[HN Gopher] Increasing Retention Without Increasing Study Time [...
___________________________________________________________________
Increasing Retention Without Increasing Study Time [pdf]
Author : JustinSkycak
Score : 227 points
Date : 2024-08-17 13:53 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (files.eric.ed.gov)
(TXT) w3m dump (files.eric.ed.gov)
| ngetchell wrote:
| [2007]
| Almondsetat wrote:
| It's only a four page article about a particular spaced study
| strategy. Nothing really groundbreaking nor a comprehensive
| collection of techniques
| boredemployee wrote:
| any other recommendation for articles regarding techniques that
| works for most people?
| sva_ wrote:
| The default algorithm in Anki, in case you don't know it
| oehtXRwMkIs wrote:
| Or not, since they recently added FSRS as an alternative.
| watwut wrote:
| It is super unlikely that an algorithm that was made based
| on feels would turn out to be the most effective.
| Especially since it requires some learning and errors to
| even learn how to use it.
| CuriouslyC wrote:
| This is pretty much the current state of the art in learning
| research: https://bjorklab.psych.ucla.edu/research/
| closed wrote:
| From a more applied angle, a book like "10 steps to complex
| learning" might be helpful.
|
| I come from a similar cog psych background as the Bjork
| Lab, so am a big fan of their research, but books like 10
| steps come from instructional design, which is a bit more
| focused on the big picture (designing a whole course vs
| individual mechanisms).
| jimhefferon wrote:
| Thanks for the tip.
| uolmir wrote:
| This is good stuff but I'll say that it isn't as
| comprehensive as all that. These studies and findings are
| almost entirely focused on simple recall knowledge
| (isolated facts, vocabulary). That's an important part of
| learning certainly and it informs research on learning
| higher order concepts but it's not the full story.
|
| Just to name one example, folks might look into research on
| conceptual change theory (eg Chi or Posner). This theory
| helps explain why a concept like electricity is so
| challenging to learn. The reason, in brief, being that
| naive conceptions make a category error and think of
| electricity as a thing rather than a process. And this
| theory then informs instructional practice. Specifically,
| teachers should be aware of difficult concepts and should
| design activities that force students to confront the
| contradictions between their naive models and more
| accurate/complete ones.
|
| Mickie Chi also has fascinations research on active
| learning (ICAP) and related work on the effectiveness of
| peer learning.
| kqr wrote:
| The comment I wrote below is weird. What I mean to say is
| google for articles on writing good prompts. The rest matters
| less.
|
| -----
|
| Ignore this:
|
| Spaced repetition, if you can stick with it, works. The
| details around schedules etc. don't matter as much as doing
| it in a way that you can keep up.
|
| Also writing good prompts is important. I have yet to write
| more extensively about this but here is a start:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41126734
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| FSRS v5 is state of the art
| lxm wrote:
| https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19288640-how-we-learn
| david_allison wrote:
| Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Marsh EJ, Nathan MJ, Willingham DT.
| Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning
| Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and
| Educational Psychology. Psychol Sci Public Interest. 2013
| Jan;14(1):4-58. doi: 10.1177/1529100612453266. PMID:
| 26173288.
| adamgordonbell wrote:
| Scott Young has a lot on this, including going deep on the
| literature and explaining it to populist student audience:
|
| https://www.scotthyoung.com/blog/the-best-articles-on-
| learni...
|
| For instance, on memory:
|
| https://www.scotthyoung.com/blog/2019/02/15/memory/
| highcountess wrote:
| It's just typical learning "science" fluff
| trwhite wrote:
| I recently read and enjoyed "A Mind for Numbers" by Barbara
| Oakley, full of lots of techniques for learning maths and science
| consf wrote:
| Does the book offer practical strategies?
| bdjsiqoocwk wrote:
| The simplest way of increasing retention is being interested in
| the subject.
| rmbyrro wrote:
| The topic isn't about simplicity, but performance and
| efficiency.
| Jtsummers wrote:
| Simple, but not sufficient since you still need to pair your
| interest with some methods of study and practice. Which methods
| of studying are more effective or efficient is the question
| they're researching.
