
How to Learn Efficiently - acconrad
http://lemire.me/blog/archives/2014/12/30/how-to-learn-efficiently/
======
ivan_ah
> _As an undergraduate student, I found that writing a summary of everything I
> had learned in a class was one of the best ways to study for an exam. I
> would just sit down with a blank piece of paper and try to summarize
> everything as precisely as possible. Ultimately, writing your own textbook
> would be a very effective way to learn the material._

Amen.

Back when I was tutoring a lot, I used to ask the students to keep a "master
formula sheet" and continuously add formulas to it. In the final review
session, I asked them to explain each math formula in plain English, e.g F=ma
--> forces cause acceleration (and the acceleration produced by a force is
inversely proportional to the mass of the object). I could immediately tell
who understood the material and who was trying to get by on memorization.

Another useful exercise is to pretend you forgot your "formula sheet" and try
to reproduce it from scratch. If you can't it means you're not solving enough
problems---after solving 5-10 problems using a given formula, you start to
remember it, and not as a string, but as an idea. You can forget a string; you
can't forget an idea.

~~~
matwood
I used a similar technique. In undergrad and grad school my studying consisted
of typing up the notes from class and summarizing the book chapters. I was
always amused when people would ask me for the notes without realizing that
the act of creating them was the study part. I rarely looked at them after the
fact.

~~~
halfcat
That's right. You train to recall, by recalling. This was a big revelation for
me when I studied mnemonics.

Information can flow in two directions: into your brain, and out from your
brain. It is the act of repeatedly retrieving the info from your brain that
strengthens your memory of that info, not the repeated input of that info into
the brain.

------
uulbiy
There is a coursera course called "Learning How to Learn"[1] by Barbara Oakley
that is starting soon. I took the previous session and it was very
interesting. I liked the science[2] behind each part of the course
(procrastination, memory, modes of thinking etc). The weekly interviews were
certainly a big plus (however they were usually long at ~40 minutes).

It's a fun four week course with very little work and I recommend it.

[1]
[https://www.coursera.org/course/learning](https://www.coursera.org/course/learning)

[2] After each lecture there was a list of references to check out for more
info.

~~~
ctoscano
If I were to pick one part of that course to share it would be the explanation
of how long term memories are formed through practice (1-6 Introduction to
Memory).

Knowing how something actually works, and knowing precisely how my actions
achieve the desired result is important to me. I'm very skeptical of study
techniques, and more interested in the underlying physiology that I am trying
to manipulate.

Long-term potentiation (LTP) "is widely considered one of the major cellular
mechanisms that underlies learning and memory."[1]

Spaced Repetition[2] and Spaced Learning[3] at techniques directly designed
around LTP.

The course content is locked, but there is a fantastic paper that gives a
thorough overview of what we know about the behavior of memory[4], as well as
a video series by the principle author[5] linked below.

This is kind of my thing. Please let me know if you are interested in learning
more, or if you know of additional sources you'd recommend I check out.

[1][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-
term_potentiation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-term_potentiation)

[2][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_repetition](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_repetition)

[3][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_learning](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spaced_learning)

[4][http://bjorklab.psych.ucla.edu/pubs/RBjork_EBjork_1992.pdf](http://bjorklab.psych.ucla.edu/pubs/RBjork_EBjork_1992.pdf)

[5][http://www.gocognitive.net/interviews/spacing-improves-
long-...](http://www.gocognitive.net/interviews/spacing-improves-long-term-
retention)

~~~
cle
I have found Part II of Luc Beaudoin's book "Cognitive Productivity"[1] to be
very interesting. It presents a theory of learning using a "mindware" model in
which learning is the purposeful instilling of mindware[2]. His core
strategies for "instilling mindware" include deliberate practice and
repetition. I'm no expert in this field, but I've found Beaudoin's model to be
helpful in understanding _why_ deliberate practice works--it helps develop the
"monitors" we need to recognize when knowledge is applicable, the "motivators"
to push us to do something about it, and the knowledge itself. I don't know
how widely accepted his theories are, or if there are other accessible
sources, but I've found the book to be very useful in thinking about how I
learn.

