General Studying Strategy: read slowly and visualize every detail vs. rapid multiple passes

[basophilic]

Basically asking about what you think is better and why. And it concerns literally everything med-school-related you read - lecture notes, textbooks, test prep review books, etc.

The slow and careful approach - read extra slow to visualize everything in your head to the last detail; as you learn other things, you visually connect them to what you already have; I guess here you get to learn what you do read deeply, but at the end of the day not have read a great deal.

Rapid, multiple passes - read everything multiple times rapidly with some visualization but to a smaller extent (in other words, just like reading a book you visualize the gist and move on; you're not visualizing to every last detail); here you can have read through a high volume of material but not necessarily know it with as much depth.

Of course, these are extremes on a spectrum; but what do you prefer and employ more? And why? Also, if you change from one or the other extreme with different subjects/blocks, can you elaborate for what subjects you use what? Thanks everyone in advance for the input.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Rekt]

Rapid multiple passes. You get a macroscopic view at first and then pick up details with each pass.

Rule one is accepting you'll never be able to learn and understand everything. You even have to go into exams with knowledge deficiencies.
The same applies for the boards. You'll see questions with material you've never even seen. It's just the way it is.

 

[kmp0410]

Both

I read more complex things that don't make sense to me more thoroughly. Other times more slowly. Also I tend to go slower first time through (so I understand) and quicker on review.

But I don't really use books or anything. Just a combo of power points and various online sources.

 

[Entadus]

Both and it depends on the material.

A paragraph of gritty minutiae about a particularly unusual form of an already rare disorder is going to require a different strategy than learning the basic physiology of a fundamentally important system (e.g. autonomic nervous system, cardiac action potentials, pressure-volume loops, etc.

The ability to decide and know when to employ each strategy is one aspect that allows top students to shine

 

[basophilic]

Both and it depends on the material.

A paragraph of gritty minutiae about a particularly unusual form of an already rare disorder is going to require a different strategy than learning the basic physiology of a fundamentally important system (e.g. autonomic nervous system, cardiac action potentials, pressure-volume loops, etc.

The ability to decide and know when to employ each strategy is one aspect that allows top students to shine

Would you say that's the main ability (natural intelligence and memory aside) that top students have?

 

[basophilic]

So in general, the middle-ground is ideal?

One rapid pass to understand the general structure and scope of what you're reading - i.e. the main idea of the major topics and how those major topics relate to each other. In other words, understanding the overall forest and its trees.

The second pass to read slowly and carefully to visualize (in your head) the nitty, gritty details - i.e. making a mental video or image as accurately as possible. In other words, parsing out the stems and the leaves.

The third pass to review to quickly recall the structure and the connections you make between the concepts as well as recalling the vivid image/videos you made in your head.

Is this a good general studying strategy to have in med school? Would this routine be in place of making and using Anki or in addition to it?
If you do use Anki, do you do the first (structural) pass, then translate the details into Anki?

 

[futuremdforme]

I don't re-read, I build everything into flashcards and study from those.

 

[kmp0410]

So in general, the middle-ground is ideal?

One rapid pass to understand the general structure and scope of what you're reading - i.e. the main idea of the major topics and how those major topics relate to each other. In other words, understanding the overall forest and its trees.

The second pass to read slowly and carefully to visualize (in your head) the nitty, gritty details - i.e. making a mental video or image as accurately as possible. In other words, parsing out the stems and the leaves.

The third pass to review to quickly recall the structure and the connections you make between the concepts as well as recalling the vivid image/videos you made in your head.

Is this a good general studying strategy to have in med school? Would this routine be in place of making and using Anki or in addition to it?
If you do use Anki, do you do the first (structural) pass, then translate the details into Anki?

That's a pretty good strategy. That's what the learning specialists recommend at my school pretty much.

I personally watch lectures on 2x speed but pause and rewatch as needed so that I really learn everything first time through. I make flash cards and notes on my slides all during this time. This takes a little longer, but with the 2x it usually works out to the actual lecture time...but then I've done a lot more too. I generally use Anki to get the details down. Though I know a lot of people do that differently. So you find what works.

 

[ortnakas]

So in general, the middle-ground is ideal?

One rapid pass to understand the general structure and scope of what you're reading - i.e. the main idea of the major topics and how those major topics relate to each other. In other words, understanding the overall forest and its trees.

