The Conversation Here LO9817

jack hirschfeld (
Sat, 7 Sep 1996 23:03:18 -0400

Replying to LO9756 --

Tim Goos emerges from his lurking mode to tell us:

>There is a small architectural firm here that works in concert with a
>public facilitation firm. As the public makes their comments in a public
>session, the facilitator (in standard ways) records in worded form the
>views of the people. The architect, however, is present to use her/his
>conceptual skills to present the images of the discussion. The resulting
>report produced by this coupling includes both the visual and verbal
>summary of the discussions and recommendations of the participants.
>So, if fact, there is at least one example of a group deliberately trying
>to appeal to both methods of learning.

At the Systems Thinking in Action conference last year, there was an
official mind-mapper (sorry, I've forgotten her name) who "summarized"
several of the meetings using large posters with drawings, key phrases,
connectors and other visual representations of the event. These were
posted during the conference and 8 1/2 x 11 copies were distributed at
conference end to all who wanted them.

[Host's Note: It was Nusa Maal Gelb, and she described her drawings as
"Visual Synthesis." I thought it was very effective. Nancy Margolies has
done similar at other conferences I've attended.]

Many trainers and educators "mix and match" experiences to appeal to
different kinds of learners, and although this is done in a programmatic
way, it is hardly ever measured that I know of, so items aimed at aural,
visual, kinesthetic, analytical, empirical, etc. are all done by guess
work. Use of multiple simultaneous methodologies is very rare, and it
would be interesting to study whether this increases breadth of
comprehension. Has anybody conducted such a study?


Jack Hirschfeld Doesn't anybody stay in one place anymore?

Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <> -or- <>