my style of learning (as a double major and varsity athlete)

the goal of studying is quite simple: do it as little as possible (while achieving good results, of course). learning itself is something we've partaken in since birth, yet despite being constantly bombarded with new information (especially as students), we are never truly taught how to effectively and efficiently learn. some have attempted to study by trying new techniques seen online, but they have not truly synthesized these 'techniques' into core paradigms they can apply in a more personalized manner. as a private tutor and university teaching assistant, i have taught my methods to many students and seen them achieve substantial improvements. thus, the goal of this entry is to present this synthesis for you as principles, rather than more copy-paste techniques.

studying as a skill

i'm an extremely strong believer that studying is a skill that must be developed through self-evaluation and refinement. it's not something you can truly perfect. i gained this notion in my final year of high school. once i received my offer for my top choice school program, i decided to take a more experimental approach to studying. rather than continuing what i was doing or giving in to 'senioritis', i began to test different studying methods for each test. these included using flashcards, mindmapping, and many techniques you see online (feynman technique, blurting, etc.). from this practice, i generalized learning into 3 forms: memorization, application, and relation. no subject of study is inherently one or the other. rather, each subject contains different proportions of each form. for instance, musculoskeletal anatomy is skewed towards memorization, whereas calculus is skewed towards application.

the rest of this entry will go into each of these three forms of learning. you will notice overlap in my explanations of each (especially as they are refined). you will also see that the techniques described are actually quite simple: studying should not be complicated. many techniques you see online are complex derivatives of the ones presented in this entry. of course, adding complexity does not necessarily add value: in many cases it actually takes it away.

memorization

memorization is, of course, the act of committing facts to memory. this is an extremely important aspect of studying (such as with the aforementioned anatomy example). however, it is also the most misused. when we overemphasize this aspect of our learning, we may struggle to work with information when it's presented in new forms. this form is also, from my experience, the lowest return on investment for the time it costs to study.

'but if memorization is so bad, why should we do it at all?' i can hear you wondering. first, a given fact could be quite isolated from the rest of the content in a given subject: there really isn't much that can be done to connect it to the rest of the content in a relational manner, so memorization is best in this case. second, when done properly, memorization can act as a more passive form of relational learning (more on this soon).

memorization-based learning is the easiest way to partake in active recall and spaced repitition (you have likely heard these concepts before). the main technique to use for this is of course flashcards. specifically, anki has the best flashcard system due to its scheduling mechanic. going into detail on the best settings for your flashcard decks is beyond the scope of this entry (there are many resources online for this).

however, flashcards can also become quite overwhelming. i have previously found myself in a 'flashcard hell' when i have made so many flashcards for a given subject (hundreds to thousands) to the point where i could not even complete them in a reasonable amount of time, much less actually learn the content.

so how do we make flashcards that thoroughly encapsulate important content whilst not overwhelming a user in numbers? to answer this, let's think about the anatomy of a flashcard:

a typical flashcard has a term (front) and a definition (back). to fix this, instead of giving a flashcard to each term/definition, we will create flashcards that ask questions with answers that encapsulate multiple terms. for instance, instead of having separate flashcards for concepts X and Y, we can make one flashcard that asks "how does X relate to Y?". an answer to this flashcard requires an implicit understanding of both X and Y, but it also goes deeper into their influences on each other, thereby decreasing the number of flashcards whilst increasing the depth of understanding. building implicit knowledge requirements into your flashcards is something most people don't do. you don't need a separate flashcard for information that is implicit to understanding something else.

this can be taken even further. let's say concept Z is a result of X and Y. instead of having a flashcard for each of the 3 concepts, we can have one flashcard: "why is Z true?". now we have covered all of these topics in a single flashcard.

application

application-based learning also needs little introduction. it is merely the application of knowledge to solve problems or understand case studies. this is also an extremely important aspect of learning. if you haven't solved any calculus problems before, you probably won't be able to solve them in a timely manner, regardless of how well you understand the concepts.

however, once again, this form of learning can often be misused. application-based learning is more about integration of concepts and validation of understanding than it is about deriving new information. when overemphasized, important topics can be missed if they are not encountered in problems/cases, or learners can begin to memorize the questions themselves rather than deriving meaningful understanding. application-based study, in my opinion, shouldn't be emphasized until about 2 weeks out from an examination. memorization and relation should take precedence before this point, since they build the foundation of knowledge and intuition that application draws on. application is more of a validation step (confirming that understanding is solid) and a way to build efficiency and speed in problem solving, rather than a way to build understanding itself.

the typical medium for this style of learning is practice problems, which might make you think it's limited to academic courses. that's not the case, however. as a simple example, i am not a computer science or software engineering student. all of my knowledge about computer science and machine learning is self-taught. leet-code was an amazing resource for practice in improving my skills in data structures and algorithms.

relation

relation-based learning is the most important, yet most underutilized form of learning. as humans, we are evolutionarily prone to learn through relationships. a simple example: when you see bear tracks in a forest, you have a certain level of confidence that there is a bear nearby, and thus it may not be safe. you have not actually seen the bear, but you are able to relate the information you have to this conclusion. the peak level of understanding we can obtain in a subject is intuition, which we get by understanding the relationships between information, not necessarily the discrete topics themselves.

relational learning is all about finding how concepts connect to one another. sometimes this might be location, category, appearance, functionality, etc. there is no single correct way to relate concepts. it is about tailoring the approach to your own intuition. sometimes a new topic might come along that is hard to fit in the relationship web that you have built. in this case, it's okay and even preferable to go back to square one and remap all of your connections to form an even better intuition. developing an understanding of these relationships should make up the majority of your study time.

the best way to practice this style of study is through mindmapping. i don't mean through complex illustrations. i mean through thoughtful grouping and connections between concepts. some connections might be more relevant than others; some topics might be more important than others. how can you emphasize that visually? again, there is no one correct answer.

mindmapping is the skill that must be developed the most. when starting, you will usually not be able to derive much from your illustration, and that's ok. figure out what makes sense to you, what doesn't, and draw again. as you do this more and more, you'll get better at creating maps for new content with less revision. these sessions of studying will be the most cumbersome and time-consuming. however, the return on investment here will be unlike anything you have seen before. this requires the most active engagement with the material possible. you aren't copying the connections that are taught to you; you are instead deriving these connections yourself.

putting it all together

none of these three forms exists in isolation, and no subject is studied well by leaning on just one of them. the real skill is in figuring out the right proportions for a given subject, and the right sequence across your study timeline.

start with relation. as soon as you're introduced to new material, begin mapping how it connects to what you already know. this is slow and uncomfortable at first, but it's what builds the intuition that makes everything downstream easier. this should take up the bulk of your early study time.

use memorization alongside this, but sparingly and deliberately. reach for flashcards mainly for the facts that resist being connected to anything else, and build your flashcards to require implicit understanding of multiple concepts rather than one isolated term at a time. if you find yourself making hundreds of shallow flashcards, that's a sign you're substituting memorization for relation, not supplementing it.

save application for last, roughly the final two weeks before an exam. by then, your relational map and your memorized facts should already be in place. application is where you stress-test that foundation, expose the gaps you missed, and build the speed and fluency you'll need under exam conditions. it is validation, not discovery.

this sequence — relation first, memorization woven throughout, application at the end — isn't a rigid formula. the exact proportions will shift depending on how memorization-heavy or application-heavy the subject is. but the order matters more than the ratio: you can't efficiently apply or memorize what you haven't first understood, and you can't understand a subject by only memorizing or only drilling problems. treat studying as the skill it is, keep evaluating what's working, and refine from there.