The second pass to read slowly and carefully to visualize (in your head) the nitty, gritty details - i.e. making a mental video or image as accurately as possible. In other words, parsing out the stems and the leaves.

The third pass to review to quickly recall the structure and the connections you make between the concepts as well as recalling the vivid image/videos you made in your head.

Is this a good general studying strategy to have in med school? Would this routine be in place of making and using Anki or in addition to it?
If you do use Anki, do you do the first (structural) pass, then translate the details into Anki?

I do something similar-- I think this system actually has some official name, but I don't know what it is-- I just adapted a method based on advice from the class above me.

On my first read, I just read and highlight and try to get the big picture. I've found if I take notes at this stage, I don't really catch on to what's important and wind up transcribing the whole thing.

On my second read I look more carefully and also make notes and/or flashcards (I use Memorang not Anki, but same general idea).

Third read I review the notes/flashcards and do practice questions if there are any.

 

[The_Sunny_Doc]

This block I'm going rapid multiple passes. I used to linger way too long on the lectures first past, thinking I had to understand everything. Big mistake. I would never get through all of the lectures.

 

[basophilic]

Thanks all for the responses. It seems like most people use some variant of the method I outlined above.

But no one seems to have addressed the part about really visualizing. And by that I mean something like imagining yourself as a bolus of food and visualizing everything you'd encounter through the digestive system through that bolus's eyes. Or for jaundice imagining an exaggeratedly yellowed skin and orange eyes, dark colored urine coming off in bathroom stall, imagining that same person releasing a diarrhea-like and bloody stool, and so on and so forth; you also engage other senses like smell or sound or touch. Disgusting a bit, but I'd assume it'd really help you learn the particular topic well. Thoughts on this? Any potential disadvantages to this?

 

[Merely]

I agree with both, after you've been through it so many times it also gets easier to go through and you can go through faster since every time you just absorb more and more material

 

[The_Sunny_Doc]

Thanks all for the responses. It seems like most people use some variant of the method I outlined above.

But no one seems to have addressed the part about really visualizing. And by that I mean something like imagining yourself as a bolus of food and visualizing everything you'd encounter through the digestive system through that bolus's eyes. Or for jaundice imagining an exaggeratedly yellowed skin and orange eyes, dark colored urine coming off in bathroom stall, imagining that same person releasing a diarrhea-like and bloody stool, and so on and so forth; you also engage other senses like smell or sound or touch. Disgusting a bit, but I'd assume it'd really help you learn the particular topic well. Thoughts on this? Any potential disadvantages to this?

That's exactly how my brain works. I picture things moving around. It's why visual-spatial learners are usually better at Physics than Chemistry - they can picture the problem being solved.

Problem with that strategy in med school that if you consciously do it, it can take too much time.

You'd be surprised how much knowledge you'll remember subconsciously when the test comes.

However, it might be a method that works well for you! Give it a try and let us know.

 

[basophilic]

That's exactly how my brain works. I picture things moving around. It's why visual-spatial learners are usually better at Physics than Chemistry - they can picture the problem being solved.

Problem with that strategy in med school that if you consciously do it, it can take too much time.

You'd be surprised how much knowledge you'll remember subconsciously when the test comes.

However, it might be a method that works well for you! Give it a try and let us know.

Sure thing! I just really enjoyed using it (and was really effective) in the few history courses I've taken in high school and college.

But I agree the trade-off here is that it's slower and when your brain is trying to trudge through tons of text, it becomes extremely reluctant to make this sort of visual imagery. But that's why I described a more middle-ground plan above - first pass would be to understand structure and main idea of what I'm going to read; also, to assess what I already know about it vs. what I need to know; then in second pass, I'd focus on visualizing carefully the high-priority stuff; then third pass would be reviewing to recall the structure/main idea and the visualizations as well as to see any other high-priority stuff I missed in second pass.

 

[sliceofbread136]

Quick and multiple. It's all about repetition

 

[basophilic]

Quick and multiple. It's all about repetition

I agree repetition is necessary, but does it by itself help with integrating and connecting concepts? Also, you can make each repetition more effective by making vivid or absurd imagery in your brain, no?

 

[kmp0410]

Thanks all for the responses. It seems like most people use some variant of the method I outlined above.

