How the high school learning experience can set false expectations for college

Previous high school experience tells students...

• there's always a second chance
• someone will remind you of upcoming due dates
• the teacher can't give the whole class failing grades
• the student will be told exactly what's on the test
• very few tests are cumulative, so short term memory is usually sufficient (if your smart and pay attention, good grades are easy)
  
• paying adequate attention in class is usually good enough; outside studying is not required
• tests are relatively easy and fair
• tests are designed so that even the lower-achieving students can potentially pass
• there are many grades during the semester, so a few screw-ups are okay
• each question on the test will have been addressed many times, both in class and in the reading
• most of the required knowledge comes from class and one or two texts, not mostly from many different texts
• long, boring lectures are the exception
• teachers will work hard to make sure students understand what is being taught
• teachers know how to teach, most of the time
• teachers care about student progress, most of the time
• someone will help students identify which classes need to be taken and when
• someone other than the student is responsible for the student's learning
  

For these reasons, students fail to understand ...

• how difficult college can be
• how little oversight there is
• the implications of this lack of oversight
• the implications of their new personal freedom and the necessity for self-control and good habits
• the real nature of the problem (it's no longer an issue of how smart you are, but of how how much you practice good habits)
  

Technique more important than ability

Technique is often more important than skill. For example, many experiments show that ability to recall items is more related to the technique of chunking (grouping things into categories) than it is to an inherent memory capacity. Chess masters' ability to recall the placement of pieces on a chess board is far superior to that of novices IF the pieces are placed in meaningful "real game" patterns. The masters' ability is no better than the novices when the pieces are placed randomly, because the masters recall patterns rather than individual pieces (Chase and Simon, 1973). In addition, children who are taught techniques for accomplishing a given task can often outperform adults who don't know the techniques. Teaching people how to learn is, by extension, more important than their basic intelligence.