| IncreasePosts wrote:
| You can just make yourself interested in whatever you want? If
| not, then it probably isn't the simplest way.
| bdjsiqoocwk wrote:
| I would counter, why are you spending time learning something
| you're not interested in?
| consf wrote:
| Passion and curiosity are powerful tools in learning. But not
| always can be there for you
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| I'll mention that I've gone full-time on an iOS/macOS tool for
| learning Japanese through reading called Manabi Reader:
| https://reader.manabi.io
|
| It combines reading and flashcards, such that it tracks every
| word and kanji you read and learn in order to show you analytics
| on what you need to learn to be able to read something or achieve
| JLPT goals, and highlights unknown/learning words in texts. Next
| up for the flashcard part is to replace the SM2 algorithm with
| FSRS for the flashcards, as well as having flashcards get
| passively reviewed simply by reading content.
|
| I also suspect people are missing out on speed of learning when
| reviewing flashcards one at a time for hours. Besides actively
| recalling reviewing flashcards passively while reading, I'll
| experiment with other review techniques like seeing a page at a
| time of vocab / revealable answers. Our minds absorb at the
| periphery of our vision and scanning/inputting a bunch of
| information at once, too. I'm unconvinced flashcard UI is the
| final expression of forgetting curve research based learning apps
|
| Also working on Reader features such as manga/pdf/youtube/game
| emulators, plus expanding to all languages.
| shahzaibmushtaq wrote:
| "Teach others what are you trying to teach yourself better" is
| the best long-term retention strategy in my personal experience.
| wahnfrieden wrote:
| For language acquisition?
| jakderrida wrote:
| Si
| shahzaibmushtaq wrote:
| Also try for other things that are difficult to grasp.
| kqr wrote:
| Also possibly the most time consuming. Best and efficient with
| time are two different metrics.
| practicemaths wrote:
| What is consider efficient if it yields less best results?
|
| I understand time constraints and end goals may prohibit the
| 'best' approach.
|
| What I do not understand is how can you say something is more
| 'efficient' if the yield in understanding is less than what
| you would get with another method.
|
| Hopefully this will clarify my thought process here:
|
| If 'Best' is to teach others and requires 10,000 hours to
| yield 90-99% understanding.
|
| In contrast, 'Efficient' method requires 2,500 hours to yield
| 30-40% understanding. However, there is diminishing returns
| meaning that doubling your hours to 5,000 does not return you
| with 60-80% understanding, rather maybe closer to 50-60%
| understanding. With 7,500 hours closer to 65-70% and 10,000
| hours may around 75-89% understanding.
|
| Here you've spent the same amount of time but did not achieve
| the same level of understanding. I think you may have a
| dynamic 'Best' vs 'Efficient' curve and to switch between
| those options to optimize maximizing your level of
| understanding in the least amount of time.
| fn-mote wrote:
| The problem I have with this argument is that you cannot
| consider "efficiency" in a vacuum. You need to have a
| metric against which to measure it.
|
| Consider these two scenarios -
|
| Goal: remember where to look up information when it comes
| up in $JOB Metric: how much you remember, how quickly you
| find the info
|
| Goal: discover new hyper-efficient method of training an AI
| (or insert popular ML topic here). Metric: percent
| improvement vs current pubished best practice (deliberately
| vague) Required understanding to make progress: "like a
| Ph.D. from Stanford"
|
| Now you can possibly measure something.
|
| The idea achievement of "90% understanding" is VERY topic
| dependent. Simple topic? Sure 100% understanding, I
| remembered the Latin names of all of the plants in my
| house. Complicated topic? The information for "100%
| understanding" might not even be written in the textbook -
| it probably includes things like seeing the
| interconnections between the topics and being able to apply
| them in slightly different contexts.
|
| Make sure you read the studies so you know what they're
| talking about. In this area, I think summaries are
| frequently misleading. You have to know what the real
| evidence is that substantiates the claims. (I cannot tell
| you how many times I have looked at the evidence and just
| rolled my eyes - obviously not applicable in settings where
| I wanted it to be.)
