Rushing for immediate results in learning often leads to haste making waste.

In Taiwan's education system, we have grown accustomed from a young age to having weekly quizzes, monthly exams, midterms, finals, entrance exams, and so on. All these various tests serve to prove just one thing: whether students have actually learned, and whether parents can see if the money they spent was effective.

Indeed! Everyone has surely thought this way—even myself. When I'm sick, after taking just two doses of medication, I'll constantly scrutinize: "Is it really working, or should I switch to another clinic and try that?"

This thought pops up quite often, which is normal. However, many things simply take time: nurturing a relationship, recovering from an illness, working out to lose weight, and learning is no exception.

Throughout my teaching career, the question I get asked most frequently by parents is: "Are there exams in your course? If there are no exams, how do we know the child has learned?"

Back when I was a student, I also often reflected on this. I knew I was learning, but I needed time to reflect on and organize the information in my head. Why do so many teachers like to finish teaching a section and say, "Alright! Put away your textbooks now. Pop quiz time—let's see if you were paying attention just now"?

Is this truly the most effective assessment? Or is it merely proof generated by schools and cram schools to show parents that they are doing their jobs?

This question is discussed in detail in the book Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World.

[Note] The ideas discussed in this book may not be the definitive absolute truth, but they are certainly worth pondering deeply.

Cognitive psychologist Nate Kornel proposed the concept of "desirable difficulties." Difficult concepts during learning create short-term hurdles, slow down progress, and lead to mental stress or discomfort; however, they ultimately benefit long-term learning outcomes.

Abundant hints, predetermined methods, and frequent periodic tests during the learning process often boost short-term learning performance, but over time, they do not foster a student's "systematic learning."

Lindsey Richland, a professor at the University of Chicago, observed hundreds of video-recorded math classrooms around the world. Typically, a class begins with the teacher lecturing, followed by students buzzing in or doing practice exercises. Upon observation, we find that most students do not truly grasp the "patterns of the underlying concepts" taught in class, but rather they pick up on the "teacher's patterns" because the teacher provides "hints."

For example:

I ____________ a cup of coffee last night. a. do b. does c. did d. doing

It was observed that many teachers offer corresponding hints when asking questions. Initially, they guide students with "making-connections problems" (the knowledge itself).

However, when students look at the teacher pleadingly with their eyes, it turns into a "using-procedures problem":

Perhaps the past tense was being taught that day, so students naturally only give the past-tense answer, c.

Or perhaps the teacher emphasized "last night," so students likewise answer with the past-tense option, c.

The result is that the student got the answer right and the teacher is satisfied—but did the student truly understand?

Teachers around the world teach using two types of problems:

Making-connections problems: extending from fundamental concepts into broader ideas.

Using-procedures problems: following sample problems to solve other similar ones.

In fact, aren't periodic stage-based exams the same way?

This is why many children can perform very well on weekly quizzes and monthly exams throughout the semester.

All they need is to become familiar with the concepts and knowledge for that specific unit; after the exam, they cast that knowledge aside, believing their minds should move on to the next stage. But in reality, learning is an ongoing process of connecting concepts and leveling up, rather than an isolated series of stage-based hurdles. Consequently, these children struggle when facing major comprehensive exams—what we often call "underperforming on test day." Perhaps they simply never built up the complete, coherent logic of learning they needed.

The book concludes that training with hints fails to leave lasting learning outcomes; between deliberate practice sessions, taking deliberate breaks is crucial, and scoring high marks does not equate to actual progress.

Teachers and students must strive to avoid interpreting current performance as true learning. Scoring high during the learning phase can indicate that one is grasping the material well, yet it is essential to realize that this is often merely a flash in the pan, rather than actual progress.

Teachers should provide "desirable difficulties" that make students feel challenged and frustrated. But if a student can "articulate" a conclusion in their own words—even if it's incorrect—being forced to think through the answer will ultimately lead to better learning in the long run.

In learning, those processes of accumulating experience that seem "hard to define" are precisely what shape who we are today.