To translate this post click on your flag in the right menu of the blog’s homepage.
Why do teaching-focused programs fail in the learning of strategic approaches and learning-oriented approaches fail in the learning of operational tasks?
The discovery of the ontology of human learning at The Unicist Research Institute opened the frontiers of knowledge to design educational processes, integrating both extremes: the learning of operational processes and the learning of strategic approaches to reality.
One of the most common mistakes in adults’ education is to use the same knowledge acquisition tools for operational and for strategic approaches.
In this sense, when the same knowledge acquisition tools that are used in operational fields are applied to the learning of strategic approaches, they produce paradoxical results, and the same happens when strategic approaches are used for operational fields.
Designing educational processes is a very difficult task and requires being aware of the nature of the process in which the individual is involved.
The higher the level of ambiguity one is able to manage the higher the search for the “know why” of a reality that one needs. When you are in a secure context, the “know how” of a reality suffices to operate. BUT when you are in ambiguous and uncertain contexts and you are responsible for making things happen, then you need to understand the nature of those contexts in order to influence.
Less ambiguity means a “know how” orientation, while more ambiguity means the predominance of a “know why” oriented approach. And this “know why” cannot be taught, it needs to be discovered. That is why it requires a learning approach.
But, on the other hand, teaching is the most functional approach to operational aspects.
Reality shows that complicated problems have both complex parts and simple parts. That is why they require an approach that includes both learning and teaching.
Individuals that predominantly use their operational thinking approach will search for a security framework, looking for a teaching-oriented approach while conceptual thinkers will search to go beyond the existing boundaries and will tend to learn from their own experience and mistakes instead of looking for a teacher. And this is neither good nor wrong; both approaches have different functionalities. Operation, tactics and strategy work at different levels.
So in order to develop strategies an individual needs to go beyond the existing known boundaries: an individual needs to have a great learning capacity, because cause-effect relations cannot be taught, they can only be discovered.
For tactic development, being able to divide the problem into the operational parts suffices. In Operational learning one needs to be able to assimilate methods and analogous situations.
And what is the nature of the learner? What is the real nature of the object of learning?
The most successful educational programs are those that are designed according to the nature of the process. There are no rigid recipes here. They are fallacious. The unicist ontology of learning proposes a “change without changing” that is improving the results by respecting the nature of the learner. The key here is the right diagnosis.
Access more information at: http://www.goodwillnetwork.net/deb_tdpi.shtml
If you would like to receive monthly information on new scientific developments, please register here.
If you would like to get acquainted with unicist technologies, you can request an invitation as a Guest Participant in a module of Unicist Strategy.