<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
On 11/20/2009 1:20 PM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:86eint9f6e.fsf_-_@blue.stonehenge.com" type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">"Bert" == Bert Freudenberg <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:bert@freudenbergs.de"><bert@freudenbergs.de></a> writes:
</pre>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Bert> Many younger folks prefer videos to written documentation.
I don't know that you need to bring age into this. :)
What I've learned after decades of being a corporate trainer is
that people learn from three modes:
concepts: background descriptions, terminology, first principles,
building blocks
structure: fill-in-the-blank patterns, completing a portion of
the task, or the entire task
examples: working through a single specific task from front to back
People prefer different things, and at different times, for different tasks.
Screencasts are great *examples*, but they're horrible structure
or concepts.
We really need all three. One's not *better* than the other... it just comes
at it from a different angle.
Aside: if you look at Learning Perl, you'll see that we deliberately mix up
all three... sometimes a topic is introduced "concept-first", sometimes
"structure-first", sometimes "example-first". And it works really well.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Randal is absolutely right. As a homeschooling father of many, my wife
has spent time studying the variety of learning styles. In a home
school environment you often have liberties that you don't always have
in other environments. So you can tailor the education more to the
child as necessary or desirable.<br>
<br>
>From Wikipedia <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles</a>
we have:<br>
<ol>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Visual_learning"
title="Visual learning">visual learners</a>;</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Auditory_learning"
title="Auditory learning">auditory learners</a>;</li>
<li>reading/writing-preference learners;</li>
<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinesthetic_learning"
title="Kinesthetic learning">kinesthetic learners</a> or <a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tactile_learning&action=edit&redlink=1"
class="new" title="Tactile learning (page does not exist)">tactile
learners</a><sup id="cite_ref-LdPride_0-1" class="reference"><a
href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles#cite_note-LdPride-0"><span></span><span></span></a></sup></li>
</ol>
So while, I myself, prefer written communication. I do understand
others have different preferences and abilities which enable them. My
father who is kinesthetic to this day does not understand how I can
read about something which hands on in nature and be able to then do
it. He was an auto mechanic and always believed you learn by doing not
reading. How can you learn to fix a car by reading a book? Pretty well
actually. :)<br>
<br>
I believe the sooner a person understands their nature and works within
it as much as possible will progress and learn at their best rate. Of
course we must acquire some ability to learn via the other means if
necessary. Such is life.<br>
<br>
Jimmie<br>
</body>
</html>