HUMAN LEARNING - NATURAL DRIFT TO LOOSE COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE

HUMAN LEARNING - PROFESSOR CONCEDES CoP AS GOLD STANDARD IN EXECUTIVE DEVELOPMENT

 HUMAN LEARNING - 3,000 CoPS AT CATERPILLAR WORLDWIDE

MORE  IN  ARCHIVES...

RESEARCH NEWS NOTIFICATIONS...REGISTER

These are quite astounding and profound adult learning discoveries by these authors. They follow very similar arguments to Adler (1940). See how valid they may be for 21st century knowledge workers.

Any approach which emphasises speed and ignores efficiency (ie., effectiveness) is no solution at all...

The mind can digest so much information at a time. As there is no possibility of increasing the rate at which the brain can clear information, the aim must be to increase the efficiency of reading.

There is a great technical problem in communication. The speaker or writer take their whole thought and has to configure it linearly. The observer or reader has to take the line of symbols and from it reconstruct the original wholeness of thought.

'Taking things in' is a process OF the mind, not an injection INTO the mind.

The reader must assimilate - learn - by understanding and not by memorizing. They must be selective, discriminating and organizing.... The author has the obligation to give the reader time to assimilate... otherwise the material would remain undigested.

Memorization often impedes learning. It makes quick comprehension difficult if not impossible... It concentrates on the words themselves, looking AT them instead of looking FOR their meaning....And to the extent that he uses this most inefficient method of learning, his capacity is wasted....

Becoming a passive receptacle for printed words also ignores the invaluable related existing knowledge that is already stored (in the mind)....

Students we have tested on the reading of digests have as a rule not retained the information as long as those who, by reading the originals, have been obliged to look FOR their knowledge; nor have they comprehended so well: some have had only a superficial understanding, as though they had looked AT the material.

The material (using digests/Cliff notes) would remain undigested.... if there were no amplification or illustration, no constructive repetition or variation. It is never our intention, therefore, to imply that incidental material is unecessary. They are there because they

- contribute to understanding,
- arouse interest,
- stimulate the imagination,
- and give the reader a chance to use his own knowledge;

They also provide
- the colour and the TONE that are often the best indications of the author's intention and purpose.

To concentrate properly (while reading) a reader should be as active and spontaneous as he is in conversation or discussion.

- DEBRIEF -

ASSIMILATION...DIGESTION...ABSORPTION......... not EXPOSURE.
Exposure, ie., information dumping (mega portal databases) does not equal assimilation.

Memorisation seems to be the obvious solution to warehouses of information that the knowledge worker has to somehow store. NOT SO say the De Leeuw's. It is the opposite of what we should be doing - discerning for the author's meaning, not collecting a set of facts.

It takes time to digest cognitive food.

You cannot...... SHORT CUT..... profound learning !

Time is needed, the authors later write, for you to already access your pre-existing knowledge on a certain area so you can then make appropriate modifications ! We need to 'cast a network of schema round the new information.'

Like critics elsewhere, the De Leeuws are definitely implying that learning CANNOT be done reading on a train going home from work or playing an educational tape in a car stereo system while you are driving your car. We must be 100 % attentive... to discern and organise the underlying meaning of the subject matter.

The De Leeuws spell out for us why we need to read all the supposed "waffle" from an author. Those "incidentals" are paramount to grabbing the WHOLE meaning of the author. They motivate us. They give us time to absorb the real meaning as our mind plays around with the illustrations. We comprehend the passages so much better... even if it takes twice as long to read.

However, let me again say, authors like lecturers are subject-matter experts. They have rarely been trained in human learning theories to design their set of writings around these theories. And neither have nearly 100 % of the editors in all the world's book and magazine publish establishments !!!!

One of the world's prolific and respected business writers, Charles Handy, stated in a breakfast seminar in 2002 that he was troubled why so few people ever get to finish his books, let alone apply what he for years has been writing.

Well, sorry Charles... you have zero diagrams, you have zero sub-headings, you have zero bullet points, you have zero end of chapter summaries, you have zero references or index. What do you expect from a baby boomer generation grown up with TV and Comics ? Just SHOCKING formatting that few people have any patience with. OK ?

The finishing line of learning from our environment is when we can say... "I have read it and it makes clear SENSE to me." Until dry facts make sense to you, ie, have some meaning to you then you have NOT learnt. Just look at your bookshelf and tell me five major learning points you gained from just one of your books there.

Well............ ....can you ? !

If not... then you have spectated not assimilated.
We simply cannot afford to spectate as knowledge workers. Something has to change.

___________________________________

See More on Assimilation Skills...