[DecayingOrganic]

Anki's key benefits stem from its utilization of two highly supported and extensively researched pedagogical strategies: (1) retrieval practice and (2) spaced repetition. In contrast, the practice of note-taking, which essentially entails summarizing information in one's own words, has been found to have 'low utility' in academic literature. [0]

[0]: https://sci-hub.ru/https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26173288/

[duckmysick]

Depends on the note-taking strategy. From the same paper you cited, section 8.4 Practice testing - Issues for implementation, pages 34-35:

> Another merit of practice testing is that it can be implemented with minimal training. Students can engage in recall-based self-testing in a relatively straightforward fashion. For example, students can self-test via cued recall by creating flashcards (free and low-cost flashcard software is also readily available) or by using the Cornell note-taking system (which involves leaving a blank column when taking notes in class and entering key terms or questions in it shortly after taking notes to use for self-testing when reviewing notes at a later time; for more details, see Pauk & Ross, 2010).

Further explanation: https://lsc.cornell.edu/notes.html#post-1037

The Cornell note-taking system combines moderate and high learning techniques: elaborative interrogation, self-explanation, practice testing, and distributed practice.

If you think about it, creating Anki cards is note-taking in a specific format. Of course you can skip it and use a set prepared by someone else. It would be interesting to test: is creating your own flashcards better for studying than using ready-made ones?

[james-revisoai]

Founder of StudyWand.com here, who received a 15k grant to develop an AI generating flashcard app in 2020 after an earlier prototype.

We've found students more consistently study ready-made cards that are at desirable difficulty (they get about 80% correct) and which are segmented by topic (e.g. semantic grouping of flashcards to tackle "one lesson at a time" like Duolingo). Students would prefer to use pre-made flashcards by other students in their class, then AI flashcards, then create and use their own.

There is limited evidence by Roediger and Karpicke who are the forefathers of retrieval practise that creating cards is also important. Frank Leeming (2002 study Exam-a-day) also showed that motivation when studying is peaked when you ask just a few questions a day, but every working day.

Now one of the vital benefits of retrieval practise with AI over creating your own cards is foresight bias - not mentioned yet in this thread - the fact that particularly in some subjects like Physics, students don't know what they don't know (watch this amazing Veritasium video, it also explains why misconceptions are so handy for learning physics): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eVtCO84MDj8 - basically, if you use AI quizzes (or any prepared subject-specific right/wrong system), you learn quickly where your knowledge sits and what to focus on, and reduce your exam stress. If you just sit their making quizzes, firstly you make questions on things you already know, you overestimate how much you can learn, and you consolidate on your existing strengths, and avoid identifying your own knowledge gaps until later on, which is less effective.

--

To quote from my dissertation experiment on background reading for retrieval practise, the end is about foresight bias a little: Retrieval practice – typically, quizzing - is an exceedingly effective studying mechanism (Roediger & Karpicke, 2006; Roediger & Butler 2011; Bae, Therriault & Redifer, 2017, see Binks 2018 for a review), although underutilized relative to recorded merit, with students vastly preferring to read content (Karpicke & Butler, 2009; Toppino and Cohen, 2009). Notably mature students do engage in practice quizzes more than younger students (Tullis & Maddox, 2020). Undertaking a Quiz (Retrieval practice) can enhance test scores significantly, including web-based quizzes (Daniel & Broida, 2017). Roediger & Karpicke (2006) analysed whether students who solely read content would score differently to students who took a practice quiz, one week after a 5-minute learning session. Students retained information to a higher level in memory after a week with the quiz (56% retained), versus without (42%), despite having read the content less (average 3.4 times) than the control, read-only group (14.2 times). Participants subjectively report preference for regular Quizzing (Leeming, 2002) over final exams, when assessed with the quiz results, with 81% and 83% of participants in two intervention classes recommending Leemings “Exam-a-day” procedure for the next semester, which runs against intuition that students might biases against more exams/quizzes (due to Test Anxiety). Retrieval Practice may increase performance via increasing cognitive load which is generally correlated with score outcomes in (multimedia) learning (Muller et al, 2008). Without adequate alternative stimuli, volume of content could influence results, thus differentiated conditions to control for this possible confound are required when exploring retrieval practice effects (as seen in Renkl 2010 and implemented in Methods). Retrieval practice in middle and high school students can reduce Test Anxiety, when operationalised by “nervousness” (Agarwal et al 2014), though presently no research appears to have analysed the influence of retrieval practice on university students’ Test Anxiety. Quizzing can alleviate foresight bias – overestimation of required studying time – in terms of students appropriately assigning a greater, more realistic study time plan (Soderstrom & Bjork, 2014). Despite the underutilization noted by Karpicke and Butler (2009), quizzing is becoming more common in burgeoning eLearning courses, supported by the research (i.e. Johnson & Johnson, 2006; Leeming, 2002; Glass et al. 2008) demonstrating efficacy in real exam performance.

[JonathanFly]

According to some people (Justin Sung on YouTube is where I heard it, probably, so no idea if credible) you can influence the forgetting-curve and make Anki more effective by having more context, putting knowledge into relationships with other knowledge, etc. It's a multiplier on raw/rote space repetition.

[clbrmbr]

I have found that by adding simple etymologies I can improve my recall of Latin names for plants. The etymology connects an otherwise totally new word to existing word-concepts.

[O__________O]

Really depends on how you’re defining context, since to me there’s concepts like memory chains/ladders, which simply fit sequential memories into a visualization — then there are applications contexts, which actually mirror reality of future use.

Great example of this is topic of memory sports [1], which do use techniques that work, but are likely less useful for actual remembering real world complex information.

[1] https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_sport

[DavidSJ]

I think the benefits are multiplicative here.

As another experienced Anki user, I have found I get much more leverage out of spaced repetition (both in terms of efficiency of memorization, as well as in how useful the information is) when I've first made the knowledge my own and structured it in a way that makes sense to me before creating the cards, rather than just dumping a bunch of pure entropy into the Anki database.

That's not really note-taking per se, but it is ensuring that the stuff I'm trying to memorize isn't pure entropy (which is always more of a challenge to memorize in any event), but rather is part of a larger sense-making structure. The purpose of spaced repetition is to help prevent that structure from decaying; it's not a substitute for having it in the first place.

[tpoacher]

As others already pointed out, the linked article seems to say the reverse of how you interpreted it (though I would agree the terms are a bit ambiguous).

Note taking as parrotting is distinct from note taking as distillation. The latter has much more chance of getting results with proper spaced repetition, since it will help establish a concrete foundation on which to build more knowledge in an easily retrievable manner. The former may or may not benefit from spaced repetition at all.

I would say if GPT distills successfully, while this isnt as good as self-distillation, it may still be useful.

If not, or worse, actively bullshits, it probably won't be much help.

[clbrmbr]

Note taking with SRS may be greater than the sum of the parts.

[motoboi]

Yeah. But hey! You can only recall what you learned in the first place, right?

[qumpis]

Could you elaborate on the definition of 'low utility'? Is it only in the context of memorization (retaining), or in the context of general understsnding?

Can't see how summarizing isn't a preprocessing step for learning in general. Spaced repetition is a natural next step. I don't see how they compete