[Edu-sig] Learning and Doing

[Steve Morris]

Stephen R. Figgins quotes:
 > 
 >   Of course, this is nonsense.  There are not two processes, but one.
 >   We learn to do something by doing it.  There is no other way.  When
 >   we first do something, we probably will not do it well.  But if we
 >   keep on doing it, have good models to follow and helpful advice if
 >   and when we feel we need it, and always do it as well as we can, we
 >   will do it better.  In time, we may do it very well.  This process
 >   never ends.
 > 
 >   John Holt
 >   Instead of Education 

In this case (as usual) I find John Holt just a little cutsy. What he
says is true in a sense but a little misleading. In our complex world
the distinction between learning and doing is useful but largely
distinguished by intent. John makes a philosophical point which is
less useful in practice. By definition any action we take is "doing"
something. Reading a text book is "doing" something. This is a
spurious and not useful definition of "doing."

Here are some contrary examples.

When I learned valences in highschool I was learning chemistry but not
doing it.

I learned realivity by reading a physics book and then solving
problems. I learned both by reading AND by doing. However I could
never have solved problems in relativity without first "learning" by
reading.

When I do something seldom I technically learn something each time I
do it but frequently this is just refreshing something I forgot. It is
not clear that there is net learning in this case.

I learned about the evils of genocide by reading history and current
events. I have never felt the need to "do" it to learn it.

I could teach someone to play a perfect game of tic tac toe by getting
them to memorize a set of rules but never letting them play a single
game. If there memorization skills are good enough they would never be
beaten when they did start playing.

There are many (most?) subjects that are so complex that there must be
an initial phase where you are only learning. When you first learn how
to hold a cello, how to hold the bow, how to sit, how to finger, how
to stroke; at this initial phase you could hardly be considered to be
playing the cello.

There are (at least) two kinds of learning, transferring knowledge and
acquiring skill. John's real point is that "doing" is often the most
valuable way of learning skills. When he says that there is no
difference between the process of learning and the process of doing I
contend he is playing with semantics.