DustPapers

Paper on Teaching and Learning In An Experiential Context

The Socratic Educative Posture and Naturalistic Decision-Making
in Novice Fly-fishing Skill Acquisition
Dustin Kunkel

“What is the use of perfect technique drilled to perfection if the wrong decision is made?”

Introduction

This paper, by assignment, follows a rather different path than a typical academic paper. We were directed by the instructor to limit discussion of technical details of the sport, instead focusing on “skill acquisition and learning theory.” Since the goal is to highlight both theory and methodology in teaching a particular skill experientially, a thesis statement would overly simplify the required assignment. Instead, I develop a framework that presupposes vast openness to coaching in a dynamic environment—no matter the skill. It is also critical to note there are divergent developments in research and attendant theory-modification particularly since 1985 (Mack, Huddleston, Dutler, & Mintah, 2000, introduction section, para. 2). As such, I utilize recent research almost exclusively.

With this notion of developing a conceptual framework rather than a thesis, I begin with assumptions on my part regarding the role of coach and learner; discuss my coaching style; reference relevant definitions of “skill;” explore theory and relevant research; and close with an application of my philosophy to coaching a particular skill.

The “Specific Outdoor Activity Example”

Four physically healthy boys (able to hike 10 miles with a 40 lb rucksack), between the ages of 14 and 16, accompanied by four male mentors from their community (any adult male who spends weekly time with the boy) will accompany me on a 5-day summer trip to learn how to fly fish mountain lakes in the Idaho wilderness. We will backpack approximately 10 miles in to a base camp at 7000 feet within three miles of five small alpine lakes (all of which hold trout). I chose fly-fishing because I know it well, it is a skill that requires a deep awareness of the environment, and is a highly complex skill to acquire.

Assumptions

As per the assignment notes, it is particularly useful to assume “motivated” individuals in an “ideal environment.” This is because learner motivation leads to learner-designed goals and actions (S. Banks, personal communication/lecture, October 20, 2005). I also assume that good coaching requires accepting the individual is from a particular social and cultural context, and Outdoor Education (OE) often extracts the learner from that context (Brookes, 2003a,b). By involving mentors, I assume the situational learning will be ‘carried home’ more effectively due to the relationships involved: “to maintain those changes depends on maintaining, or at least periodically returning to, the changed circumstances” (Brookes, 2003c, p. 420). By so doing, my philosophy rejects dispositionist grandiose notions of my “leader” role—i.e. being a “character architect” rather than one of many helpers in the learner’s life.

Although I disagree with some applications of the “family metaphor” in Islands of Healing, (Schoel, et al, 1998, pp. 96-98) especially regarding groups that are “extracted” for a day, I believe it is helpful to assume the “family metaphor” has value in this situation because the boys are accompanied by mentors and/or fathers. Thus, in this case, “agreement to work together as a group and to work toward individual and group goals” (p. 96) provides the foundation for the experiential learning to take place in a situationist and social interactionist perspective—“it is people who actually create society” (Pike, 1996, p. 381).

Coaching Style

With the previous assumptions supporting my coaching, a primary goal that frames all decisions I make as coach is this: learning a skill is not for a week, but for a life. Furthermore, I see no reason to improve upon using “an indirect teaching approach that encourages exploration” (Gallahue, Werner, & Luedke, 1975, p. 16) despite it being formulated as “the first level of the learning hierarchy” for young children (Gallahue, et al, p. 16). Rink points out,
. . . indirect instruction strategies usually are most often intended to involve the learner [no matter what age] in the process of creating rather than duplicating the response identified and communicated by the teacher . . . (1999, p. 151) . . .there is no single theory of learning that would explain learning or the lack of it in all situations, and therefore, there can be no single approach to instruction . . . (p. 163)

My form of indirect instruction rests philosophically upon what Manheimer calls the “Socratic educative posture” as defined by Kierkegaard (1977, p. 5). This “posture” refuses to develop a systematic methodology or expect resolution. It recants any control over the learner and instead seeks “learning space” through ironical juxtapositions of concepts, relying on the learner to wrestle with his or her own existence and learning.

If indirect instruction is one side of the coin (coach-centred), then the other side is the concept of “motivation” (learner-centred): since “pupils do not all define success in the same way” (Biddle, 1999, p. 112), it is essential to identify what “success” is to each one, and consequently, arrive at an understanding of their motivations. Granted, this is can be a long and painful trek, but the Kierkegaardian Socratic educative posture allows the coach to listen and “ask the hard questions” without entering prescriptive methodology. This, in turn, provokes more opportunities for the learner to turn inward and discover his or her motivations.

