Wining with Chris

How to Study the Right Way for the CSW

Posted on

I wanted to elaborate a bit more on the way to use the learning techniques. I have to start out by saying that I wish I knew this info when I was in college. It might have made calculus, genetics, and all those fun classes so much easier. Well, maybe.

A couple of caveats to start out. Again, I’m approaching this from a non-wine perspective. I’m on the science side of this question. But it’s valid nevertheless whether its’ the CSW or a MOOC that you want to ace.

Work with Your Mind

As I discussed before, the traditional techniques of cramming give you a false sense of security. You’re going to retain some info in short-term memory.

Then, confirmation bias will set in and let you believe that you’ve mastered it. Would that it were so. There are two problems with that premise.

First, it’s a false hope. You may have it for a bit of time, maybe even for the exam. But, then it’ll float away unless you actively recall it.

The second problem is that you may not get the best scores that you could on the test. Traditional methods don’t fall through with the scores. Other methods are more effective.

So, how can you use this info to your favor?

Studying to Learn

Distributed practice and flashcards are excellent ways to find a home for the information in your mind to make it last.

You could use distributed practice to study your flashcards. Do a few topics at a time once. The next time, do the next set, and continue going through your deck.

You can create separate practice quizzes using blank maps one time, recalling regions and stats with another, and then, doing your dates and other data in yet a third session.

Creating Your Flashcards

There is growing evidence that supports the benefits of handwriting versus computer use for taking notes in better cognitive activity and memory retention. It makes sense because you’re engaging more of your brain. It also creates stronger neural pathways for more effective recall.

What I propose is this: Write out your flashcards preferably with cursive writing. I can hear the moans from here. It is harder but only because you likely haven’t used those muscles since grade school. Your hand will probably get tired, but you’ll help yourself learn.

I have a handy project notebook with columns where I write questions on one half and the answer on the other. I nerd out and create a random pattern of asking questions so that I’m not just memorizing the order of answers. That’s an essential part of the practice.

Make It a Daily Practice

The next critical factor is to make it something you do every day. Even if it’s five minutes in the morning, it works. And some evidence suggests that it’s more effective if you’re trying to learn new material when doing it before you go to bed.

Use information like this study to your advantage and make your learning the best that it can be when you need it most.

After all, jumping back into the study habit is tough if you’ve been out of the saddle for a while. You lose that sense of discipline and urgency. The CSW exam will change all that for you.

Final Thoughts

You may find starting your journey daunting. It is, and I’m just a third into it, more or less. But having the reassurance of making your studying work for you is heartening and empowering.

Yeah, it’s hard. You don’t have to get too deep into it to figure that out for yourself. But make it a challenge with a kick ass reward at the end of it. I don’t know as I can think of a better occasion than to pop for a nice Burgundy or vintage port.

Photo by Aaron Burden on Unsplash

Studying for the CSW

Posted on

An essential thing to put on your to-do list when studying for the CSW is to attend the webinar, “The Insider’s Guide to the CSW Exam.” It gives you the lowdown about what you need to know and expect on the test.

If you’ve purchased the workbook, you’ll find that the info is concise but jam-packed. And anything in it is fair game for the exam. It is daunting when you start reading it, especially the figures, foreign terms, and geography.

Time Commitment

One point that struck me particularly was the advice to study every day for an hour and perhaps plan on a year to get ready. Yes, you read that right. It’s essentially an associate degree in wine.

And it makes such good sense too. The memorization is the biggest hurdle you’ll face. So, the more you see it, the better it’ll stick.

But there’s a good way and a bad way to go about it.

Relearning How You Learn

If you’re like most people, you studied by one of the following techniques:

Rereading
Highlighting
Cramming
Reviewing your notes

You may have had enough success to pass. But psychologists have found that certain techniques are better uses of your time. That comes in handy with the CSW exam.

According to a study by John Dunlosky et al, practice testing and what the researchers call distributed practice scored best for improving test scores. Doing the latter would involve practicing a selection of spelling words one at a time but not repeating them twice in a row.

If you just wrote each one 10 times, you end up giving yourself a false sense of learning. And what you do know is likely short-term memory which fades fast.

