Don't make highlighting, rereading and summarizing your main way to study
- Moderate value
- Evidence A
- Saves time
- Free
- Takes minutes
- Some willpower
In plain words
What students use most are highlighting and rereading, yet in the ranking of ten common study methods both sit in the lowest tier. Writing summaries, the keyword mnemonic and picturing images for a text are in the lowest tier too. They are not completely useless, only that the conditions under which they work are too narrow, and the same time is better spent on self-testing.
- Cost
-
Free, and it saves time. The hard part is that these are the easiest things to do and the ones that most feel like “I'm studying.”
- What you get
-
A review evaluated ten common study methods and rated them by whether their effect carries across learning conditions, student characteristics, materials and kinds of tests. Rated in the top tier were practice testing and distributed practice. Rated in the middle tier were elaborative interrogation, self-explanation and interleaved practice. The five rated in the lowest tier were: summarization, highlighting (or underlining), the keyword mnemonic, imagery for text, and rereading. The review states that most students say they use rereading and highlighting, but these do not reliably improve grades and should be replaced with other methods, for example using practice testing in place of rereading.
- Notes
-
Underlining can be used to “mark the spots you will test yourself on in a moment”; the problem is treating the underlining itself as studying. The review also makes clear that the lowest tier does not mean zero, only that the conditions under which it works are narrow and more research is needed. For what to do instead, see §23.14 (close the book and test yourself) and §23.15 (spread the same time over several days).
- Evidence grade
- A : Specific numbers from meta-analyses, large cohorts or randomized trials; for law and policy, the statute or official text.
- Sources
-
- Dunlosky J, Rawson KA, Marsh EJ, Nathan MJ, Willingham DT (2013). Improving Students' Learning With Effective Learning Techniques: Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 14(1), 4–58. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100612453266
Mentioned in
Translated from the Chinese original. Original book, section 23, tip 16. Content may be out of date and rules differ by place. When you actually deal with an agency, a doctor or a court, follow what local officials, doctors and lawyers tell you. Disclaimer