Optimizing Study Time: A Second Year Student's Experience in Chemical Physics

[Howers]

I'm a second year student in chemical physics, at the University of Toronto, and I study roughly 25 hours during the weekdays and about 20 hours on the week ends. I go to class but can't ever pay attention because I can't learn math on the board.

This disturbs me, because my school suggests I should spend 2-3 hours per hour of lecture, and says typical physical science students spend 10 hours for the week and 24 hours during the weekdays.

I never have free time, and I'm always at my desk. I read all my textbooks, and seldom glance over lecture notes. I try a bunch of questions from the books too. Does that just make me a slow learner?

 

[yoran]

Everyone learns on its own tempo. I too am considered a "slow" learner but eventually I understand the course better than the "faster" guys. It just depends on how well you want to master the course. When I study a course, I just want to understand everything in the course. Basically I do that because I can't remember things I don't understand. For example, I cannot remember and reproduce a mathematical proof if I don't fully understand it. Other people would just skip it or memorize it and I think that does the difference between me and them.
I have the same thing in classes as you do. Often, I don't understand anything (or at least not much) during class, but when I'm studying it at my own desk, on my own tempo and while taking my time, it always becomes very clear. You shouldn't worry about that, I think almost everyone has it.
Also, what the university says doesn't apply to anyone. You should just follow your own way. As you're in second year, you must know by now if your method works. If it does and you feel fine with it, don't worry about what other people do or say.

I hope this helps and reassures you.

 

[lisab]

I, too, had to put in hours and hours doing my homework when I was in school. It seemed I had to study much more than other students...it amazed me that some of them could get away with so little study time. But like the previous poster, I often understood the material far better then they did.

I couldn't learn much in class either. Going to class was a waste of time except it did let me know what I should be studying outside of class time.

I had essentially no social life until I graduated.

 

[hiddenmist]

Well there are always people who study so much while there are people who don't. I hardly study and I am 2nd year student at university of waterloo. I just cram hard for the exam. Though I wish I study as much as you because I end up not understanding everything because I don't study enough.

 

[Hydrargyrum]

I don't study at all.

 

[cristo]

I'm sure there are many threads on this topic that you can find if you search the forum. To agree with some other posts, there are always people who study more and who study less. The important thing is to strike a good balance between your studies and social activities: afterall, university isn't all about studying and getting perfect grades!

 

[Asphodel]

Too much, in that I rarely get enough sleep. Not enough, in that I rarely master things to the degree I'd like.

I suppose I'll finally strike the balance I want when I retire and can study things according to whatever timetable I find comfortable instead of always worrying about exams and project deadlines?

But for some things, it really is just easy enough (for someone used to surviving upper-division physics & math) that the studying required approaches zero.

 

[thinkies]

I don't study at all.

May know that particular field in which you are not studying 'at all'?

 

[Hydrargyrum]

Sure. I don't study for Math, science, english, history, or any other classes

 

[thinkies]

Sure. I don't study for Math, science, english, history, or any other classes

I don't see how you can succeed without studying. Especially if you are in college/university.

Obviously there are some subjects where you don't need to 'study'. (Example:Let's take math. If you manage to understand the concepts and all, you pretty don't need to study. Math is practical, not by-heart stuff...)

However you may want memorize some formulas...

Anyhow, studying is important.

P.S.: Unless you've finished university/college or w/e, it's reasonable that you are not studying...^.^

 

[Hydrargyrum]

I think I have eidetic memory, what some people call photographic memory, because I just remember stuff without trying to

 

[CPL.Luke]

I think to a large extent people here are talking about studying in the genreal sense of doing school work outside of the class room. currently in that sense I'm pulling 8 hour days 5 days a week sunday through thursday.

I rarely study in the sense of readings, however at this stage in the game I have to pull a 30-40 hour week in terms of just getting my homework in.

if your still in lower level stuff that doesn't require homework, or only has it as 20% of the grade or so its entirely possible that you can not study and do pretty well. later on as the homework edges to 50% of the grade or more and each assignment extends to 2,4,20 hours you'll have to work more or not do so well.

 

[thinkies]

I think I have eidetic memory, what some people call photographic memory, because I just remember stuff without trying to

Interesting. Still, revising won't cause any harm, right?

 

[Tedjn]

In the US we never say revising :)

I think that we also need to distinguish between different types of studying. Some people sit down at their desk in a quiet area and devote their attention to their topic. Others may intermingle studying with fun (case in point: surfing on Wikipedia) so that what they are doing may not seem like studying. I even sometimes study in class, because I find it easier to study when I can't possibly be doing something else I want to do.

