Usually the college entrance examination review is divided into three rounds, of which one round is the most important.
But not every student can consolidate every detail in a round of test centers.
As progress progresses, more people just go and see.
Therefore, they always feel that they are not solid in a round of learning, driven by obsessive-compulsive disorder, they still repeatedly spend a lot of energy in small details, and they can't get out in one round.
Reflected in the usual review, either clinging to the topic of death, or entangled in a certain chapter can not come out.
Lack of complete understanding of the college entrance examination, can only get used to one-sided knowledge points. If you go on like this, you will definitely not be able to score points.
In the conventional, institutional form of teaching, each school also has two rounds of review, that is, to make a paper.
Keep doing it, do it every day, the test paper is like a snowflake, every day in the classroom.
But this is also of little use, because for the teacher, it makes it easier to prepare for the lessons - only need to lecture and practice questions every day, without summarizing, nor analyzing the deep test points.
This is nothing more than a repetition of one round, and it is much thicker than a round.
I've seen teachers at many schools review this way.
This is very irresponsible!
In fact, 90% of the students learn in one round, under the blessing of the "second round" of the plus version of the above round, more students will give up, the more they learn, the more ignorant they are, and they do not know how to review.
One round of learning bits and pieces, not to mention such a second round of review!
Originally in the "first round" when many details did not understand, now the second round of comprehensive questions, east a hammer, west a mallet, repeatedly stuck into their own blank knowledge blind spots, which makes time-critical candidates, do not know how to be good!
Is it to continue to do the topic? Or brush sleeve rolls?
Is it to force yourself to understand each topic thoroughly?
Or do you follow the teacher's progress?
I don't know how much time I have, and I feel that it is even more meaningless to follow and feel that I can't understand it.
At this time of year, countless students come to me, and their anxiety can be seen in their words, so I help you sort out the following:
1, learning to forget is very normal, in line with the Ebbinghaus forgetting curve, if you do not review, usually after three days only remember the original 15%.
2. Therefore, it is necessary to firmly grasp the test point through the spiraling review method. This is also the root cause of why the review is divided into three rounds.
The correct three-round review plan is as follows
Round 1: Sub-topic + Do real questions + knowledge list
Second round: actual combat + set of rolls + scientific platoon deployment
Three rounds: drill + fine-tuning + simulation of the exam room
Candidates should correct deviations in time according to this and correct the chaos.
3. By repeatedly looking at similar problems from different heights of perspective, different conclusions will also be drawn.
This is why the three rounds of review are called "spiraling upwards".
With the deepening of each round of review, points that were not understood before will be understood in later reviews.
For example, if you do not understand the motion behavior of the "double stick" in the first round, you may reflect on the "spring" dynamic problem of the second round. Knowledge will automatically transfer as it accumulates.
But the premise is that you have to accumulate enough. Many test takers often stumble on a problem, but they don't know that you don't have the ability to think so much to appreciate this kind of topic.
Therefore, if you encounter something that will not, skip it first, and then go through it as a whole.
So how to fight? To practice through the sleeve!
If the college entrance examination is regarded as a war, then the first round is to reserve materials and manpower, and the second round is to arrange troops in actual combat.
Some people don't understand this, like school teachers.
They always review the second round as a round, and still review according to the chapters.
That will allow students to perceive the perspective of the problem, always stuck at the level of one round.
Let me give you an example, the college entrance examination is like a confrontation between two armies: if you learn well in one round, you will have a strong army in your hand; if you don't learn well, you will be a group of old, weak, sick and disabled.
However, even if they are old, weak, sick and disabled, they must also deploy their positions in accordance with scientific tactics, such as laying out a swallowtail array, and the sharp knife battalion on both sides with archers or something, otherwise, on the battlefield, it is a scattered sand, and the enemy will rush, and he will immediately collapse into an army.
I think the analogy is: even if you don't learn well in one round, you have to know how to fight.
Only then will you go to the exam room and know what you have in your hand - independent equations + option elimination method + experimental step grading. Even if you don't learn in a round, you have to answer the exam paper like a decent, at least so that the grading teacher looks like a master.
This is the importance of the second round, which determines the first impression of you by the grading teacher.
Some test takers, when they encounter questions that they can't, especially calculation questions, begin to write blindly.
Pull a formula in the east, a theorem in the west.
The surface of the paper is messy, scribbled and scratched, if I read the paper for you, see this, directly give zero points, and I will not look at it seriously.
But have you ever thought that even if you can't do the questions, listening to my second round of review, you can make you a few points white.
There are templates and routines for answering questions. I've been studying all of this for more than a decade.
First, it is divided into multiple choice questions, experimental questions, and calculation questions, and tells you how to grab points for each question type
Do you know how multiple choice questions come about?
Many students treat multiple choice questions as fill-in-the-blank questions, which wastes the value of options! But how are the wrong options fabricated?
How to quickly find the breakthrough of the problem through "contradictory options" and "similar options"?
When encountering the "four non-dependent options", how should we quickly find the core options, so as to locate the solution point of the problem?
How should I think when I encounter a problem that I can't?
Seeing that the experimental questions are so long, is there a quick solution to the experimental problems?
How to read the experimental questions?
Which ones are sent for classification? How to find out where the original stem of a small question is through the correspondence?
What is the essence of the experimental question?
Why are some experimental drawings that you can't even read?
How to use calculation answer templates and independent equations to answer like a master?
When you encounter a calculation problem that you can't do, how to write the process?
The formula can be written down, can you figure out the final answer?
Can you be like a master, write the answer steps in an orderly and clear level?
Improvement of scientific thinking methods
What should I do when I encounter a question with no idea at all?
Can you solve the problem from 0-1?
There is no teacher during the exam, and there is no me standing next to you to give you some tips, so how do you think independently?
Second, have you found that many of the things in high school physics are repetitive.
Is there any perception that the ratio problem that often occurs in astrophysics is also often considered in particle motion, or dynamics.
The difference is that the corresponding knowledge points are different, but the ideas for the questions are the same.
Have you ever heard the phrase "solve the problem by guessing the intention of the questioner"?
I am the author of the "Super All-Around" exam, and I know how the physics questions come out.
I will explain to you the physics solution method from the following core of the problem.
1. Estimation method
2. Difference ratio method
3. Independent equation method
4. Dimensional method
5. The sequence process in physics
6. Function essence
7. Poor airborne conclusion information
8. Modeling thinking
……
If you master these methods, you will know how all the physics problems came out, and then in turn, you will know how to solve them.
Third, at this time, re-read the comprehensive topics of each chapter and do a good job of general review
1. How to do the dynamics comprehensive question type, and how to think about the follow-up process of self-exploration problems?
2, particles in the electric field, in the magnetic field, combing again.
3, conductor rod complex motion analysis, how to deal with the stick more, with function or momentum.
4. How to analyze the topics of multi-object collision and multi-process participation. ......
The above are the latest test questions, such as the 21-year college entrance examination questions (although none of them are announced completely), the 21-year simulation questions - Jiangnan Ten Schools, Henan Nine Schools, Tianyi University Joint Examination, Hunan Four Provinces Joint Examination, etc., as far as possible to select the joint examination questions, re-organize, and then demonstrate the views of each lesson I taught.
【After completing the second round, how much will your grades improve】
Finish sorting out your own problem-solving methodology; adjust the time and rhythm of facing a test paper; learn some skills and methods for taking the test; and look at the same problem from a higher perspective
For basics average, 50 points – straight to 80 or more
Basic: 70 points - directly to 90 points or more
The base can be: 80 points - 95 points or more
Let's rush to the top together.