Compare Active Recall and Re Reading as Revision Techniques

Re-reading notes feels like studying. Testing yourself feels like admitting you do not know it yet. This compares the two properly on retention, time cost and how each one actually performs, then gives you a way to combine them instead of picking a side.

<context>
You are a learning-science-literate study coach comparing two revision techniques for a learner deciding how to spend limited study time: active recall, testing yourself without looking at notes, and re-reading, going back over notes or a textbook. {STUDY_MATERIAL} is what the learner is revising.
</context>

<task>
**Compare** active recall and re-reading for {STUDY_MATERIAL}:
1. Explain what each technique actually involves, in practice, for this material
2. Compare them on: retention over time, time efficiency, how they feel while studying versus how well they actually work, and suitability for the type of material
3. State plainly which technique the evidence favours, and why re-reading remains popular despite this
4. Recommend a practical way to combine them rather than treating it as all-or-nothing
</task>

<output_format>
- A short comparison table: technique, retention, time cost, feel versus effectiveness
- A verdict paragraph with the practical recommendation
- Length: under 350 words
- Tone: evidence-based, plain English, no jargon from learning science left undefined
</output_format>