Laws of learning

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

baggywrinkle

cranky old fart
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
549
Reaction score
4
For those of you who are struggling - and you know who you are.
It may be helpful to be aware of the six laws of learning. Sometimes brute force is not enough. Knowing where and how to apply pressure can make all the difference in the world.

Law of Readiness
The Law of Readiness means a person can learn when physically and mentally adjusted (ready) to receive stimuli. Individuals learn best when they are ready to learn, and they will not learn much if they see no reason for learning. If trainees have a strong purpose, a clear objective and a sound reason for learning, they usually make more progress than trainees who lack motivation. When trainees are ready to learn, they are more willing to participate in the learning process, and this simplifies the instructor's job. If outside responsibilities or worries weigh heavily on trainees' minds or if their personal problems seem unsolvable, they may have little interest in learning.


Law of Exercise
The Law of Exercise stresses the idea that repetition is basic to the development of adequate responses; things most often repeated are easiest remembered. The mind can rarely recall new concepts or practices after a single exposure, but every time it is practiced, learning continues and is enforced. The instructor must provide opportunities for trainees to practice or repeat the task. Repetition consists of many types of activities, including recall, review, restatement, manual drill and physical application. Remember that practice makes permanent, not perfect unless the task is taught correctly.


Law of Effect
This law involves the emotional reaction of the learner. Learning will always be much more effective when a feeling of satisfaction, pleasantness, or reward accompanies or is a result of the learning process. Learning is strengthened when it is accompanied by a pleasant or satisfying feeling and that it is weakened when it is associated with an unpleasant experience. An experience that produces feelings of defeat, frustration, anger or confusion in a trainee is unpleasant. Instructors should be cautious about using negative motivation. Usually it is better to show trainees that a problem is not impossible, but is within their capability to understand and solve.


Law of Primacy
This law states that the state of being first, often creates a strong, almost unshakeable impression. For the instructor, this means that what they teach the first time must be correct. If a subject is incorrectly taught, it must be corrected. It is more difficult to un-teach a subject than to teach it correctly the first time. For the trainees' first learning experience should be positive and functionally related to training.


Law of Intensity
The principle of intensity states that if the stimulus (experience) is real, the more likely there is to be a change in behavior (learning). A vivid, dramatic or exciting learning experience teaches more than a routine or boring experience. A trainee will learn more from the real thing than from a substitute. Demonstrations, skits, and models do much to intensify the learning experiences of trainees.


Law of Recency
Things most recently learned are best remembered, while the things learned some time ago are remembered with more difficulty. It is sometimes easy, for example, to recall a telephone number dialed a few minutes ago, but it is usually impossible to recall a telephone number dialed a week ago. Review, warm-ups, and similar activities are all based on the principle that the more recent the exercise, the more effective the performance. Practicing a skill or new concept just before using it will ensure a more effective performance. Instructors recognize the law of recency when they plan a lesson summary or a conclusion of the lecture. Repeat, restate, or reemphasize important matters at the end of a lesson to make sure that trainees remember them instead of inconsequential details.

Members don't see this ad.
 
An interesting read :clap:

thanks, baggywrinkle.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I can respond to this based on my own experience:

1. Don't cram. Two hours of study time per hour of lecture is a general guideline.

Retention is based on:

2. Repetition...repetition... Rehearsal....rehearsal... Go over your notes as soon after lecture as you can. Don't buy flashcards. MAKE and use flashcards. Carry them with you always. Pull them out when you find yourself doing nothing (like riding the bus). Do the rehearsal actively (aka out loud). You look absolutely insane on the bus - but who cares? :)

3. For general ed courses, outline the textbook in your own words. You imprint the info on your brain and have a great study guide. (It works for some science courses, but keep an eye on how much time you spend outlining.)

4. For those intense science classes, forget outlining. It's outrageous. Instead use the repetition/rehearsal method and follow that up before exams with practice tests. Most textbooks have companion websites with lots of opportunities for practice and presentations of lecture material in a different format.

5. Make time for leisure. Set a timer for study. When it goes off, stop and do something fun - go running, watch a movie (or two or three), play with your kids, or eat something yummy.

6. Go to sleep. Figure out how much sleep you require. Some get by on 4 hours and some require 8 hours (I'm a 7 myself).

This is a cool thread. Share your study methods, please. I'm always open to new ideas.

Troy
 
Don't try to memorize things. Learn the concept and the mechanism. Once you understand how something works, the rest comes easy.
 
thanks a lot for this thread. I'm a freshy in college and I really have to change my study habits to fit college life. I may say it's a bit difficult when I haven't had chem class in awhile but I think I'll manage. Keep this thread going, most people already know about these study tips, but it's good to have a reminder once in awhile. :)
 
dgroulx said:
Don't try to memorize things. Learn the concept and the mechanism. Once you understand how something works, the rest comes easy.

Somethings can only be retained by use of memorization. You can only learn the concept if its a conceptual topic. Two classes that would illustrate this are A & P vs Organic.. One is clearly a brute force memorization where the other you can use your brain to figure things out.
 
J Lucas said:
Somethings can only be retained by use of memorization. You can only learn the concept if its a conceptual topic. Two classes that would illustrate this are A & P vs Organic.. One is clearly a brute force memorization where the other you can use your brain to figure things out.

True, but you will get further if you learn concepts. Anatomy is memorizing names, but physiology is concepts. During my P1 year, we had a year of pathophysiology where you needed to apply the concepts from the prerequisite physiology course. Now in my P2 year, I need to understand physiology and pathophysiology to treat underlying disease. They don't review because you are expected to retain everything you've learned in college. I'm not sure that I could memorize that many things.

My therapeutics class is mainly conceptual. Pharmacology is also conceptual other than memorizing some drug names and where they act on the body. There is memorization of drug structures in Med Chem, but they are easy if you understand why certain functional groups are on specific drug molecules.

I think for students that are thinking of going into pharmacy, trying to learn concepts will equate to better success in pharmacy school. It's only a study tip. Use whatever techniques you need to succeed.
 
Whatever happened to baggy? I miss his crankiness.
 
something else you all may be interested in is

www.vark-learn.com

it will tell you how you best learn.

just go there and click on the questionnaire.. and poof.
 
I do not know about pharmacy. But in statistics it is ENTIRELY conceptual, and a lot of algebra and calculus that requires you to be mathematically fluent.
I remember that I took the masters exam and PhD qualifying exam for statistics in august. I passed the masters comprehensive by 28 points (passing was a 52%, I got a 79.45%) but failed the PhD qualifying by 4.5 points (I got a 55.5% the passing was a 60%) and will take it again in january (We get one more opportunity to remediate the exam). In my grad class, 32 students took the masters, 7 failed, and 31 students took the qualifier, 16 failed. I studied harder for these two exams than mostly anyone else. So you might ask what happened?

I have come up with the following reasons:

I studied many of the previous tests for 7 straight years both masters and PhD. But the committee was entirely different. So doing this helped a lot with the 1st question out of the 8 questions on the qualifier, but with not much else since many of these teachers never wrote the qualifier before.

So who did well? The people with good intuition, or with stronger backgrounds. There is a girl who rarely studies much but she passed easily. Most students stayed in North Carolina for the whole summer to study. I stayed there for half the time, but studied a lot when I was in Florida, usually spending as many as 5 hours a day for 4 days per week. This other girl only studied very intensively 3 three weeks before the exam during the summer. Yet, some of the others who passed had much stronger math background than me (for example the highest scorer on both exams had a biology masters from Duke and had taken all of the master in statistics courses over there even though she had not officially gotten the degree, or had masters of statistics before they even came to the school (five students had previous masters in statistics degrees from Mississippi State, Brigham Young University, Columbia University, Ohio State, and Pune University in India) (They had repeated all of their first year classes and already knew everything and did not have to study anyway).

However, the best thing that I could have done was not to study at all the last two weeks before the test. I had so many different types of problems floating in my head that when I saw something different, I just froze. Secondly, I made about 9 points of purely careless errors, which WOULD HAVE MADE THE DIFFERENCE. You have to give your self sometime to be away from the material otherwise your brain will be thinking about every problem you have seen. This will cause a detriment for you to figure out new problems that you have not seen before.

So sometimes, in a conceptual type of problem solving test, studying is definitely necessary, but overstudying can cause your problem-solving skills to go right down the drain.

Maybe in pharmacy, it is more memorization, except the organic classes. The organic classes, seem to be about memorizing certain base rules and then applying them. However, there are a lot of exceptions and conditions just like in statistics. But I assume some of the drug literature and anatomy classes are pure memorization.

I would actually like to learn both pharmacy and statistics, since many of the statisticians work in the pharmaceutical industry. So after I am done (with either masters or perhaps PhD) I am thinking of perhaps gaining work experience as a statistician at a hospital or CRO (if I can get a job, not sure the market is quite difficult and competitive) and then going to pharmacy school (preferably UNC-Chapel Hill or UF) to understand the scientific aspects of the analyses that I would be eventually doing on the job. Furthermore, there are more opportunities for someone with a scientific background rather than just a statistical background. The statisticians are basically sitting behind a computer with SAS the whole day. I would enjoy actually knowing the mechanisms behind drug discovery and development, rather than just analyzing some data that comes out of some research studies.

Furthermore, I am particularly interested in pharmaceutical statistics (biostatistics) and there are limited openings for just that.