Certainly, different people need to study for different lengths of time. Dare I say some are just more lucky than others (Hydrargyrum for example)? However, I echo what cristo wrote, that no matter what a healthy balance needs to be struck between academia and social life.

 

[ok123jump]

I don't study at all.

Sure. I don't study for Math, science, english, history, or any other classes

I think I have eidetic memory, what some people call photographic memory, because I just remember stuff without trying to

Hydrargyrum,

I am not normally provocative, but, I would like to point out an observation.

I've looked through your comment history and have yet to find a single post which demonstrates your intelligence, skill or facts that you've remembered that are pertinent to solving advanced physics problems or the other subjects discussed in this forum.

Maybe you are intelligent... Hey, it's possible. I tend to disregard how "intelligent" you feel you are - you have yet to demonstrate the depth of your intelligence or any achievements that you have racked up in your "lack of studying".

Did you win a national math competition without ever studying? Did you win the Intel Science Fair? Did you write a new theory on the nature of intertia?

I once believed as you do, even some of the same nonsense came out of my mouth. I assure you of two things:

1 - There is no such thing as a "natural genius". You cannot give me one example from history of any great author of antiquity who was not absolutely consumed by their study. Similarly, you cannot furnish me with a single example of a modern day genius who is not a prolific reader and consumed by their passions.

There is a direct correlation between intelligence and one's approach to problem solving (of any sort) - intelligence is not a fixed quantity.

2 - The view that intelligence is a fixed quantity and some people "simply don't need to study" is a pernicious point of view. There is a direct correlation to the experts that I know in the field of physics and the amount they study. Some of my collegues study to the point that I do not know when they have time for their families or their lives - but I guarantee that they can solve many problems that I struggle with.

If you don't want to study, I will not try to convince you; however, I reiterate that you are absolutely deceived if you think that anyone get intelligence as a free ride.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070207090949.htm

To Howers,

The more you study now, the less you will have to study when it matters.

I suggest that you put in 40+ hours a week studying. Make it fun. Learn to enjoy working out problems, tackling new problems and gain an appreciation for the structure and the depth of the problems. If you make them your friend, they will remain your friend for life.

Also, read A People's History of Science by Clifford Conner.

Hope that helps.

 

[Monocles]

I study pretty much every day for at least several hours, but I am always doing it with friends so it never actually feels like work even though I do actually get stuff done (albeit at a slower pace). If I did it alone I'd probably get it done quicker but its not as much fun that way. Plus, studying physics doesn't actually feel like studying to me anyways. Its too much fun.

 

[zhentil]

A word of warning: as some posters have pointed out, a balance needs to be struck between school and life. I will also point out that if you are used to allotting a leisurely 40 hours per work for undergraduate studying, you will be mauled if you go to grad school. You need to study hard, but you also need to study smart.

 

[malawi_glenn]

I agree with zhentil: Its not the amouth of study, it is the quality.

Also one needs to find their own rutine how to study. Some works better in small groups discussing the material and solvning stuff toghter. Others just sit by themself all the time.

One of my best advices are to read through some of the material before the lecture, so you are prepared and you know a bit what is hard for you about that perticular chapter.

And I study (including lectures) approx 50h each week.

 

[Defennder]

Is that 50h per week for undergrad or grad studies?

 

[malawi_glenn]

Undergrad, I also take more courses than I have to. I take like 40-45 credits each semster. Full time studies are 30creds/ semster.

 

[leon1127]

the number of work devote to academic can be computed with the following formula

24*7 - 5 * 7
= (24-5)*7 by distributivity
= {24 + (-5)}*7 by invertibility
= 19 * 7 by closure of number field
= 133 by usual multiplication defined on the number

I am not joking about this number... If you don't believe that, finish your master in one year

 

[MathematicalPhysicist]

leon1127, you work for satan so it makes sense you should put in the hours. (-:

 

[Hydrargyrum]

Hydrargyrum,

I am not normally provocative, but, I would like to point out an observation.

I've looked through your comment history and have yet to find a single post which demonstrates your intelligence, skill or facts that you've remembered that are pertinent to solving advanced physics problems or the other subjects discussed in this forum.

