Hierarchical Lattice Scaffolding
When does our learning become knowledge and how do we consolidate learning in to our existing knowledge structures? Can we articulate the WHAT, the HOW and the WHY of our coaching or practitioner interventions and when do we question a knowledge base that is so often accessed unconsciously and never therefor purposefully questioned or interrogated? These question have ramifications for coaches and practitioners both in how and what we learn and importantly why. When we think of how we identify performance problems, problem solve, generate solutions and decide courses of actions do we draw upon existing knowledge already saved to memory or do we have to learn new things to help us? If we consider that new knowledge is simply new electrical patterns of activity in the brain, either a connection that didn’t exist or a stronger bond between a series of neurons, does it make sense to seek the final and most compelling answer thus closing down neural growth or seek the next powerful question therefor ever adding to and evolving our knowledge base? I like the idea that knowledge is a complex ‘ever expanding’ web like structure built within a hierarchical latticed scaffold, we create connections across the scaffolding and create intricate patterns and shapes throughout the structure when we learn, when we think and when we create – which when I think about it now, is the very act of being conscious, aware and capable of thinking…
- How do we as coaches and practitioners learn and what is important?
- Is the knowledge required to physically execute a skill versus coaching a skill distinct and different?
- When should learning be conscious or unconscious?
- How, with subconscious/unconscious learning, can we be sure that understanding is achieved?
- When knowledge is tacit and ‘performative’ – should we be purposeful in trying to add procedural/declarative depth to the understanding? Consider coaches and practitioners who have been athletes – could this be challenging to deeply held unchecked beliefs?
- When should we use implicit or explicit approaches to learning? When is either approach useful?
- Are we good at differentiating between knowledge types in coach and practitioner education programmes and could we tackle learning in novel ways?
- Could we make use of case studies -scenario (SBL) and problem based learning (PBL) tasks with coaches, practitioners and athletes to create really safe ‘blended’ learning environments?
- Is there a skill in positioning an answer next to another question?