The Word of mAn[S]o0r

How do you learn the most effective and useful things in your life?

Through a classroom experience? Through someone taking the time out and guiding you through the process? or by jumping headfirst and learning on the job?

I guess, different people have different abilities to grasp knowledge, and while some will be more adept in picking up on theoretical concepts and applying them to their own settings in their heads, others would need concrete proof before accepting it as practical. The standard consultant answer to any question… “it depends”

and indeed it does. But my dilemma is, does it have to?

First lets understand what the term ‘learn’ actually means shall we? Wordnet @ princeton university defines it as to “gain knowledge and skills”. Now here is where the dilemma lies. All fingers are not equal, hence every teacher and/or mentor is not equal either. What you would eventually learn, either by teacher or mentor, is dependant largely on what they know in the first place. It is a widely known statistic in the education industry that one person can only pass on 80% of their knowledge off to other people, while many people have the abiltiy to learn or retain only 20% of what is taught to them. Hence how much does a person to have gain, in terms of knowledge or skills in order to ‘learn’?

Almost all of us go to different schools/colleges and universities, and everyone is expected to learn almost the same stuff. But why is it then that certain universities develop a reputation of a center of excellence? while others lag behind? I get varying answers on this issue from the different people i talk to, such as 1)not good faculty, 2) not good facilities or 3) not serious enough management. But seriously, does one need that to truly ‘learn’?

How many people graduating from intermediate nowadays even know the basics of chemistry? other than what they’ve been asked to rote-learn to clear their exams? I myself am guilty of that crime, passing through inter, opting not to study (read rote-learn) many sections just because they weren’t the ‘current favourites in the board exams’. So why go through that exercise at all? The same can be said about universities in our proud country, where free-thought is killed and rote-learning/paper filling is encouraged to quite some extent. Even the famed cambridge system couldn’t survive the nation of ‘high scorers / low learners’, with every other student getting multiple A’s, yet failing simple entrace exams.

My contention however, is that they do learn. Even if they fail exams they learn. Because learning (thankgod!) cannot be regulated by what is written in textbooks. They learn the soft skills of ‘dealing with life’.  Whether it be cajoling a grade out of a teacher, standing up to a bully or even being one, these are the lessons which make the character of a person, and make life worth living (or not).

So eventually, the answer becomes, you learn the most out of live by just plain living it. And nothing else. However, to prove that you ‘know your shit’ (so to speak)  you many need to go through countless years of education and certifications afterall. But as much as they can teach you, there is no equivalent to a real life experience.

Trackback URI | Comments RSS