Memory Key Newsletter

========================================

T h e M e m o r y K e y

<http://www.memory-key.com>

Your resource for information about memory and memory improvement

July 2005

http://www.memory-key.com/newsletters/issue_62.htm

========================================

THIS MONTH ON MEMORY-KEY.COM:

ORGANIZING FOR LIFE

CLASS LENGTH -- DOES IT MATTER?

BLOG

========================================

ORGANIZING FOR LIFE

Organization — how often have I said it? — is the key to memory. Organized information is easier to understand (indeed, how easily information is understood is a direct reflection of how well it’s organized), and organizing information you need to learn helps you understand and remember it.

But organization is valuable at another level, too. The rise of “personal organizers” (both tools and people) in this Age of Information Overload attest to that!

I recently read an article in Atlantic Monthly about the organizing guru David Allen, author of “Getting Things Done” (or, as it’s apparently known to his fans: GTD). I have to say I didn’t find “Getting Things Done” an enthralling read, but I’m not quite sure why — maybe I was just in the wrong mood at the time. Certainly I agree with some of his advice, as readers of my book on “Remembering Intentions: How to Remember Future Actions and Events” can attest. (I should add that I’d never read GTD prior to writing it — a reader suggested they complemented each other and very kindly lent me a copy).

I personally enjoyed Stephen R Covey’s "The 7 habits of highly effective people" more, but I think that’s more a reflection of an easier and friendlier writing style. James Fallows in his Atlantic article suggests that a basic difference between Allen’s and Covey’s systems is that Allen groups things by context while Covey groups them by importance, and I have to say I am entirely with Allen on this issue, although it may seem counter-intuitive. It may seem sensible to prioritize tasks according to their importance, aiming to do the most important first, but in fact you’re more likely to do something if you’re in the right place.

This sounds slightly stupid and self-evident, but think about it. How many times have you delayed doing something very simple because the place where you remember the task is not the place where you can do it? For example, I put up with a very sticky lock in my front door for months, simply because I only remembered it when I locked or unlocked the door. Obviously when I was locking it, I was going out; when I unlocked it, I had coming-home-type activities to do, and by the time I’d done those, the need to fix the lock had slipped out of mind again! The task itself — unsticking the lock — took about 30 seconds when I finally got around to it. (Yes, I did always know the only way to deal with this was to walk straight in one day, not stopping to do anything, and get the graphite and deal with the lock right away — what can I say? Even knowing what you should do doesn’t always mean you do it!)

Which brings us to another point — you have to remember that people are not logic machines!

This is actually a very important point, although it sounds rather silly. But we are emotional beings, and you have to take into account how we actually operate, not how we “should” operate. For a start, you need to take into account that we live in a world where new tasks are constantly popping up — email is constantly flowing into our inbox; the phone goes; people drop by with “if you’d just take a quick look at this” … You need to be flexible to deal with all of this, and you need a system which accommodates the way the world is, not how we’d like it to be.

You also have to take into account your emotional response to this constant flow of incoming information. This is where Allen makes what I think is a particularly telling point. Even if you don’t feel overwhelmed by all the demands on you, even if you don’t think it bothers you (and most of us don’t even get to that point!), there’s still something in your head that’s aware of all the tasks you haven’t done. And this contributes to your feelings of stress.

This is supported by the surprisingly dramatic feelings of relief that simple organizational acts seem to produce in most of us. Something as simple as making a list of the tasks you need to do can have a noticeable impact on your anxiety level; sorting your tasks into categories (such as: “must do right away”, “must do this week”, “must do sometime”, “should do sometime”) can reduce your stress even more.

Of course, it’s not just about organizing yourself. It doesn’t matter how well you organize yourself if you don’t develop the right habits! For example, if you decide to use a calendar, even if you remember to write down your appointments, it’s pointless if you don’t develop the habit of looking at it every day. Similarly, it’s pointless to move your “emails to action but I don’t have time to deal with right now” out of your inbox and into an “action” folder, if you never check the folder!

