No, I am not asking which is better, I know memory techniques are better and with training, a lot more effective than rote. They make studying and memorization a lot more fun and I have already invested too much in memory techniques to go back
.
So my point is comparing ‘normal’ studying and memory assisted studying. I wasn’t a ‘bad’ student in secondary school, in fact I was often accused of being intelligent. Before I entered university, I read some materials in preparation and forgot most of their content after some time, I think that’s what ignited the spark to better learn the memory techniques.
In secondary school, I got along just fine with nothing more than a few acrostics and acronyms here and there and simple word mnemonics, a lot of which were hastily formed for an exam or test and forgotten soon after. I read Harry Lorayne’s book in my final year of school but hardly used the techniques, I can actually remember only one actual usage of the link method for school work. Mostly just simple visualizations.
When I entered university, I noticed to my utmost dismay that I could not recall anything after reading a whole page. In fact I have tried active recall with a paragraph and failed 
, I could maybe remember the main gist of the chapter (of course, I consciously chose the topic) but hardly anything on the specific page. I think this would have been better if I tried by subtopics instead. I was worried my memory was somehow failing, so I spent time analysing my method from secondary school and comparing to my university experience.
Here are my findings, they maybe correct or not:
- In secondary school, I hardly engaged in long-term study (studying without an exam or test approaching) I mainly practised calculations and then read for theory exams days before or on the morning of the exam (this may be a cause of my avoidance of reviews?). I have done the opposite in university, starting with theory subjects ( I didn’t still finish any) and now trying to play catch-up with calculations that need constant practice, can I just say, I regret this. But at the end I am going for a career with a lot of theory (MEDICINE) so I need to get better at this.
- Looking back, I don’t think I really tried active recall as I am trying now, my method of reading was more of reading main points in my note, do maybe definitions, features those kind of things, not normally (casually) but trying to memorize them, I think my main method was logical connections.
- In secondary school, the material was a lot less condensed, and a lot was very logical so I could just read main points, and expand on them if needed in an essay exam after all I was in the class, so I have a basic understanding of the concepts.
- The teachers were a lot better then and notes were really enough to get me through the exam. Now, my lecturers do not cover the course outline, the learning conditions are not conducive and I sometimes unavoidably miss lectures.There are also no concise notes that I am sure the exams won’t exceed which leaves me with a large volume of materials to cover and I am not sure what the main points in any given topic are. A lecturer went as far as advising us to read beyond the course outline
and nowadays I seem to have an opposite reaction to pressure (more pressure makes me want to rest more
) - The only exception to my not engaging in long term studying was for a final exam, which combined knowledge from three years of senior secondary school which into an exam on four subjects, and as I think about it now, I must have been saved by constant practice of the past questions, so for most new topics I approached, I already had ‘hooks’ for the information due to having come across it in past questions before and/or after studying.
So here I am again, I have had a bittersweet relationship with memory techniques, sometimes even thinking about giving them up, other times wondering how my life will be without them. Now, while reading, I can actively engage with the material deciding which are the main points and encoding those, helps me focus and makes studying very interesting not to mention it takes care of the active recall problem. Though I usually end up just skimming and picking main points, I know it will be better to actually read and generate a keyword from understanding of each paragraph and then encode this, it was in attempting to do this, I discovered my bad active recall extended to paragraphs, I think I should find my limit, one or two (hopefully more) sentences, encode at the limit and gradually synthesize the memory images for paragraphs maybe later pages. I think I should try some things more before drawing conclusions (I replied somone in this forum talking about my whole circle around and back to memory palace for studying) I seem to make bad (rash) judgements sometimes and it can cost me time. But sometimes I think that I think too much and should just make decisions and see the results.
At last, the main reason I started this post, I seem to have noticed that I don’t do much better than those with no techniques (we haven’t written any exam yet but just from little questions and answers). Most of my school mates don’t use techniques as far as I know apart from the obvious acronyms and acrostics. I know some people maybe using techniques without realising (I have gone around asking) someone told me about attaching the information to the place she’s reading, another talked about “being the story” and some may not be disclosing all of their methods. I can do stuff that they likely cannot do and don’t need to do but they seem better with actual school stuff. I feel kind of jealous of them that I am putting in all this effort and they seem to be natural at it. Appearances may be deceiving, I know and they seem to put in more time and effort than I do, but I doubt I can remember to any reasonable degree without techniques.
Sorry, this was so long. Any input on this will be appreciated.