Is it normal to forget most previously learned material?

[RoshanBBQ]

To woopy:
You have to remember the classes you are taking right now are easy pieces of cake. If what you say is true, there will be classes in the future difficult enough where even viewing the solutions of old tests will not help. I also find it odd your classes have such identical tests. I know some of my classes do, but all of them? No way.

on topic:
Forgetting a lot of specific solutions and a lot of memory-based stuff is normal. But it's forgotten in such a way where you realize you need to know it. For example, if I forgot exactly what the time shift property is of the Fourier transform and I encounter it in a class, I will still remember: "I need to use this property that I've forgotten." Then it takes about 5 seconds on Google or 2 minutes finding and looking it up in a book to acquire what I need. And if I notice a whole topic in a new class completely hinges on some forgotten skill from another class (e.g. perhaps I need to be able to do Fourier transforms in general), a small 20 minute review of the material should bring me up to speed -- the worst case scenario being I need to reread parts of a textbook for an hour or so (e.g. rereading, and skipping parts I know I know, a chapter on Fourier transforms).

edit: Though, there are certain types of information that are so fundamental I think it is a bit ridiculous to forget. What that material is changes from degree to degree. An example would be basic differentiation and integration. Or despite me using it as an example of what has been forgotten, for EE, forgetting Fourier transforms is a bit ridiculous. I have the entire tables in my head. When I was in a stochastic processes course for engineers, my eyes lit up when I saw we were doing frequency stuff since it's so fresh in my mind. I even got a problem 'wrong' in the class since the TA and no one else in the course remembered the impulse scaling property. Since I secured a near 100 in the course, I never bothered bringing it up, though I felt a bit like injustice had transpired on that day. And this TA was a holder of a prestigious fellowship at my university. He should have known better.

 

[Shaun_W]

I forget most of what I've learned immediately after the exam! Things that I got As in, the next semester I had absolutely no idea of even the fundamentals of.

It's all about how you learn. If you rote learn the exams then you'll naturally forget much of what you've learned and be unable to apply the knowledge in any situation outside of the exam questions you've been practising.

I'd say that most students do this, and the education system (at least in the UK) actively encourages it. Firstly, that's likely exactly how your teachers got through their exams, then secondly when you get to university, lecturers vary rarely have time for undergraduate students because that's not what they're paid for.

But the end results are the same; the student who rote learns a few days before the exam gets an A as does the student who spends the entire semester studying and actively learning the material. Universities don't give a damn about creating forms of assessment that can weed out those who actually understand the material from those who just learn to answer exam papers, so why should students give a damn about learning it? Most students don't like their subject anyway, they only chose it because they hated it the least or have been told it was respected and have noticed that almost every single job nowadays requires a degree. And for most jobs it doesn't matter whether you understand your subject or whether you rote learned it, it's nothing more than a certificate that the company use to filter out those who have one from those who don't.

I see a lot of people are raging at Woopydalan because he admits he rote learns, doesn't study much during term time and doesn't really give a damn about the material being taught. I can understand why people who have a passion for maths, physics, chemistry etc. are not happy at this, but Woopydalan is typical of modern students. Woopydalan also demonstrates understanding of how to play or cheat the system, and this alone is something that is highly sought after by many businesses. I'd much rather employ someone who can get the same results but with much, much less time spent.

Overall it's not the fault of students or university lecturers that this goes on but it's the government's for trying to cram so many people into university and industry's for stopping recruiting non-graduates.

 

[deluks917]

I only really remember what I have learned if I work through it in detail from the beginning.

 

[genericusrnme]

I didn't read through this whole thread but one thing I've noticed is that a lot of people think that lecturers are there to learn for them and that they don't have to put much effort in on their end or think that taking notes (even following those set layouts they teach now that are supposed to 'maximise' your retention or some other rubbish) constitutes learning and understanding.

Since I started focusing on education and started teaching myself material outside of classes I found that I've never had a problem with remembering stuff I've covered previously (even stuff from the first chapter of a book I may have started to read before deciding that it wasn't suitable).