[1]
[https://leanpub.com/cognitiveproductivity/](https://leanpub.com/cognitiveproductivity/)

[2] a term coined by David Perkins, who provides some of the foundation upon
which Beaudoin builds his theories: [http://www.gse.harvard.edu/faculty/david-
perkins](http://www.gse.harvard.edu/faculty/david-perkins) (see also
[http://amzn.com/089859863X](http://amzn.com/089859863X))

Other sources commonly cited by Beaudoin include Carl Bereiter, K. Anders
Ericsson, Keith Stanovich, Phillip Ackerman, and Aaron Sloman. I hope this
provides as much fodder for you as it has for me :).

------
warbaker
I like this article in large, but sometimes it really is appropriate to blame
the instructor/textbook if you feel confused.

Everyone wants to believe that the harder and more painful an experience is,
the more you got out of it, but that's not the case.

Imagine if you took a math textbook and then removed every fifth sentence.
It'd be way more confusing, way harder, and require much more struggle, and
that struggle would be a waste of time.

Struggle matters, but you need to struggle on the right things.

~~~
jmnicolas
You intuitively know a bad teacher from a good one.

When I learned programming both my teachers left me confused.

But I rapidly understood that the first was hard to understand because he was
a sort of genius and you had to get to speed if you wanted to follow him, the
other was just an incompetent lazy bastard that was there just for the pay (I
remember asking him once a simple question on his domain specialty, he just
resorted to Google and didn't even find the answer !).

------
SebKba
I would absolutely recommend the book that's mentioned at the end of the
article: "Make It Stick: The Science of Successful Learning by Peter C. Brown
et al."

It's a great read for anybody who wants to continue learning new material. I'm
one of the people who had very poor studying practices beforehand...

~~~
roflmyeggo
Marked to read, thanks for the recommendation! Moonwalking With Einstein is
also a good read, albeit more for pleasure and insight into our brains than
any practical applications.

~~~
thirdtruck
Ditto on Moonwalking. I listened to the audio book and found its practical
advice incredibly helpful.

~~~
vladplatt
Out of curiosity, what new practices did you adopt after reading Moonwalking?

~~~
thirdtruck
I've found the "Memory Palace" technique useful (tying items to memorize to
specific places in familiar locations).

------
relaytheurgency
The Learning Style theory is junk with the flimsiest evidence, but tell that
to any teaching institute in this arena so obsessed with constructivist
ideals. The reason I did not continue on to teach physics was partially due to
an insistence that it was teachers who needed to expend more effort to make
classes "fit" a student's preferences so that their learning would be a
gradual climb. You learn material by flailing, not by floating.

~~~
jfarmer
Beep beep. Back the truck up.

I am a dyed-in-the-wool constructivist and I think the theory of "Learning
Styles" as it's used today is rubbish. It's a mistake to think they're
attached at the hip.

By "the theory of Learning Styles", I specifically mean the idea that some
people are "auditory learners", "visual learners", "kinesthetic learners",
etc. and that part of a teacher's job is to figure out which "learning style"
best fits a given student and present them material in a manner consistent
with that style.

I'll add that in the "literature" these things are called "learning
modalities" and "learning style" refers to something else, but I've never
heard someone use "learning style" and not mean learning modality.

It's also ironic that you use the phrase "constructivist ideals."

Constructivism has deep roots in the American philosophical tradition of
Pragmatism[1]. C.S. Peirce coined the term "pragmatism" to contrast
_specifically_ with the Kant's transcendental idealism. One of it's core
epistemological tenets is that the only thing we can be sure of is that
certainty is impossible.

In _The Quest for Certainty_[2], JohnDewey himself called out the "fallacy" of
philosophers in taking abstract categories (e.g., "Visual Learners") for
granted and not seeing them as conceptual tools invented to solve specific
problems in a specific context.

Like you, I find it frustrating that many educational thinkers take these
concepts for granted and deploy them in a classroom environment as if it would
be absurd to ever do anything else. However, if you read any early Pragmatist
thinkers like Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., C.S. Peirce, William James, or John
Dewey, it's clear that rejection of this maneuver is one of the central themes
in everything they write.

    
    
        [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatism
    
        [2]: https://archive.org/details/questforcertaint032529mbp

~~~
relaytheurgency
Perhaps I should clarify. I am not claiming that there is a superior
educational philosophy. I am only claiming that in most modern educational
institutions, constructivism is the practiced philosophy of education and is
taught to all teachers. These institutes often also hold a belief in the idea
of learning modalities and, contrary to the foundations of constructivism,
preach these ideas quite blindly without regard to their flimsy evidence or
poor performance when put into practice.

