How should I review my study notes for a certification exam?
Do not re-read your notes passively. Use them as a reference for active recall: cover each section, attempt to recall the content before revealing it, and mark what you could not recall. This transforms a passive review activity into retrieval practice. Prioritize reviewing notes on weak domains and recently studied content. Full note re-reading should only occur during initial orientation, not as a primary review strategy.
The way you review your notes determines how much benefit you extract from the time invested in creating them. Most candidates re-read their notes, which produces modest retention benefits at the cost of significant time. Evidence-based note review strategies produce substantially better outcomes by converting review from passive re-exposure to active retrieval practice.
The Problem with Passive Re-Reading
Re-reading notes creates a familiarity illusion -- the material feels known because it is contextually familiar from previous study. But familiarity in recognition is not the same as retrievability under exam conditions. You recognize material you have seen before; you retrieve material you have practiced recalling.
Research by Koriat and Bjork (2005) demonstrates that students' confidence in their knowledge after re-reading is systematically higher than their actual performance on subsequent tests. They feel more prepared than they are, because familiarity feels like knowledge.
The solution is not to stop reviewing notes -- it is to change how you review them.
Active Note Review Methods
Cover-and-Recall Method
- Position a blank sheet of paper over your notes
- Read only the section heading or the first word of a bullet point
- Attempt to recall the content before sliding the cover down
- Compare your recall to the actual notes
- Mark items you could not recall as review priorities
This converts note review from re-reading to retrieval practice. It takes no longer than passive re-reading but produces dramatically better retention.
Self-Testing Against Notes
Use your notes to generate test questions:
- For each concept, create a question and attempt to answer it before checking
- "What are the three types of authentication factors? Describe each."
- "What is the purpose of certificate revocation and what mechanisms implement it?"
Answer the questions without looking at notes first. Use notes only for verification.
Note-Based Mind Map Reconstruction
Without looking at your notes, create a mind map of a domain from memory. Then compare your mind map to your notes and identify missing branches. This identifies structural gaps (missing concepts or relationships) rather than just detail gaps.
Prioritizing Review: Not All Notes Are Equal
For effective note review in a time-constrained study period, prioritize:
| Priority | Note Content | Review Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| High | Domains where practice exam scores are lowest | Every review session |
| High | Content you flagged as confusing during study | Every review session |
| Medium | Domains at 70-79% on practice exams | Every other session |
| Low | Domains above 80% on practice exams | Weekly check only |
Re-reading notes on domains where you already score 90% on practice exams is low-yield. Reviewing notes on domains where you score 55% is high-yield. Prioritization multiplies the efficiency of your review time.
The Review Session Structure
A structured 45-60 minute note review session:
| Time | Activity |
|---|---|
| 0-5 min | Quick look at priority list (what needs reviewing today?) |
| 5-30 min | Cover-and-recall review of high-priority domain notes |
| 30-45 min | Self-testing on recently flagged concepts |
| 45-55 min | Flashcard review of specific weak facts from notes |
| 55-60 min | Update review log (what still needs work?) |
The review log -- a simple running list of concepts you could not recall -- is the most important output of a review session. It becomes your targeted study list for the next session.
Reviewing Process vs. Concept Notes
Concept notes (definitions, frameworks, principles) respond well to the cover-and-recall method because they have discrete recall targets.
Process notes (ordered steps, sequences) require a different review approach: attempt to write the sequence from memory without looking at the notes, then compare. The goal is not just knowing each step but knowing the order -- which sequential recall tests better than cover-and-recall.
For processes relevant to your certification:
- Incident response phases
- Change management procedures
- Risk management steps
- Project management process groups
Create a "blank sequence" review habit: on a blank sheet, write the process name and attempt to fill in all steps in order. Compare to notes. Repeat until you can complete the sequence accurately twice.
Using Notes Alongside Practice Questions
The most efficient integration of notes and practice questions:
- Take a domain-specific practice set (15-25 questions)
- After reviewing wrong answers, locate the relevant section in your notes
- Use cover-and-recall on that note section immediately after reviewing the wrong answer
- The wrong answer creates a retrieval failure that primes the subsequent note review
This timing -- note review immediately after a retrieval failure -- produces stronger encoding than either activity alone.
Frequently Asked Questions
How many times should I review the same notes? Until you can recall the content accurately without looking. For most certification content, this requires 3-5 spaced review sessions. After that, switch to full practice exams for retrieval practice rather than note review. Over-reviewing notes on well-consolidated content is low-yield time use.
Should I revise and rewrite my notes during review? Yes, sparingly. When review reveals a gap or error in your notes, correct it. When you have learned something new that should be integrated with existing notes, add it. But avoid wholesale note rewriting as a review activity -- the time spent rewriting should be spent on active recall instead.
Is it useful to compare my notes to a study partner's? Yes, as a gap-identification activity. Different people note different things as important, and comparison often reveals concepts or relationships one person captured that the other missed. This is most valuable done orally (explain your notes to each other and identify differences) rather than simply exchanging written notes.
References
- Koriat, A., & Bjork, R.A. (2005). Illusions of competence in monitoring one's knowledge during study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31(2), 187-194.
- Roediger, H.L., & Karpicke, J.D. (2006). Test-enhanced learning: Taking memory tests improves long-term retention. Psychological Science, 17(3), 249-255.
- Kiewra, K.A. (1989). A review of note-taking: The encoding-storage paradigm and beyond. Educational Psychology Review, 1(2), 147-172.
- Dempster, F.N. (1989). Spacing effects and their implications for theory and practice. Educational Psychology Review, 1(4), 309-330.
- Rawson, K.A., & Dunlosky, J. (2011). Optimizing schedules of retrieval practice for durable and efficient learning: How much is enough? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140(3), 283-302.
- King, A. (1992). Comparison of self-questioning, summarizing, and notetaking-review as strategies for learning from lectures. American Educational Research Journal, 29(2), 303-323.