Study Methods

[SteveA]

I am interested in how people are going about studying for this exam.

First I would like to broadly define two primary study methods:

Method 1 - Primary focus is rote memorization of various lists. A study guide is the primary information source, and source texts are used sparingly for additional information as needed. General exam strategy is to regurgitate as much information from as many semi-relevant lists as possible, with a secondary focus on application of information from the lists to the specific problem.

Method 2 - Primary focus is comprehension of the readings. The source readings are the primary information source, and a study guide is used sparingly for additional information as needed. General exam strategy is application of information from the readings to the specific problem with a secondary focus on inclusion of as much information from as many semi-relevant readings as possible (note that I use the term "readings" in place of "lists" here as this method may not entail looking at any such lists).

Based on the people I have spoken to, it seems that Method 1 is far more popular than Method 2. However, the small number of people I've spoken to that have used Method 2 seem to have a much higher pass rate than the larger group of Method 1 users.

It also seems that an individual's learning style could dictate which method they are using. For example, my rote memorization skills are non-existant. Thus, I am using Method 2.

So the questions are: Which method are you using? Do you believe one method is inherently better than the other? Why?

[djtrifecta]

I use a hybrid, but memorization is at the core of it.

The fact is that there is not much time in the exam to sit and think about the questions for a long time. You need to have the material memorized so that on the "softball" questions, you can burn through them quickly for all the points. Some of the questions won't be able to be answered by simple memorization and you'll need to maximize your time on those questions (for they often are for more points). However, you're right that blind memorization is not the best strategy, as the exams have drifted away from just asking simple lists. They often ask questions that combine multiple aspects and require more thought than just memory.

My method is that I:
1) read the entire syllabus quickly, but not for every detail
2) memorize 50-80% of the flashcards
3) outline the concepts

By "outline" I mean that you sit in front of a blank Microsoft Word file and give yourself one topic of the exam. You should be able to create an entire outline of the topic/issue from your memory or understanding of the issue, being as detailed as possible. After you've laid out all you know about it, review it against your study manual or the reading material. Update and add to it as you see fit. When the full outline becomes second nature (either due to memory or preferably understanding), then you've done enough IMO.

[Kenny]

You also need to consider the individuals who have used approach 2 but have the memory to remember most of the "lists" without actual "memorization" in the sense you are using it. I beleive that some people I know, while not specifically spending much time "memorizing", are still able to recall very specific lists with ease. Perhaps it is because they have a better conceptual understanding of the material, but I'm not convinced.

[ElDucky]

There roughly 40 broad topics. 10-15 I've listed as highly likely, meaning I'd expect to see at least 5 of them, so I memorize and focus on those. I still understand the other topics and memorize important lists for other topics. Hopefully there are no defective questions, but they are easier to answer if you understand the material.

[raxicoricofallipatorius]

Method 2. I also have problems memorizing lists, so method 1 isn't an option for me. I passed DP on the 1st try, so the method seems to work for me.

Kenny hinted at it; I think if you understand the material and have read the source readings, recalling "lists" (not the actual lists from the manual, but things you can put down for your answer) should be easy. I do think that this should be the case for most people, if they choose method 2.

[Blondie]

I have been using method 2, and taking notes throughout each reading (which for the most part have been lists). I find it easier to review my own notes rather than reading summaries from a study manual...

[SteveA]

Maybe I have the wrong idea of what "memorizing lists" means to most people.

I envision this to be (1) summarize the readings in the format of bulleted lists (or buy a study manual that does this for you), and (2) memorize those lists verbatim.

I do not intend to do this. While my notes of the readings are in bullet format, I do not intend to memorize this information verbatim, nor do I believe I could do so if I chose to. What I am doing is going over my notes multiple times in order to have a very strong and detailed understanding of all the information covered by the readings. I intend to be able to easily craft a detailed response to relevant questions, incorporating a large portion of all relevant readings.

While similar in results to verbatim memorization of lists, to me there is a fundamental difference in the means by which I store the information in my mind. Its like memorizing multiplication tables versus understanding how to multiply. I'm curious if others are doing the same thing as I am, or if verbatim memorization of lists is the norm.

[ElDucky]

There are certain lists that can and should be memorized. Obviously you should not be memorzing all of the notes.