~~~
jfarmer
I was agreeing with you while simultaneously pointing out that you, like the
folks you're criticizing, are conflating a constructivist model of learning
with a handful of specific approach to teaching derived (mistakenly, IMO) from
that model.

Just don't throw the constructivist baby out with the bathwater. :)

As a counterpoint, the Logo programming language[1] is an example of a well-
executed pedagogical approach informed by constructivist thinking.

    
    
        [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logo_%28programming_language%29

~~~
relaytheurgency
Yes, exactly. One can criticize a consequence of a thing without criticizing
the thing itself. I did not actually criticize constructivism anywhere. One
might criticize, for instance, certain aspects of US economic practice which
are derived from capitalism without actually criticizing the economic theory
of capitalism. It is possible (probable) that educational institutes, like
governments, are merely misusing theory. I don't know why there needs to be
any counterpoints, I did not criticize constructivism.

------
emptytheory
I'm one of those people who failed as an undergraduate. You know what's not
pleasant? Being under constant stress to perform and "progress". Maybe, just
maybe, that has something to do with learning in school. By the way, that's
entirely a product of the academic system.

"The opposite is true: a good course is one where you always feel that you
will barely make it."

Because making people stress necessarily means they're learning more? How do
we know that? My experience suggests the opposite.

"It might not be a pleasant course, but it is one where you are learning. It
is by struggling that we learn."

Yes: struggling with the _material_.

~~~
slinky773
"Drive" by Dan Pink sort of talks about that. Your purpose should be something
that you provide, not external factors, like grades and fears from what comes
from them.

~~~
emptytheory
It's entirely possible to be internally driven and to still not function well
in a school. (Unless you think the only purpose students should pursue is
"succeeding in school".)

~~~
toolz
I think my story is a decent anecdote to support your statement. I spent half
of college on academic probation with the main contribution to my terrible GPA
being default failing status from skipping too much class.

I dropped out of school, got a job that was supposed to teach me something. It
turned into answering the phone, but I used that time and title to land a Jr.
software dev position and within just a few months I was being assigned solo
projects and completing them ahead of schedule because I actually enjoyed
learning the material outside of a structured environment.

I'm not a genius. I'd bet I'm not even that special. I think many people are
just too conditioned to follow the wide beaten path, that even when they see a
more appealing path they are scared to take it, and no one is actually
encouraging them to take that path.

~~~
dasil003
I'm in the same boat. I struggled through college because I had to in order to
keep my parents' health insurance (!), but my heart wasn't in it. Eventually I
learned to do the minimum and coast through, but I had other things going on
in my life that were so much more interesting and I just couldn't muster the
motivation to "study".

Enter the real world, and guess what? Critical thinking skills and a tenacity
to solve real problems are in tremendously short supply. You've got high-GPA
graduates galore who can't tie their own bloody shoes. Motivation is
everything.

------
plg
> _Interleaved practice feels much harder (e.g., “you feel confused”), and it
> feels discouraging because progress appears to be slow. However, this
> confusion you feel… that is your brain learning._

I'm sorry to be a grouch, but is this based on any scientific evidence or just
the OP's opinion?

~~~
bluusteel
"Desirable difficulties" were originally suggested by Robert Bjork, a
psychology professor at UCLA. For a short overview, see his website:
[http://bjorklab.psych.ucla.edu/research.html#idd](http://bjorklab.psych.ucla.edu/research.html#idd)

------
bajaj
Most of the techniques mentioned in this article relate directly to the way
our brain makes associations and forms memory. Learning something is a two
step process: retaining the new information in the brain and then forming
association between that and the things that we already know.

I have observed that trying to recall something that I have learnt ensures I
retain the information instead of simply getting the illusion of learning
something.

Mixing topics essentially allows you to create new associations in the brain
about the topic. The stronger the association about a topic, the more you
retain the information. Another technique that works really well is trying to
apply a new topic to your own life. By relating new information to things you
already remember, you create the pathways to remember and retrieve certain
information. Edit: link - how long term memory works:
[http://education.purduecal.edu/Vockell/EdPsyBook/Edpsy6/edps...](http://education.purduecal.edu/Vockell/EdPsyBook/Edpsy6/edpsy6_long.htm)

------
kaens
Something my high school Computer Science teacher told me was that I wasn't
learning effectively if I didn't have to try to understand something at least
three times before it clicked.

Roughly 15 years later, I've found his advice to at least smell true.

Stated more generally, learning is to some significant extent about gaining
understanding[1]. When you don't understand something, it is confusing.

