Why my professors' study guides often missed the mark
As a med student I watched brilliant professors build resources students skimmed, so I tried to fix how study materials actually stick.
Hook
I sat in lectures where professors poured hours into quizzes and guides, while half the class guessed through them the night before exams.
The Problem
From the student side it often felt like a mismatch, teachers made detailed documents and we treated them like optional reading. The effort was obvious, but the uptake was low.
Many materials were dense. Pages of text, long tables, and exhaustive lists looked useful, until you tried to recall them under time pressure. Those formats did not help me build quick recall, they just made me anxious.
Timing also mattered. Resources arrived either too early, before we knew what to focus on, or too late, when we were already cramming. That made great content feel irrelevant or unusable.
Feedback loops were weak. Teachers rarely saw how students actually used their materials. I watched classmates create their own shortcuts, flashcards, and summaries instead of engaging with the official resources.
There was also a trust gap. Students guessed what would be tested, they skipped parts that seemed unlikely to appear on exams, and educators lost visibility on what stuck. All that hard work ended up underused.
The Insight
I realized the issue was not effort or expertise, it was alignment between how teachers teach and how students actually study. That pushed me to build Neobloc, so educators can make materials that students actually use and remember.
Curious how other educators handle this. DM me or drop a comment.