I agree with what Shaun_W says

I'd say that most students do this, and the education system (at least in the UK) actively encourages it.

A lot of the time you are taught to pass exams rather than understand material, you're even encouraged to guess on multiple choice questions because 'theres a 1 in n chance you'll get a mark'.

The rest I don't agree with, why would you want to employ someone who, instead of knowing what they should know, has to look everything up and only knows how to work with it if you give them a week or so to prepare, I'd rather have someone who knows what they're doing straight away.

 

[Illuminerdi]

When I was younger, I used to have this problem, as well. I don't anymore, though. The key thing to remember is math, but don't just memorize formulas. You should memorize, abstractly, how to problem-solve and derive everything instantaneously on your own.

In the sciences, virtually every law of nature can be described with a differential equation, so you only have to commit one form of said equation to memory, making your memory much more efficient. (i.e., ∑F=ma for deriving simple harmonic oscillations, falling motion, etc.)

 

[jk]

To the OP, good luck getting through upper division classes and medical school using your strategy

 

[smashbrohamme]

Honestly, what difference does it make?

If the kid is smart enough to memorize tests then he will be smart enough to learn from "On the Job Training"

He may not realize it; but he is studying; he just has a slight advantage because he knows exactly what the test is going to be on. He is not completely taking old tests and getting A's. He has to be putting in some work.

Half the engineer's we hire have to get specialized/trained for months in a general area anyways before they become productive. I never see any of them whip out old math theorems to learn something on the job; lol. You really think electrical engineer's are breaking out a pencil/pad instead of a fluke meter?

We use programs to number crunch. I don't even want to start listing electrical software programs that completely do everything for you.

Anyone remember HTML? Guess what we use now?

Drafting with a board and T-square...Pro/E and Catia all day baby! and I can manipulate it however I want. You want a 3/4 hole there? no problem..done in 3 seconds..you want me to make you a assembly drawing with a exploded view at a certain orientation showing transparent backup geometry? Drafting T-square..a week project...I can do it in 10 minutes in Pro/E...

Want me to run kinematics? How about I route a cable through resistors using logical references on a imported wirelist using E3??

You go ahead and paper and pencil it; I will be out in the field prototyping my designs while you double check your equations! :)

By the way to the kid who says he can pass from using old tests...that won't fly in the later classes; so you better start learning what a 8 hour study session is.

 

[genericusrnme]

Honestly, what difference does it make?

If the kid is smart enough to memorize tests then he will be smart enough to learn from "On the Job Training"

He may not realize it; but he is studying; he just has a slight advantage because he knows exactly what the test is going to be on. He is not completely taking old tests and getting A's. He has to be putting in some work.

Half the engineer's we hire have to get specialized/trained for months in a general area anyways before they become productive. I never see any of them whip out old math theorems to learn something on the job; lol. You really think electrical engineer's are breaking out a pencil/pad instead of a fluke meter?

We use programs to number crunch. I don't even want to start listing electrical software programs that completely do everything for you.

Anyone remember HTML? Guess what we use now?

Drafting with a board and T-square...Pro/E and Catia all day baby! and I can manipulate it however I want. You want a 3/4 hole there? no problem..done in 3 seconds..you want me to make you a assembly drawing with a exploded view at a certain orientation showing transparent backup geometry? Drafting T-square..a week project...I can do it in 10 minutes in Pro/E...

Want me to run kinematics? How about I route a cable through resistors using logical references on a imported wirelist using E3??

You go ahead and paper and pencil it; I will be out in the field prototyping my designs while you double check your equations! :)

By the way to the kid who says he can pass from using old tests...that won't fly in the later classes; so you better start learning what a 8 hour study session is.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make here...

 

[RoshanBBQ]

I didn't read through this whole thread but one thing I've noticed is that a lot of people think that lecturers are there to learn for them and that they don't have to put much effort in on their end or think that taking notes (even following those set layouts they teach now that are supposed to 'maximise' your retention or some other rubbish) constitutes learning and understanding.

