Pareto's Study Method: Focus on What Works for You

I once ran into an old professor of mine. As an expert in environmental science, she is always quick to remind me to see the whole picture: never to look at a particular kind of pollution as an isolated phenomenon, but as an intricate part of a bigger cycle.

So she claimed that a student as brilliant as myself (her wording was a little different) would benefit more if I actually attended her classes. What an outrageous statement, don't you think? Like most teachers, she argued that the best way to study is to engage all your senses in the process: the more, the merrier.

Here's where I disagree.

I prefer to look at it from an engineer's point of view: why differentiate and diversify when you can assimilate and optimize? If I learn more by reading lecture notes in the privacy of my home, why on earth should I be forced to sit through long and tiresome lectures?

The Pareto principle

This is where the Pareto principle comes into the picture. It basically says that 80% of your results come from 20% of your efforts.

Say you try to study using all your senses: attending lectures (hearing), reading (sight) and taking notes (writing). Then you discover that almost all of your results come from the reading alone. If that is the case, I would recommend that you optimize that channel and give it most (if not all) of your time.

My argument is not that you should skip lectures altogether. Some people learn best by mixing all methods. I'm simply saying that if you notice one method works a lot better than the rest, you should focus on it. Always optimize, even if it means you won't diversify. For more on this mindset, see study smarter, not harder.