So, for the CSW, you could practice the terms in this manner, geography, and all the other bits instead of rereading the text several times. It’s harder up front, but it helps you retain it better to recall it at the exam.

You could print up the blank maps from the workbook and test yourself. Mix it up with a review of terms and another session with regs. You get the idea.

If things seem overwhelming, give it a shot and see if it makes things click for you.

Photo by Ben Mullins on Unsplash

Biodyamic Wines?!

Posted on

This entry is in the series Alternative Wine

When I first read about biodynamic wines, I thought it was a joke. I even laughed out loud.

“Yarrow blossoms stuffed into urinary bladders from Red Deer?”

“A humus mixture prepared by stuffing cow manure into the horn of a cow and buried into the ground?”

Huh?!!

I thought I entered the Twilight Zone.

What Are Biodynamic Wines?

Apparently, it was the brainchild of an Austrian philosopher named Rudolf Steiner. He believed the vineyard was a life force that the vintner had to manage with potions like the two above, for lack of a better word. And you had to mix them in the correct proportions.

We’re talking about something on the order of one sixteenth of an ounce per ten tons of compost. Skeptics will recognize the homeopathic implications of this preposterous formula.

Oh, and did I mention the moon phases of flower, fruit, leaf, and root that dictate what you can do in the vineyard? You probably figured that was next.

What the Evidence Says

Casting aside the prescience for a moment, the moon has absolutely nothing to do with the growth of vines or any plant for that matter. It’s the sun and the photoperiod that make the difference.

And as for tasting different, let’s just call it a riff on the bandwagon effect. It’s not unlike someone believing the more expensive wine tastes better like I mentioned last time. Sure, it’s not a hard-and-fast rule, but cheaper ones are not necessarily bad. And wines do evolve.

The worst thing about biodynamic wines is that there are people that believe in this nonsense. The astrology angle is one thing, but the homeopathic element shoots it into the stratosphere.

The new requirements by the FTC say it all.

“(1) there is no scientific evidence that
the product works and (2) the product’s claims are based only on theories of homeopathy from
the 1700s that are not accepted by most modern medical experts.”

So, where does that leave us? Unfortunately, it is a splitter faction of the organic-nature-rules-chemicals-are-bad ideology that is fully of hype and shady marketing practices.

My take: It is utter nonsense of the most insidious type. Avoid at all costs.

Photo by Kenrick Mills on Unsplash

Organic Wines?

Posted on

This entry is part 2 of 3 in the series Alternative Wine

Let me start off by saying that I’m approaching this topic from what the scientific literature says about these issues.

Defining Organic

Let’s begin with the definition of a 100-percent organic product. According to the USDA’s National Organic Program, it means that all the ingredients and processing fall under this definition with no GMOs with ones that are approved.

There are varying definitions, not unlike the wine classification system in many countries. They involve different levels of organic ingredients, certification, and use of non-organic ones.

The critical takeaway is that an official framework and regulating body exists unlike natural and biodynamic.

The definitions are nuanced and probably out of the ken of the average person. We’re talking the difference between 100, 95, and 70 percent of the contents. Then, there is that stickler about sulfites.

Sulfites and Wine

Winemakers use them to control downy mildew and other pests that could wipe out a vineyard quicker than you can say phylloxera. As with agriculture, chemicals are necessary as are GMOs to reduce the use of the former.

That’s one reason why EU winemakers are in a panic as the debate continues whether to allow its use which is currently allowed. The problem is that there isn’t an alternative. Without it, they risk devastation of their vineyards.

Sorry to break it to you, folks, but the whole world is composed of chemicals including wine, food, and even you. Suggesting otherwise shows a general ignorance about chemistry and the world around us.
That’s called the appeal to nature fallacy.

Lest we forget, sulfites are a product of fermentation. And those chemicals keep wine from turning into vinegar and preventing you from contracting nasty bacteria. E. coli, anyone?

BTW, the most toxic substance in the world is a natural one, botulism.

The bottom line is that chemicals are not bad.

What About Organic Wine?

