Familiar with The Tacit Dimension by Michael Polanyi? He made an observation that has since become known as Polanyi’s Paradox. “We know more than we can say.” Largely because of tacit knowledge.
I love audiobooks and recordings like the Teaching Company's Great Courses series as a way to increase the base of my knowledge in an area while I do housework or am on public transport. But I use speed them up (usually somewhere around 1.5x for good lecturers or up to 2x for commercial nonfiction). I don't retain as much as I do reading, but I usually end up with a good understanding of the scope and scale of the subject and a few interesting directions for more reading later.
I do alright with text to speech on things where I'm just listening for useful nuggets to use later (I pause, read, and highlight when something useful comes on), as opposed to trying to get a holistic or deep understanding of it. It's the equivalent of skimming, I suppose.
Not directly related to the main topic, but to the idea about needing to do things in order to learn, have you read "The Extended Mind" by Annie Murphy Paul?
I admit this is one of those that I started and then got distracted and never finished, but I do intend to go back to it soon, because the ideas I got from the part I read still rattle around in my mind (or my body?).
From that site:
"[I]t holds that the mind constructs our thought processes from the resources available outside the brain. These resources include the feelings and movements of our bodies; the physical spaces in which we learn and work; and the other minds with which we interact—our classmates, colleagues, teachers, supervisors, friends."
I haven't heard of "The Extended Mind" by Annie Murphy Paul before but I admit that it plays nicely to my biases; I've always disliked the metaphor of the disembodied brain-in-a-vat, and have noticed enormous changes to my preferences and how I think based on hormonal changes related to childbearing. I'll add it to my list and let you know when I finish reading it :)
Would love to know if anyone else has read it in the meantime 👀
I'm a college professor who uses technology in an attempt to help people learn how to help other people learn [better | faster | more efficiently] using technology (My students are classroom teachers, preparing to use their classroom technology more effectively for their students) The meta- or fractal nature of that sentence is clear to me.
What "learning or teaching effectively" boils down to is (after 30+ years studying it): being motivated to learn fuels the desire to do the necessary work to learn.
The necessary work of learning is practicing. At first with a guide or guru or sherpa, then with less guidance, and finally without the need of external help. Any similarity to Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development is only partially coincidental.
The learner - importantly - needs to be primed to learn. Ready. Motivated. Hungry. Then, the guide's job is to make the learner aware of what to look for in the way of "useful evidence" or how to parse out the "gold nuggets" among the fuzzy homogenous buzz of information. Next, the bystander's job is to help improve their efficiency locating the nuggets on their own. Last, the emerging expert is allowed to run the whole show without help to prove their expertise. Any similarity to the "guild system" of artisans is only partially coincidental.
A learner needs to see the relevance of a lesson before they will invest more than minimal attention toward learning it. As an example of this, a person who memorizes only the math formulas to pass the test will likely not remember them a day or two later. A person who understands the reason why Pythagoras' theorem is such an important tool for solving many different types of practical problems will likely have no trouble remembering it decades later.
Learning is hardly ever successful without learner motivation. Learning can hardly be prevented once motivation is complete, which is summarized in a construction called "The Geneva Paradox": "A learner who is not ready cannot be taught. A learner who is ready does not need to be taught." (or in Zen, "When the student is ready, the Master will appear"). I learned this in the context of Jean Piaget's beliefs about the relationship between learner and teacher, thus Geneva.
Which is my typical long-winded way around to say... in all the examples you shared, it seemed clear to me that you were primed to pay attention to something, and you used your opportunity to rehearse and practice until you felt comfortable that you learned it.
As always, Eleanor... A wonderful summary.
(Sidebar... as is my habit, I like to double-check my references. This time, when checking the wording of the Geneva Paradox, I could not find any mention of it through Google... Which now leaves me in an unenviable position. I COULD take credit for it, but I won't.)
You sound like you are doing a much more useful job of teaching teachers than at least 90% of my master's program professors, so first, thanks for that. Second, thanks for the kind words and breaking down the steps of successful learning here!
Also... sorry for how long this took, I definitely thought I already replied to this, not sure what happened there.
Familiar with The Tacit Dimension by Michael Polanyi? He made an observation that has since become known as Polanyi’s Paradox. “We know more than we can say.” Largely because of tacit knowledge.