Maybe you are intelligent... Hey, it's possible. I tend to disregard how "intelligent" you feel you are - you have yet to demonstrate the depth of your intelligence or any achievements that you have racked up in your "lack of studying".

Did you win a national math competition without ever studying? Did you win the Intel Science Fair? Did you write a new theory on the nature of intertia?

I once believed as you do, even some of the same nonsense came out of my mouth. I assure you of two things:

1 - There is no such thing as a "natural genius". You cannot give me one example from history of any great author of antiquity who was not absolutely consumed by their study. Similarly, you cannot furnish me with a single example of a modern day genius who is not a prolific reader and consumed by their passions.

There is a direct correlation between intelligence and one's approach to problem solving (of any sort) - intelligence is not a fixed quantity.

2 - The view that intelligence is a fixed quantity and some people "simply don't need to study" is a pernicious point of view. There is a direct correlation to the experts that I know in the field of physics and the amount they study. Some of my collegues study to the point that I do not know when they have time for their families or their lives - but I guarantee that they can solve many problems that I struggle with.

If you don't want to study, I will not try to convince you; however, I reiterate that you are absolutely deceived if you think that anyone get intelligence as a free ride.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070207090949.htm

To Howers,

The more you study now, the less you will have to study when it matters.

I suggest that you put in 40+ hours a week studying. Make it fun. Learn to enjoy working out problems, tackling new problems and gain an appreciation for the structure and the depth of the problems. If you make them your friend, they will remain your friend for life.

Also, read A People's History of Science by Clifford Conner.

Hope that helps.

I only said I don't study. I didn't say I'm the next Isaac Newton. And I don't think I'm the smartest person here; in fact, I think I'm the dumbest. Besides, I'm sure you didn't study in high school either.

 

[vladittude0583]

My Physics study time dedication

I usually spend about 15 hours/week studying for my Physics with Calculus 1 course and perhaps about 70% of that total time is dedicated to solving end of chapter homework problems.

 

[Asphodel]

There are also often situations like this week.

Three midterms. Since every professor I have thinks their class must be the main one I'm taking, none of them bothered to lighten up on the homework this week. Sorted by class, the assignments came to roughly: report + quiz + 2 x homework assignment; homework assignment over stuff that wasn't adequately covered but will be tossed on the midterm; 2 x homework assignment; research essay + presentation.

I study when and if my professors *let* me study. When this magically happens, I'm usually too exhausted. Undergrad life has become a huge mess of trying to absorb enough to stay ahead of other students that are also trying to absorb enough to pass the exams, with the average test scores showing that: none of us really have a bloody clue but are decent at faking it, and instructors have no clue what material they've successfully communicated to the students.

Yay!

 

[Oerg]

Undergrad, I also take more courses than I have to. I take like 40-45 credits each semster. Full time studies are 30creds/ semster.

how fast did you finish your undergraduate degree?

 

[malawi_glenn]

Iam not finished...

 

[lisab]

I study when and if my professors *let* me study. When this magically happens, I'm usually too exhausted. Undergrad life has become a huge mess of trying to absorb enough to stay ahead of other students that are also trying to absorb enough to pass the exams, with the average test scores showing that: none of us really have a bloody clue but are decent at faking it, and instructors have no clue what material they've successfully communicated to the students.

Yay!

LOL! Sounds like my college experience...

 

[ok123jump]

I only said I don't study. I didn't say I'm the next Isaac Newton. And I don't think I'm the smartest person here; in fact, I think I'm the dumbest. Besides, I'm sure you didn't study in high school either.

Why settle for less than being the next Newton?

I didn't attend much high school - I went to college early; however, when I was there, I studied at my own pace. I was quite the fan of reading my entire textbook then sleeping through most of the lectures. Needless to say, I didn't make many friends with the staff.

However, I suggest that you study your math and physics intently - go beyond the class if they are boring you. I think that these high school classes are good for one thing only, knowing where the pace of the slowest kid is - that way you can blaze ahead.

 

[Oerg]

Iam not finished...

then by how much do you intend to finsih ealier by cramping your credits?

 

[malawi_glenn]

then by how much do you intend to finsih ealier by cramping your credits?

since I have swiched university and program, I'll be finished 1year after my plans ;)

 

[Hydrargyrum]

Why settle for less than being the next Newton?

I didn't attend much high school - I went to college early; however, when I was there, I studied at my own pace. I was quite the fan of reading my entire textbook then sleeping through most of the lectures. Needless to say, I didn't make many friends with the staff.

