Why Do I Go Blank on Tricky Exam Questions Despite Understanding the Theory?

  • Thread starter Thread starter smart_worker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics
AI Thread Summary
Preparing for competitive exams can be challenging, especially when transitioning from theoretical understanding to solving tricky numerical problems. A common issue is that students may feel they grasp the concepts but struggle with application in exams. To address this, practicing a variety of problems is essential. Engaging with solved example questions before attempting unsolved ones helps reinforce understanding. It's important to attempt problems independently and check answers against solutions to identify areas needing improvement. If solutions are unavailable for certain examples, attempting those problems can still provide valuable practice. Building a solid foundation with simpler problems can enhance confidence and skill when tackling more complex questions. Overall, consistent practice and self-assessment are key strategies for mastering the material and improving performance in competitive exams.
smart_worker
Messages
131
Reaction score
1
i am trying to prepare for competitive exams.i purchased halliday and resnick.when i try to learn a chapter.i first go through the theory part.then when i come back to solve the numericals,my mind goes completely blank.i understood the chapter but when i come up with some tricky questions,i just don't know how.the same goes with chemistry and math.my iq is very low.what should i do to to solve them?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
yeah. I have the same thing, to some extent. I can read through a chapter, or listen to a lecture, and walk away thinking that I have a fairly good understanding. But then if I'm given a tricky question, I sometimes just have no idea. I think this is because understanding the subject is on a continuum. In other words, you can understand a bit, or understand well, or understand really well. And often I don't even realize if I understand something a bit, or really well. I think doing practice questions can help you realize how well you know the subject. Therefore, I always have to practice a few questions, or even just make up a suitable physics problem, so that I can test how well I know it. And if I don't know it so well, then I re-learn the stuff that I was not so good with, and practice again. That's how I do it anyway, everyone is different, but this might help you too.
 
BruceW said:
Therefore, I always have to practice a few questions, or even just make up a suitable physics problem, so that I can test how well I know it. And if I don't know it so well, then I re-learn the stuff that I was not so good with, and practice again. That's how I do it anyway, everyone is different, but this might help you too.

What exactly do you mean by practising? Is it like understanding the solved example questions and then try to solve the unsolved ones?
 
yeah, I mean ideally all the example questions would have solutions. And for each one, I would try my best to get the answer myself (without looking at the solution), and then check it with the solution. And if I got it wrong, then keep practising until I can do the problem all myself without looking at the given solution halfway through.

But if some of the examples don't have solutions, then for those I guess you can't tell if you got it right. But you can still try them anyway, it will still be good practice, as long as you give it a good attempt. Also, you can always just think up example problems in your head to practise. But this will maybe be less efficient for studying, since the examples in your book will usually be pretty good ones.
 
You need to understand the concepts thoroughly and need to do more simpler or sample problems to get used to the material. Then, you should do better solving the more difficult problems.
 
I’ve been looking through the curricula of several European theoretical/mathematical physics MSc programs (ETH, Oxford, Cambridge, LMU, ENS Paris, etc), and I’m struck by how little emphasis they place on advanced fundamental courses. Nearly everything seems to be research-adjacent: string theory, quantum field theory, quantum optics, cosmology, soft matter physics, black hole radiation, etc. What I don’t see are the kinds of “second-pass fundamentals” I was hoping for, things like...
TL;DR Summary: I want to do a PhD in applied math but I hate group theory, is this a big problem? Hello, I am a second-year math and physics double major with a minor in data science. I just finished group theory (today actually), and it was my least favorite class in all of university so far. It doesn't interest me, and I am also very bad at it compared to other math courses I have done. The other courses I have done are calculus I-III, ODEs, Linear Algebra, and Prob/Stats. Is it a...

Similar threads

Back
Top