I am reviewing the assigned reading for this evening’s grad class. Sometimes, you pick up something on a second or third review that you miss the first couple of times through. One of the assigned readings for tonight is a recent summary of what basic research on memory would suggest for study strategies (Rohrer & Paschler). So, how should students review content so they will optimize their long term retention?
Contrary to what some might assume, researchers have many practical suggestions for students. Often, most of the techniques suggested are ignored. Nearly every study skills course I know of teaches some variant of SQ3R and I have never found a student in one of my classes using this technique. We keep offering the suggestion and the students continue to ignore it. Situations like this are frustrating to those in my line of work. The claim there are no practical suggestions is just to accurate.
Anyway, the multiple readings of the Rohrer and Paschler article led to an insight. These authors purposefully focused on suggestions that are known to improve performance, but do not take additional time. Beyond offering concrete suggestions (I ask my students to consider how the suggestions might be applied to the common practice of using flash cards), the authors openly wonder why students have not recognized these strategies. If no additional time was required, why would students not figure out that certain methods of study were more productive than those they tend to use?
What seems to happen is that the more productive strategies produce a higher error rate. It seems we often select tasks that are less challenging even if these tasks are less productive. We seem to have a capacity for self deception based on the time we put in.
