word but just the general idea. It can be done even when comprehension of the actual lecture is impossible due to lack of energy/focus. Personally, I use symbols as opposed to english when taking notes of speech. (lots of arrow signs, occasional set-theory notation and pictures) In any case, the mind thinks while the hand moves automatically by reflex, sometimes not even requiring looking down much.

4. stats and small examples are interesting and can be kind of fun to read and break the monotomy of reviews. It also sometimes illustrate a point faster then first principles. Those go into the margin of notes as opposed to the main-body and is only read if required. Some annoying profs also test you one those small things, especially if the course is rather empty on testable content for the given time.

5. Other people's notes can be okay, if they are comprehensive and detailed. However most people don't make those notes but some quick and dirty thing, so its better to make your own, where you understand your own format and shorthand symbols. There is also a certain sense of security in knowing that the information in the notes are filtered with the best of your own judgement.

Good professors actually design their presentation to be easy to take notes of, with various markers and careful control of presentation order to tell you the relationship between the things presented. Following them results in notes thats organized like a textbook and can be read as such. (except such material may not be actually in the assigned text or easily accessible source)

For Professors that use powerpoint slides, some people print them out before hand and write notes on the printouts. I can see how this can be effective (for example, highlighting parts where the professor focuses on for "must remember for exam" items and cross out stuff the profs says "ah no time to cover") but I've generally been too lazy to do it.

If it's blah blah blah, boring, irrelevant.. I'm most likely not going to remember it anyway, so what's the point of taking detailed notes.

Because the course being boring isn't a excuse for poor marks! If you are not going to remember it in your brain, you'd better have it remembered somewhere.

There is also the question of open notes exams, and the more (mentally indexed, seachable) stuff you have, the better.

-------
I have to add that taking notes aren't actual learning. actual learning happens in your own time, and notes is just something to study from. The real learning happens when you sit down and read all your sources, text, notes, problem sets and organize them into coherent knowledge and force yourself to memorize it. You don't have to read all the notes or anything like that (often, I simply don't), but it one can scan it to make sure one knows whats necessary in it.

The use of notes is that you can procastinate actually studying until the last week (or day, even) before the exam. The stuff covered in lecture and the likes are likely to be long, long forgotten without extra reinforcement people that review material quickly, but they can be recovered thanks to notes.

It is more efficient time-mark wise to rely on short term memory then trying to learn everything and put them in long term memory for an exam weeks away.

[Proteus_MST]

Re: Re: Re: The art of learning

Originally posted by civman2000

I find taking notes to be extremely valuable in math classes. That's because I write everything down in my own words, sometimes using different notation than the professor is using, sometimes working out the proofs before he finishes them, etc. It forces me to understand the material more.

That´s similar to the way I do my learning.
I read in several books about the impüortant topics and then try to write it down in a compüressed way and with my own words (as even books waste a lot of words I am normally able to express the important essence with half of the words used in the books (or even less))

[VetLegion]

For each two books you read you write one?

[Pekka]

"Because the course being boring isn't a excuse for poor marks! If you are not going to remember it in your brain, you'd better have it remembered somewhere."

I strongly disagree. If it is not of interest, then I pay no strong attention. I'll just see if something interesting comes up.

This is of course assuming that you know the basics of your own field. If you don't, well you better, even if it's boring. Or then change your field.

"The real learning happens when you sit down and read all your sources, text, notes, problem sets and organize them into coherent knowledge and force yourself to memorize it."

Sure. And for many they don't remember anything because they were taking notes, not listening.

Doesn't work like that for me at all. I listen, then come back reflecting on the issues with course material and some additional searching, IF it is an interesting topic. During this reflection I write few things down.

"The stuff covered in lecture and the likes are likely to be long, long forgotten without extra reinforcement people that review material quickly, but they can be recovered thanks to notes."

And if it's detailed information, it's most likely useless anyway. If it's not detailed, but clearly vital, well of course you're supposed to know it anyway.

This is just saying you should study for exams. This happens by taking notes, so you can study that again before the exams.

Learning is not about exams. Exams are just a way for someone to measure what you did learn. So you either prepare to learn or pass an exam.

For the other, you can do repeat repeat repeat. For the other you need to listen, reflect on things, and yes, read additional stuff not even included in your course material, discuss the issues with other people etc etc etc. If you do not 'elaborate' on it, but you know the 'mandatory stuff', then it tells more about the level of skill of this person and the motivation also.

I'm not saying you shouldn't take notes. I'm saying, writing _everything_ down and not being able to listen what the person is even talking about, because you're too busy copying it all down.. works for some, but it's not the only way.

"It is more efficient time-mark wise to rely on short term memory then trying to learn everything and put them in long term memory for an exam weeks away."

Right, and also useless.

If one goes out there to just get a degree, that's fine. But at least I hope some people go there to _learn_.

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by VetLegion
For each two books you read you write one?

Only about the topics in the books that are necessary for the exam.

It´s (at least for me) much more efficient than just a stupid continuous repeating of the stuff I havbe to learn.
This way it gets into my working memory (as I used the information I had to learn [by formulating it with my own words and writing it down] instead of just repeating the things written in the books over and over).

I had a good comparison of those two methods.
In one Semester during my study of Biology I learned for 2 exams.
Both of about the same difficulty level.
For the one I used the traditionasl way of learning by repeating things written in books over and over and used a learning time of about 3-4 weeks.
For the other I did it the way I mentioned above by writing the important things in compressed form in my own words, but used only a learning time of one week.

I was successful in the second exam, but failed in the first one.

[Zkribbler]

Re: The art of learning

Originally posted by Pekka
.... when I'm curious as to what people write down, because the lecturer said nothing of importance, they give this 'why aren'y YOU writing this down' look. There's an instant eye battle.

A friend of mine told me of his first day in one class. The professor went off on the importance of taking good notes. Then he whirled and pointed an accusatory finger at my friend, "Last year," the professor snarled, "a student sat in that chair and never took a single note during the entire year. --And that student flunked!" Automatically, the whole class looked at my friend. He knew he had to take some notes, so he wrote down the word:

"Flunked."

[Pekka]

That professor sounds like an *******, and gets into things that are not of his business to begin with. Sounds like a commie professor to me, and if this is his attitude, I'm not sure he has anything interesting to say about his subject either.

[General Ludd]

Yeah, probably not. I would of punched him the crotch.

[Sirotnikov]

While I agree wholeheartedly with your 2 openng posts, I must say that writing is really important.

The question arises: what do you write?

If you simply write down what the professor / teacher is saying, then you are doing little to promote studying - infact you are delaying it to a later time (when in your room, reading your notes).

I on the other hand, tend to think and try and conceptualize the material on my own - and then write it down.

Writing down is part of the process of making a mental image of the material. Writing down forces me to make a knowledge map in my head, since I never write down what the teacher said - rather - I write my own concise record with plenty of symbols (like MORON does).

So in the end - I have an essay which is not a copy of what was said in class - but rather of my own synthesis and analysis of it.


Then I can only look at it for a short while, when preparing for a test.

This, instead of re-reading everything and rewriting it.

I always "re-write" stuff before tests - since I again analyze it and synthesize the information. I don't simply copy it. Thus - my brain "gets it".

[Pekka]

"I on the other hand, tend to think and try and conceptualize the material on my own - and then write it down."

I do this also.

When I'm reflecting the material later on, I'm writing down things from my head. Later on. And more like hints. Hints so I can remember the whole thing.