When it comes to learning and applying new knowledge, everybody is not the same. People learn in different ways. Usually people find management training so arid because they have been subject to a ‘one size fits all’ instructional design.
I was discussing this recently with a business partner who works with us in the Netherlands. As I was explaining mind mapping with him, I suggested that the most potent, most memorable mind maps for a class are in this order of priority:
· Those Mind Maps each person draws themselves
· Mind Maps developed in the class as a group
· Prepared Mind Maps discussed with the class and used as a revision aid.
In a learning context, Mind Maps appear to have currency and value for the learner to the degree to which they are dynamic. The dialogue the group makes in the genesis of a mind map mirrors or 'maps' the narrative of how they came to understand.
Let me illustrate this with an example I have come to use recently in explaining to people about the value and nature of the Resource Management Strategy as a management document within MSP. A description of this document is laid out in Appendix B of the MSP Guide, showing what the typical contents of this document. There is also a brief discussion of its importance in the chapter on Planning and Control in a programme. Learning theory is rich in models and categories of learners. We keep things relatively simple, but it still takes us a long way in creating effective learning experiences for managers. Using David Meier's Accelerated Learning model, we recognise four basic types of learner: · Aural: well served by traditional lecturing, 'chalk-and-talk' type teaching. These types of learners sometimes feel cheated of content if there are not frequent aural explanations and if the courseware is ‘word-light’. · Visual: people who doodle, think pictures, are more comfortable with illustrations of abstract concepts, processes and organisations · Kinaesthetic: those who prefer 'hands on', tactile learning experiences, they tend to be activists, and so are well represented, we find, among senior management. The worst thing a trainer can do to this kind of learner is to make them sit behind a desk for long periods and ask them to listen. · Intellectual: comfortable with abstract models, but must see the 'big picture' first. They have less tolerance for being drip-fed information that the other three groups. Most of us have one preferred dominant style for learning, but also have secondary styles as well. So our approach in designing training is to assume that all four types will be present, and that we need regularly to present learning that appeals to each type. It needs to be multi-modal. Increasingly in the 21st century at least three of these types will no longer tolerate bullet-point based lecturing in management settings. So we don't do 'Death by PowerPoint'. However, most of us do have the Visual mode of learning as either our primary or secondary preferred style of learning. Mind Maps work well with this. The ‘Intellectuals’ value to the ‘holistic’.see-it-all-at-once-joined-up aspects of Mind Maps, the Kinaesthetics appreciate the narrative of dynamic Mind Maps and the Aurals really want to talk them through. More later…
However, as I develop the hand-drawn mind map (see picture) as part of a coaching discussion, people begin to 'see' patterns and themes, as well as links with other sources of information (such as the Programme Plan) that they would have missed if they had just studied the MSP Guide in isolation.
Comments