Space
out your study sessions
As noted above, it’s better to distribute the time you have
available to study over a greater number of shorter sessions than it is to cram
your studying into a single marathon session. In thinking about exploiting this
‘spacing effect’ in your own studying, you might wonder whether there is an
optimal method of spacing out your study sessions. Is there an ideal number of
sessions? Is there an optimal interval between sessions?
The good news is that simple guidelines on scheduling your study
sessions are sufficient. In terms of the number of sessions you use, too few is
more of a problem than too many. If you have 12 hours to dedicate to
a topic, it’s better to study over six two-hour-long sessions than it is to
study over a couple of six-hour-long sessions. In terms of the length of
intervals between your sessions, research indicates
that longer intervals tend to be associated (up to a point) with better
retention. However, since studying often takes place in a limited timeframe,
you should prioritise the number of sessions over getting the longest possible
inter-session intervals.
Alternate between studying similar topics
We often believe that it’s best to ‘block’ topics when studying
– to allocate a period of time for one topic, and to conclude a review of it
before moving on to the next one. However, contemporary research has
consistently indicated that alternating between different topics (referred to
as ‘interleaving’) can be more effective, especially for topics that are
similar in nature and might otherwise be easily conflated.
As an example, if you were learning about psychoactive drugs
(for a friend, of course), you’d probably want to look at different classes of
drugs: eg, stimulants, depressants and hallucinogens. Broadly speaking, you
could deal with these topics in one of two ways: blocking or interleaving. The
blocking approach would involve studying each class of drug sequentially; you
would conclude your review of stimulants in their entirety before moving on to
depressants and then hallucinogens. Alternatively, you could interleave the
classes of drugs by organising your studying around categories of information
within them. For example, their definitions, exemplars, mechanism of action and
profile of psychological effects. Interleaving would involve first looking at a
definition for each class of drug, before moving on to an example from each
class, followed by their respective mechanisms of action, and then finally
their profiles of psychological effects.
Here’s a general rule of thumb you can follow in figuring out
whether it might be better to block or interleave your study efforts.
Research indicates that
interleaving seems to bias your attention towards looking for differences between
topics. Therefore, it’s most effective when you’re studying topics that are
similar (and require more effort to distinguish from each other). It’s also
effective under conditions where you have discretion about assigning
information to a category, as might be the case if you were classifying works
of art. In contrast, blocking seems to focus your attention on looking
for similarities between topics. Therefore, it’s best used for
topics that can be easily distinguished and/or when category membership has
been predetermined, such as would be the case if you were learning about
elements of the periodic table.
Focus on constructing your own understanding of a topic, not
reproducing someone else’s
In the ‘Need to Know’ section above, we noted that memory is
fundamentally reconstructive, as opposed to reproductive, in nature. If you
rely on passively rereading your course materials, you’ll tend to end up using
your memory to try to reproduce the author’s understanding of the subject
rather than generating your own. So, what is the best catalyst for generating
your own understanding of what you read? The answer is to question what you
read as you’re reading it. By responding to your own questions, you are forcing
yourself to think about how to explain the subject matter in your own words and
with reference to your previous knowledge and experience.
You can use an approach called elaborative interrogation to
systematically incorporate the process of questioning into your reading. This
technique involves annotating your sources with questions that require an
explanatory response from you. You can provide this response verbally,
initially using your sources for assistance. Do this iteratively with the aim
of eventually not needing to consult your sources at all during the process of
responding to your questions.
In using elaborative interrogation, try to focus on explanation
as much as you can; your aim is to make the information as meaningful to you as
possible. Phrasing your questions so they begin with ‘why’ or ‘how’ will help
you do this, as will thinking about concrete examples of more abstract
concepts. For example, you might annotate this section with the question: ‘Why
is responding to your own questions conducive to the reconstructive nature of
memory?’
Make retrieval practice an integral part of your studying
Given that the purpose of studying is to prepare for an exam of
some kind, it’s ironic that we tend to favour approaches such as rereading over
testing our ability to retrieve information from memory (retrieval practice).
Testing is not just a way of measuring learning; it can also be a powerful
mechanism of learning. This is another one of those findings
in psychology that is so robust as to now be considered axiomatic. It’s
referred to as the testing effect.
