If I’m honest, my study habit for most of my life was rereading. Highlight the chapter, go back over the highlights, feel like I had it. Make It Stick took that habit apart pretty quickly. The authors point out that rereading builds familiarity with the text, and familiarity feels a lot like knowing. It isn’t the same thing.
One paragraph in the book has stayed with me more than any other. In short, the authors argue that when you practice pulling information out of memory, and you do it at different times, in different settings, and mixed in with other material, you aren’t just storing the information more firmly. You’re linking it to more of what you already know. Over time those links become a network, and that network gives you more ways back in when you need the knowledge later.
I want to unpack that, because I think there are three ideas packed into it.
- Retrieval is the workout, not the test.
We usually treat quizzes as a way to measure learning. The research in this book says the act of recalling something is what strengthens it. Every time I have to pull a concept out of my head without looking, I’m making it easier to find next time. That’s why low-stakes quizzing works even when nobody is grading it. - Spacing and variety make it harder, and that’s the point.
Cramming feels productive because the material is right there in short-term memory. Spacing it out means I’ve forgotten a little before I practice again, so I have to work to reconstruct it. Same with changing the context. The book describes a study where kids practiced tossing beanbags. One group only practiced at the target distance. Another group practiced at a closer and a farther distance and never at the target itself. When they were tested at the target distance, the mixed group did better. The variety forced them to build a more flexible skill instead of a groove for one exact situation. - Interleaving builds the network.
Mixing different topics in one practice session feels messy. It also forces you to figure out which idea applies to which problem, which is exactly what real life asks of you. Nobody hands you a problem labeled “this is a Chapter 4 question.”
Where I see this at work
I’ve spent a lot of my career on M&A integrations and change adoption, and this paragraph explains something I’ve watched happen many times. We put new colleagues through training on systems and processes before Day 1. They sit through it once, in one room, in one block of time. Then they hit a real situation weeks later, a payroll question, a benefits issue, a request they’ve never seen, and the training doesn’t come back to them. It was learned in a single context with a single cue.
The colleagues who adapt fastest are usually the ones who have had to use the information in a few different situations early on. They’ve had to pull it up on a call, explain it to someone else, apply it to a messy case. Each of those moments added another path back to the knowledge. That’s the “multiplies the cues” part of the paragraph, and it’s why I’m skeptical now of any adoption plan that treats training as a one-time event.
What I’m changing in my own learning
As a working adult in a master’s program, I don’t have time to waste on study methods that only feel effective. So here’s what I’m doing differently:
Closing the book and writing down what I remember before I review my notes
Coming back to earlier readings weeks later instead of moving on for good
Connecting each new concept to a real problem I’m working on, which forces me to retrieve it in a different context than the one I learned it in
Mixing topics when I review instead of studying one chapter at a time
None of this feels as comfortable as rereading. That’s kind of the lesson. The effort is where the learning happens, and the connections I build along the way are what will make this knowledge useful when I actually need it, not just on the next quiz.
Leave a Reply