In my experience, if you are not experiencing confusion -- more specifically
the removal of confusion through effort of some sort --the "learning" you are
participating in would more accurately be called memorization..

[1] at least in this context

------
KedarMhaswade
I like the essence of this blog post. I have applied similar strategies and
although I am not a 100% sure about them being the 'right thing' to do, I am
fairly convinced that they are a 'way to go' about learning new things. One
thing is clear though (like Malkiel says in his book 'Random Walk Down the
Wall Street' \-- you become rich slowly, you only become poor fast), you have
to learn to be patient -- you are going to get better at things only
gradually.

Sometimes however, you need a more direct feedback if you are 'making
progress'. I have seen that maintaining a blog or two is very effective in
getting that feedback in two different ways. Making video lectures of your own
is also an attractive option, but requires more effort. If you just write down
something you think you understand as succinctly as you can, it helps to
solidify your understanding. And if your (understanding of the matter and
hence) writing is any good (of course, you should actively promote it), the
magic of Internet will make your writing visible to many. People will flock to
your blog and will ask you all kinds of questions, sometimes they will point
out your mistakes and then you learn more what you thought you had already
learned.

------
Cyphus
Side note: It's useless to have a disclaimer to spammers on a comment form.
The vast majority of spammers use bots to fill out these forms.

------
rcarrigan87
I always really liked this article which I think breaks down more precisely a
lot of what this author is getting at.

[http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-
blog/2011/03/07/yo...](http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-
blog/2011/03/07/you-can-increase-your-intelligence-5-ways-to-maximize-your-
cognitive-potential/)

------
_xander
Any thoughts on learning to code in an 'interleaved' manner? I.e. studying
more than one language or concept at once?

~~~
jmartinpetersen
My current quest is to take something from the business domain I work in and
implement the bizarre math stuff (which I don't get all of) in a backend in F#
with a frontend in Javascript (I'm fluent in neither).

I've tried it before (with different technologies), and although it didn't
make me an expert in either field, I've found it neatly ties most things
together.

Oh, and it's usually fun, especially if you put somewhat bizarre obstacles in
your way (remember, it's a learning experience, not production code). It could
be something elaborate like
[http://www.xpteam.com/jeff/writings/objectcalisthenics.rtf](http://www.xpteam.com/jeff/writings/objectcalisthenics.rtf)
or just a concious decision to implement a part of the design in a part of the
system where it isn't most obviously at home.

~~~
jfarmer
If your goal is to learn those two languages, I'd instead pick a
problem/domain you understand very well and then express the various aspects
of that problem in both F# and JavaScript rather than implementing some
aspects in F# and some aspects in JavaScript.

This will help you develop a better sense of how F# and JavaScript differ as
languages, what ideas are natural in one but unnatural in another, the
conventions and idioms around tackling certain problems, and so on.

~~~
dblarons
I once worked with an engineer who implemented the card game hearts in every
language he learned. After the first implementation, you don't have to spend
so much time thinking about the problem domain and can focus on finding the
most idiomatic solution in the new language. The other benefit is that the
project always has a clear endpoint.

------
DamagedProperty
I enjoyed this essay and he makes some good points. There is this feeling
though so much isn't said about context and results. The audience seems to be
college students.

I have been an avid learner since I left high school but my college experience
was more understanding closed systems of teacher/professor goals and
requirements (3.8 computer science graduate). I really didn't learn anything
except to be exposed to ideas. The real learning always starts after school.
What I find is we as human beings are incredible learning machines and learn
efficiently already. What the OP seems to really be saying is a watered down
approach to making another person happy with what they think you need to
learn. AKA, express results within that system.

Goals, curiosity and discovery are tools to learning.

------
Yadi
Thanks for the awesome piece, I never knew about these stuff, but I have
always realized that when I'm a little confused that means am almost learning
about the topic.

Also! I can say I agree about the school part %100!

My professor who use to make us feel like we are failing the course every
quiz, taught us the best of Web Protocols and advanced topics, however %3
passed the class. Literally me and 2 other students out of 10, so I guess it's
just the matter of who really wants learn and whom just going in to get a
degree.

------
cabinpark
I was very lucky, from an early age, to be told that I should focus on
learning how I learnt. I figured out how I learnt best in high school and
never looked back. Now I have no problems learning any skill becase I know how
my brain learns things and thus can cater specifically to it.

Unfortunately there is no catch-all method to learning and it is something you
have to discover for yourself through exploration and good old trial-and-
error.

------
slinky773
This is why I always make an active effort to participate in my classes. It
generally all sticks better in my brain if there's something I can remember
with it - I'll remember the four stages of the 30 Years' War if I can remember
my teacher lecturing and me asking questions and my classmates joking around.
It has worked so far, so I guess there's something to that.

------
gnuvince
For people still in school, I have found that nothing beats flash cards for
learning. It takes a bit of time, effort and discipline to write and use them,
but in the long run, it's going to be easier and faster to study for exams.

