I now make up lessons for my children mainly by summing up the wrong questions, because in a limited time, this is the most efficient method. You can think the other way around: suppose you do seven papers a week, but in fact you can do most of the questions (suppose 70%). You can do these questions three times and 30 times, but you may not be sure about those questions that you can't do many times. Therefore, if you can spend time repeating the topics you have mastered on topics that you can't do, your score can be effectively improved. No one can understand this truth. The key is how to do it ~

My experience is that if I let myself see it, I may stare at the wrong question many times and it still has no effect. The process is roughly like this:

1) No: No, not at all.

2) After knowing the answer: Oh ~ ~ Yes! It turns out that there are one or two places I didn't expect, so I did it when I thought about it. then what There is no later, but I may not remember this problem next time. ...

The purpose of the wrong question book is to record those places that you didn't expect before, that is, the bold sentence above, which we call knowledge blind spots, or weak points, or simply places where your way of thinking is not suitable.

But recording alone is still useless. You need a targeted analysis: what caused me not to think of it? Is it because a formula is not mastered? A knowledge point is not well understood? Some kind of problem-solving thinking is not skilled? Or is there a blind spot in the way of thinking? This analysis process is very important. If you can make such a targeted summary and analysis, you will catch one of your points almost every time you make a mistake, and then carry out targeted training, so that you can really get rid of the sea tactics and use your time most efficiently. Is that understandable?

But according to my experience, it is very, very difficult to ask students to do this by themselves, because it requires a higher understanding of the overall knowledge and the ability to analyze problems explosively, which is a bit like "Being in this mountain and separated by these clouds, how can I tell?" -students may not even have knowledge, how can they have this strategic ability? So at this time, one-on-one targeted counseling is a more efficient method. If you have an experienced teacher, you can have a thorough understanding of the fundamental points of your mistakes in each question, whether it is blind spots in knowledge or blind spots in thinking, and then help you summarize and analyze the training in a targeted manner, which will be very efficient and of course costly. However, if the make-up teacher just brings the students together and then plays the mode of "doing the problem-telling the answer", it seems meaningless to me, and it is still the old routine of sea tactics.

I hope these experiences can help you.