[Tutor] I learn pretty much everything visually

[ThreeBlindQuarks]

Wow, that is one long reply DN and clearly a topic you think much about.

I too have been hesitant about concepts like everyone needing to be taught the one way that works for them. That does not match reality for me as I don't think I have any one dominant modality. I find many useful in combination especially if I want to remember what I learn.

My theory is about flexibility. People who use various methods to adjust to whatever is around them can often do better in many areas of life. Yes, some people cannot use all methods. Color-blind people may not easily read some graphs for example, and blind and deaf people obviously may need alternate methods or something like a translation into a medium they can use. The same applies for people who do not speak the language some of the instruction is in fluently or at all.

For many people, lectures work and yet others prefer texts and so on. I find many to be complementary as lectures can share things like enthusiasm or what the lecturer thinks is important or cover mostly what will be on the test while the book covers much more widely. But both (and other forms such as one-on-one tutoring or programming assignments) will often not be at the level you are looking for.

In my view, general computer understanding is a good thing to have before actually focusing in on one language to use. Do you want to learn about loops within python or enter a course knowing some general things about loops and learning which kids python supports and how they differ from each other or from those in other languages? 

Just to end with this one example, how many things in languages like python are really loops even if you do not see them? Consider operations like list comprehensions where the loop is still somewhat visible, to generators which yield results on demand but yet are loops internally to vectorized operations such as adding two vectors or multiplying matrices. Consider using objects that look like they are doing things atomically but internally use loops or functions you can call and pass it another function which it invokes repeatedly on members of a list you supply and returns a list of the changed things. 

You may not see a loop and some forms of learning may make you think you are seeing lots of unrelated features. Or you may learn ane way and be puzzled when others show their code.

So, ideally, you learn a bit about general computer ideas and instantiate that knowledge in something like python. But learning from books or videos is probably not enough for those of us without photographic memories. As DN and others say, practice and experience can help drum things in. But skipping the learning part and just copying code and trying it out is also not ideal. A mixture can be more than the sum of the parts.

There is nothing wrong with favoring some mode of learning any more than of being lefthanded. But never using one hand does not really make good use of what you have. Sure, people teaching should consider using approaches that people can use but with few exceptions, I think the student is responsible for figuring out how to get SOMETHING  from many different styles. 

But sticking with it can be important if the course you take starts as too basic and if it is too advanced, consider finding what you are missing before resuming.

Python has so many resources out there, that something should be useful, albeit not necessarily the free stuff but also not necessarily the expensive stuff. I have rarely found a need to pay especially when enough material is freely online or in Library books I can just borrow.

Q




Sent with Proton Mail secure email.

------- Original Message -------
On Wednesday, June 14th, 2023 at 11:17 PM, dn via Tutor <tutor at python.org> wrote:


