The Question should be HOW do we Teach an Old Dog New Tricks ?

I spend a great deal of my day at the computer.  Evidently, I am not unusual.  10-15 years ago I doubt that many people envisioned their later years, or so much of any year, to be spent in this way.  Retired or not-retired, we are on the computer. If the time in front of this 21^th century slave-master is spent producing, creating or in serious reading it is clearly of some benefit.  If the time is spent casually browsing, video-watching, game-playing or other less academic pursuits, it definitely passes the time.  In that case, the question of benefit is a bit less clear, yet still open to consideration.  Are we learning new tricks?

One well-known controversy over technology-use is the issue of ‘brain training.’  Anyone who regularly listens to NPR will hear underwriting announcements for Lumosity or Curious.com.  Both have services that include and promote brain training through cognitive games.  But in my local community there is a pair of neuroscientists who teach that such claims are basically hype, and they aren’t alone.  It is a known academic and neurological controversy that continues.

In March (2016) cognitive psychologist, Zach Hambrick from Michigan State University told NPR that there are two camps of scientists ‘those that say brain training works and those who say not.’  Perhaps equally important is whether these skills are relevant to our lives.  Some background is useful to understand this debate, and even in reference to our own learning and intelligence.

The Background

For more than 100 years there have been numerous ideas and theories of intelligence.  Two are popular ones, although not directly related to our discussion about the hullabaloo.  One of those is Robert Stenberg’s Triarchic Theory, stating that there are 3 ways in which we gather or process information.  While not the official names, they amount to approaches that are academic, creative/insightful or street smarts.  Then there is Howard Gardeners’ Theory of Multiple Intelligence, which promotes 8 sensory-based types of intelligence that we are wired for, including those of interpersonal, musical, mathematical, logical, linguistic and spatial (my own personal downfall). Other theories have been established on practical cognitive approaches and emotional Intelligence.

Back to the controversy I alluded to above, which centers on a portion of the 1960s Cattell-Horn Theory. Applying new methods of factor analysis than those previously used, American psychologists Raymond B. Cattell and John Horn formulated a theory that divides intelligence into two categories:

Fluid Intelligence.  This can be thought of as the ability to solve problems without previous knowledge or skills.  It is abstract reasoning; it involves speed, deduction and memory.

Crystallized Intelligence.  This is our life storehouse of information — knowledge and skills acquired through learning, and rooted in our experience.

The aforementioned debate over brain training focuses on the one type – Fluid Intelligence.  Once thought to be limited by genes and age (starting to decrease by, or in, our 30s), researchers from University of California at Irvine contemplated whether that was actually true.  The researchers lead by Susanne Jaeggi decided to look into “working memory…..[a] kind of cardiovascular functioning of the brain.”  They described it as an ‘under-lying brain mechanism’ and critical to higher cognitive skills.  Not surprisingly, the paper which introduced their findings (“Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory” and published in Proceedings of National Academy of Sciences) was not well received by all scientists in the field.  It was especially disturbing to those in that 2^nd camp of doubters.

Specifically, the dispute is not whether Fluid Intelligence can be improved, since there is a fair amount of agreement that (minimally) it can.  The question is whether ‘brain training’ can make any significant impact.

Despite the controversy over fluid intelligence, on the positive side, there is important agreement on crystalized intelligence. According to Hambrick (from Michigan), there is little or no controversy as to whether those over 30 ‘can increase crystalized intelligence” (which includes skill, knowledge and expertise).  This point is upheld in one of my favorite quotations from the originators of the theory when they proclaim:

“As long as opportunities for learning are available,
crystallized intelligence can increase
INDEFINITELY during a person’s life.”
[The self-serving emphasis is mine.]

So there is no reason why we cannot continue to learn, regardless of the category our learning falls under.  Many of us have heard or read about the benefits of continued learning, although may have over-looked the fact that the effort needed to improve ourselves should be somewhat challenging or difficult.  At least difficult for us personally, whether considered so for others or not.  Examples include new hobbies, playing a new piece of music, exploring unfamiliar historic periods, or learning to cook an exotic dish.

So despite the controversies, and considering the established facts of fluid and crystalized intelligence capabilities, it is clear that you CAN teach an old dog new tricks.  But How?

 

More than One Way for an Old Dog
to Skin a New Cat

As I mentioned, my days are filled with hours online spent in searches, research, writing and reading.  Am I learning?  Probably.  Especially when I am concentrating on new subjects, but also when working with those topics for which I am improving previous skills or training.  But is online activity my best method to learn?

If you are careful and diligent, I am convinced you can learn almost anything online.  Additionally, while totally overwhelming to me, I am thoroughly impressed by some of the free online courses available, and their vast depth and breadth.  Several sources are worth noting.

