Métodos de Estudo

A revista científica “Psychological Science in the Public Interest" divulgou uma interessante pesquisa sobre métodos de estudos.

A síntese da pesquisa com o devido link se encontram a seguir e podem ser acessadas pelo leitor.

Improving Students’ Learning With Effective Learning Techniques

Promising Directions From Cognitive and Educational Psychology
Many students are being left behind by an educational system that some people believe is in crisis. Improving educational outcomes will require efforts on many fronts, but a central premise of this monograph is that one part of a solution involves helping students to better regulate their learning through the use of effective learning techniques. Fortunately, cognitive and educational psychologists have been developing and evaluating easy-to-use learning techniques that could help students achieve their learning goals. In this monograph, we discuss 10 learning techniques in detail and offer recommendations about their relative utility. We selected techniques that were expected to be relatively easy to use and hence could be adopted by many students. Also, some techniques (e.g., highlighting and rereading) were selected because students report relying heavily on them, which makes it especially important to examine how well they work. The techniques include elaborative interrogation, self-explanation, summarization, highlighting (or underlining), the keyword mnemonic, imagery use for text learning, rereading, practice testing, distributed practice, and interleaved practice.

To offer recommendations about the relative utility of these techniques, we evaluated whether their benefits generalize across four categories of variables: learning conditions, student characteristics, materials, and criterion tasks. Learning conditions include aspects of the learning environment in which the technique is implemented, such as whether a student studies alone or with a group. Student characteristics include variables such as age, ability, and level of prior knowledge. Materials vary from simple concepts to mathematical problems to complicated science texts. Criterion tasks include different outcome measures that are relevant to student achievement, such as those tapping memory, problem solving, and comprehension.

We attempted to provide thorough reviews for each technique, so this monograph is rather lengthy. However, we also wrote the monograph in a modular fashion, so it is easy to use. In particular, each review is divided into the following sections:

General description of the technique and why it should work

How general are the effects of this technique?

 2a. Learning conditions
 2b. Student characteristics
 2c. Materials
 2d. Criterion tasks

Effects in representative educational contexts

Issues for implementation

Overall assessment

The review for each technique can be read independently of the others, and particular variables of interest can be easily compared across techniques.

To foreshadow our final recommendations, the techniques vary widely with respect to their generalizability and promise for improving student learning. Practice testing and distributed practice received high utility assessments because they benefit learners of different ages and abilities and have been shown to boost students’ performance across many criterion tasks and even in educational contexts. Elaborative interrogation, self-explanation, and interleaved practice received moderate utility assessments. The benefits of these techniques do generalize across some variables, yet despite their promise, they fell short of a high utility assessment because the evidence for their efficacy is limited. For instance, elaborative interrogation and self-explanation have not been adequately evaluated in educational contexts, and the benefits of interleaving have just begun to be systematically explored, so the ultimate effectiveness of these techniques is currently unknown. Nevertheless, the techniques that received moderate-utility ratings show enough promise for us to recommend their use in appropriate situations, which we describe in detail within the review of each technique.

Five techniques received a low utility assessment: summarization, highlighting, the keyword mnemonic, imagery use for text learning, and rereading. These techniques were rated as low utility for numerous reasons. Summarization and imagery use for text learning have been shown to help some students on some criterion tasks, yet the conditions under which these techniques produce benefits are limited, and much research is still needed to fully explore their overall effectiveness. The keyword mnemonic is difficult to implement in some contexts, and it appears to benefit students for a limited number of materials and for short retention intervals. Most students report rereading and highlighting, yet these techniques do not consistently boost students’ performance, so other techniques should be used in their place (e.g., practice testing instead of rereading).

Our hope is that this monograph will foster improvements in student learning, not only by showcasing which learning techniques are likely to have the most generalizable effects but also by encouraging researchers to continue investigating the most promising techniques. Accordingly, in our closing remarks, we discuss some issues for how these techniques could be implemented by teachers and students, and we highlight directions for future research.

Fonte: http://psi.sagepub.com/content/14/1/4.full?ijkey=Z10jaVH/60XQM&keytype=ref&siteid=sppsi

Adiante, transcrevo os principais métodos de estudo e sua maior ou menor eficiência:

1) Testes práticos: consistem em exercícios de múltipla escolha, dissertações, entre outros, acerca da temática estudada.
Grau de eficiência: Alta.

2) Prática distribuída de estudos: é estudar o conteúdo ao longo do tempo. Não deixar acumular a matéria; não estudar apenas na véspera da prova ou durante horas seguidas. Devem-se utilizar doses “homeopáticas” de estudo. Para tanto, organizar um horário de estudos é fundamental para o sucesso na aprendizagem.
Grau de eficiência: Alta.

3) Elaboração de perguntas: é elaborar questões sobre o tema, para tanto, o discente deve estar familiarizado com o assunto; estar mais amadurecido (ensino médio e ensino superior).
Grau de eficiência: Média.

4) Explicar o conteúdo para si mesmo: para tanto, torna-se mister aprender e apreender o assunto. Nesse método o discente deve “pensar em voz alta”; explanar para si mesmo o conteúdo.
Grau de eficiência: Média.

5) Estudo intercalado de diferentes conteúdos: É comum que os estudantes esgotem uma matéria. Mas há, nesse método, a alternância de conteúdos, justamente para forçar a memória de longo prazo na fixação do conhecimento.
Grau de eficiência: Média.

6) Resumo: trata-se de uma técnica difícil, porque os estudantes tendem a ter interpretações superficiais sobre o texto-base e não conseguirem extrair o fulcral dele. Ou, ainda, reescrever o texto utilizando outras palavras/expressões.
Grau de eficiência: Baixa.

7) Grifar textos: é fundamental estabelecer o que é fundamental de ser destacado. E retirar a essência de um texto não é uma tarefa tão simples. Usualmente, os estudantes acabam grifando trechos não relevantes ou grandes partes, o que dificulta sobremaneira o armazenamento da informação.
Grau de eficiência: Baixa.

8) Associação mnemônica: não são todos os conceitos que permitem o uso dessa técnica e em longo prazo a memorização se torna difícil.
Grau de eficiência: Baixa.

9) Associação de imagens com textos: “A técnica pode ajudar a formar uma narrativa, de modo a organizar o assunto de uma maneira mais clara a partir das imagens. A associação de imagens foi classificada como de baixa utilidade porque os pesquisadores não conseguiram identificar com clareza em quais situações o método dá certo”.
Grau de eficiência: Baixa.

10) Releitura: “Estudos analisados revelaram que é melhor dar uma pausa maior entre a leitura e a releitura do que já reler logo após terminar o texto (esperar 2 ou 4 dias para retomar o material). No entanto, apesar da "facilidade" de se executar essa técnica (não requer muita habilidade, você só precisar ler de novo), a técnica é muito ineficaz quando comparada a outras citadas por aqui, segundo os pesquisadores”.
Grau de eficiência: Baixa.

Fonte: http://guiadoestudante.abril.com.br/vestibular-enem/descubra-quais-sao-melhores-metodos-estudo-se-preparar-vestibular-enem-742679.shtml

Por Marcos Paulo