However, I suggest that you study your math and physics intently - go beyond the class if they are boring you. I think that these high school classes are good for one thing only, knowing where the pace of the slowest kid is - that way you can blaze ahead.

I do go beyond my classes. I'm teaching myself calculus and it's pretty easily sometimes, much easier than algebra. And the Newton part, I know no one is going smarter than him or Joseph Lagrange, so there's no point in trying to be.

 

[BioCore]

I have always wondered something, how is it that people like Einstein, Max Planck, and all those other great scientists generally absorbed the material so well. Did they really do so many questions or did these guys just fully understand and master the concepts somehow.

The reason I ask is that I have heard this from many Professors and I sometimes tend to believe this. If you constantly keep doing questions, all you will be learning is how to do those specific types of questions, but will not be able to apply your "knowledge" to other question forms.

 

[maverick_starstrider]

In response to BioCore:

Guys like that tend to develop larger than life persona's and history's and one hear stories about them never doing work and such but I'm sure they worked extroardinarily hard and were a little lucky. However, I think a big part of people like that as well is that they LOVED their field and couldn't get enough of it so even though they may not have been "studying" they were often increasing their understanding (einstein used to, apparently, read maxwell's original work "for fun").

As for me I never studied in high school and in undergrad I worked maybe 5-10 hours a week and went to maybe 30% of my classes (I had some crap teachers and classes were so early). And my grades weren't great but they were enough to get me into grad school. I haven't started my masters yet but I imagine I will study a fair bit more since I will be confined to a kind of 9-5 environment with TAing and such. (and mandatory classes). I also, however, love learning about physics and math in my free-time, I just hate in undergrad classes where you really don't LEARN about a field of physics you just understand the 3 to 4 problems that the prof did on the board and regurgitate them come final. (i.e. after taking E&M I didn't feel like I understood a thing about it and had absolutely no physical intuition for it but I could solve for the electric field due to a cylinder, a ring, a sphere etc. like nobodies business).

 

[uman]

I'm pretty sure teaching yourself calculus counts as "studying".

Also, calculus is easier than algebra? You must not have a very rigorous calc book...

 

[uman]

Also, there's a quote "if you shoot for the moon and miss, you'll still land among the stars". I forget who said it.

The point is that although I promise you will never be as good as Isaac Newton, that doesn't mean there's no point in trying to be.

 

[vladittude0583]

My Opinion

I have always wondered something, how is it that people like Einstein, Max Planck, and all those other great scientists generally absorbed the material so well. Did they really do so many questions or did these guys just fully understand and master the concepts somehow.

The reason I ask is that I have heard this from many Professors and I sometimes tend to believe this. If you constantly keep doing questions, all you will be learning is how to do those specific types of questions, but will not be able to apply your "knowledge" to other question forms.

I am a physics major myself after much time spent being a medicine and pharmacy major. Ultimately, I realized just how much I love science and mathematics especially in the field of physics. During my years spent working on prerequisite courses such as Biology and Chemistry for medical/pharmacy school, physics was the only course that actually challenged and forced me to study for my grades; I ultimately made A's in both General Physics I & II along with Physics w/Calculus I & II. The prerequisite courses for medicine/pharmacy were easy A's for me and never thought of them as challenging nor were they actual courses requiring much intelligence, except in the form of memorization; physics on the other hand forces you to think more logically and critically in terms of the physical world and how it undermines Biology & Chemistry along with all the other disciplines of mathematics and science.

Anyhow, in regards to your question about how does one really learn physics, etc. I have noticed in my years doing undergraduate physics courses, you really must have an imagination along with the mathematical intuitions necessary in solving physics problems. Its different if one person has equations in front of them and just solves physics problems by plug & chug compared to one who really understands the principles of physics and how it applies to the problem itself. Understanding and imagination is the key to winning over in Physics. I will tell you right now that I have helped several people with their physics studies and that the one thing I always tell them is that you have to think logically and also ask yourself if the answers make sense. This type of feeling is just something one develops who has a passion for physics and not for one that just needs to take the course because it is a requirement. I for one have a passion for it and therefore feel more close to the subject than the average person. Its kind of a relationship thing... lol

Another thing too is the mathematics. Many will tell you that mathematics is the language of Physics, however, you must have a general knowledge of the mathematical rules and its implications in the calculations for physics to make sense. Anyhow, that is all I have to say for now.