My point is that there are a number of people out there providing advice on how to organize your life, and most of them have good advice, but putting a system in place is only part of the job. The harder part is developing the habits that enable the system to work. You’re also more likely to be successful if you take into account your own foibles — you need to build a system which as much as possible fits in with how your life is structured already; don’t expect that you can simply redesign you life!

My book “Remembering Intentions” has a number of practical recommendations about how to organize your life and develop the right habits to increase the likelihood that you’ll remember tasks you need to do, as well as explaining what we know about how our minds remember intentions.

See the sidebar for links to some of my favorite organizing books. And here are links to a couple of useful tips articles from Rita Emmett, author of The Procrastinator’s Handbook:

http://www.ritaemmett.com/articles/article_paper_paper.htm

http://www.ritaemmett.com/articles/article_12_tips_desk.htm

David Allen’s official site is at: http://www.davidco.com/ and there’s a link to the Atlantic Monthly article on his home page.

========================================

Find out more about my e-book on "Remembering intentions" at:

http://www.memory-key.com/shop/intention_ebook.htm

========================================

CLASS LENGTH -- DOES IT MATTER?

A recent article in Inside Higher Ed discusses the growing popularity of 3-hour, once-a-week night classes on college campuses, particularly aimed, I think, at students who work or are at home with children. The writer claims that such courses “almost always fail”, and lists the following problems:

“unless the subject is one that does well in a traditional lecture-type format, the content cannot be delivered properly in one shot”
“not enough practice-and-feedback loops to help students absorb, retain and apply information”
“Teachers found it difficult to engage the students for three-hours straight”
it’s exhausting for the teachers too
there’s not enough one-to-one contact opportunities
the standard course often ends up being trimmed to fit into the reduced schedule, short-changing the students

Of course, on the plus side, such classes allow more flexibility, reduce travel time, and make it possible to properly get “into” a subject, undertaking activities you couldn’t fit into a standard hour length class.

The thing I really like about Inside Higher Ed is the commentary. A number of academics were sufficiently excited by this article to send in their own thoughts, and most of them were very positive about such classes.

I think the most important point comes down to how the class is run. Yes, if the class is of the stand-up-in-front-of-the-class-and drone-on-and-on-until the-time-is-up variety, then a 3-hour class is a really bad idea! But then (I guess it’s obvious) I’m not a big fan of the traditional lecture format. I’ve known lecturers who would save everybody’s time if they simply handed out copies of their lectures and let everyone read them in their own time. Lecturers who actually engage their audience are a different story.

If teachers realize that a 3-hour class is not simply 3 one-hour classes, but a completely different animal, that would be an important first step. A 3-hour class should mix lecture with activity and discussion. A one-hour class is extremely limited in what it can do.

To be honest, I’m not a fan of one-hour classes at all. By the time everyone’s settled and you’ve got administrative details out of the way, reminded everyone what you were doing and what you’re going to do, the time is significantly less than an hour. And an hour isn’t long enough in any case. It takes time to get your head properly into a subject. While it’s true that most of us are limited in how long we can concentrate on one thing, that “thing” isn’t the topic, it’s the task. Thus, if you have different activities (listening, talking, doing, watching), you can keep on topic for a long time, and find that you’re benefiting from the longer time in ways you’d never have imagined, if you have no experience of anything but chop-and-change hour-long classes.

There’s no denying, however, that three hours is a long time to concentrate, especially at night. Students need to be highly motivated, and highly disciplined as well (to keep engaged between classes). Such classes are unlikely to suit students who need a lot of support.

In other words, I think 3-hour classes offer both students and teachers opportunities that don’t exist in standard one-hour classes, but to be successful you need teachers that can take advantage of those opportunities, and self-disciplined students.

Reference: http://insidehighered.com/views/2005/07/29/wilson

========================================

BLOG

www.memory-key.com/blogger.html