Contrary to how it might feel, both success and failure to
retrieve information are helpful for your memory. Both outcomes serve to
calibrate confidence in your perception of your knowledge. This is invaluable
information in orienting your studying so that it is based on evidence of
progress rather than guesswork! When studying, it’s not what you think you know
that matters, but rather what you can prove you know. Strange, isn’t it? You
probably always thought of tests as your nemesis and studiously tried to avoid
them. Yet that whole time, you could have used them as a tool of learning.
You should not make the mistake of dismissing retrieval practice
as a cynical exercise in ‘learning to a test’. Its usefulness is not limited to
scenarios where you know what questions will be featured in a forthcoming exam.
Nor does its effectiveness depend upon congruence between the content or format
of your retrieval practice and the exam you eventually take. Furthermore, the
benefits of retrieval practice are not simply limited to facts; they also
extend to concepts and the transfer of knowledge from one domain to another.
You can incorporate retrieval practice organically into your
studying by using the read, recite, review (3R) approach. This involves reading
a short passage of text, putting the source to one side and trying to recall
the information in your own words, before checking your recall against the
source for factual accuracy. You repeat these steps until you are satisfied
with your ability to capture the meaning (not words) of the source material in
question. If you type out your attempts to recite information from your sources
rather than just verbally recall them, you’ll be organically producing notes
that capture your understanding of the material.
Don’t just highlight material, think about it
By this point you will have gathered that interaction with your
sources is important in studying effectively, but you should know that not all
types of interaction are created equal. For example, highlighting text is a
method that’s widely used by students. Ostensibly, this seems like a perfectly
sensible thing to do when studying. Explicitly identifying the most important
parts of a source should help focus your attention by
filtering out less relevant material and reducing the burden on your memory.
However,
the literature on the effectiveness of highlighting makes for unhappy reading,
especially if you own a stationery shop. On the rare occasions where a study
has shown highlighting to have a positive effect on learning, it’s not been the
act of highlighting per se that is behind the effect. Rather, it’s the thinking
behind what is being highlighted – why the highlighted information is
significant – that counts. Indeed, research indicates
that the people who report using highlighting most frequently tend to do it the
least effectively and get the least benefit from its use. I know it’s nice to
think that a highlighter works like an optical scanner with a direct connection
to your long-term memory, but it is no substitute for mentally engaging with
the text.
Key points
- You can’t rely
on intuition about how well your studying practices are working for you.
Intuitive judgments of learning are often inaccurate and tend to produce
an inflated perception of progress.
- Avoid defaulting
to habitual, passive approaches to studying such as rereading and
highlighting sources. These do not take advantage of the reconstructive
nature of memory, and make it more tedious and less effective.
- Systematic
engagement with the meaning of your source material is the key to
successful studying.
- Rather than
cramming your studying into an extended session before the exam, it’s much
more effective to distribute the time you have available for studying over
a larger number of shorter sessions.
- When you are
studying similar topics that might be easily confused, it’s a good idea to
interleave your studying – to alternate between the topics during your
study sessions. This can help you identify the differences between the
topics and reduce the chances of them being conflated.
- You should view
self-testing as an integral part of your studying. One way to do this is
the read, recite and review (3R) method: read a section of text, set it
aside as you try to recall its content in your own words, and then check
your recall, repeating as necessary.
-AEON
Paul
Penn is a senior lecturer in psychology at the
University of East London. He is the author of The
Psychology of Effective Studying: How to Succeed in Your Degree (2019) and the winner of the 2021 UK Higher
Education Psychology Teacher of the Year award.
I have always spaced and alternated my studying and reading. I have no idea where or when I learned this habit; it doesn't matter. What matters is that I learned and continued to utilize these methods.
ReplyDeleteHave you ever tried to think of something or tried to solve a problem and simply hit a wall? Have you ever successfully thought of what you needed or needed to solve when you were thinking or doing something else entirely? Everyone does. It's not a fluke.
Your passive mind is always working on something. It has amazed me how completely I figured out what I needed to know for one class assignment while working on another class assignment. The same is true when reading an article about one thing while busily engaged in another entirely different situation.
Thanks for posting these methods of effective study.