Just like the textbook mentions a few times, I have been using the strategy of turning headings and subheadings of chapters into questions, then going back after I read the chapter to see how many of the questions I can answer. I discovered this strategy myself and didn’t know it was so recommended or that it even was discovered previously. It makes studying so much thorough and is a great way for me to evaluate my own knowledge. I try to avoid highlighting key points and definitions within the chapters, because based on my past experience with doing that, I tend to rely on just that information and most likely disregard the rest of the material. It’s all about fooling myself into studying more thoroughly.
That's a good strategy. I personally have never used that but it sounds like a good way of metacognitively analyzing your grasp of new material. I have had the same experience with highlighting things in chapters. It is a good way to encode information but so far as grasping all of the ideas it doesn't provide a thorough enough study of the material.
ReplyDeleteI agree too and I like your idea a lot and I think it could be more effective than just highlighting the key points in the chapter. i think it would be more beneficial to me if I overlook the chapter first and then make questions and then answering them as I read the chapter.
ReplyDelete