Do you feel that this graph describes your learning rate?

Post Reply New Topic

Kinda actually.

Something more like this

Yeah, very much. Things tend to make no sense to me at first, but then at some point it will all suddenly become clear (or a big chunk of it will, anyway). I.e. Learning calculus was like that. And when I was about 15 I stared at a reference manual for 2 weeks until it all suddenly made sense, and then I could then write (6502) machine code with no problems.

It seems like things 'cook' in the back of my mind in some mysterious/opaque way, and when that process is done it sends the information back to the front of my mind in large chunks.

That pretty much exactly describes me, at least with most subjects that I'm mildly interested in but not obsessed with. I'd describe it as, perhaps "epiphanous learning". In Grade six, for instance, I did pretty poorly on some coursework for long divison yet did well on an end of unit test.

I'd also like to say that life events, situations, and dilemas make a lot more sense and, to some degree, even seem "more real" in hindsight rather than when they are occuring.

Genuinely learned material seems to "stick" longer and is more "deeply integrated", at least I'd assume, for me than for the average person. But it takes me A LOT more time to initally learn the material.

YES!

Yep, I always feel slow at first. When I'm in class, the other students always understand things before I do. I think this has something to do with verbal processing and my tendency to "tune out." When I'm presented with material in text form, I do so much better. I then pull off miracles on major exams. This has always made me question my intelligence, so I guess I just have a different learning path than NTs. In the end, my path works because I usually score above average on exams.

Okay, I hate to be the anal math geek (well, actually I don't), but that graph makes no sense. It's title ways learning rate vs. time, but the y-axis says amount learned. You'd need to graph the derivative of amount learned against time in order for it to match the title. Sorry, I just couldn't resist throwing that out there .

good eyes, but I guess you can also just change the title to match the axes. It would just be knowledge as a function of time.

I suppose so. Well normally I know the stuff before we do it in class, but if I feel a tiniest bit insecure about the stuff we're learning, I go home and learn the crap out of it. XD

That chart relates to me for math-based classes and statistic based classes. Statistics is worse, I learned all the concepts, but just can't translate a word-problem into the math behind its request.

"knowledge" and "learning rate" are both wrong terms for what I'm fairly certain this graph is supposed to represent; "understanding of material being learned vs. time" would make the most sense...

Hmmm I suppose my learning rate is equivalent to the graph. (I'm assuming graph represents amount learned within a certain time span). It is dependent on my interest in the subject if I'm not interested I learn what I need to know for exams, life and whatever is necessary in my opinion. If I'm interested in the subject my mind is more like a supercomputer when it comes to storing data. It does help that my memory is very precise and clear.

I look on the internet and other forms of information for the purpose of quenching my thirst for knowledge. The result is knowledge about many areas I can come off as a professor in some areas I decided to look into.

Very much so.

I characterize my learning process as based around a threshold point of knowledge acquisition; at first, I'll learn everything I can about a subject in a strictly recitation sort of way, and then at some point an "Aha!" moment hits and I realize why it matters. Afterward, I fit every bit of related information I learn into that interpreted paradigm. That's the first stage, so to speak.

The really fun (second) stage comes when I start unintentionally/inadvertently forming weird, complex analogies between the details of my different "Aha!" knowledge reservoirs in the classic 'a' : 'b' :: 'c' : 'd' format. Figuring out a snazzy analogy usually sends me into a hypomanic state, which has its ups and downs. On the one hand, my thought productivity on the subject-at-hand skyrockets, but on the other, I'm utterly unable to shift my brainpower to anything else. Getting high off learning is a double-edged sword...

Imagine the second chart with a line that starts at zero and peaks(humps) way below the average "peak" and pretty much immediately tapers back to zero and where it "peaks" is where I "think" I understand it when in reality I just have a very minor boost in my confidence regarding whatever the topic is because I have someone holding my hand . If the case were I actually tried to not have my hand held, so to speak, the me line would most likely be a total faltline.

Kind of, although I don't necessarily pass my class mates.