After a long while, I'm writing an examination. This is basically a certification examination which is a step in registering with the exchange as a dealer, so I didn't expect to really "learn" much in the process of preparation. Most certification examinations just leverage on knowledge you already picked up in the past, but this one is different, and is a function of almost completely new information. So it's brought back memories.
Back in the day, I'd developed something of a specialty when appearing for multiple choice examinations. I had found that it was far more effective to dive into things like sample questions, end - of - chapter questions, mock exams etc because it forced you to draw out your memory rather than stuff something in. It probably also contributed to success in a more direct and efficient way because there was some finite likelihood that similar questions would actually appear in the paper. The one casualty in the process was actually learning about the subject - but back in the day, who cared :)
What I probably didn't realise, is that learning was still happening in a passive way.
Over the years, things changed. With higher education, examinations became tougher (and not always multiple choice either). It was now important to actually learn the basics of the subject and figure out solutions as a logical offshoot of those basics. I'd frown upon someone who just looked at the answer and treat it as the endgame, because somehow it collided with the sanctity of learning. I began to look down on, what was in effect, my own method of learning and getting by.
Now I've come almost full circle. This time, the examination is a step in something much bigger. It's one of the pre-requisites for a bigger process, rather than being the only one. I can only afford so much time to prepare, regardless of my subject interest. It's also more important that I get this done efficiently without much ado, so that brings its own clarity.
That makes me wonder about this whole "learning for the sake of learning and interest" thing. We always frown upon blind and rote learning - starry eyed ingenuity always makes for better pop culture. But maybe one goes through phases where there are other, more important things than pure learning. Maybe it's each one's tendency to their own. In such cases, it's probably far more effective to allow romantic illusions of learning and discovery to play out in the background!
Back in the day, I'd developed something of a specialty when appearing for multiple choice examinations. I had found that it was far more effective to dive into things like sample questions, end - of - chapter questions, mock exams etc because it forced you to draw out your memory rather than stuff something in. It probably also contributed to success in a more direct and efficient way because there was some finite likelihood that similar questions would actually appear in the paper. The one casualty in the process was actually learning about the subject - but back in the day, who cared :)
What I probably didn't realise, is that learning was still happening in a passive way.
Over the years, things changed. With higher education, examinations became tougher (and not always multiple choice either). It was now important to actually learn the basics of the subject and figure out solutions as a logical offshoot of those basics. I'd frown upon someone who just looked at the answer and treat it as the endgame, because somehow it collided with the sanctity of learning. I began to look down on, what was in effect, my own method of learning and getting by.
Now I've come almost full circle. This time, the examination is a step in something much bigger. It's one of the pre-requisites for a bigger process, rather than being the only one. I can only afford so much time to prepare, regardless of my subject interest. It's also more important that I get this done efficiently without much ado, so that brings its own clarity.
That makes me wonder about this whole "learning for the sake of learning and interest" thing. We always frown upon blind and rote learning - starry eyed ingenuity always makes for better pop culture. But maybe one goes through phases where there are other, more important things than pure learning. Maybe it's each one's tendency to their own. In such cases, it's probably far more effective to allow romantic illusions of learning and discovery to play out in the background!
No comments:
Post a Comment