To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test • Hacker News Board

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#11

Post by ojbyrne » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 1:52 AM UTC

ionfish wrote: post #2

Here's one example of this kind of phenomenon. If you really want to understand a question, write a paper about it. It's easy enough to read five or ten research papers in an area, and if you do that thoroughly, and write extensive notes as you do so, you'll start to feel that you understand the area and the issues involved. However, if the way you learn is much like mine, when you try to start writing you will reali…

Another way - if you really want to understand something, teach it. The preparation required to not embarrass yourself in front of students is huge.

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#12

Post by binaryfinery » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 2:05 AM UTC

Basically how I got a First from Imperial. Have fun 9 months of the year. Last three months before exams, get all the problems, tests and exams available and answer them all.

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#13

Post by aik » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 2:19 AM UTC

ghshephard wrote: post #10

ARGH. The title completely ignores the fact that the experiment-subjects that retained the information the best DIDN'T just take a test, they also retrieved it from memory and wrote what they knew. THEN they were tested on it. Horrible, horrible summary. A better title might have been "What they say is true, Read, Write, [Recite] - Then you'll test well." That is: "Read the Source Material - let's say a chapter of 10…

This entire article is so full of that kind of crap - full of baseless insinuations and twisted meanings - it completely infuriates me.

With the influx of recent NYT articles on education I'm nearly convinced the NYT is purposely trying to sabotage education (or rather they have a clear agenda, which I wish I knew where came from, that they are pushing through by twisting other people's words).

As you say, retrieval practice is absolutely fundamental. Every person does it! Studying doesn't comprise of one method - concept mapping or repeated study - it's a combination! What kind of ridiculous study was this? Also, the article makes it seem like all experts purport 'concept mapping' as the "holy grail" of learning, that's it, nothing more.

The test obviously assisted by assisting in organizing and structuring the information for them, in addition to highlighting key points from the readings. Also, the article never mentions what type of test they were taking. Multiple-choice? Essay? Short answer? Verbal? None of the above? That information would be the single most important piece of this article.

To me this article seems to simply highlight how poor students are at understanding how they themselves learn and think.

What NYT seems to want you to think: Test taking is the best way to learn. Forget in depth studying techniques or figuring out how you yourself learn.

More of the truth: Tests (depending on how they are set up) are useful in assisting with learning in various ways, and super useful in providing feedback and assessing where a student is and what to focus on in the future.

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#14

Post by aik » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 2:23 AM UTC

kang wrote: post #3

Recalling information is not necessarily learning. That 'drawing-relation-diagrams' method contributes more towards understanding in my view. Also this is very limited in domain. As an example, here in India students learn English for an year or two before appearing in MBA examinations. One common observation is that many students do thousands of comprehensions and unseen passages but still stand nowhere in the 'read…

That's how it works in Japan too. Kids study English for 8 years and aren't able to speak a word or make basic linguistic connections.

And it's all based on study and test taking.

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#15

Post by ericHosick » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 2:28 AM UTC

We retain (1):

  10% of what we read

  20% of what we hear

  30% of what we see

  50% of what we hear and see

  70% of what we say

  90% of what we teach

I used to lecture at a college. After learning about this the answer for me was like duh...

I made my students teach my classes.

(1) Edgar Dale, Audio-Visual Methods in Teaching 3rd Edition. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston (1969)

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#16

Post by joe_the_user » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 2:57 AM UTC

ericHosick wrote: post #15

We retain (1): 10% of what we read 20% of what we hear 30% of what we see 50% of what we hear and see 70% of what we say 90% of what we teach I used to lecture at a college. After learning about this the answer for me was like duh... I made my students teach my classes. (1) Edgar Dale, Audio-Visual Methods in Teaching 3rd Edition. Holt, Rinehart, and Winston (1969)

Actively learning and interacting with material is useful.

I'm more trouble by glib and simplistic statistics supposedly illustrating this.

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#17

Post by jarek » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 2:59 AM UTC

aik wrote: post #14

kang wrote: post #3

Recalling information is not necessarily learning. That 'drawing-relation-diagrams' method contributes more towards understanding in my view. Also this is very limited in domain. As an example, here in India students learn English for an year or two before appearing in MBA examinations. One common observation is that many students do thousands of comprehensions and unseen passages but still stand nowhere in the 'read…

That's how it works in Japan too. Kids study English for 8 years and aren't able to speak a word or make basic linguistic connections. And it's all based on study and test taking.

Sadly, that's most of second language 'learning' in public schools in most places around the world.

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#18

Post by tygorius » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 3:00 AM UTC

kang wrote: post #3

Recalling information is not necessarily learning. That 'drawing-relation-diagrams' method contributes more towards understanding in my view. Also this is very limited in domain. As an example, here in India students learn English for an year or two before appearing in MBA examinations. One common observation is that many students do thousands of comprehensions and unseen passages but still stand nowhere in the 'read…

Recalling information is not necessarily learning. That 'drawing-relation-diagrams' method contributes more towards understanding in my view.

As far as I know, all definitions of learning include the ability to recall. As the article points out, the students that drew concept maps "felt" they understood the material, but later were actually worse at demonstrating it with the follow-up test on understanding of the material (ie, both recall of the previous facts and the ability to draw inferences from them).

It's true that rote memorization is not the same as learning, but that's not what was being tested in the study. They specifically tested to determine both recall and understanding.

Re: To Really Learn, Quit Studying and Take a Test

#19

Post by tygorius » Fri, Jan 21, 2011, 3:26 AM UTC

aik wrote: post #13

ghshephard wrote: post #10

ARGH. The title completely ignores the fact that the experiment-subjects that retained the information the best DIDN'T just take a test, they also retrieved it from memory and wrote what they knew. THEN they were tested on it. Horrible, horrible summary. A better title might have been "What they say is true, Read, Write, [Recite] - Then you'll test well." That is: "Read the Source Material - let's say a chapter of 10…

This entire article is so full of that kind of crap - full of baseless insinuations and twisted meanings - it completely infuriates me. With the influx of recent NYT articles on education I'm nearly convinced the NYT is purposely trying to sabotage education (or rather they have a clear agenda, which I wish I knew where came from, that they are pushing through by twisting other people's words). As you say, retrieval…

What NYT seems to want you to think: Test taking is the best way to learn. Forget in depth studying techniques or figuring out how you yourself learn.

I had the opposite reaction. I figured the writer had been so indoctrinated into the view that "teaching to the test" was evil, bad, and wrong, that when a positive result popped related to testing, just that one point alone became the "news" hook of the story.

Hmm, in looking at her list of past articles, it appears the author mostly covers the medical beat. Perhaps it's a case of a "helpful" editor spicing up the story with a more controversial headline.