> On 14/06/2023 09.44, Alan Gauld via Tutor wrote:
> 
> > On 13/06/2023 19:28, Mats Wichmann wrote:
> > 
> > > One of the real problems when there are too many offerings is finding
> > > one that is (a) any good and (b) fits your learning style
> > 
> > > Be nice if we could do a bit better here on tutor, but I, at least,
> > > don't see a way (Alan?).
> > 
> > I don't think it's possible. As you say, there are different
> > learning styles. One person's good tutorial is the next
> > person's nightmare.
> > 
> > My own tutorial is aimed at a very specific type of learner;
> > namely one who wants to learn to program, but is already quite
> > experienced around computers - more than a casual web browser,
> > social media jockey etc. It suits those from that user-base
> > who want a "serious" tutorial. But if they want games,
> > medals and flags it's not going to work for them.
> > 
> > Other tutorials target those who just want to learn Python for
> > a specific purpose, but that could be as trivial as writing
> > macros for some application(Gimp say, or vim) to doing advanced
> > science or data analysis at university research level.
> 
> 
> The idea of "Learning Styles" is concerning. It is 'pop-psy', because
> the idea seems so easy to recognise within one's self*. Evidently there
> is a basis in truth, therefore the whole thing must be true(?). However,
> the idea has been de-bunked by serious researchers.
> 
> * this phenomenon repeated in every psych course, whereby the students
> each self-diagnose themselves to be suffering from any and every
> psychosis known to man - or at least the ones covered in that course.
> (see also medical students learning about sundry diseases)
> 
> 
> Worse, the idea that I have (only one) learning-style, is a tendency
> towards 'damage', in the sense that as soon as someone says "it has to
> happen like this..." (s)he is rejecting all other possibilities, without
> factual (or critical) basis. Ultimately, if you tell others that there
> is only one way you will do things, they won't want you on their
> teams, invite you to their parties, etc.
> 
> There is no question that we have individual biases. Speaking
> personally, I enjoy using my Kindle for fiction, but prefer paper-books
> for technical stuff - I'm used to recalling the location of information
> as 'how far through the book', 'which side of the page', and similar. In
> like mind, I find videos awkward, even recorded lectures, and even
> knowing that I've gained the advantage of rewind-and-replay. That said,
> just as during synchronous lectures, I take notes and rely upon those
> for 'replay'. (free hint: one of THE most valuable learning tools EVER -
> providing, providing, providing, you go back and review...)
> 
> 
> Another piece of (related) spurious pop-psy is the "10,000 hours"
> quotation. Ericsson (the reputed author) himself, spent years and
> considerable effort attempting to undo the 'damage' done by reporters
> (Malcolm Gladwell, and others) who seized upon the number which was only
> an observation, and turned it into a 'target' - forgetting that there
> are (many) other factors which affect learning. (you will note that the
> better critics target Gladwell rather than Ericsson, but ...) For
> example, someone with low physical coordination, eg can't catch a ball;
> can improve their skills - but it highly unlikely to ever become an
> Olympic-level athlete (despite being allowed to drive a car which
> requires similar relative-motion 'calculations')
> 
> The point that Ericsson noted, and which @Alan encourages (see Tutorial
> and other conversations), is that learning does not take place in one
> 'flash' - by reading a paragraph, watching a video-clip, or hearing an
> audio-snippet.
> 
> Learning needs to be consolidated. Learning also needs to be proven. The
> former leads to ideas such as "spaced repetition". The latter to
> "deliberative practice" (no, that's not a spelling mistake!).
> 
> This is where the learner practices what (s)he has learned. In our case:
> actually writes code to solve some problem - and keeps at it until the
> script works. Doing this repeatedly is equivalent to the musicians
> Ericsson observed, practising their art, for hours every day (for years
> - thus hours * days * years ~ 10,000!). This takes fortitude and inner
> determination ("intrinsic motivation"). Without that, without YOU
> maintaining a constant enthusiasm to get yourself to where you want to
> be, the rest is just static-noise (or even, excuses to prepare yourself
> for failure).
> 
> 
> That said, I mentioned working in a team. Accordingly, yes, there is a
> place for extrinsic (external) factors. Perhaps the best of these for
> any (every?) trainee (counting Python-Masters in such a mode), is to
> find a mentor or coach. This person does not need to be a fantastic
> Python coder, but someone who understands the challenges, can empathise
> with your situation, and provide encouragement.
> 
> 
> The commentary on "practice" leads some to recommend what is called 'the
> Project approach to learning'. Whereas a curriculum-based course
> attempts to provide a 'complete' coverage of the basics, usually under
> some sub-heading (pick a heading, eg Python for Data Science);
> project-based is exactly that. The former tends to evoke comments such
> as "I'm just ploughing my way through all these lectures" (see earlier
> comments about the need to stop and consolidate 'learning' with
> "practise"!) Conversely, the latter maintains interest through
> challenge: don't know how to do this bit? - well go away and learn then.
> Powerful (extrinsic) motivation (to problem-solving types)!
> 
> I was surprised by the number of people joining a recent PythonTraining
> Co-op, who self-identified as Python-Journeymen, but who had also
> noticed that great chunks of 'basic knowledge' about Python had been
> 'missed-out' - accordingly we talked about how to use a more traditional
> (curriculum-based) course to best fill-in the gaps between their
> "islands of knowledge". There's no such thing as a "silver bullet"!
> 
> Seeing you asked (did you ask? OK, just in case) I favor a mixture of
> them both. Sometimes, show a 'solution' using the tools necessary, then
> ask the trainee to 'go and do thou likewise' with a similar problem.
> Sometimes, here's a problem, think about it - oh, is something
> perplexing you? here's some Python tools which will be helpful, ah now
> that makes it easy/ier...
> 
> 
> 
> FYI looking at our Internet courses' dashboards. MOST trainees fail to
> utilise or fail to finish watching the (expensive-to-produce) video
> content - apparently preferring the written explanations (despite what
> the training platforms would have us believe - and trumpet
> all-day-long). Similarly, university librarians repeatedly report
> students given a choice of eBook or paper will most likely choose the
> latter - even the so-called 'digirati' generation(s)! Secondly, the
> biggest cause of drop-out is loss of motivation (compared to other
> matters when 'life happens').
> 
> Those who do the practical stuff succeed (in career or hobby). Whereas,
> those who (rush through) and only commit their understanding to
> short-term memory in order to pass the final-exam (and gain the
> 'wall-paper'), are no use to anyone when they're sat in front of an IDE
> and a spec - particular three months later!
> 
> 
> Cognitive Psychology is my research topic.
> (but I'd better stop writing here)
> 
> YMMV!
> 
> --
> Regards,
> =dn
> _______________________________________________
> Tutor maillist - Tutor at python.org
> To unsubscribe or change subscription options:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/tutor