How many times have you or someone you know do something over and over again, yet learn nothing from it? If you are like me, then at least a few times.
On the other hand, Elliot Massie once said something to the effect that if you hand a salesperson a crumpled and smudged fax that explains how to increase her sales and thus increase her commissions, then more than likely, she will learn how to increase her sales. So did she learn by doing? If you call reading "doing" something, then she "learned by doing." If I turn an idea or thought over in my head (reflect) and learn something new, am I'm doing something or am I'm doing nothing?
In the July 23, 2004 edition of Science Journal, it was reported that information is obtained by two means; 1) trial-and-error tactics and 2) watching others. So if we watch someone do something and gain information from this act, did we learn by doing?
So when we say we "learn by doing," what exactly do we mean? Is it the same thing as saying that we "live by eating?" Or does it mean something more specific?
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
The LC Blog is a community feature of Learning Circuits. It is dedicated to sharing ideas and opinions about the state of learning and technology.
Posts
About the LC Blog
The LC Blog is a community feature that Learning Circuits launched in 2002. The main feature of the LC Blog is its Question of the Month, which hones in on a priority topic facing learning professionals. Anyone--and everyone--can contribute to the LC Blog.
Blogmeister for the LC Blog is currently Justin Brusino, Community of Practice Manager for Learning Technologies at ASTD. Connect with Justin on Twitter @ASTDLearnTech.
Blogmeister for the LC Blog is currently Justin Brusino, Community of Practice Manager for Learning Technologies at ASTD. Connect with Justin on Twitter @ASTDLearnTech.
StumbleUpon
Blog Archive
-
▼
2005
(160)
-
▼
June
(11)
- iPods for Learning
- Multi-media elearning...
- Dear Blogmeister - June 15, 2005
- Workflow learning vs. the "me-focus" culture
- The Power of Us
- What do you think?
- Understanding Systems Content
- Open Source E-Learning vs. bundled vs. merging vs....
- A Reading from "Learning By Doing"
- Living by Eating
- Aldrich Axioms of Resistance to Change in Formal L...
-
▼
June
(11)
Search This Blog
About Learning Circuits
ASTD launched Learning Circuits in January 2000. Its goal was to promote and aid the use of e-learning, creating a body of knowledge about how to use technology efficiently and effectively for learning. There are nearly 800 articles currently on the website.
About ASTD
ASTD (American Society for Training & Development) is the world’s largest association dedicated to workplace learning and performance professionals. ASTD is dedicated to providing resources to practitioners working the field of e-learning. ASTD delivers the free webzine Learning Circuits, the ASTD TechKnowledge Conference & Exposition; two educational certificate programs on e-learning design; and numerous books and Infolines.
Blog Roll
Blog Topics
Concepts
Tools
Type
Companies
Organizations
Year
Tools
Type
Companies
Organizations
Year
5 comments:
Wow. So it was Elliot Massie who suggested people can learn from reading. He's good.
Having said that, I think your point is well taken. The phrase "blended learning" became useless as it
a) Was taken to be always good,
and
b) Meant everything.
"Learning By Doing" could easily follow the same trap. One can learn by doing many things. And, as Jay Cross reminded me, some people decide to do things by gut feeling, which might be a great example of learning by not doing!
In my book of the same title, I suggest formal learning programs get the right balance of:
* Simulation (representing reality)
* Game (to motivate) and
* Pedagogy (to explain).
The premise of the book is that many programs go too far on the third area, pedagogy, and not nearly far enough on the sim and game elements (in that order).
As one keeper of the phrase, I hope it doesn't get killed the way "blended learning" was.
Hi Clark,
Actually, I believe Elliot Massie already realized that we already knew that people are capable of learning from reading. Rather, he was suggesting that leaning can often be accomplished via very simple methods, sort of like what Richard was speaking of in his post .
And secondly, that the amount of design and development that needs to go into a learning package often depends upon the motivation of the learner. For example, in this case, the salesperson has a strong motivation to learn the new method of selling (it will increase her commissions), thus a simple fax is all that is needed. However, when motivations are not as strong, then a lot more effort has to go into the design and development of the learning package. For example, when Mobile engineers discovered a way to save the company a bundle of money, a memo went out to the field, yet the adoption rate remained rather low – there just wasn’t a lot of motivation for change. What was required was viscosity rather than velocity.
So you have just taken a new job. You quit your old one and move your family across the country. You find out when you arrive that you have a new boss. This boss has no experience, no skills in relevant areas. But he is highly motivated, and has a crumpled up fax. How good are you feeling?
You are about to fly to Tampa, Florida. Your pilot, as of yesterday, worked in the local Wal-Mart. But don't worry. She is highly motivated, and has the crumpled up fax.
I believe we should always aim for as simple as necessary, but not more so. We should also, when there is a conflict between time and completeness, go for timely over complete.
And yes, the motivation of a learner is of huge importance. The more motivated they are, the less you need to add game elements, quid pro quo, and mandates.
To go back to the pilot example, there is a great deal of training necessary, including simulations and experience, to make a good pilot. There is also a crumpled up fax that contains a recent radar image of a huge storm that is given to the pilot at the last moment that could save everyone's life.
Given all of that, I am fairly happy with the amount of "crumpled-up faxes" that most people, including my managers and CEOs, have received, from IT, from HR, from the media. As for help with their project management skills, I wouldn't mind a bit more.
Uh, Knowledgestar, cave men couldn't read, so the fax won't change the situation at all.
I'd like to add something to Don's original scenario. Acting on the fax was not the learning. The trial-and-error that followed was the source of the learning. That's what sticks. Learning requires both doing and practice.
Interesting debate. Taking the view of the sales girl and having been a learning sales girl for many years I pose the following. There are several levels to her learning. 1. firstly on picking up the crumpled fax she learns that faxes are a channel for receiving sales tips/learning 2. on executing the advice she learns that selling this way works for her (or not) and 3 as a result of what happens in point 2, she will make a mental bookmark about whether to trust crumpled faxes.
My thoughts, she is more likely to be motivated to learn someting new if the fax is from a source she respects as being an expert in this area - someone she can learn from.
Also, if the fax represents a shortcut to closing the sale and it works, she'll use it again and share it with her friends who are of course all sales people!
Post a Comment