But no one seems to have addressed the part about really visualizing. And by that I mean something like imagining yourself as a bolus of food and visualizing everything you'd encounter through the digestive system through that bolus's eyes. Or for jaundice imagining an exaggeratedly yellowed skin and orange eyes, dark colored urine coming off in bathroom stall, imagining that same person releasing a diarrhea-like and bloody stool, and so on and so forth; you also engage other senses like smell or sound or touch. Disgusting a bit, but I'd assume it'd really help you learn the particular topic well. Thoughts on this? Any potential disadvantages to this?

Just another method to understanding the material. And understanding (when you can) is always better than memorizing...so do what ever works. I come up with the weirdest little things/images/whatever to help me remember things.

 

[sliceofbread136]

I agree repetition is necessary, but does it by itself help with integrating and connecting concepts? Also, you can make each repetition more effective by making vivid or absurd imagery in your brain, no?

Not really for me. The concepts are fairly simple mostly except for the occasional concept where I have to take a step back and really wrap my brain around it

 

[achamess]

I'd like to offer another strategy: multiple passes over a body of knowledge at increasing level of detail.
Here is a concrete example for physiology:
1st pass: GI phys. chapter in BRS Physiology
2nd pass: GI phys chapter in Physiology (Costanzo)
3rd pass (optional): Boron and Boulpaep - GI Physiology sections

The reason for this big picture -> high detail sequence is that the learning of new material is facilitated by your current knowledge of the subject. That is, if you already have some knowledge about a topic, you can build on that. This phenomenon is called meaningful learning.

Many students (myself included), make the mistake of jumping right in to a highly detailed text (say, reading Big Robbins as my first go at learning Pathology) and get completely bogged down in the details, remembering almost nothing because it doesn't mean much. Starting with something like Pathoma would have been much better. Then, having some frameworks in my mind, I could approach Robbins again (if I really wanted to), and those details could be related to what I already knew.

So, time permitting, and depending on your goals, I recommend a high-to-low level approach to learning medical (0r any) kind of knowledge.
For long-term retention, spaced repetition (e.g. Anki, Firecracker, Memorang) is still needed, but in the same way, you should move high level to more detail, over time.

My buddy and I talk about this strategy (and several others) in our guide on learning medicine.

 

[basophilic]

I'd like to offer another strategy: multiple passes over a body of knowledge at increasing level of detail.
Here is a concrete example for physiology:
1st pass: GI phys. chapter in BRS Physiology
2nd pass: GI phys chapter in Physiology (Costanzo)
3rd pass (optional): Boron and Boulpaep - GI Physiology sections

The reason for this big picture -> high detail sequence is that the learning of new material is facilitated by your current knowledge of the subject. That is, if you already have some knowledge about a topic, you can build on that. This phenomenon is called meaningful learning.

Many students (myself included), make the mistake of jumping right in to a highly detailed text (say, reading Big Robbins as my first go at learning Pathology) and get completely bogged down in the details, remembering almost nothing because it doesn't mean much. Starting with something like Pathoma would have been much better. Then, having some frameworks in my mind, I could approach Robbins again (if I really wanted to), and those details could be related to what I already knew.

So, time permitting, and depending on your goals, I recommend a high-to-low level approach to learning medical (0r any) kind of knowledge.
For long-term retention, spaced repetition (e.g. Anki, Firecracker, Memorang) is still needed, but in the same way, you should move high level to more detail, over time.

My buddy and I talk about this strategy (and several others) in our guide on learning medicine.

Is this plan compatible with Firecracker? Also, wouldn't this become too much during M2 which would involve lecture notes, FA, Pathoma, and Qbanks (Kaplan and Rx)?

 

[achamess]

Is this plan compatible with Firecracker? Also, wouldn't this become too much during M2 which would involve lecture notes, FA, Pathoma, and Qbanks (Kaplan and Rx)?

How you execute is based on your goals, curriculum, time, etc. It's not going to look the same for everyone. But the general principle is, if you have to choose a source to learn from, start with the "higher level" (less detailed) version, then work your way to more detail. That will get you the most bang for your buck and it will make any subsequent learning that much easier. Jumping right into the most detailed text is both ineffective (for most people) and probably unnecessary for most people, unless your goals are to crush class exams, impress your friends, or be a future specialist in the thing you're studying.

