(Premier Login aceputt) Forum Owner Posted Jul 13, 2012 11:19 AM
This is recently sent from Michael Hebron about educational psychology. This is not really "neuro" as he uses this term rather loosely. It's basic cognitive psychology, so it is based upon concepts of the brain that are pretty dated, so we have to be careful about the old-bottle / new-wine language problem embedded in the staleness. Even so, pretty interesting read about the Ten Step researchers in the Netherlands. The Ten Steps guys are really talking about COMPLEX EXPERTISE like medicine or engineering, where the "cognitive load" overwhelms novice students trying to master the expertise. So the whole applicability of what Hebron is saying is questionable, since movement skills (especially fairly self-contained skills like "the full swing" only) don't really compare to the cognitive load of a PhD in Engineering or an MD degree is Internal medicine with a subspecialty in rare infectious diseases diagnostics. But, yes, when the golf novice gets overwhelmed by the information, then these Ten Steps guys make a valid point: instruction will be more effective if you recognize and deal with the overload, and for that they offer a template.
Ten Steps to Complex Learning is a heavily researched book by Jerome J.G. Van Merrienboer and Paul Kirscher filled with valuable insights about transferring information to students; some of the books highlights follow.
The plan being used for transferring information from a source to a receiver is an important component of learning, some say the most important component.
Buildings and manufactured products are designed from plans that are determined by the requirements of the end product. Any plan for transferring information in learning environments should also be based on the requirements of its end product, which is meaningful complex learning.
Complex Learning forms in the brain because of an "integration" of information that is made up of knowledge, skills and attitudes that include emotions, perceptions and biases.
To achieve a transfer of information that supports complex learning research suggests using a holistic seamless plan. This type of plan is different from approaches to learning that breakdown concepts or general information (the whole) into distinct parts or categories. Plans that separate the whole into segments have had a disastrous effect on the fields of vocation and professional education. (p 7)
Holistic seamless plans focus on integrating several objectives of a real life performance into one whole. The aim is to clear a student's mind of details so they can be more personally creative when learning (we should not force students to put on an analytical hat).
A brain compatible plan for transferring information will not be tracking each component of a skill separately. Plans for complex learning will focus students on using a detail free whole picture or general non-specific concept of what they are learning (plans often work because of what they do not contain and not because of extra details).
Plans for complex learning are designed to help develop the ability to transform what is learned in one situation to other situations. An overwhelming amount of evidence has been obtained that revealed breaking a task down into a set of distinct elements does not work if meaningful learning is the aim (Clark and Estes 1999, Spector and Anderson, 2006).
Research has shown that learning the whole is more important than knowing its parts and holistic-seamless plans for transferring of information support this view. Solutions for many problems that can exist when it comes to learning are available within holistic plans for improving.
Declarative, procedural and affective learning are all integrated and joined when using a holistic plan, thereby increasing the chances that a transfer of information occurs. (p 7) (do not bring information to students, lead students in the direction of gaining new personal insights).
Achieving complex learning is supported through what is referred to as "authentic learning tasks". These tasks are based on real life situations, which are always the driving force of meaningful learning. One of the reasons authentic learning tasks support a transfer of information is; with these kinds of tasks students will gain insights for constructing knowledge that is general in nature and abstract in scope. This rather than using a plan that is bound to several CONCRETE SPECIFIC components. Holistic plans allow students to better diagnose the variety of problems they may encounter in real world environments (accuracy at the cost of application, slows learning).
Traditional compartmentalization or separation of the whole into parts follows a plan that does not start with a simplified whole model of reality that can support a transfer of information efficiently (the more we reduce the information in an idea, the more it will be remembered).
In the 1960's Briggs and Taylor reported that the use of a fragmentation approach with students, rather than having the opportunity to learn a skill or concept as a whole, will make it difficult for students to acquire a coordinated whole skill or concept. The suggestion is to start with the whole picture and use that as your model.
Holistic plans offer a notion of modeling real life tasks in a way that students can actually experience complex learning from them (Achenhagen, 2001). (Realities can be seen as complex, but learning about them does not have to be).
A holistic plan takes the transfer process into account and is always directed in the direction of whole general concepts and objectives which are more useful for learning than highly specific objectives filled with details.
Learning task is a general term that refers to a project, or a problem that needs to be solved. These tasks provide information gained from a whole picture or general concept that runs parallel to a different and previously known whole or general concept, thereby supporting complex learning.
The Whole vs. Parts
The book Science and Golf contains sixty-six peer reviewed research papers that were presented at the fifth World Scientific Congress of Golf held in 2008. What follows are highlights from one of the papers, "Linguistic Analysis of Golf Movement: Motor Plan Driven Analysis and Instruction" by Kanny Kahol and Debbie Crews. Their research supports evaluating the golf swing as a whole unit, not as several parts.
Their paper starts; "Complex motion sequences such as golf swings are composed of discrete smaller movements called "gestures," A gesture driven model for studying golf motion is presented in this paper.
This model uses a plan that compresses all the many golf movements into a whole unit or gestures. Any analysis of gestures is for an individual golfer and not for a model. Conventional golf analysis is normally used to evaluate several features like wrist angle etc, thus analyzing the swing from an outcome perspective.
A gesture based model focuses on an personal internal motion plan (an important insight). Research in psychology and exercise science has shown that humans will internally plan movements in whole gestures, organized non-consciously through feel and kinematics.
A gesture driven analysis allows for focusing on the full, complete movement, which can be a combination of several features. Research shows that this full mental picture is a natural intuitive understanding of any movement. Normally we don't mentally break down our daily movements into parts and details.
Studies show feedback from instruction generated through gesture analysis is very constructive. It allows students to develop better kinematic and kinetic sequences, and also an improved internal representation (non-conscious motor plan) of the required skill. This technique also allows for analyzing core movements and tailoring the feedback to each golfer, while focusing on their movements (not a model).
Studies show human beings piece together (non-consciously) units of motion into a whole unit that supports any goal driven activity. It is the kinematic and kinetic components of this whole unit that are responsible for ascertaining which muscles and limbs move and how much force is required (Cizek 2005) Learning and performing have been shown to be mostly non-conscious acts (5% conscious, 95% non-conscious).
The term liaquistic analysis is used because all the gestures that make up a motor plan we could say are an alphabet of small motions, used for constructing whole movements within the rules of motion pattern plans. This is much like how we combined several letters into a single word. One advantage of a gesture driven approach is: it is based on basic core movements found in non-conscious motor plans (we just do it). When we think about how to do something, or break it into parts, our automatic response system shuts down.
This research paper notes that the "gesture" model deviates from the outcome driven analysis prevalent in golf and moves to a more person - centric approach for teaching and learning.
A key point: this "gesture" models work with all the features in a single instant. Hence movement is seen as the emergent phenomena of all limbs and muscles involved. Studies show this type of analysis is critical to learning.
Humans often do not have an intuitive understanding of how a single feature relates to whole movements. Studies show we are more comfortable understanding full motions called "gestures". Studies also show a methodology that links individual components or a combination of features into a basic unit is more suitable to instruction and learning.
This approach non-consciously brings all segments of movement into "gestures" that are user specific and can be varied in order to execute more effective movements in different contexts.
"Gesture" models support internal intuitive instructions that aim to train the motor plan of the user directly, rather than focusing on the success of the outcomes of movements. The potential for learning a movement pattern quicker; exists with this type of non specific feedback to the golfer.
Suggestion - Focus golf training information on the common denominator of swinging. Then swing the weight of the club and studies show the required motion patterns of golf strokes from putter to driver arrive. "The golf swing has a beginning and a finish, with nothing in the middle." Susan Berdoy Meyers PGA
Any detailed description of the golf swing is a history lesson. It is something that has already happened and not meant to be used as a model to be copied. Every swing on the golf course has different requirements. No two swings any golfer has made have ever been the same. The ever changing golf course conditions are what provide the model for the next swing. The golf course conditions define (1) what club to use, (2) where to place the ball in your stance, (3) the size of the swing, (4) the pace of the swing, (5) and the alignment of the club face, head and shaft through impact."
Of course, Debbie Crews doesn't know anything worth listening to and her science is pretty dubious since she doesn't try to understand the modern neuroscience research piling higher than ever since 1990. Hebron's description is cast in pretty general and hence vague language that has problematic application to golf teaching. For example, he says that the full swing has many "components" and should not be taught one component at a time (e.g., wrist position at top of backswing). However, that doesn't really apply to the four separate skills of putting, even though his claims MAY apply to teaching the setup or the stroke in terms of components. Even so, there has to be a mixture of components teaching and integrated teaching. So the real problem here is the concept of "skill". Hebron doesn't seem to recognize there are coordinated yet separate skills in golf and these SEPARATE skills have to be taught separately and also taught in an integrated way. It's not as simple as he suggests.
Putting Coach and Theorist