I had an argument with someone about whether or not one could learn something by reading content that doesn’t explicitly give the message the author wants them to learn.
So, for the sake of argument, we discussed this blog post: Life Lessons Tied Up In a Bow. For fun, go read that article. What do you think the message of this post is supposed to be?
Don’t read ahead and cheat.
I’m hoping that if you got this far you did actually look at that article. If you didn’t some of this might not make sense. For me, the highlight take away is that like the presenter in the video (and the little girl and the author), I have been tying my shoes the wrong way for years. Actually watching that video really turned me on to TedTalks, which is why I attended the Monterey TedX last spring. Another take away one might get from this article is how stubbornness can hold you back. Another might be my main point of this article about whether she would have eventually figured it out even having not being taught. What was the author’s main take away: The value of one’s elders.
Ok, I can see that and it’s a valid lesson. Does it make any of the other ones I’ve mentioned less valuable? Not especially. Did you come up with some other lesson I didn’t mention? Probably. We all draw on our own childhood experiences and learning to draw the conclusions we will. Unlike school, we don’t all have to come to the same conclusion to find value in something we’ve read. Now, revisiting something later can provide us with whole new insight. In particular, I’m thinking of great books like Gulliver’s Travels and The Little Prince. Both of these are phenomenal stand alone stories which a child could enjoy, but read as an adult can offer so much more. I should mention at this point that I absolutely love A Modest Proposal, but would strongly recommend against reading that to young children.
As I’ve mentioned, I have a degree in Instructional Design. One of the types of learning theory I studied is called Constructivism. In constructivism, one is given a foundational amount of knowledge and then asked to solve a problem which requires the learner to reach beyond what they’ve explicitly been taught to make the connection of the lesson. Some believe this is a more effective form of instruction because the learner determines the path for getting to the final answer, instead of being shown exactly how to get there.
The problem with constructivism is that the person reading has to want to make it a learning experience or to dig deeper. I maintain that if that is the goal of the person, they can make the deeper connection; if not, then they enjoy a nice story and take away from it what they will.