Since I started focusing on education and started teaching myself material outside of classes I found that I've never had a problem with remembering stuff I've covered previously (even stuff from the first chapter of a book I may have started to read before deciding that it wasn't suitable).

I agree with what Shaun_W saysA lot of the time you are taught to pass exams rather than understand material, you're even encouraged to guess on multiple choice questions because 'theres a 1 in n chance you'll get a mark'.

The rest I don't agree with, why would you want to employ someone who, instead of knowing what they should know, has to look everything up and only knows how to work with it if you give them a week or so to prepare, I'd rather have someone who knows what they're doing straight away.

I have for a long time thought students who could easily make As get Bs or lower because they don't read the textbook and only use the lectures! Though I didn't immediately materialize it to apply to this topic at hand, I have to say I agree with this.

The kinds of things I forget are the kinds I studied just to get over with them and out of necessity (i.e. I didn't like power in EE, so I studied for the A but have since forgotten most of the theory) whereas things I studied out of interest I remember much more (i.e. I liked pattern recognition).

I think the lecturer observation is a symptom instead of a cause. The real cause is enthusiasm of the material. So in a sense, if someone only attends lectures, it's plausible they don't really have interest in the material, explaining why they don't study it enthusiastically after class. The prior statement brings about two explanations of lower memory retention: lower amounts of studying AND lower amounts of enthusiasm while studying. I studied A LOT for power electronics just to get the A, but the efficiency was brought down by how bored I was with it (low enthusiasm) -- as well as the retention afterward. My goals while doing HW in that class were to solve all possible problems likely on a test. Once I felt I gained that knowledge, I promptly stopped studying. For classes I enjoy, my goals are to see what cool things I can learn, meaning I try to reach a deeper level of understanding beyond what is needed on a test just out of joy. The efficiency of studying as well as retention after studying amplify due to my desires.

 

[PhizKid]

I can see how some of the OP's comments can insight some unproductive responses but I think there is, at the very least, honesty in his statements.

What do you think the OP should do?

To the OP, good luck getting through upper division classes and medical school using your strategy

It seems my thread has been hijacked as I am no longer the OP, I guess...

 

[jk]

It seems my thread has been hijacked as I am no longer the OP, I guess...

Oops..sorry. Jumped in the middle

 

[jk]

Honestly, what difference does it make?

If the kid is smart enough to memorize tests then he will be smart enough to learn from "On the Job Training"

He may not realize it; but he is studying; he just has a slight advantage because he knows exactly what the test is going to be on. He is not completely taking old tests and getting A's. He has to be putting in some work.

Half the engineer's we hire have to get specialized/trained for months in a general area anyways before they become productive. I never see any of them whip out old math theorems to learn something on the job; lol. You really think electrical engineer's are breaking out a pencil/pad instead of a fluke meter?

We use programs to number crunch. I don't even want to start listing electrical software programs that completely do everything for you.

Anyone remember HTML? Guess what we use now?

Drafting with a board and T-square...Pro/E and Catia all day baby! and I can manipulate it however I want. You want a 3/4 hole there? no problem..done in 3 seconds..you want me to make you a assembly drawing with a exploded view at a certain orientation showing transparent backup geometry? Drafting T-square..a week project...I can do it in 10 minutes in Pro/E...

Want me to run kinematics? How about I route a cable through resistors using logical references on a imported wirelist using E3??

You go ahead and paper and pencil it; I will be out in the field prototyping my designs while you double check your equations! :)

By the way to the kid who says he can pass from using old tests...that won't fly in the later classes; so you better start learning what a 8 hour study session is.

You know someone had to create those nifty tools you use, right? And that someone had to have a deeper understanding of the principles than you seem to think is necessary. Thing is, if want the really interesting jobs, you'll have to get more than a surface understanding. But if you are content to have the kind of job where all you do is follow directions laid out for you, well.. three is a need for that as well.

They are not very interesting jobs and tend to be the ones to get cut first in a downturn

 

[mesa]

It seems my thread has been hijacked as I am no longer the OP, I guess...

My apologies, somehow I misdirected myself in thinking that Woopydalan was the OP, I went to edit my post but that option is not available?