Can an ex NFL player go to a game and just enjoy the game like an average fan, or do they spend the whole time critiquing every last play?
In my previous post on the "quality" of training that I'm subjected to, there is an interesting revelation to be found. Note that I did not go into an all out bashing of the learning curriculum like I have seen so many other learning folks do. I've seen so many colleagues that could not get past the lack of ________ (objectives, instructional strategies, interaction, feedback, and the list goes on).
It makes me wonder if sometimes we as learning people are so caught up finding the negative things wrong with training, that we actually learn less than the average person does. I wonder how much of our cognitive load is taken up with thinking "how this could be better" rather than thinking "how can I get the most out of it".
This isn't to say that we should not strive to improve the learning. After all, that is the profession we are in and it is a noble goal. However, we have all gone through some type of mandatory training or training sponsored by an external organization where we know that our thoughts and comments will have little (if any) impact. It seems like it is these situations where learning folks may struggle the most. Sort of like an ex-NFL player who knows what needs to change, but can't get on the field to change it...maybe that's why so many of them turn into broadcasters and critics :-)
Monday, November 3, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This is a very good question, Benjamin - and a good analogy.
I have a similar one: I went to drama school after finishing school, where I won awards for my performances. People often ask whether I am able to simply enjoy a show, or whether I spend all my time noticing what should and shouldn't be happening.
My answer is that, when I enter the theatre, I choose to suspend credulity. I become complicit with the performers in pulling the wool over my eyes Yes I will notice when things are badly executed, but that will be with a different part of my brain... and only if they are really dire, will that overtake my immersion in the moment.
With regard to learning, I often champ at the bit when learning experiences don't meet muster. However, my primary goal is to achieve my own ends - to get out of it what "I came here for", so I am able to compartmentalise my dissatisfaction and become entirely self-serving in order to learn as much as I can under the circumstances.
In football, what matters is to win the game. Making perfect plays, although it may improve the show, is not essential to achieve the objective.
Some people care more about the process, others about the result. Personally, I am more result-oriented. This doesn't mean I don't care at all about the process, but I think there may be many ways to achieve one result. In the end, what matter the most is what the learner learns, not how he learns it. I noticed over the years that process-oriented people want things to be so perfect that they take too much time to achieve what they want and in the end they are faced with the choice of either sacrificing on "perfection" or delaying delivery.
My point is that if the end result meets the requirements, why should we criticize the means? Obviously, they were somehow right. On the other end, if the objectives are not met, we probably took a wrong turn somewhere. In such case we should analyse the process to identify areas of improvement.
Karyn/Guy,
I appreciate your comments. You both have touched on the importance of the end result. I agree that some in the learning field are too focused on the process even though the end result is met. In fact, some are so concerned with the process that even when the end result isn’t met, if the process looked good along the way, then they are still happy. This goes back Human Performance 101 which involves looking at the actual needs (not just a training need).
I did leave out a little piece of information in my original post that also played into the mix. I was “strongly encouraged” to take these courses (i.e. they were basically mandatory); therefore, it was apparent that motivation was obviously lacking in some/most of the students.
I definitely have a different mentality when I am intrinsically motivated to learn a particular subject (that’s why I can spend an hour or more researching the BCS College Football standings in an attempt to figure out how the computer polls place Penn State at #4…but I digress). What I witnessed in these courses was an end result that was detached from the needs of the students. In hindsight, perhaps it is easier for us to critique the process when we don’t see the end result being met.
In my case, did I learn something in the course? Yes!!! Did I achieve the end result that they wanted me to achieve? Hard to say since no end result was provided, but I would probably say “no”!!! Did I learn enough to make it past the assessment? Yes, with flying colors, but the assessments were so easy that I probably didn’t need to go through the course to pass. I think that’s a scary thought with some of the way that people assess the end result.
Ben
Post a Comment