Deci and Ryan (1985) render motivation down to three key psychological needs: competence, autonomy, and relatedness. Biddle connects “relatedness” to “strivings to relate to, and care for, others; to feel that others can relate to oneself” (1999, p. 119). Thus, motivation never stands alone, but requires the presence of others; hence, my inclusion of mentors in the skill-building process. At this point, the coach faces an inherent contradiction, which is often glossed over or “solved” by simplistic methodologies: recanting control whilst hoping mentors and learners grow not only in the skill but also in their life-long coaching of one another (primary objective at the beginning of this section). However, the Kierkegaardian Socratic posture provides a helpful perspective—the educator “hovers over” the existential problem without reducing the complexities of the contradictions, nor the potentials for learning. Secondly, by taking a stance as the least effectual of the mentors (after all, the others will remain with their mentees long after I am gone) I empower them to explore not only skill and decision-making, but also the development of interpersonal skills.

In summary, my coaching style falls within a style continuum defined in our lectures: “guided discovery” for early novitiates—i.e. using “a broad, question-based approach to help the learners arrive at the agenda without knowing it;” but moving as rapidly as possible towards “the coach as resource”—i.e., “the ‘library’ or the more competent observer or analyst” (S. Banks, personal communication/lecture notes, October 20, 2005).


Key Definition: “Skill”

We return to the phrase quoted at the top of this paper. Stated conversely—making the right decision outweighs “perfect” technique. It is essential, then, to identify the connection between decision-making and technique: “skill is a person’s ability to consistently select, organise and execute actions which are appropriate to a given situation” (Hardy & Fazey [class handout], 2005, p. 3). Stated more succinctly by the lecturer, “skill is the appropriate application of technique” (personal communication/lecture, October 20, 2005). In their discussion of kayaking, Higgins and Morgan recognise that “the ‘open’ nature of kayaking dictates that each time a skill is used it is unique” (p. 4) which also explains the use of skill in fly fishing, a highly complex art in a dynamic environment. Higgins and Morgan go on to explain that “we believe that . . . more particularly the teaching of it should be based on it’s real use” (p. 4). In other words, practicing technical competencies away from the environment in which the skill is used is counterproductive to long-term learning of that skill which is the appropriate application of the technique.


Theory and Relevant Research That Frame My Instruction Style

Until the last 20 years, skill-teaching has been built on theoretical models of the computer/servo, the reduction of errors within a defined system, and/or the hierarchical organization of behaviour (Summers, 2004). Although there are now many attested fallacies regarding these theories, it is the application to the actual task of coaching which I find of interest: basing human learning on computers and servos can easily cause a reductionist coaching perspective which does not account for the dynamics of the human consciousness. A hierarchical model can lend itself to hierarchical teaching methods—Teacher inputs, learner receives passively.

The extensive use of laboratory research “that emphasized carefully controlled laboratory experiments involving simple ‘novel’ tasks” has also influenced skill acquisition theory and methodology until the last twenty years (Summers, 2004, p. 12). Recently, researchers have begun to question this experimental methodology for its reductionism, and develop new “multi-dimensional and nonlinear” theories (Mack, Huddleston, Dutler & Mintah, 2000, introduction, para. 3): “the ecological approach sees skill as an emergent consequence . . . “ (Summers, 2004, p. 15).

The ecological approach to skill-acquisition has opened up new areas of research in the study of expert-novice differences and “how the knowledge and strategies exhibited by experts are acquired” (p. 13). At this point, skill-acquisition has critical confluence with another body of research known as decision theory, undergoing a similar paradigm shift. “Classical decision theory” based on reductionism and laboratory experiments is giving way to “naturalistic decision theory” (NDT) which highlights expert decision-making in a natural environment (Orasanu & Connolly, 1995). Some particular insights from NDT research include these:

1. Experts are distinguished from novices mainly by their situation assessment abilities, not their general reasoning skills, and by the fact that they generate and evaluate a single option based on knowledge and experience rather than analyzing multiple options concurrently.

2. Reasoning is schema-driven rather than a computational algorithm. . . people create causal models of the situation.

3. There is a decision cycle which reflects the incomplete knowledge, dynamically changing conditions, and competing goal structures rather than segregating reasoning and acting (Orasanu & Connolly, 1995, pp. 19-20).

