Learning vs Drilling and Training
by Conrad Ho, Hong Kong, 3 April 2018
Recently, a young male student lodged a complaint to Conrad Ho after having studied some advanced courses in Educational Kinesiology. He said, “As things are in fact so simple, just tell me the correct answer and I go right for it. No need to do so many tests and go in roundabout ways to educate and discuss.” Another student is a mother who has just given birth to a child. After finishing one of the courses in the Basic Life Skills Workshop Series of Qinesiology® facilitated by Conrad and her mind in doubt, she raised a question, “If I just do the fourth step in the balancing procedure repeatedly until I master the techniques, isn’t it simpler and more direct? Why involve all the troubles to do all five steps?” I personally think that these challenges originate from different concepts and purposes.
First of all, the definitions. “Drilling” is to practice a relatively simple operation repeatedly in order to learn the relevant techniques, best to achieve the level of fluency. For instances, writing a word, reciting an article, brushing teeth, running, punching, etc. “Training” is to practice a set of related operations repeatedly in order to learn the technology, best to achieve the level of mastery, examples include calligraphy, writing, personal hygiene, track and field athletes, boxers, etc. According to Conrad’s understanding, drilling is a subset and training is the set. Relatively, drilling is more on the micro level and training is more on the macro level. In the world of drilling and training, there are standard answers. Everyone knows what the best is in principle. Competition is on the meticulous attention on important details. The winner is the one who have gone to further details with more importance. Therefore, drilling and training is the process of moving from conceptual knowledge to actions producing better results.
“Learning” has a broader sense which may encompass drilling and training, but learning is not a bigger set and drilling and training being its subset. Learning is the process of moving from not knowing to knowing, no matter whether the knowledge originates from conceptual thinking or real action. When learning activities do include drilling and training, the purpose is for trial or experiment to experience, not for mastery of techniques and technology to excel.
The reader may find it easier to understand in the light of neuroscience. Learning occurs when new brain circuitry has developed to do a specific physical operation that is not known to the person before. The purpose of drilling and training is to stimulate myelination on the best existing neural connection while trimming away others. In the design of Mother Nature, progress is accomplished first by learning new alternatives; then finding out the best option through trial and experimentation, and finally, after repeated drilling and training, achieving excellence. In my personal opinion, as far as learning as well as drilling and training are concerned, the point is not on how they can be substituted to each other as asked by the above-mentioned two students. It is on what the optimal combination is.
In modern societies in well-informed areas, many people have already been doing well by drilling and training. Personally, I find it boring to compete with masters in the “red sea” full of players and stained by blood. The effort yields less result. I would rather compete with masters in the “blue sea” of learning. In the virgin sea of the unknown, I would feel more excited and playful.
To learners and consumers, they need to decide whether they would like to drill and train themselves, their children, their subordinates, etc. or facilitate them to learn. For those who agrees with me that the society is becoming more and more complicated, constantly changing in more and more ways, i.e. more and more uncertainties are be built into into our daily lives (Imagine the elderly who are familiar with offline life are now facing the difficulty of not knowing how to book services online.), I suppose you would naturally also agree that learning ability will be an increasingly important tool for reaching and keeping the leading positions in the competition in the future world.
So, for those who have come to the same conclusion as mine, believing in the importance of cultivating learning ability, should we still assign so much significance to the relatively simpler method of drilling and training? Personally, I think we need to allocate more energy to the relatively more complicated method of learning. The proportion is at least 50-50. In my way of bringing up my own children, the ratio is learning 70 and drilling and training 30. That is to say, I do my best to offer my children the most opportunities in trial and experimentation. When they find the areas where their interests and gifts overlap, I will let them implement their own chosen regime of drilling and training.
What are you going to do?
