[ansarigf]

I mean, to many people, it's all about the process, not about learning. I'm doing this process now, and this is called learning so this is what I must do.... ? No! You are processing alright, but that's not equal to learning.

It is as if people go into.. single node mode, where you have to process (write the info down) but you can't do anything else at the same time, like listening and reflecting this information on what you already know. It's difficult, so would you rather listen and get the goodies, or write it down and miss half of it? The process becomes more important.. hey look at me, I'm not slacking, I'm learning here, doing the process!!

What really pisses off people is when you have like powerpoint slides up there, and you ask at some point 'hey, can we have these slides available at some point?' and the lecturers are usually more than happy to do it. So there's a big letdown. What?!?! All this work for nothing?! This jerk just made a shortcut, because he is TOO lazy to write his own stuff down!

Hey, it's not my fault you're an idiot.

[Eviftilia]

I never write them either.

I don't even carry a notepad with me

[Jambjanatan]

Me theory is that people like to do the process, and equate that with learning.

As in, I need to do this in order to learn. Often times, it is the rigorous process during the teaching that distracts you from the actual learning though.

[MicoSiru]

I think this is not because people are stupid in general. I think this is just lack of knowledge on different styles you can have.

People also feel guilty if they aren't obedient to the .. idea of the process. Everyone else is writing furiously, I must be doing something wrong by not writing it down?

Then there's the question of, well, you didn't write it down, how are you going to remember this all in the exams?

I never study to the exams as in trying to read it all. There's no point. Waste of time. I already learned in the class, so when I got to certain topics, I can say 'I remember this stuff' and check out few details quickly, and test myself. If the test fails, I'll go over the subject in more detail. If I pass it, fine, to the next topic then.

It's more vital to know the area of the knowledge you are supposed to have. For me, it's even easier to .. pass an exam, to just attend classes and listen, and read the index of the study material and while reading it, trying to relate all those words into the classes and examples. Then build a mental image of the big picture. That's it.

But of course there are subjects where you kind of need to .. work more with the notepad. For example in math, I find it important to understand the concept as well as some of the details. And even in math, it's far more important to get the idea of the technique at hand. Why is this done?

So many who hate math think ok here's this thing that is difficult to say and there are these phases I need to do, but what is this going to do anyway? I don't know is the answer where you will not remember it and hate the subject anyway.

Many math teachers do not emphasize things anyway, their way of teaching is pretty much a process also.. from point A to Z, that's it. That's horrible, that's the way to kill the magic in math for everyone and make sure that only few will actually be interested in it later on.

[eocavrWM]

But teaching is difficult, it's a great skill. There are some that are great in it, there are lots of people who are bad in it.

THe old school way of just trying to remember it all, it just doesn't apply to the modern information age. We can retrieve the details with no effort, if we know how to fetch that info. There's also waaaayyy too much details to remember these days.

So the old rewards and punishments goes only so far. As in, the reward is a good grade. The punishment is a poor grade.

Persuasive communication is far more important. It's not that we kill all the enviromental distraction so everyone has to focus on the actual word, it's how you portray that word, how you present it, it's even how you carry yourself. Are you motivating these people, are you making it interesting, are you making sense of it..?

Lots of teachers, especially in the academic world have this need to explain things correctly, but with so difficult ways that it's stupid. As if the message doesn't get enough respect when you 'dumb it down' a little, just to get everyone on board so we get the picture and can therefore go to the actual difficult stuff?

As if there's a need to drop certain percentage out, because they just didn't have the aptitude?

Since when did these people have the right to be the gatekeepers of information and innovation? I've had lots of experience with this, there's this one math professor, I just can't get it when he is lecturing. It's tough as hell, because he just doesn't explain anything, sometimes there's NO examples at all with the difficult stuff... etc. And when you ask a question, the answer is the same as the guiding just a second before. I didn't ask that, I didnt' get it then so please explain this in other terms, that was the freaking point.

Of course it means you need to be a bit creative and come in terms that you have to explain some stuff so it makes sense. But when ever I'm holding a presentation or teaching something, I make sure that the material is simple enough, it doesn' tmake it obsolete, it makes it more relevant. Let's understand what we are talking about first, then continue forward. It's more important to understand how and why instead of what is this little thing here...

Sometimes if I'm facing a difficult math test, and I can't get past a phase and thus go further in it, I just explain what I am supposed to do and the idea of it. Some professors appreciate the fact that you know what's happening, and just because there's one phase you can't hack, the mechanical procedure is just not going forward, .... it doesn't mean you do n't get it. In fact you show you do get it. Sometimes when you get the mechanics of it, it really doesn't mean you get it after all.

[Blolover11]

WTF Pekka?

[jeraveike]

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.


Originally posted by Pekka
I think that.. Universities should have mandatory course on how people learn. They aren't manditory, by my university has such courses available.

[Auzuigcx]

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

[icyfreshy]

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.

[GoblinGaga]

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.

[carline]

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))

[85IbLcwQ]

"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_.

[eEwbYjOH]

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."

[GlictStiply]

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

[Vkowefek]

"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.

[raspirator]

Yes, when I'm doing something that takes effort and requires lots of references, I read books and summarize them with my own words. One paper per book, max.

This is a very good way, I do recommend this one. Then you can .. just look at these papers kind of at the same time, chosoe your way of doing it .. you can circle some similiar things so you can refer them both on one issue, or kind of explain one issue and use two references in different spots etc..

For me it is the easiest way to go on about it.