My coaching approach merges ecological skill-acquisition, NDT, and the Kierkegaardian Socratic educative posture. I find that by framing a skill session with the assumption that the learner can approach skilfulness through naturalistic decision-making, I support the learner in the move away from problematic focus on technical details. We enter a realm of focus conducive to “the appropriate application of technique.” This does not mean technique is null. Rather, technique becomes an outcome of making appropriate decisions in a natural environment.

Within NDT, the status of “expert” in the mind of the learner is critical: if “we see performance as a broad based continuum with phases that have certain identifying behaviours, not isolated points, the issue of who exactly is or is not an expert is of relatively little concern. It is more important for us to understand where an athlete fits along this continuum of behaviours” (Starkes, Cullen, & MacMahon, 2004, p. 266). At first, this seems contradictory. However, it might be more helpful to use the terms “expertise” or “experts” to denote a set of attitudes and behaviours on one end of the NDT spectrum, rather than a single individual. For example, experts are “superior in using predictive information (i.e. advance visual cues) to guide their anticipatory responses” (Savelsbergh, van der Kamp, Oudejans, & Scott, 2004, p. 374). At this point, decision-making and focus of attention begin to interweave: “the education of attention is the process of learning which sources of information to attend to in which situation and when to attend to these variables” (Savelsbergh, et al, 2004, p. 380).

“Expert use of predictive information” raises another key coaching concept, the emphasis upon tactics (whilst, at least initially, reducing emphasis on mental/emotional, technical, and physical factors). Since tactics--as opposed to goals--are environment and situation-specific, coaching “tactics first” helps in these ways:

1. It allows the learner to associate physical, mental/emotional, and technical factors within a broader framework of real-time choices and environment-specific predictions.

2. Tactics can be likened to the “foundation” of learning. Once the foundation is built well, then the other parts of the house go up easily—the mental, emotional, physical and technical sides.

3. Tactics are an easy way to jump-start learner-initiated questions. Tactical questioning is like a massive hall with a 1000 doors that open into a 1000 rooms with 1000 more doors, and so on.
4. Learning tactics in the initial acquisition of the skill might be intrinsically linked to ongoing learner motivation (although there remains little research to substantiate this hypothesis, since the realm of inquiry is young).


The Trip as Naturalistic Library

Since I have framed my coaching philosophy as a “posture” rather than methodology, it follows that the trip, itself, will be open to serendipity and multiple perspectives. Recent research in spatial reasoning suggests people use imagination to build inference capacities through “multiple views” in a location (Newcombe & Huttenlocher, 2000, p. 109). Gatto draws a clear distinction between what students are trained to do in school and what learners are expected to do in a library. He suggests libraries are the ultimate learning climate for the motivated learner (2003, p. 51)--the expectations are high, but simple.

There is certainly no way to pack an entire building up a mountain, but the concept, itself, travels:

People.

This includes two friends of mine: one an expert fly fisherman with local knowledge of the area, and the other a geology teacher. During the drive and the hike to the base camp, these “teachers” will share what they know. They will then remain nearby through the duration. Prior to the trip, students would watch at least two DVDs with their mentors of fly fishing experiences (not “teaching” DVDs) to initiate the “expertise continuum.” It should also be noted that the “family metaphor” is discussed on the trip to the trailhead as a means for the group to identify common goals, attitudes, and behaviours.

Gear (not including basics for hiking/camping in the wild).

Snorkelling gear for going under the water to view the environment, sieves for collecting underwater specimens, magnifying glasses, binoculars, geology books specific to the area, digital video camera with a large view screen for playback (extra batteries), rod-reel-line-leader-fly combo for each learner and each mentor (one set of “cheap” rods, one set of superior rods), ½ sheets of paper with a hole punched in one corner and snap-rings to create journal pages.

Some pages will contain information in bullet form prepared by myself and the other leaders specific to the tactical and contextual information we share: i.e., geological formations, formation of mountain lakes, types of trout and their feeding patterns, insects, the “hard look” in fly casting, explanations of my coaching paradigm, description of NDT theory, etc. These pages will not be shared in a “lecture format” but simply placed at the disposal of the learners.

