michael_nielsen

Universities actually cram very little information into students, and they do it painfully slowly. Bad pedagogy leaves only crude brute force study methods viable; profs have to limit the scope if they want to keep their students happy enough to not bash them on Rate My Professorhttps://twitter.com/TheAyenem/status/1116771886132813825 …

I'm not denying that some students study very hard, or that some programs require something like an order of magnitude more content to be retained in the short- to medium-term. Just that there is a hard limit on how much content can be crammed this way, and it's a low ceiling

If it feels like school is an all-consuming slog, that's the feeling of fighting your brain -- which builds models, and has to consume and discard massive volumes of extraneous information. "This isn't extraneous!" It doesn't believe you, and you don't really believe you, either

I should note that there are (probably broadly trainable) strategies for massively improved rote memorization, but the very hacky way this works makes me very skeptical that information stored this way can be accessed for much more than basic call-and-response

The first sentence is just plain wrong. But the implied question, when fixed up, is a good one: what are the opportunity costs for SR? I've experimented intensively with this question in mind. AFAICT, SR is most useful when learning a little outside your expertise.

Inside one's field or fields of expertise, SR is still occasionally useful, with little niggling things you keep having to look up. But for the most part I agree: one's natural interest and ways of encoding knowledge are powerful signals which do most of the trick.