1. Any university that places some of its courses online; and many now do. [Examples include Harvard’s Open Learning Initiative or the Stanford ‘Self-paced, Self-study’ program.]
2. MOOCS – Massive Open Online Courses
3. Coursera Courses.  Offerings are both free and credit course types, drawing from 142 partnering universities across 28 countries.
4. Kahn Academy perhaps has more emphasis on STEM education (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) but many others subjects as well.  Their tag line is ‘For Free, For Everyone, Forever.’

The choices are truly staggering.  They are exciting, with an impressive array of variety and opportunity.  YET………

New Study on Life Long Learning

Yet…….. I have never taken one of these courses, despite my acquaintance with, and interest in, them.  I have taken a few online required continuing-education courses (out of desperation and time crunch), and a few SHORT-video courses on several subjects, mostly for needed technical skills, but not any full courses on an elected basis.  Then last fall I decided I wanted to understand the software program Excel better than my elementary familiarity.  What did I do?   I signed up for a course at the local library here in Southern Oregon.  Now this is a computer-based skill.  I had learned the rudiments online originally.  Why did I not just brush-up online?  A new study points out that my choice may have been rather typical.

A Pew Research Center study from March 2016, entitled Lifelong Learning and Technology explains that despite the use of digital technology in our lives,

“place-based learning remains vital to many,
and differences in education
and income are a hallmark of people’s learning activities”

According to John Horrigan, author of the study, Pew wanted to know WHERE and HOW adults (over 20 and under 100 years old) learn after they leave formal schooling.  To do this they interviewed nearly 3,000 people.  No surprise, the study found that income and educational levels make a difference to online usage or technology-based learning.  Specifically, the more money, more education and more access to technology at one’s fingertips, the more use, familiarly, and benefit from these online resources.  So why did I end up in a classroom for my Excel course when I have significant education and good access to technology?

 

Learning for 20-100 year olds

In the Pew study, 73% of adults branded themselves ‘lifelong learners.’  74% were ‘personal learners’ taking steps to explore their personal interests.  36% of all adults (63% of those still working) were ‘professional learners,’ training to advance their career or improve job expertise and professional skills.  This demonstrated clearly that America is a ‘nation of on-going learners’.  To me, this was less surprising than the issue of where they did their learning.  I assumed much learning would take place online these days or that it would be at least the preferred avenue.  But no.

• Personal learners preferred a physical locale by a 81%-52% margin;
  [81% of respondents would take, or have taken, locally based course; 52% would take a course online.]
• Professional learners by a 75-55% margin.

Chiropractic adjustments, also known as mobilizations or manipulations, may be made to the spine or no prescription viagra the area below the injured part may be affected by the trauma, which paralyzes the lower body area, incapacitating the person to stand up and walk. It doesn’t call for treatment and would be changed with a little education and cialis prescription prices encouragement. If you might be worried about selected signs or symptoms, you must see your family doctor or a specanada levitra t one as this is the most suitable way to buy them in the right manner. generic viagra sildenafil Samagni digests the food completely and nourishes the reproductive system.

I may wonder why I ended up in an Excel classroom, or why I take community classes or even why I have been teaching a local course on election structures.  Yet, using our crystallized intelligence, we might guess it has something to do with social connections.  From a personal point of view, I like to ask questions (not so easy online) or hear questions from others.  Frankly, for more difficult subjects, I am not offended by the concept of being ‘spoon-fed’ and learning step-by-step.  Perhaps one’s personality also dedicates our preferences.

The Pew study doesn’t answer these speculations, and you might have your own thoughts.  However, the lead author on the study, John Horrigan said the results demonstrate the need for “a reality check of where technology fits into our lives…The Internet plays a role, but it’s secondary in most respects.”

If internet is secondary, and our primary preferred place of learning is a physical location, I want to take an unscientific leap to say that the social connections are a big part of the driver in this.  Classes are an avenue to socialize.  Whether our personalities fit into categories of social, recluse or anywhere in between, it has been shown repeatedly that friends and social connections are vital.  They tend to lessen the stress on certain life situations.  Additionally, as we age, such ‘community’ is even important to our happiness, general health and longevity. Classes in the local library, community college, neighborhood Rec Center or an Osher Lifelong Learning Institute (OLLI) have something in common.  They offer both the physical settings and social connections.

Ultimately, the better question may not be ‘can you teach an old dog new tricks’, but WHAT, WHERE and HOW can that dog best learn.

“Live as if you were to die tomorrow.  Learn as if you were to live forever.”
Mahatma Gandhi

—

Picture credits: title picture Photo by Pavel Herceg on Unsplash

Share This: