This is kind of a “common core math” approach to reading. It decomposes a process and presents it step by step, in contrast to either
Presenting a goal, and letting each learner figure out the how on their own
Presenting the assembly line steps needed to mechanically generate the answer
Anecdotally, this is approximately what I do when reading (or listening), just all at once and without physically highlighting/flashcarding. But I’m still taking each piece, understanding how it fits into the greater whole (I visualize actual pieces of a tinker-toy like structure fitting together, but that’s just me), and then moving on and forgetting the parts that don’t matter.
Two notes:
This relies on the source material being laid out in a particular way, and with a specific density of information. Too dense (a list of facts or grocery items to memorize; a math textbook) and there is nothing to forget, and no repeated information to absorb. Too diffuse, and there’s only one idea present in the first place, already separated by plenty of dead space, and repeated enough to get it through (basic communication theory: tell em what you’re gonna say, say it, tell em what you said. Use examples.)
I do not recommend trying this on casual conversation. People very often include a detail in their stream of thought that doesn’t connect, and gets forgotten as irrelevant, but was the most important part to them. For example, their name.
These are great points. I have only tried this on a few subjects. It seems to work well for biochemistry. I’ll have to see how it works for differential equations this coming quarter. And I would never have thought about applying this to casual conversation, but that’s worth pointing out. Thanks for mentioning it.
This is kind of a “common core math” approach to reading. It decomposes a process and presents it step by step, in contrast to either
Presenting a goal, and letting each learner figure out the how on their own
Presenting the assembly line steps needed to mechanically generate the answer
Anecdotally, this is approximately what I do when reading (or listening), just all at once and without physically highlighting/flashcarding. But I’m still taking each piece, understanding how it fits into the greater whole (I visualize actual pieces of a tinker-toy like structure fitting together, but that’s just me), and then moving on and forgetting the parts that don’t matter. Two notes:
This relies on the source material being laid out in a particular way, and with a specific density of information. Too dense (a list of facts or grocery items to memorize; a math textbook) and there is nothing to forget, and no repeated information to absorb. Too diffuse, and there’s only one idea present in the first place, already separated by plenty of dead space, and repeated enough to get it through (basic communication theory: tell em what you’re gonna say, say it, tell em what you said. Use examples.)
I do not recommend trying this on casual conversation. People very often include a detail in their stream of thought that doesn’t connect, and gets forgotten as irrelevant, but was the most important part to them. For example, their name.
These are great points. I have only tried this on a few subjects. It seems to work well for biochemistry. I’ll have to see how it works for differential equations this coming quarter. And I would never have thought about applying this to casual conversation, but that’s worth pointing out. Thanks for mentioning it.