A note on the fishing gear: utilising a “performer constraint” approach (Araujo, Davids, Bennett, Button, & Chapman, 2004) by allowing novices to try inferior and superior gear can aid long-term skill acquisition. Cheap fly rods do everything expensive ones do, without the extra sensitivity and/or casting ability. This allows them to recognize the differences between “sensitive” and “spongy” rods. It positions the learner within the expertise continuum, highlighting skill-acquisition compared to an inferior tool.

The educative posture

Once we arrive on site, we immediately begin with what Vickers, et al, call “hard first instruction:” “. . . decision training . . . introduces the athletes to the complex knowledge they need. . . as soon as possible” (2004, p. 113). This means setting up the gear for the learners and sending them out with their mentors for the rest of the day to fish, with group consensus on “check back times.”

The “hard first instruction” goes hand in hand with the “hard look” principle (Banks, 1997)—the only tactical principle I will share with the learners on the first day during check back. The concept, applied in kayaking, is that by focusing attention on exactly where they want to go—i.e., the “hard look—learners gain proprioceptive knowledge of technique without regressing to a dependence upon internal cues. The “hard look” keeps them tactically focused on their environment, and technique follows.

Though there is little research to validate this approach specifically to fly-fishing, there is enough in similar complex skills to warrant the hypothesis.

Janelle, Duley, and Coombes suggest, “most would agree that the successful acquisition of motor skills is reliant upon the refinement of attention-related skills” (2004, p. 283). More specifically: “a stronger contention would be that motor skill learning . . . occurs because of attentional skill development” (p. 299). My own experience in learning fly-fishing was exactly this. In times of decision duress--as Banks also relates in kayaking--I “regress” to this first principle rather than thinking about what my arms or feet are doing. The fly lands where I want it to land, because that is the first thing I learned to pay attention to.

A perception that “indirect learning” and the Socratic educative posture is not hard work would be very misleading. Since the learner is motivated and the coach is motivated, activity continues for extended periods of time. As Lee and Simon mention, “. . . there are few, if any, exceptions to the law of practice [makes perfect]” (2004, p. 29). When connected with a contextual interference perspective, this means that learners will immerse themselves in learning by stretching and “re-loading” their working memories (Lee & Simon, p. 36) through multiple sessions in multiple environs. This includes but is not limited to: utilising the “library” of people, gear, and resources; moving from lake to lake in the area; fishing around individual lakes; going underwater; hiking the area; talking by the fire at night; and coaching one another as they move from place to place.

My primary coaching goal is met from discussions that arise, without resorting to an outcome-based approach: mentors and learners develop emergent coaching and fishing skills of their own, to carry on learning long after I am gone. A final note: the digital video camera becomes a tool used as an “impartial observer” to aid one another in analysis of NDT, tactics, and coaching skill development (Sanders, 2004, p. 162; Araujo, et al, 2004, p. 427). Notice the lack of focus on technique. I would start and end each day recording, watching, and discussing the most experienced fly fishermen in the group, if that were considered helpful by those involved.


The “aha” moment.

“From the research so far, it seems that motor skills that require spatial-temporal coordination or consist of relatively complex motor components . . . might be best characterized by this all-or-none learning process . . .the challenge for the coach . . . is then to find ways of bringing about these seemingly sudden changes or insights” (Dickinson, Weeks, Randall, & Goodman, 2004, p. 81). Although I recognise the existence of “aha” moments, my view differs with “the challenge for the coach” raised by Dickinson, et al: As an educator and coach, I do not “find ways” to bring about learning, but instead, promote and provoke a library of learning that students find helpful in their desire to learn.



