SuperMemo supports two distinct reading schemes: priority based and incremental. What is your view on the optimum balance?
This dichotomy comes from the need to bridge two worlds: the world of knowledge acquisition and the world of knowledge retention. From the historical perspective, this translates to bridging traditional textbook learning with classical SuperMemo (i.e. pure spaced repetition based on active recall). With classical SuperMemo, you would work with questions and answers and make sure you keep high retention levels. However, there is still enormous benefit from browsing, search and reading beyond that what can efficiently be stored in memory. Traditional reading produces dismal retention levels. Certainly below 5% for an avid high-volume reader. Still, without SuperMemo, people such as Bill Joy can build impressive bodies of knowledge in their brains. SuperMemo 99 attempted to employ the concept of a tasklist to lay the first narrow bridge between these two worlds. On one hand, you would keep on reading. On the other, you would keep on making your repetition. In the middle, you would build a
Related Questions
- Is incremental reading through SuperMemo the same as Photo reading? And how come schools and universities haven made it mandatory as of yet?
- Can I view the real time chart of a class based QoS policy, which is deployed on an interface that supports Port QoS monitoring?
- SuperMemo supports two distinct reading schemes: priority based and incremental. What is your view on the optimum balance?