|
| Edit: See this comment (not me) -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41275869
| Swizec wrote:
| > Complicated topic? The information for "100%
| understanding" might not even be written
|
| Bjarne Stroustop, creator of C, famously rates his C
| knowledge as 7/10
| Jtsummers wrote:
| I suspect you mean C++, not C.
| chrisweekly wrote:
| Tangent: efficiency nearly always comes at the expense of
| flexibility.
| shahzaibmushtaq wrote:
| Yes, possibly the most time consuming if you are thinking of
| writing a book.
|
| How effective something is comes with what is best and
| compromise effectiveness for efficiency.
| consf wrote:
| Efficiency and effectiveness are indeed different metrics.
| And I think balancing time and retention needs is key
| shahzaibmushtaq wrote:
| Different metrics can be interdependent, efficiency and
| effectiveness are among them.
| hinkley wrote:
| Someday you will die. Then you will die again when people
| forget you. Only the effect you've had on the world,
| including teaching others, who pass that along, outlives that
| second death.
|
| So what's this about efficiency? You should be more worried
| about effectiveness, not efficiency. Particularly in this
| profession.
| shahzaibmushtaq wrote:
| Best thing I have read after a long time. Thank you!
| maksimur wrote:
| > Someday you will die. Then you will die again when people
| forget you.
|
| I've already heard that line somewhere but can't remember
| where and who said it.
| zoogeny wrote:
| It's one of those quotes that gets attributed to a lot of
| different people. Here is goodreads claiming it was
| Ernest Hemingway [1].
|
| "Every man has two deaths, when he is buried in the
| ground and the last time someone says his name. In some
| ways men can be immortal."
|
| 1. https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/9556005-every-man-
| has-two-d...
| cainxinth wrote:
| "See one, do one, teach one"
| shahzaibmushtaq wrote:
| Yes, monotasking is the way to go.
| cyberax wrote:
| > "Teach others what are you trying to teach yourself better"
|
| A joke in Russian universities:
|
| - A teaching assistant tells a student: "Look, I've been
| explaining it to you for so long, that I myself understood it!"
| hinkley wrote:
| I tried to help some dude understand integration by parts,
| which I'm not sure I'd understood myself. I warned him. But
| it was late, he was desperate, and I was just going to go
| play computer games anyway.
|
| I figured it out, but I've no idea if I got him sorted out
| for his final.
| consf wrote:
| 100%! Teaching others reinforces your understanding
| huhtenberg wrote:
| The expression goes "to know is to be able to explain".
| riiii wrote:
| Yes, but there are plenty of exceptions. I know brilliantly
| knowledgeable and extraordinary clever people that are so
| socially awkward that they can't explain virtually anything.
| simonw wrote:
| How are they at writing?
| riiii wrote:
| Good question and I think you're making a valid point.
|
| I think overall on average they would do a decent job of
| explaining it in writing to equally brilliant people. Not
| so sure about "dumbing it down" for the "others".
| hinkley wrote:
| I push the new guys to fix project documentation once they've
| figured out a tricky bit. It helps solidify their knowledge,
| and helps us double check that they understood, and it's
| something they can contribute when they still haven't become
| part of the bus number on anything yet.
|
| That all sounds reasonable and smart, but the real reason I do
| it is the Curse of Knowledge. People in a system can't see it
| from the outside. They make assumptions, use opaque or even
| misleading jargon, and employ circular logic. The new guy
| doesn't know the lingo, or the circular logic. Their
| explanation will make more sense to the next hire than anything
| I can say. And having it written down this way can also give me
| new perspective on the system. Maybe it doesn't have to work
| this way.
| zoogeny wrote:
| Adding a new smart person to the team is one of those golden
| moments for a team, IMO. You get a tiny window of watching
| them struggle until the tribal team knowledge seeps into them
| by osmosis. During that time they don't yet know who to ask
| the questions to directly so they will post to team slack
| channels or the lead directly.
|
| One must capitalize on this brief period because smart
| programmers are flexible and adaptable. Very quickly they
| will acclimatize themselves to the mess that surrounds them
| and they will become as blind to the deficiencies as the rest
| of the team.
| hinkley wrote:
| Adjacent to this: ignore criticism as feedback, but treat
| questions as feedback.