References

Araujo, D., Davids, K., Bennett, S.J., Button, D., & Chapman, G. (2004). Emergence of sports skills
under constraints. In A. Mark Williams & Nicola J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice (pp. 409-433 ). New York: Routledge.
Banks, S. (2005). The hard look. Retrieved December 10th, 2005, from British Canoe Union Web
site: http://www.bcu.org.uk/pdfdocs/hard%20look.pdf
Biddle, S. (1999). The motivation of pupils in physical education. In C.A. Hardy & M. Mawer (Eds.),
Learning and Teaching in Physical Education (pp. 105-125). London, UK: Falmer Press.
Brookes, A. (2003a). A critique of neo-hahnian outdoor education theory. Part one: challenges to
the concept of “character building.” Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 3 (1), 49-62.
Brookes, A. (2003b). A critique of new-hahnian outdoor education theory. Part two: “the
fundamental attribution error” in contemporary outdoor education discourse. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 3 (2), 119-132.
Brookes, A. (2003c). Adventure programming and the fundamental attribution error: a critique of
neo-hahnian outdoor education theory. In B. Humberstone, H. Brown, & K. Richards (Eds.), Whose journeys? The outdoors and adventure as social and cultural phenomena (pp. 403-423). Barrow-in-Furness, UK: I.O.L.
Deci, E.L. & Ryan, R.M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New
York: Plenum.
Dickinson, J., Weeks, D., Randall, B., & Goodman, D. (2004). One-trial motor learning. In A. Mark
Williams & Nicola J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice (pp. 63-83). New York: Routledge.
Janelle, C.M., Duley, A.R., & Coombes, S.A. (2004). Psychophysiological and related indices of
attention during motor skill acquisition. In A. Mark Williams & Nicola J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice (pp. 282-308). New York: Routledge.
Gallahue, D.L., Werner, P.H., & Luedke, G.C. (1975). A conceptual approach to moving and
learning. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Gatto, J.T. (2003). The underground history of American education: an intimate investigation into
the prison of modern schooling, revised edition. New York: The Oxford Village Press.
Hardey, L. & Fazey, J. (2005, October). Understanding and improving skill. In S. Banks (Ed.),
Extracts from the resource pack of the coach development programme prepared as handouts for students. Learning and Teaching in Experiential Context, University of Edinburgh, Moray House School of Education, Msc in Outdoor Education Programme.
Higgins, P. & Morgan, A. (1997). Skimming the surface: teaching kayak support strokes and rolls.
Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Leadership, 14(1), pp. 3-6.
Lee, T.D., & Simon, D.A. (2004). Contextual interference. In A. Mark Williams & Nicola J. Hodges
(Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice (pp. 29-44). New York: Routledge.
Mack, M.G., Huddleston, S., Dutler, K.E., & Mintah, J.K. (2000, May). Chaos theory: a new science
for sport behavior? Athletic Insight: the online journal of sport psychology, 2 (2), Retrieved November 28, 2005, from http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol2Iss2/Chaos_Theory.htm
Manheimer, R.J. (1977). Kierkegaard as educator. California: U.C. Press.
Newcombe, N.S. & Huttenlocher, J. (2000). Making space: the development of spatial representation and
reasoning. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
Orasanu, J. & Connolly, T. (1995). The reinvention of decision making. In G.A. Klein, J. Orasanue,
R. Calderwood, & C.E. Zsambok (Eds.), Decision making in action: models and methods (pp. 3-20). New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Co.
Pike, E. (1996). Contemporary issues. In P. Beashel & J. Taylor (Eds.), Advanced studies in
physical education and sport (pp. 377-415). Surrey, UK: Thomas Nelson.
Rink, J. (1999). Instruction from a learning perspective. In C.A. Hardy & M. Mawer (Eds.), Learning
and Teaching in Physical Education (pp. 149-167). London, UK: Falmer Press.
Sanders, R. H. (2004). Biomechanical analyses in physical education. In J. Wright, D. Macdonald, & L.
Burrows (Eds.), Critical inquiry and problem-solving in physical education (pp. 159-170). London: Routledge.
Savelsbergh, G.J.P., van der Kamp, J., Oudejans, R.R.D., & Scott, M.A. (2004). Perceptual learning
is mastering perceptual degrees of freedom. In A. Mark Williams & Nicola J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice (pp. 374-389). New York: Routledge.
Shoel, J., Prouty, D., & Radcliffe, P. (1998). Islands of healing: a guide to adventure based
counselling. Hamilton, MA: Project Adventure, Inc.
Starks, J.L., Cullen, J.D., & MacMahon, C. (2004). A life-span model of the acquisition and retention
of expert perceptual-motor performance. In A. Mark Williams & Nicola J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice (pp. 259-281). New York: Routledge.
Summers, J.J. (2004). A historical perspective on skill acquisition. In A. Mark Williams & Nicola J.
Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice (pp. 1-26). New York: Routledge.
Vickers, J.N., Reeves, M., Chambers, K.L., & Martell, S. (2004). Decision training: cognitive
strategies for enhancing motor performance. In A. Mark Williams & Nicola J. Hodges (Eds.), Skill acquisition in sport: research, theory and practice (pp. 103-120). New York: Routledge.

posted by Dust @ 6:32 AM