upvote
I once heard a lecture by a (famous) college professor who talked about the large numbers of students who failed (college) Algebra 1.

His argument was: you cannot memorize algebra, you have to understand. Students who are failing in college do so because they do not understand the fundamentals, and try to memorize enough to succeed - not realizing that the effort needs to go somewhere else.

Rule 1 of memorization is "do not [memorize] if you do not understand". [1] (Note: that source uses the word "learn" instead of "memorize", but to me the word learn means come to understand.)

There is a role for memorization and rote repetition, but it is not the foundation of understanding.

[1]: https://super-memory.com/articles/20rules.htm

reply
As a teacher, I feel this is wrong. A lot of students fail by trying too hard to understand.

They listen in class, then read the text and notes you posted, then watch a Youtube explaination, then ask Chat, then ask you questions ... anything to avoid trying to do a few practice questions where they might make a mistake.

It's like watching people try to learn to play basketball when they are afraid of shooting hoops in case they miss a shot. So they watch videos or read books to really understand how to shoot hoops. And then fail miserably when they are tested.

OK, you could argue that exercises build a type of understanding, and listening to explanations builds a different type of understanding, and the former is more useful, but people don't understand that.

reply
Yeah, memorization is very underrated.

Memorization increases the size of the building blocks you can use.

Mathematics is where I see this most clearly. Why memorize hundreds of theorems? Because then you can just cite them on the fly when doing real mathematics. If you had to re-derive everything, you'd be stuck doing undergrad level math forever.

reply
Chess Grand Masters have large repertoires of memorised openings. They do not play rote games with no understanding.

They run variations, twists and traps, on recalled openings and duel and fool by creating and breaking expectations.

In line with a number of other activities rote core skills and reflexes are foundational but not all, they're essential to practice and to dealing with situations where they don't fit but can be bent to purpose.

reply
> Chess Grand Masters have large repertoires of memorised openings. They do not play rote games with no understanding.

This is a good example because a test of one's understanding is "do you know how to make the opponent pay for varying from the standard opening?"

For a beginner, the answer is no.

reply