You re-read your notes and everything feels obvious. Is that good evidence you've learned it?

No — that fluency mostly reflects high retrieval strength in the moment, which is a weak and often misleading sign of durable learning.

Re-reading keeps the material continuously in front of you, so retrieval strength stays pinned high and everything reads as "known." But recognition ("that looks familiar") is far easier than recall ("produce it from nothing"), and it's recall that predicts whether you'll have the information later. The performance-versus-learning distinction warns exactly against this trap: the smoother study feels, the less it may be teaching you.

And note the timing: this fluency illusion depends heavily on how recently you read. It's strongest right after reading, when retrieval strength is freshest — recency inflates the feeling of knowing. Let a day pass and that easy familiarity fades, which is exactly why "it felt obvious when I read it last night" is no guarantee you can produce it today. Swap re-reading for self-testing to convert that false fluency into real storage strength.