The essential thing to understand about this topic is the cache that the term organic has with its followers. The USDA is precise about the distinctions from their regulatory perspective. Marketing is a whole different animal, and that’s where the questionable advertising practices come into play.

Some may claim that the wine tastes better. More likely, it’s another riff on the “marketing placebo effect.” In essence, it’s the phenomenon whereby someone thinks a bottle of wine tastes better just because it costs more. The opposite is possible with organic wines because of the spoilage risk.

Cutting to the Chase

If you’re drinking organic wine because you believe it’s healthier, forgive me if I chuckle. It is alcohol, after all, but I don’t fault you one bit for why you or I drink. It isn’t like drinking a glass of orange juice to ramp up your vitamin C intake even if you take it with a shot of vodka.

There are no superior health benefits, minuscule positive environmental effects, and certainly not a way to avoid the so-called evil chemicals.

Don’t get me wrong. Organic farming has lots of problems and questionable benefits, but it has brought to light better agricultural practices like integrated pest management.

It makes sense on so many levels both environmentally and economically. If we’ve learned anything from the last few years of wildfires, it’s that an income is not a sure thing for winegrowers. The fact remains that conventional agriculture has the least impact on the environment.

My take: It’s marketing hype and greenwashing with no clear consumer advantage.

Photo by Karsten Würth (@inf1783) on Unsplash

Natural Wines?

Posted on

This entry is part 1 of 3 in the series Alternative Wine

The word, natural, is a loaded one. The Dictionary.com definition of “existing in or formed by nature” may seem cut and dried.

So, where does that leave us?

Defining Natural Wines

While there isn’t an official designation or legal status, there are some common denominators like no chemicals, irrigation, mechanical harvesting, and, perhaps most importantly, no manipulation after-the-fact.

Again, I’m speaking as a consumer and wine enthusiast. I am not a vintner. As I see it, there are two ways to view that last point. First, you look at it from the old world perspective.

There’s a saying by Martin Luther that sums it up well.

“Beer is made by men, wine by God.”

Tradition has dictated that Nature rules the vineyard and the harvest. That’s why irrigation and other artificial practices are forbidden in some regions and for some classifications. Some in the industry won’t even call themselves winemakers for just that reason.

Then, there is the new world, specifically, American take on it.

Wine is a commodity like any other good sold on the market. That means making a consistent product that someone will buy consistently and appeal to a large segment of the targeted audience.

It also involves creating a brand. Pick up the average bottle of domestic wine, and you’ll see an eye-catching label with a fun name. It’s all about getting that impulse buy which brings this discussion to the next point.

The Bane of Marketing

Unfortunately, all of these practices equate to another case of a huge lobby misguiding and misinforming their followers. That’s right. It’s organic farming and the natural following.

Pick up any magazine or search for a recipe on the internet. The chances are the ingredients will mention at least one organic product not because it’s better or more nutritious but to sell the message and the gospel.

BTW, under its current wording, hybrids and grafted vines which are the vast majority would qualify as GMOs.

It’s easy to see how it can become a slippery slope quickly. After all, natural doesn’t equal safe. GMOs are not harmful to people or the environment. (I’m putting my money on WHO, AMA, and AAAS instead of the likes of misinformed bloggers who say otherwise.)

Organic farming uses pesticides too, and their products contain residue no matter what you’ve heard to the contrary. That’s marketing in action too. And while it bears the brunt, they are not alone.

The FDA Fail

The problems with the term, natural, regardless of its association with wine are many. The FDA has dragged its collective heels on defining it. Instead, they have vague explanations as they have with the terms, organic and GMOs.

What the FDA hasn’t done are the following:

Implied a health benefit
Considered the processing method(s)
Addresssed the question of pesticides

Natural wines are less insidious but guilty nevertheless. Minimizing any negative environmental effects is worthwhile and should be the aim of anyone in agriculture.

What is wrong is when the industry blurs the lines between cherry-picking and misinformation with a good message. Producers overstep the boundaries where there is no legal definition in place. They’re making it up as they go along. That’s also what makes it filthy.

My take: Buyer, beware! There’s a lot of greenwashing that muddies the waters.

Photo by Jax on Unsplash



		Wine Name:

		Vintage:

		Shipping to: