Doc wrote:
Winston wrote in
:

Absolutely, I am convinced that a lot of machinists are tactile
learners and cannot count the number of times that students have told
me, "I learn best when I can have the real thing to figure out as
opposed to reading the manual". My guess is that a lot of the people
in this group are of that ilk.
I'd go much further than that.

I know of no one who learns better from text than from doing it
themselves, particularly with the guidance of an expert. Machining,
electronics, math, needlepoint ... the subject does not seem to
matter a bit.


Actually I have had several students who do exactly that. They take the
written stuff, don't tend to use only texts, and go off to do their own
thing. In fact one of them would rewrite the stuff in his own words as he
had found over time that this was the best way for him to learn. He had
problems if he had to work with others in a group or had to immediately
apply whatever the subject was. These types of learners are few and far
between in my experience, but they do exist.

My own opinion is that there is no one way to teach someone, so the best
method is to let them choose the way they learn best and provide support
for that (within reason).

I could not agree more. Hand them the 'tools' and jump out of the way
as much as possible!

Regarding rewriting --
One thing that helped me immensely:
Pretend that I am to teach a class on a given concept.
That really focuses the mind!

I was a tech a prominent electronics company here in Silicon Valley.
A student had been sent to me for mentoring on some basic electronic
principles that were causing him difficulty. The last subject was
electronic impedance; he was particularly anxious because of an
upcoming exam.

As I parroted the usual litany regarding the efficiency advantage of
matching the source, transmission line and load impedances, I stopped
talking. Suddenly, for the first time in my life, I 'got' the gist
on a visceral level. I sat there for a moment doing my best impression
of a 'deer in the headlights'.

I could 'see' that 'impedance' was little more than the ratio of voltage
to current for a particular part at a particular frequency and that if
the E/I ratios of these three parts were the same (at a given frequency)
that power would flow from one to the next with the best efficiency and
least reflection back to the source. My mind's eye recreated the resulting
'bell curve' that would describe the point of maximum power transfer
with respect to frequency.

Holey Underwear!

I asked the student to think of the 'impedance' of a component (or any
part of a transmission line) as being little more than it's ratio of
voltage to current at a given frequency. I mentioned that generally
speaking, 'Low impedance' meant high relative current; that 'High
impedance' meant low relative current. (A gross oversimplification
but a useful visualization tool.)

His eyes lit up and he 'got' it instantly. Smart young man.

A week later, my boss visited wearing a big grin.
Our guy aced the exam! That made my week and 11 years later, it
still makes me grin.

--Winston


--

On YouTube, all the tools have volume controls.