[TDKR]

I came across an interesting article (errr more like a video) featured on Lifehacker about studying habits.

Bad techniques: highlighting (I’m looking at you Mr. Tim Gearty), re-reading, keyword mnemonics, and cramming

Good techniques: elaborative interrogation, self explanation, and summarization

Great techniques: practice testing and distributed practice

Agree/disagree?

For those who passed part(s) or entire exam with good scores, which of your study techniques was most effective?

REG - 72, 72, 81
BEC - 77
FAR - 70, 81
AUD - 74 "so that's what it feels like." Round 2: 79

Passing the exam is not impossible task. GIVING UP is the only way YOU can make it impossible!

[W_HAMILTON]

I don't know. When it comes down to it, I think everyone has their own learning styles. I actually really like Gearty's teaching style because it jives with how I learn best (i.e., through highlighting and note-taking).

Back in school, I almost never did practice problems to study; instead, I would go over the material over and over and maybe look over problems that we worked in class or examples from the textbook. I felt like if I understood the material, the problems themselves were basically simple math, so why spend time doing simple math when it is the concepts that I needed to worry about? Everyone else was working problems while I was just going through the chapter over and over. And I wouldn't call it rote learning, because now that I am studying for the CPA exam, I find that a lot of the material has still stuck with me.

So, I think the moral of the story is, whatever way works best for you, do that and don't worry about what others consider the “best” way!

REG - 93 (7/30/13)
BEC - 90 (8/19/13)
AUD - 98 (8/31/13)
FAR - 84 (10/19/13)

[W_HAMILTON]

I don't know. When it comes down to it, I think everyone has their own learning styles. I actually really like Gearty's teaching style because it jives with how I learn best (i.e., through highlighting and note-taking).

Back in school, I almost never did practice problems to study; instead, I would go over the material over and over and maybe look over problems that we worked in class or examples from the textbook. I felt like if I understood the material, the problems themselves were basically simple math, so why spend time doing simple math when it is the concepts that I needed to worry about? Everyone else was working problems while I was just going through the chapter over and over. And I wouldn't call it rote learning, because now that I am studying for the CPA exam, I find that a lot of the material has still stuck with me.

So, I think the moral of the story is, whatever way works best for you, do that and don't worry about what others consider the “best” way!

REG - 93 (7/30/13)
BEC - 90 (8/19/13)
AUD - 98 (8/31/13)
FAR - 84 (10/19/13)

[Anonymous]

I'm currently 3 for 3, so haven't passed it entirely yet, but close enough that I feel entitled to give an opinion. 🙂 Especially since I have studied in far less time than many people on here, so my studying has been both effective and efficient. Not that there's anything wrong with studying for longer…just laying the groundwork for my post. That being said, from the list:

Bad techniques:

– highlighting (I'm looking at you Mr. Tim Gearty) – I'd agree with this one. I've never seen the point. *shrug*

– re-reading – When there's time, this can be helpful if you have a good book, so moderate disagreement

– keyword mnemonics – hardcore agreement. Memorizing “2+3=5” is far less helpful than knowing how to count on your fingers – understanding trumps memorization any day

– cramming – This one just varies a lot person to person. If I don't cram, I will fail, because I thrive off that last-minute, high-intensity struggle for knowledge. But, a lot of people really need to sit back and relax right before test-day (or test-time). However, cramming alone is not sufficient – there's so much material in these tests that you have to have at least a bit of time for everything to soak in. How long that is will vary from person to person. But like, most of these tests I've studied under 50 hours. I don't think I could do that all in the week of the exam (like if I was off work), so super cramming doesn't work, but I do usually do 15-20 hours of that in the last 4 days or so before the exam, because that level of cramming is best for me.

Good techniques:

– elaborative interrogation – Umm, interrogation of what/who?

– self explanation – Yes but it doesn't have to be elaborate – I'll read over the right answer to a question I got wrong and mentally connect the dots, say “Oh that's it…” and be on to the next one. That is important, but not everyone needs to actually write it out or even say it in their own words – just depends on how your memory works.

– summarization – Kinda same as above. Yes, but doesn't have to be a big process.

Great techniques:

– practice testing and distributed practice – Through school, I never did this, and didn't see the point. But for the RTRP exam and now for these, I have felt like the practice questions were what carried me through the exams. However, I still see W_HAMILTON's point about doing repetitive math being useless. The reason that I love the practice questions (specifically in Wiley Test Bank, since that's what I use) is that their focus seems to be more on the concepts than on the math. And…if I get one wrong due to the math, I don't stress over it (like if I knew how to do it but typed a number in wrong). For me, the test bank questions ask about the concepts from a different angle, and by doing so help me to flesh out the ideas and concepts. However, I would not advise this without first having a solid understanding of the concepts…I never start in TB till I've finished reading in the book.

[Anonymous]

I'm currently 3 for 3, so haven't passed it entirely yet, but close enough that I feel entitled to give an opinion. 🙂 Especially since I have studied in far less time than many people on here, so my studying has been both effective and efficient. Not that there's anything wrong with studying for longer…just laying the groundwork for my post. That being said, from the list:

Bad techniques:

– highlighting (I'm looking at you Mr. Tim Gearty) – I'd agree with this one. I've never seen the point. *shrug*

– re-reading – When there's time, this can be helpful if you have a good book, so moderate disagreement

– keyword mnemonics – hardcore agreement. Memorizing “2+3=5” is far less helpful than knowing how to count on your fingers – understanding trumps memorization any day

– cramming – This one just varies a lot person to person. If I don't cram, I will fail, because I thrive off that last-minute, high-intensity struggle for knowledge. But, a lot of people really need to sit back and relax right before test-day (or test-time). However, cramming alone is not sufficient – there's so much material in these tests that you have to have at least a bit of time for everything to soak in. How long that is will vary from person to person. But like, most of these tests I've studied under 50 hours. I don't think I could do that all in the week of the exam (like if I was off work), so super cramming doesn't work, but I do usually do 15-20 hours of that in the last 4 days or so before the exam, because that level of cramming is best for me.

Good techniques:

– elaborative interrogation – Umm, interrogation of what/who?

– self explanation – Yes but it doesn't have to be elaborate – I'll read over the right answer to a question I got wrong and mentally connect the dots, say “Oh that's it…” and be on to the next one. That is important, but not everyone needs to actually write it out or even say it in their own words – just depends on how your memory works.

– summarization – Kinda same as above. Yes, but doesn't have to be a big process.

Great techniques:

– practice testing and distributed practice – Through school, I never did this, and didn't see the point. But for the RTRP exam and now for these, I have felt like the practice questions were what carried me through the exams. However, I still see W_HAMILTON's point about doing repetitive math being useless. The reason that I love the practice questions (specifically in Wiley Test Bank, since that's what I use) is that their focus seems to be more on the concepts than on the math. And…if I get one wrong due to the math, I don't stress over it (like if I knew how to do it but typed a number in wrong). For me, the test bank questions ask about the concepts from a different angle, and by doing so help me to flesh out the ideas and concepts. However, I would not advise this without first having a solid understanding of the concepts…I never start in TB till I've finished reading in the book.

[Author]

Replies