Monday, October 07, 2019

About learning

I came across the article below via various academics. Thanks to Suresh Govindarajan for some clarifications. The study is about undergraduate students. One of the techniques is mentioned below. But I am not sure whether it can be done uniformly for all subjects. Some mindless learning also may be useful. Perhaps the use of the technique below extends beyond the particular subject. “Learning occurs when we get something wrong and have to correct it. So a particularly effective way to teach something in a way that will stick is to put students in a position of having to arrive at the best answer they can, without hints, even if that answer is wrong. Then, after they have committed (preferably some time after), you can correct them, preferably with a hint (just one) to prompt them to rectify the error themselves. Psychologists who have studied this refer to the approach as introducing “desirable difficulties.” Google it if you have not come across this term before. (The term itself is due to the Stanford psychologist Robert Bjork.) “ STUDENT TEACHING EVALUATIONS ARE EFFECTIVE, BUT NOT IN THE WAY YOU THINK
My experience: I have read the article a couple of times now. I wonder whether some mindless learning and just staring at stuff without understanding may also useful since it may be difficult to follow the procedure described at the end (desirable difficulties) for all subjects. I describe my experiences. In college I studied Complex Analysis during the month before the final examinations and completely forgot about it after the examinations. Then in 1978, at the age of 37, I found that William Thurston has completely changed the area that I have been working since my thesis days. I could not understand any of it. I used to stare at the notes before going to sleep. Then in 1982, I realised some elementary aspects of it can be understood through Complex Analysis and started a seminar learning Complex Analysis along the way. Then in 1984 I attended a conference on Thurston’s work at work only to find that professors from various universities studying his notes word by word and trying to fill in the details. That gave a start and some understanding, enough to use some of it and even prove some related results, came bit by bit. Now in 1979, a collaborator Peter Scott used parts of Thurston’s work I did not learn and am going through the same process again. I do not really know what mixture of methods works in learning.

No comments: