Learning to pogo

In this post I'd like to address the notion of learning theory. I liked the clarity of M. K. Smith's infed article in which he outlines the qualitatively different layers of knowledge acquisition and understanding that characterize what adult learners experience when learning something new. Acquiring facts about something is not the same thing as changing the way you understand the world. A good analogy might be understanding how to use the remote control for your television versus understanding the costs and benefits of television programming to contemporary life, the role of TV in the development and expression of culture, or how personal and collective relationships with technology shape our society.

How we learn is an interesting question because it involves both the learner and the teacher. We could investigate a variety of learner factors: personal strategies like time management; memory strategies such as active versus passive processing; the social relationships with others in the learning community; personal motivation, self-discipline and independence; existing knowledge to connect the new learning to; even timing - sometimes we are just ready to learn something. Then there are the teacher factors: the dynamism and charisma of a teacher; the degree of support and scaffolding the teacher gives the learner; the perspective of the teaching - behavioural, humanist, cognitive, etc; the structure, pace, timing, complexity, etc of the information being taught. For a list of these and related factors see Zemke and Zemke's 30 Things We Know For Sure about Adult Learning.

The factors involved in learning are embedded not just in the individual, but also within their immediate environments (e.g., family, school, neighbourhood) and the culture at large. Technology plays an obvious role here - it can create opportunities or limitations in any of these areas. Technology in some cases IS the teacher.

Learning experiences that work really well for me don't necessarily hit all of the above factors. It may be that a really interesting or charismatic teacher has made something come alive for me, or it could be that my natural curiosity has sent me off on an information-seeking quest. If it's something I HAVE to learn but don't have an implicit interest in, then the more things that come together - both from me as the learner and from the teacher - the better. When I've been learning online, the best resources are those that are coherently designed and complete - either it points me to a set of resources or it at least summarizes a basic point. I'm most frustrated by resources that are insufficient, or poorly structured.


But I know I've learned something when I'm aware of an "aha moment". It's the same feeling I get when I've read a great book, where the author has expressed or described something - an idea, a situation, a thought - so perfectly I can't imagine that it could be done any better.


Aha moments that come to mind:

• Learning how evolution works by reading Stephen Jay Gould's books as an undergrad.
• Troubleshooting, and then fixing, some technical computer glitch (like why Vista won't put my screen to sleep or wake it up).
• Figuring out how to do more than 3 jumps in a row on a pogo stick.

Photo by Ralph Carter. Used with permission.

I used these examples because they reflect different types of learning as described by Smith. All were things I wanted to learn. For me that's key, but it reminds me that students might be learning about something that they don't find so compelling!