 

[ok123jump]

I have always wondered something, how is it that people like Einstein, Max Planck, and all those other great scientists generally absorbed the material so well. Did they really do so many questions or did these guys just fully understand and master the concepts somehow.

The reason I ask is that I have heard this from many Professors and I sometimes tend to believe this. If you constantly keep doing questions, all you will be learning is how to do those specific types of questions, but will not be able to apply your "knowledge" to other question forms.

I support what has been said by the previous posters.

I would also like to add that Richard Feynman talks in-depth about his view of problems and how to view scientific results in his book "Surely, you must be joking Mr. Feynmann". You should check that out.

 

[tronter]

ed witten did all the problems in his textbooks. I don't think he was a child prodigy. Shows you that practice really makes a difference.

 

[Proggle]

Balance is, in my opinion, the key to success. I'm a 4.0 physics/math student at a well-recognized school, and study about 5-10 hours a week.

The human body is not a machine for studying, but one with many complicated needs and desires. I have found that when I study instead of exercising, sleeping well, eating well. spending time with friends and family and doing mundane activities once in a while, my academic efficiency rapidly diminishes. When I feel well and motivated, I have a much easier time acquiring information and understanding concepts. My concentration and creativity for problem solving also seem to be much better.

So in general, I would say it's better to maximize the efficiency of your study time rather than cramming in more than 20 hours a week. A few hours where you are really concentrated and feel the motivation to learn can be much better than forcing yourself into long study sessions and missing on other important activities for your person.

 

[bravernix]

Balance is, in my opinion, the key to success. I'm a 4.0 physics/math student at a well-recognized school, and study about 5-10 hours a week.

The human body is not a machine for studying, but one with many complicated needs and desires. I have found that when I study instead of exercising, sleeping well, eating well. spending time with friends and family and doing mundane activities once in a while, my academic efficiency rapidly diminishes. When I feel well and motivated, I have a much easier time acquiring information and understanding concepts. My concentration and creativity for problem solving also seem to be much better.

So in general, I would say it's better to maximize the efficiency of your study time rather than cramming in more than 20 hours a week. A few hours where you are really concentrated and feel the motivation to learn can be much better than forcing yourself into long study sessions and missing on other important activities for your person.

You are definitely right that balance is necessary to be successful. However, most people studying physics and math will need to put in more than 1 or 2 hours a day to get a 4.0. Either you are extremely gifted, your program is not rigorous, or you are still a first or second year student. Generally, it is not hard to "cram" in 20 hours a week of studying and even take weekends off. I can guarantee that if you go to graduate school you will not be successful studying an hour a day.

 

[Nick M]

I just finished taking Calculus II, Physics II, Chemistry II, and Linear Algebra this past spring.
Understanding Calculus II and Chemistry II was fairly easy - an hour of reading and an hour to complete the homework sets (per lecture). Linear Algebra took a couple hours to comprehend the reading for each lecture, but once I understood the material the problems could be completed in about an hour (each lecture). Physics II was a beast. At least 2 hours of reading and 2 hours of problem sets for each lecture.

So with 3 lectures for each math class and 2 lectures for the sciences (the other parts were labs that required about 2 hours outside of class) I spent about 30 hours a week to keep up. This got me two A's and two A-'s (a 3.8, with a 3.9 cumulative).

I normally get everything done by Saturday morning, leaving the weekend to decompress. One weird thing I do is to keep a list of topics being covered in my classes on my iPhone. I'm constantly reviewing these lists and re-explaining the material to myself. This system really helps bring everything together. Sometimes people catch me talking to myself going over the material verbally - sometimes even using hand gestures (haha). I usually just tell them I'm okay so long as I don't answer myself.

 

[bravernix]

That sounds about right to me, Nick M!

 

[rootX]

I also spend same amount of time (about 5 hours per day and 20 hours over weekend)
I lose lots of time while going and coming to classes - eating food. Also sometimes, it gets way hard to concentrate but I just keep on going.

I don't read a lot but I just keep on solving problems from my textbooks. I don't pay enough attention to lecture notes (they just teach us basic things - so I need textbooks to get stuff in depth and confront difficult problems. More problems you see, better you get at solving them )

I think it is very hard to get really high marks if you want balance in your life. All people around me have so many other commitments

 

[ekrim]

I pretty much just do homework and leave studying til the night before the test. It's a horrible system since I understand nothing until the test comes around, but it's worked so far. When I'm busy with research in the lab, TAing, or homework, actually understanding the material gets pushed aside.