Blog Nine - Memorization
Almost every student has had the tedious experience of memorizing. Cramming topics for an assessment, who was born, when, what did they do, where, etc. Vocabulary, definitions, formulas, the whole package. However, many wouldn’t imagine this to encourage a fundamental understanding of the material, especially in mathematics. Application and understanding of material is much more important than “knowing” it. But is it true that we do not have a place for memorization in school?
Memorization is often said to be only for short-term regurgitation but not truly useful for complex concepts. Psychology Professor Richard E. Mayer describes this well in his article “Rote Versus Meaningful Learning,” where he uses the example of three students studying for an exam to make an argument of the performance skills between skimming text, memorizing it, and truly understanding it. The student who remembers the text can successfully recall specific questions as they are presented in the text. Still, they are stuck when thrown a curveball and asked to apply them in different situations. However, the student who takes the time to understand the material is able to take these questions in stride and come up with different ways to use the material they’ve learned.
Albert Einstein himself even said, “Education is not the learning of facts, but the training of the mind to think.” Material is the most usable when it can be used in general rather than specific situations. A common question in American society when thinking about school, especially as a joke about school, is, “When will we even use this, anyway?” While not said seriously, it is a good point when thinking about rote learning. What are the chances that material will be asked exactly as you expect it to be in the real world? Most of the time, the main underlying concepts behind the material are what would be truly useful. The distance formula, an example I’ve used before, is built off of the Pythagorean Theorem. Understanding this and learning how to derive it would be much more beneficial in the long run than simply memorizing the formula. When students grasp the underlying principles, they gain the flexibility to apply their knowledge to novel situations, fostering a deeper and more enduring understanding.
However, we cannot wholly villanize memorization. In fact, studies have shown that rote memorization helps in “stimulating neural plasticity, which alters the brain’s neural pathways in response to new experiences,” as stated in “Why Memorizing Things (Though a Lost Art) Isn’t a Waste of Time” by the Cleveland Clinic. Knowing things by heart is still extremely useful, and training on how to do that in school will put students at an advantage. Having a knowledge base that students can call upon when tackling higher-level problems can also be achieved through memorizing.
Moreover, in specific fields and professions, having the ability to recall particular information is crucial, and there isn’t really an “understanding” of that information, for example, in the medical field. Remembering specific drug names is essential for quick and accurate decision-making if needed. Or in language learning, memorizing words is necessary before being able to connect these strings of words into sentences to communicate complex ideas effectively.
In conclusion, the debate over memorization versus understanding is delicate. Both approaches have their merits and can complement each other in a well-rounded educational system. Striking a balance between rote learning and meaningful understanding is essential, recognizing that when integrated thoughtfully, memorization can be a stepping stone toward a deeper grasp of complex concepts. Ultimately, a comprehensive education should empower students with the skills to memorize effectively when needed and to understand deeply for versatile applications in real-world scenarios.