~~~
sethammons
I never found flash cards effective. The card became a visual trigger and the
answer was tied to the appearance of the card, not the question on it. I found
that, for me, regurgitating _all_ the card's questions (and subsequent answers
with reasoning) in my head, with a reference sheet nearby to glance at to spur
my recollection of all the questions, was most effective.

~~~
gnuvince
I should have mentioned: you have to say the questions out loud, and give out
the answers out loud. And yes, your answers should be elaborate (e.g. explain
how to do row elimination in a matrix).

------
chuckcode
I've found that the things I taught to others are the things that I learned
the most completely. Not sure if it is the most efficient way but having to
explain it to someone else always seemed to crystalize the details for me.

~~~
rimantas
There is a joke about that: geometry teacher in the teaching room complains,
how dumb her class was: "I explain it once—they do not understand. I explain
it second time: they do not understand. I explain it third time: I myself
understood, they still don't."

------
tarikjn
Reading this, I couldn't help but draw the parallel with body building. The
pain means new muscle is filling the micro-tears made during effort, and you
train an other group the next day while the one you did today recovers.

~~~
solarmist
Pain is a terrible word to use when describing that it's much too
intense/broad of a word.

Soreness is acceptable (most likely not ideal either though, if your work to
soreness let alone DOMS you will need extra recovery time that could slow your
overall progress), but pain should never be tolerated.

Body sense is one of the most important things beginners have trouble
learning. Whats' the differences between discomfort, soreness, pain, etc? Body
position part of that difficult for beginners, what's it feel like to have a
straight back?

------
hvass
I would highly recommend looking into Cal Newport's blog (Study Hacks), he has
published a significant number of posts on how to learn better.

www.calnewport.com/blog/

------
vldx
I like the idea that whether you're creating product, solving problem or
acquiring skill, the underlying dynamics are very much the same.

Perseverance, reaching positive failure and resilience.

For example, the parallel between muscle building and learning (as well,
creativity and problem solving).

In the context of muscle growth, you're looking to balance two states -
anabolic (protein synthesis) and catabolic (protein breakdown). During your
exercises, you're training your [1] nervous system, which is responsible for
signalling and transmission of impulses to your muscles, triggering hormonal
responses and adaptations. The load you try to lift is proportional to the
stress you place on your nervous system. Accordingly, [2] hypertrophy (from
Greek, excess + nourishment) occurs post-workout during your resting periods
and muscle tissue is [3] formed when you're not weight training.

Protein synthesis > Protein breakdown = Muscle mass increases

Protein synthesis = Protein breakdown = No change in muscle mass

Protein synthesis < Protein breakdown = Muscle mass decreases

On the other hand, your [4] neurocognitive functioning and [5] mental
resources are no different. You're looking to balance state of intense
conscious efforts with unconscious state of incubation. During your conscious
efforts, you're collecting data and confronting with the elements of the
problem. The effort you put into solving the problem is proportional to the
decline of your cognitive capacity, leading to a decision to put the problem
aside. The unconscious incubation state takes place (ex. sleep, mindfulness,
meditation), where the memory is being repaired, information is consolidated
and new associations are formed, accordingly leading to creative insights and
problem solving.

1\. Conscious, intense and focused state of confrontation w/ the problem;

2\. Decision to put the problem aside;

3\. Unconscious incubation state;

The quality of your recovery is crucial and directly correlative to the amount
of your output.

\--

[1] -
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V77oaboEmY&feature=youtu.be...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3V77oaboEmY&feature=youtu.be&t=7m42s)

[2] -
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_hypertrophy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_hypertrophy)

[3] -
[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11255140](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11255140)

[4] -
[http://www.med.upenn.edu/uep/user_documents/VanDongen_etal_S...](http://www.med.upenn.edu/uep/user_documents/VanDongen_etal_Sleep_26_2_2003.pdf)

[5] -
[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25275517](http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25275517)

