Accelerated learning (was RE: TOP 2 IQ Percentile Re: [extropy-chat]Seven cents an hour?)

[Adrian Tymes]

--- Herb Martin <HerbM at learnquick.com> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > --- Herb Martin <HerbM at learnquick.com> wrote:
> > > This is also true of the NLP modalities:  visual, 
> > > auditory, kinesthetic:  A really good understanding
> > > will include a representation in two or more modalities
> > > and preferably all three (and some variations on the
> > > themes.)
> > > 
> > > Those who would really know something know it from
> > > many perspectives and using various methods.
> > 
> > While these various perspectives and methods can in theory be
> learned
> > in advance, I wonder...could it be the case that this rarely
> happens
> > while "book learning" (or any other sort of learning short of
> actually
> > doing the activity in question), and that almost always these 
> > alternate
> 
> No, except perhaps if you mean 'rarely' in pure statistical
> terms including those who don't understand such methods.
> 
> Yes, it is rare, but among those who know and teach the
> techniques the ability to model consciously even from
> books, lectures, or other supposedly passive learning
> makes such almost as effective as doing

I meant "rarely" as across all of human experience, most definitely
including the vast majority of teachers who have never heard of (or at
least do not employ anything resembling) your techniques - despite
constant teacher training (at least in the US).

> > If this is the case, then would it remedy this lack of value of
> "book
> > learning", at least to a significant degree, to incorporate those
> > different modes and methods, rather than avoiding them and
> > concentrating on only the simplest mode and method to 
> > optimize for cost
> > (as often naturally happens in any prepared activity)?
> 
> Not sure what you mean here, but if you intend to apply the
> methods you already seem to understand to the task of learning
> from books and listening then yes, it works -- and almost as
> well in many cases.

Almost as well as...?

> > Checking your Web site - http://LearnQuick.com/ - you seem to focus
> on
> > low-level technical skills.  
> 
> Depends on what you mean by "low level" -- while teaching
> much memorization and technical details, I slip in a deep
> course in troubleshooting, accelerated learning itself, and
> problem solving in general.

>From your Web site:

"Accelerated MCSE in a Week
Windows 2003 Seminars"

You apparently teach how to pass the MSCE exam, as opposed to how to
actually be a sysadmin or a programmer, or an overall theory of
computer science.  That kind of "low level".

> One of the fellows who taught me much of what I know about modeling
> and teaching with these methods, has suggested building superior
> curriculum materials using producers such as Steven Spielberg and
> the be comedy writers and artists to produce truly compelling 
> learning materials -- then hiring people who GENUINELY enjoy
> hanging out with young people to mediate the classes and coach
> them through the exercises.
> 
> He seriously intends an effort comparable to "a man on the moon
> within 10 years" -- we really don't need to have the curriculum
> change every 5-10 years if we build really great materials that
> are compelling, funny, entertaining and clearly indicate the
> required knowledge.

If only we could get the funding to implement such.  There are so many
proposals for reforming education, all with their own data proving they
are the One True Way - and so little funding for education period, as
people prefer to invest in shorter-term or more controllable payoffs.