I've never heard of it but it sounds interesting, I'll check it out! Thanks for the tip 🙏
I love audiobooks and recordings like the Teaching Company's Great Courses series as a way to increase the base of my knowledge in an area while I do housework or am on public transport. But I use speed them up (usually somewhere around 1.5x for good lecturers or up to 2x for commercial nonfiction). I don't retain as much as I do reading, but I usually end up with a good understanding of the scope and scale of the subject and a few interesting directions for more reading later.
I do alright with text to speech on things where I'm just listening for useful nuggets to use later (I pause, read, and highlight when something useful comes on), as opposed to trying to get a holistic or deep understanding of it. It's the equivalent of skimming, I suppose.
Not directly related to the main topic, but to the idea about needing to do things in order to learn, have you read "The Extended Mind" by Annie Murphy Paul?
https://anniemurphypaul.com/books/the-extended-mind/
I admit this is one of those that I started and then got distracted and never finished, but I do intend to go back to it soon, because the ideas I got from the part I read still rattle around in my mind (or my body?).
From that site:
"[I]t holds that the mind constructs our thought processes from the resources available outside the brain. These resources include the feelings and movements of our bodies; the physical spaces in which we learn and work; and the other minds with which we interact—our classmates, colleagues, teachers, supervisors, friends."
I haven't heard of "The Extended Mind" by Annie Murphy Paul before but I admit that it plays nicely to my biases; I've always disliked the metaphor of the disembodied brain-in-a-vat, and have noticed enormous changes to my preferences and how I think based on hormonal changes related to childbearing. I'll add it to my list and let you know when I finish reading it :)
Would love to know if anyone else has read it in the meantime 👀
I'm a college professor who uses technology in an attempt to help people learn how to help other people learn [better | faster | more efficiently] using technology (My students are classroom teachers, preparing to use their classroom technology more effectively for their students) The meta- or fractal nature of that sentence is clear to me.
What "learning or teaching effectively" boils down to is (after 30+ years studying it): being motivated to learn fuels the desire to do the necessary work to learn.
The necessary work of learning is practicing. At first with a guide or guru or sherpa, then with less guidance, and finally without the need of external help. Any similarity to Vygotsky's Zone of Proximal Development is only partially coincidental.
The learner - importantly - needs to be primed to learn. Ready. Motivated. Hungry. Then, the guide's job is to make the learner aware of what to look for in the way of "useful evidence" or how to parse out the "gold nuggets" among the fuzzy homogenous buzz of information. Next, the bystander's job is to help improve their efficiency locating the nuggets on their own. Last, the emerging expert is allowed to run the whole show without help to prove their expertise. Any similarity to the "guild system" of artisans is only partially coincidental.
A learner needs to see the relevance of a lesson before they will invest more than minimal attention toward learning it. As an example of this, a person who memorizes only the math formulas to pass the test will likely not remember them a day or two later. A person who understands the reason why Pythagoras' theorem is such an important tool for solving many different types of practical problems will likely have no trouble remembering it decades later.
Learning is hardly ever successful without learner motivation. Learning can hardly be prevented once motivation is complete, which is summarized in a construction called "The Geneva Paradox": "A learner who is not ready cannot be taught. A learner who is ready does not need to be taught." (or in Zen, "When the student is ready, the Master will appear"). I learned this in the context of Jean Piaget's beliefs about the relationship between learner and teacher, thus Geneva.
Which is my typical long-winded way around to say... in all the examples you shared, it seemed clear to me that you were primed to pay attention to something, and you used your opportunity to rehearse and practice until you felt comfortable that you learned it.
As always, Eleanor... A wonderful summary.
(Sidebar... as is my habit, I like to double-check my references. This time, when checking the wording of the Geneva Paradox, I could not find any mention of it through Google... Which now leaves me in an unenviable position. I COULD take credit for it, but I won't.)
You sound like you are doing a much more useful job of teaching teachers than at least 90% of my master's program professors, so first, thanks for that. Second, thanks for the kind words and breaking down the steps of successful learning here!
Also... sorry for how long this took, I definitely thought I already replied to this, not sure what happened there.