|
| People who don't "get" the code ask questions that contain
| feedback they often don't even register as feedback. By the
| time they distill it to an actual criticism, they're often
| so wrapped up in the problem they can't be constructive, or
| they present an XY problem. But if three people ask you the
| same question about your code? You have a design issue. Fix
| it. Fix it now.
|
| That puts me in a weird relationship with FAQs. FAQs aren't
| informational, they're confessional. Here's all the times I
| fucked up and won't admit it. Let me explain why I am right
| and you are wrong.
| specialist wrote:
| Nice. Somewhere I picked up the phrase "problem of assumed
| knowledge" for the phenomenon you describe.
|
| But your phrase is spot on, well defined, and the subject of
| ongoing research.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curse_of_knowledge
|
| Cheers.
| godelshalt wrote:
| Sounds great but I was expecting more evidence. They talk about
| this shuffling method, which interleaves material as a way to
| provide spacing and reintroduce material. But it appears to just
| be their opinion that it will help improve retention. Also what
| is the deal with this "hypothetical interaction between ISI and
| RI"? Why not do enough experiments to actually plot it out?
| Anyone can graph out a hypothetical interaction.
| kqr wrote:
| I think _Accelerated Expertise_ comes to the same conclusion
| and references the studies to back it up. It 's a good book!
| abecedarius wrote:
| Years ago there was a great extended comment here on HN about
| teaching a linear algebra course using, among other tactics, a
| similar spacing of the homework problems. He reported excellent
| results. I wish I remembered the username. Ben something?
| ExciteByte wrote:
| I think it was Ben Tilly and I think his user name is btilly.
| I also remember that comment you're referring too.
| Jtsummers wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=818367
| abecedarius wrote:
| That's the one, thank you.
| BJones12 wrote:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=818367 ?
| abecedarius wrote:
| Yes, thanks!
| mrandish wrote:
| I really appreciate HN. There aren't many public online
| forums were one could ask about a user comment made on a
| related post posted years ago and in less than 20 minutes get
| two different responses linking to the comment from 15 years
| earlier.
|
| Perhaps it helps the topic was "increasing retention". :-)
| jppope wrote:
| Real question. Does this count as a published paper?
| david_allison wrote:
| Yes, with 263 citations
|
| Rohrer, D., & Pashler, H. (2007). Increasing Retention Without
| Increasing Study Time. Current Directions in Psychological
| Science, 16(4), 183-186.
| https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00500.x
| layer8 wrote:
| It was published in a scientific journal, so yes.
| moffkalast wrote:
| > Because people forget much of what they learn, students could
| benefit from learning strategies that provide long-lasting
| knowledge. Yet surprisingly little is known about how long-term
| retention is most efficiently achieved.
|
| I've always thought that the real problem is information
| relevancy. People need practical uses for remembering something
| beyond synthetic bullshit exams. Efficient techniques are great,
| but nothing demotivates more than not having a reason to learn
| beyond being told that you have to.
|
| Nobody has to reach for flashcards, extensive notes, or advanced
| techniques when trying to learn something they're actually
| interested in, it's retained almost immediately and effortlessly.
| There has to be some kind of subconscious gauge of information
| relevancy that physically controls the level of absorption, a
| sort of "learning rate" if you will.
| larsrc wrote:
| I disagree. Motivation will keep you reading the material, but
| that alone will not make you remember it that much better.
|
| When you're motivated about something you can practice, you may
| remember more by doing it (which also acts a spaced
| repetition). But good luck trying that with, say, astrophysics
| or macroeconomics.
|
| When motivated, you're also more likely to pick up other books
| on the subject, which is another form of spaced repetition.
| james-revisoai wrote:
| I agree motivation to learn and maintaining interest is key, to
| effect the learning rate you mention. The enjoyment itself,
| although a crucifying word to use in discussions when teaching
| students considered the "best of the best", still matters and
| predominates over the effectiveness factor for most of the
| semester for students, at least. Because of just being "told to
| learn" it.
