Difference between knowning and memorizing?

[James_B]

What the difference between knowing/learning something and memorizing something?

I'm almost finished my 3 year of college and I still don't see the difference between the two. In organic chemistry, the big advice is not to memorize the mechanism but to learn why they do things. I'm still memorizing the mechanism only now, I'm also memorizing the meaning behind it.

I remember being in grade school and being corrected by authority figures about not memorizing the my multiplication table, so I never did. Now when ever someone asks me a simple multiplication question like (7)(9). I pause for a few minutes to figure it out while some other person just spits out the answer. Makes me look and feel like a fool. You would think by now I would have it memorized but I don't.

Another thing

Why are so many students and professors against the solution manual? It shows the solution to the problem and not just the answer. Plus it answers about 87% of my questions and the other 13% I ask in class or office hours.

Thoughts, questions, comments?

James_B

[DeluxeRed]

The difference between memorizing and knowing is having an understanding that allows synthesis of new concepts based on that knowledge.

Think of the difference between memorizing scales has WWHWWWH and WHWWHWW, and understanding the difference between major and minor scales. Yes, one can develop musical skills with the former, and it is also a stepping-stone to the understanding, but imagine how much better of a musician or songwriter you could be if you understood WHY they are different, what effects that causes both harmonically and emotionally, and could apply that knowledge in appropriate places--and know what those appropriate places are.

Which skill would you rather take with you to a jam? Which skill set would you rather jam with?

[dave64o]

I think the great Tom Lehrer put it best when he said "In The New Math it's apparently more important to understand what you're doing than it is to get the right answer."

If you're under 40, you probably have no idea what"The New Math" is, but if you're around my age age, you'll LOVE this description of it (YTC).

[L-A]

If you memorize, your knowledge is limited to what specific situations you studied.

If you learn (when possible, of course), your goal is the understanding of a system. Understanding creates new opportunities of interpretation and allows you to discover new methods or approaches. Memorizing formulas do not.

If you can answer "What is pi?", you're on the good path.

[TobyBass55]

There's a place for both memorizing and for "understanding". Like you said, there are just times that you need to know what 7times9 is without having to think about it or spending the time to "figure it out".

To get back to your chemistry example.....there are times it is useful to have memorized some things. Like if you need to calulate a molecular weight, you don't want to have to think about C is 12 and N is 14....... you just want to know that so you can do the calculation.

With mechanisms, like everything, people always have to memorize them first. If you are going to be a chemist in a lab, you need to understand them too. (if not, then you might only need to understand them for tests??? ) It is important for practical applications. Let's say you were doing a reaction in the lab and it didn't go to completion, or maybe it was it was really slow. Understanding the mechanism helps you figure out how to get it to work. For example, will adding more of one of the reactants help? Depends on the mechanism and what that says about whether the rate of the reaction is dependent on the concentration of that reactant.

I had to smile dave64o's post too, because I also went through that "new math" thing when I was a kid. But more recently, my son also got subjected to something similar. They must have given them 5 or 6 ways to show that 9times7 is 63.... graphically, with piles of pennies, all sorts of things. The craziest example was when he had to figure out how to represent the population of Germany with units of lines on paper, sheets of paper, reams of paper and boxes of paper. I understand they were explaining bases, but he was only in the sixth grade!!!!

[jucas]

With the organic chem, there was some memorization that had to happen, but for reactions I never memorized much. I couldn't recite answers like my frineds that worked that way, but when it came time for the exams I ended up putting in less time because for most reactions I could move electrons around until I found an answer. Neither is necessarily more effective, and I think either one should get you through most degrees. I don't memorize details well, and I'm reaching a point where I really wish I could.

And, if what you're doing works for you I wouldn't worry about other people's methods. If you understand something after you work through a problem with the solution, I wouldn't say its a bad thing.

[tycobb73]

If you understand something you can apply it to different situations.

[Bocete]

I feel the difference is obvious when you try to teach someone about a topic. Like you've said, with multiplication: someone who knows the 10x10 table by heart will have a hard time explaining it even if he/she tries. Some who knows how to multiply will be able to conjure a definition, explain through examples, show common pitfalls etc.

In both cases you multiply flawlessly. But, trying to explain multiplying shows do you really know and understand. My father has given me that advice when I was a kid, and it's a very good rule of thumb IMO and IME. Don't just answer a preparation test; talk about the given subject, to yourself if you have to. Also, that way you can easily find holes in your understanding.

[hbarcat]

You can know the name of a bird in all the languages of the world, but when you're finished, you'll know absolutely nothing whatever about the bird... So let's look at the bird and see what it's doing — that's what counts. I learned very early the difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something. - Richard Feynman

[stratovani]

If you memorize all the scales and modes, then all you can do is play scales and modes. Whereas if you learn songs, you internalize them and then you can get up on a stage anywhere and play a song!

[fdeck]

I think knowing something is when you can explain it to a skeptic, and do something useful with it. But it can sometimes be useful to memorize some basics, if they would otherwise be an obstacle to learning the more advanced stuff.

As for the solution manual, I think that the struggle is part of the learning process. Rather than looking up the solutions, you would be much better off searching back through the textbook, using it as a reference manual. Work through all of the chapter problems, not just the ones assigned as homework. Write your answers in the "style" demonstrated by the teacher at the blackboard. If you do this, you will discover that you have memorized the basic facts by the time the exam rolls around.

[XtreO]

Originally Posted by dave64o

I think the great Tom Lehrer put it best when he said "In The New Math it's apparently more important to understand what you're doing than it is to get the right answer."

If you're under 40, you probably have no idea what"The New Math" is, but if you're around my age age, you'll LOVE this description of it (YTC).

I prefer this explanation.

[Ericman197]

A lot of stuff in organic chemistry needs to be memorized, because at the level of Organic I/II, you can't possibly be expected to understand why it makes sense to use one catalyst over another. Why does nickel help with this reaction, and some organomercury with another? Who knows! But for the most part, if you just understand the basic principle of organic: that negative things are attracted to positive things, everything else fits into place. Then you just need to memorize what's more electronegative. Then you've got double bond breaking, benzene ring substitution, and a bunch of other junk. Much of this needs to be memorized, but it will make more sense if you frame it in terms of negative/positive and bond stability (how many rearrangements can you form, etc).

[Nedmundo]

I teach at a law school, where the difference between memorizing and understanding (or knowing) is critical, and largely determines a student's level of success. Often, when students flunk out, they say: "But I knew the law." By this, they mean they could recite the elements or factors of the rules. This is memorization, which is necessary to success in law school, but woefully insufficient. To succeed, the students need to know the language of the rules, and, more importantly, need to understand how to apply the rules to solve legal problems. They need to understand what the rule means, not just what it says. The very best students understand why the rule exists, and how it relates to all the other rules in that area of law.

[James_B]

Good replies.

I think, the reason why I have a lack of understanding of things is simply because of, I haven't been exposed to entirety of the subject. Example in my Tech Math class I would ask a question, the answer is "Well you'll learn that in differential calculus" Now I'm in differential and the answers now are "You'll learn that in integral calculus".

I'm kind of wondering what the physical difference of memorizing and understand are. I should locate a neurologist to anwser this question