I might be wrong, but in mathematical sciences, your background is more important than your study skills, and in pharmacy, I am not sure since I never went to pharm school.

But at least this graduate program in statistics gives me good practice and simulates pharmacy school, but in a different way. The graduate schools for statistics are probably as difficult to get into as the pharmacy schools for the most part. Some theoretical schools like UC Berkeley, Stanford, and Wisconsin only take Harvard, Peking University (China), or ISI (Indian Statistical Institute) graduates and have 30% passing rates on their PhD Qualifiers as well.

Hopefully there is not a 50% failure rate on the NAPLEX and board exams!! Many people would waste their money and pharm school then!
 
FutureRxGal said:
Cool. I was Visual: 2, Aural: 4, Read/Write: 3, and Kinesthetic: 3.
yeah i was pretty much everything....

i told the professor who showed it to me i obviously couldn't be taught!

lol
:laugh:


maybe it will help someone though... i tried the techniques for 1 test and did fairly well on it.... i just didn't want to take the time anymore
 
According to Vark I'm:

* Visual: 7
* Aural: 3
* Read/Write: 7
* Kinesthetic: 7

This qualifies me as a multimodal (VRK) type learner.
I suppose there is some truth in this, I ALWAYS zone out in class when the professor decides to do nothing but stand at the podium and babble on and on and on and on. I've discovered that my VERY best technique at studying is to make flash cards. I'm pretty horrendous at time management, and one of the bigger reasons I don't do better in school is because I can't manage my sleep well, so I make foolish mistakes and I have bad judgement. I believe that the reason behind flashcards is that when we study, we have the answers in front of us, and we automatically assume we know the solution. However, if you make a flash card with a question on one side, and the answer on the back, it FORCES your brain to THINK about the answer and to that process really embeds things into your head. You can use this approach to basically ANY class. The downside is that it takes time to make the cards, but trust me... I can stare at the Kreb's cycle for 1 hour and still not have it memorized, but I can also spend about 10 minutes making flash cards and have it memorized in about half the time. I have always had a short-term memory, and I haven't really found a way around it. But I hope this helps you guys out.
Since we are all interested in studying drugs... Have you guys heard about 'nootropics'? They are very controversial drugs, and they are touted as brain function enhancing. Does anyone have any experience with this? I have to admit I have tried Adderall before, and I'm not sure if it was a placebo effect, but my sense of focus and concentration tripled. I always get hunger pangs when I study for long long periods and then after I raid the fridge, my computer somehow magically turns on and then my study attempts go down the toilet. However, with Adderall, this doesn't happen. I have also been taking 2-3 pills of SOYA LECITHIN (you can buy these at Costco) for memory because they contain choline. If you guys remember cell bio, phospholipids (brain matter and neuronal connection components) are made of choline-phosphate group-glycerol-fatty acids... http://koning.ecsu.ctstateu.edu/principles/images/phospholipid.gif

I'm not sure if this helps any, but I was once also been highly interested in this 'miracle brain drug' called ginko biloba. After reading some articles about clinical tests, it has been determined that it has a next to nothing effect on recall and attentiveness. I take 2 soya lecithins each day, as well as a performance Centrum that contains ginko and other brain supporting ingredients in trace amounts. What supplements have you guys tried? What works for you?
 
bbmuffin said:
something else you all may be interested in is

www.vark-learn.com

it will tell you how you best learn.

just go there and click on the questionnaire.. and poof.

This was neat. I was a strong kinethetic. The tips it gave for stuydying were what I had already figgured out on my own that worked for me, after several years of school.... I learned how to study well at the end of my college years. I would say that I wish I had seen this earlier, but it probably wouldn't have worked since a true kinesthetic would have to figgure it out on their own :lol: but the tips were right on. Cool.
 
I'd say the smart way to go about things (if you are extremely concerned with grades) would be to review the material BEFORE class. Make the class the second time you see it and only use it to emphasize and clarify points of the lecture.

Me, I personally take the "cram-the-night-before" approach. It leaves me with alot more free time and I'm not too concerned with grades right now. Cramming has paid off and failed me at different times. Best score cramming was a 96, worst was a 66 (both are medical biochem test grades).

In hindsight, the test I got a 66 on was on material you DEFINITELY don't want to cram... all these different cycles, their components, enzymes taking you from one step to the next, etc. I know I screwed that one up, but that's the only truely disappointing score i've gotten by cramming. Probably doesn't work for everyone, but I find it fits me well.
 
Another method that helps (that goes along the same lines as repeating material out loud) is to actually teach the material (either to yourself or within the contexts of a study group). If you try and imagine how you would go about teaching it to someone else you often find out where your understanding of the material is weakest.
 
The Vark thing said I have a very strong read/write preference...I never realized that until almost every answer I chose was read out of a book. Very interesting. :thumbup:
 
Top