Fitts and Posner proposed this model 50 years ago in 1967 at the start of the cognitivist orientation to skill learning. Has there been any updates on this theory? Why are we still teaching it when we are past cognitive theories of skill learning? Many thanks for any insights?
Working theories don’t have expiration dates, otherwise we would be looking for alternate explanations for gravity. Fitts & Posner is considered a theory because you can only test a subset of the universe and some does not prove all. That said, you would be hard pressed to find a skill set that didn’t follow that sequence.
@@edsassler Theories are not developed independently, but usually in response to issues and problems with previous theories. Cognitivism sits as both a critique of behaviourism and an attempt to provide a better explanation of a phenomenon. Similarly, Constructivism critiques and builds on cognitivism, and Enactivisim and Enaction present even more interesting ideas about how learning occurs. My point above refers to the notion that the Fitts and Posner model reflects an information processing model of cognition and does not do a good job of accounting for the body as a dynamical system performing in complex settings. I would be interested to hear more about more contemporary theories of how we learn skills and don't believe that a theory developed in 1967 is still our best explanation.
@@alanovens8713 I was born with almost no sequential memory, so how I learn and function are different than most. I learned a long time ago that motor learning is a different section of the brain, so while I can’t memorize a password I have learned how to type it. That’s not that unusual, but my motor skill is the only working memory I have. I play piano, but I don’t know any of the notes... My lack of a sequential memory goes along with an understanding of math, which is a good example here. In school all the other kids would memorize equations to do things, I couldn’t, but I understood what they were trying to do and I could derive an equation that would work. Fitts and Posner is the basic understanding of the learning process, the application of open or closed loops is just information derived from it... My issue with questioning its validity due to age is due to a tendency to ignore theories that work in favor of nothing. There is a massive failure of the learning process going on because people don’t understand that every skill they own is due to that same process. Why they don’t teach that early in school is beyond me. Dunning and Kruger’s conclusion was really that 70% of the population skipped the 2nd and 3rd step in the process.
As you practice.... Another important concept of shifting from stages is that of PERFORMANCE PLATEAUS.... so you'll feel after getting from cognitive to associative, that you're development seems to stop growing and stays constant like a plateau.. But then the growth shoots up again as you go from Associative to Autonomous! Hope that helps
If you are looking for clear indications as to which stage you are at, you’re going to be disappointed. In leaning a piano piece with a repetitive baseline, I must first learn the left hand part. At first I have to read the notes and hit the keys. After a while I don’t have to read the notes, I just concentrate on hitting the keys. At this point if I add the right hand it all falls apart - I still need to concentrate on what the left hand is doing. A week and lots of practice later, I do anything I want with my right hand and the left had will continue to play the baseline. There is no clear transition from one phase to the next, but you always know which one you’re in.
Music should be louder. It got interrupted by the voiceover 😐
seriously
Fitts and Posner proposed this model 50 years ago in 1967 at the start of the cognitivist orientation to skill learning. Has there been any updates on this theory? Why are we still teaching it when we are past cognitive theories of skill learning? Many thanks for any insights?
ignored horribly bossman
Working theories don’t have expiration dates, otherwise we would be looking for alternate explanations for gravity. Fitts & Posner is considered a theory because you can only test a subset of the universe and some does not prove all. That said, you would be hard pressed to find a skill set that didn’t follow that sequence.
@@edsassler Theories are not developed independently, but usually in response to issues and problems with previous theories. Cognitivism sits as both a critique of behaviourism and an attempt to provide a better explanation of a phenomenon. Similarly, Constructivism critiques and builds on cognitivism, and Enactivisim and Enaction present even more interesting ideas about how learning occurs. My point above refers to the notion that the Fitts and Posner model reflects an information processing model of cognition and does not do a good job of accounting for the body as a dynamical system performing in complex settings. I would be interested to hear more about more contemporary theories of how we learn skills and don't believe that a theory developed in 1967 is still our best explanation.
@@alanovens8713 I was born with almost no sequential memory, so how I learn and function are different than most. I learned a long time ago that motor learning is a different section of the brain, so while I can’t memorize a password I have learned how to type it. That’s not that unusual, but my motor skill is the only working memory I have. I play piano, but I don’t know any of the notes... My lack of a sequential memory goes along with an understanding of math, which is a good example here. In school all the other kids would memorize equations to do things, I couldn’t, but I understood what they were trying to do and I could derive an equation that would work. Fitts and Posner is the basic understanding of the learning process, the application of open or closed loops is just information derived from it...
My issue with questioning its validity due to age is due to a tendency to ignore theories that work in favor of nothing. There is a massive failure of the learning process going on because people don’t understand that every skill they own is due to that same process. Why they don’t teach that early in school is beyond me. Dunning and Kruger’s conclusion was really that 70% of the population skipped the 2nd and 3rd step in the process.
We have this in our 3 Rd year exam damnit!!🤣🤣 That's why I am here
but how though? how do you go through stage to another?
As you practice.... Another important concept of shifting from stages is that of PERFORMANCE PLATEAUS.... so you'll feel after getting from cognitive to associative, that you're development seems to stop growing and stays constant like a plateau.. But then the growth shoots up again as you go from Associative to Autonomous!
Hope that helps
If you are looking for clear indications as to which stage you are at, you’re going to be disappointed. In leaning a piano piece with a repetitive baseline, I must first learn the left hand part. At first I have to read the notes and hit the keys. After a while I don’t have to read the notes, I just concentrate on hitting the keys. At this point if I add the right hand it all falls apart - I still need to concentrate on what the left hand is doing. A week and lots of practice later, I do anything I want with my right hand and the left had will continue to play the baseline. There is no clear transition from one phase to the next, but you always know which one you’re in.