Re: compatibility with Firecracker. Sure. You just would need to be discerning in which cards you bank so that your reviews overlap with the sources you're reading/watching for your primary learning. Let's say you watch Pathoma for Pathology. Maybe FC overlaps like 70% with that. Well then great. You may decide you want to still pick up the remaining 30% of facts from FC. That's your call.

 

[basophilic]

How you execute is based on your goals, curriculum, time, etc. It's not going to look the same for everyone. But the general principle is, if you have to choose a source to learn from, start with the "higher level" (less detailed) version, then work your way to more detail. That will get you the most bang for your buck and it will make any subsequent learning that much easier. Jumping right into the most detailed text is both ineffective (for most people) and probably unnecessary for most people, unless your goals are to crush class exams, impress your friends, or be a future specialist in the thing you're studying.

Re: compatibility with Firecracker. Sure. You just would need to be discerning in which cards you bank so that your reviews overlap with the sources you're reading/watching for your primary learning. Let's say you watch Pathoma for Pathology. Maybe FC overlaps like 70% with that. Well then great. You may decide you want to still pick up the remaining 30% of facts from FC. That's your call.

Fair point. Also, in your above example of GI physiology, where would you place the class notes (lecture notes provided by professor that you'd annotate in class)? I'd assume those would be the best resources to know really well for course exams in almost every course. Also, wouldn't that study plan prevent you from learning one resource really well? Lot of the general advice on here seems to be based upon learning a few resources very well. In your GI physiology example, for instance, wouldn't you need a lot more than 1 pass to truly get a lot out of the Costanzo book?

 

[achamess]

Fair point. Also, in your above example of GI physiology, where would you place the class notes (lecture notes provided by professor that you'd annotate in class)? I'd assume those would be the best resources to know really well for course exams in almost every course. Also, wouldn't that study plan prevent you from learning one resource really well? Lot of the general advice on here seems to be based upon learning a few resources very well.

Personally, I don't like to study from class notes.

In any case, if I were going to use class notes as part of a study sequence, I'd still start with an introductory text, which is almost always going to be better written and more coherent than a bunch of powerpoint slides. That would give my foundation. So, for example, I'd read the BRS Physiology Chapter first. Make Anki cards (or use relevant FC ones). Then, I'd move on to the class notes. More than likely, BRS will overlap significantly with class notes, so it's not like I have a whole bunch of new stuff to learn. In my learning from class notes, I'd take the non-overlapping, high yield bits and add that to my Anki/FC stuff. Each level that I go deeper, it's going to be easier. The first, intro-level stuff, is the lions share. Each subsequent iteration is just building on that. There will be significant overlap.

Here is a diagram from our book that explains what I mean pretty clearly.

"In your GI physiology example, for instance, wouldn't you need a lot more than 1 pass to truly get a lot out of the Costanzo book?"

Perhaps, yes. You may need to read again. But another evidence-based idea that we discuss is that self-testing >>> re-reading. So I would recommend reading that chapter thoroughly, getting your SR cards out of them (however you do that), and then spending more time doing self-testing than reading again.

 

[tellmemore2020]

Multiple passes in different formats. Read, notes, create questions, do own questions, do standardized questions. If I had to pick one, though, I'd say do it thoroughly the first time.

 

[Elephantintheor]

I often use something called a "memory castle" you can probable google the technique. On the + side I can remember more or less Everything, once memorized a whole block of 15-18 powerpointpresentations slide by slide, and could present that information talking 4 hours non stop (and dont tell me that memorizing isn't Learning, one must be seriously detached from the subject if one cannot understand something you have memorized!) I have passed every test I've used this methode with. However! it takes a lot of time and dicipline and it takes fairly long time to become faster. Therefore when it is less important tests I usually just read multiple times and hope something sticks, alternatively I create drawings of what I'm Learning. (I Think a lot in Pictures) which is faster but I sometimes fail test due to this :S

 

[piii]

I like to do a rapid pass (usually watch lecture).

Then a thorough pass (usually rewriting notes from lecture/PowerPoint into a word doc with images).

Then I do multiple quick passes (2-3x) before exams, where I'm making additional Anki cards for high yield memorization, and rewriting my outline on a white board. I get to a point where I have most things conceptually down, I have strong memorization of pathways and definitions. Before the exam I can usually rewrite my entire study outline from memory.

Then I finish with practice problems of provided by professor.

This is how i aced my allopathic SMP.