|
| Basically 70% of the semester most students are not studying 40
| hours - they are doing 30 hours of real work, and perhaps only
| 15 hours effectively. And for good reason: Nothing is bridging
| or rewarding them in a way that interests/motivates them, for
| courses where the interest isn't natural.
|
| A bridge to motivate them would be ideal. In 2021 I started
| using GPT-3 to generate motivational "reasons to learn a
| concept" cards for my flashcard app, - Revision.ai - which you
| can read about here in the 3rd item:
| https://www.revision.ai/articles/20ThingsRevisionAIDoesForBe...
| - the reason we disabled them was simple: we could never quite
| time the cards right to help the student when they needed it.
| When the app is closed, they aren't motivated - they don't see
| them. Mid study session? Showing such cards (or AI generated
| examples) interrupted the flow
| [https://www.instagram.com/p/CVVlIuVg31W/] We have also tried
| recommending relevant short/mid length youtube videos for
| visual/"breaks" from overwhelming learning. That did not boost
| student success either. I guess it doesn't address that you are
| still being told to do it, not naturally flowing into learning.
|
| I welcome any technical or conceptual ideas you have to improve
| this and help increase interest amongst students. We have found
| that turning lecture slideshows into sets of exercises with
| clear visuals[https://www.instagram.com/p/C5ByftwiJ00/],
| breaking content up, and showing progress does motivate
| students to study more(and in a semi-related dissertation I
| wrote, possibly reduce Test Anxiety and tension). Please let me
| know of any ideas you have!
| WaitWaitWha wrote:
| From the abstract (emphasis added):
|
| > Because people forget much of what they learn, _students could
| benefit from learning strategies_ that provide long-lasting
| knowledge.
|
| What learning strategies were taught in your secondary
| educational years?
| tnvmadhav wrote:
| spaced repetition
| aflukasz wrote:
| If you are interested in similar research, take a look at
| https://supermemo.guru (somewhat hidden "about" page:
| https://supermemo.guru/wiki/SuperMemo_Guru:About). Author spent
| quite some time on the topic and its history, including writing
| applications.
| light_hue_1 wrote:
| A lot of what's on that page is just nonsense. The page has a
| very clear bias toward one method and writes all sorts of
| unscientific drivel as a result.
|
| https://supermemo.guru/wiki/School_damages_your_brain
|
| As someone who also publishes in neuroscience I can tell you
| this is total and utter trash.
| aflukasz wrote:
| I'm not in a position to judge this author's work as a whole,
| as this is not my area of expertise.
|
| I know this person as an author of "super memo" algorithms
| for spaced repetition learning, so yes, he most likely have a
| bias, probably even financial stake to some degree, although
| not sure, I don't follow him in any way, so don't know if
| this ever was or still is the case.
|
| In the past, I've used some of his algorithms in particular,
| with quite interesting results - subjectively speaking, not
| in any scientific regime, And, obviously, those are just one
| of many. I also remembered this was his area of interest in
| general, so assumed his wiki to be of some interest in the
| context of discussed article.
|
| Thanks for your critical opinion, it will contribute to my
| priors about his writing.
| aledalgrande wrote:
| Why do researchers need to use acronyms for a 2 pager article?
| cod1r wrote:
| Sometimes I feel like I know nothing because information goes in
| one ear, stays for a bit, then just runs out the other ear.
|
| Then I have to go back and review.
|
| Repeat.
| consf wrote:
| Our brains are constantly filtering and processing a massive
| amount of information. That's why this sometimes happens
| Modified3019 wrote:
| One thing I've found when I spend most of a day trying to learn
| things, is that having a ~1.5 hour nap is pretty important. Not
| sure what goes on, but it feels like it turns the disconnected
| "fog" of information in my head into something that is a least
| loosely linked and can be vaguely recalled upon rather than
| completely forgotten.
|
| Unfortunately I kinda need to plan these sorts of days ahead,
| because trying to nap past 2PM is a good way to fuck my nighttime
| sleep.
| mrlase wrote:
| I'd highly encourage anyone interested in the contents of this
| article/learning about learning to read through the submitter's
| blog: https://www.justinmath.com/blog/
| james-revisoai wrote:
| I also recommend https://www.learningscientists.org/posters
| from scientists in the field, which covers additional
| scientifically-effective approaches that a course designer or
| more long term approach might take. For example, not only
| applying Spaced Repetition, Interleaving and Active Recall (all
| possible through automated spaced repetition apps based on
| simply input), but elements like Dual coding (related to
| "Varied practise") - mixing visual and other elements when
| learning (which requires effort to create them), and
| elaboration practise (like free recall). To the end of applying
| these - and other critical elements like focusing on the
| motivation of the learner and enabling them to understand what
| they are missing with progress & identified "blindspot"
| misconceptions (on their own incredibly powerful), I've been
| developing Revision.ai since before GPT-3, through a Psychology
| MSc.
| hnthrow12390 wrote:
| Content is good but he is part of a paid math program and some
| articles and submissions appear to be indirect
| advertising/marketing if you think about it. (but it's
| effective and less forceful) https://www.justinmath.com/why-is-
| the-edtech-industry-so-dam...
| chrisweekly wrote:
| See also the wonderful https://betterexplained.com
| paulpauper wrote:
| High IQ. A component of IQ is memory--working and long-term
| memory. There is a reason why doctors are smarter than average--
| you got to be smart to memorize all that stuff. I am skeptical
| that hacks make much of a difference. There is also a difference
| between recall and understanding. This is why speed reading
| courses are dubious because you're not really understanding
| things, but just recalling items in the text.
| westcort wrote:
| The time between study and testing (retention interval) is the
| most salient factor for students. Repeating material at intervals
| attenuates the forgetting curve somewhat, but not enough to
| generate passing scores. Cumulative exams only force students to
| study all material in a massed study session prior to a final
| exam.
|
| I say this as someone who works on education and as a lifelong
| learner who has tried many ways of improving retention.
| Nevermark wrote:
| This is not a critique of the (nice) study, but what seems to me
| the overall context that should be kept in mind, especially once
| we are talking about "optimizing".
|
| Optimizing "study, retention phase, test" for greatest knowledge
| retention at a delayed test time, is very different from
| optimizing for greatest value of knowledge learned.
|
| To optimize learning value, learn things that are immediately
| useful, you can immediately incorporate into learning something
| else, and ideally both.
|
| The sooner and more you use something, the greater its value AND
| the greater your retention will be.
|
| If you have to learn something valuable but with no short term
| use (how to handle a rare brain surgery complication), find a way
| to use it. Create an ongoing _useful_ project that will revisit
| that knowledge during the "retention interval" (e.g. a concise
| summary of rare situations you need to handle, for you and
| others, that you can revisit and improve with additional and
| updated knowledge).
|
| So optimize "topic choice", "topic progression", and "study,
| (optionally) test, use, use, use", for total value of learning.
|
| "Use" is motivation, test, study review, and value realization
| put together.
| zeroCalories wrote:
| I think a lot of topics are much less sequential the further
| you go. As an adult I spend most of my time repeating the
| fundamentals of my field, and learning a topic deeply as
| needed. For children it probably makes sense to cram the
| multiplication tables.
| Nevermark wrote:
| I would think that the opportunities to immediately "use"
| multiplication, instead of just practice it for tests, or
| some future numerate citizenship, would be omnipresent.
|
| If you don't use something after you learned it, you miss out
| on:
|
| 1. Learning how it is actually applied
|
| 2. Discovering how the knowledge is useful for you
| personally, in ways you may not expect if you don't actually
| experience using it
|
| 3. Deeper understanding and mastery of the knowledge
|
| 4. Much much much better retention
|
| It is worth creating some immediate use for new knowledge,
| even the smallest possible useful or creative project, for
| better retention alone.
|
| > learning a topic deeply as needed
|
| That is the ultimate use-oriented learning model.
|
| As for non-sequential, I agree. The more we manage our own
| learning, the more it is a directed graph (i.e. prerequisites
| translate to many follow up paths), and eventually just
| graphs (many ways to order learning of subtopics in any
| complex area).
| michaelt wrote:
| I sure hope _my_ brain surgeon isn't trying to create an
| opportunity to practice dealing with rare complications!
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-08-17 23:00 UTC)