Repeatable activities develop technique. Be this the brush stroke on a page, hitting a tennis ball with a racket or simply chopping up an onion (or not so simply as it can be sometimes). Through the repetition of this activity, we learn and develop techniques that work to meet the goal that we have set. The key question is how do we determine if we are developing good technique or poor technique? And the answer is feedback.
When we paint, we gain visual and tactile feedback to see if this matches the expectations that we have for our objective. When we hit the ball, we will instantly know through visual feedback if this has headed to that far corner as anticipated or 20 meters over the base line. When we chop an onion, we can determine if the consistency in sizing is there. The feedback is instant - but is it enough for us to know what to do next? Good feedback can come from both an internal source or an external source to tell us if we have not only met our objectives, but if we have met them in a sustainable, reproducible, and applicable way. The quality of the feedback can make all the difference in your learning and will certainly make all of the difference in the development of your technique.
A deliberate focus on technique is generally the most important aspect for developing this in a way that will allow it to be sustainable, reproducible, and applicable. Sustainable means that there is a minimisation of any long term effects of this. The intention is to avoid any damage or side effects that might be caused through this process is critical to ensuring longevity in this approach. Reproducible means that we are able to replicate the results through the use of the technique. A one-off result does not imply technique, however it might be the basis for the feedback that informs what this will look like in the future. The aim is for consistency in what the technique is able to offer. Applicable means that it is relevant to the context in which you are aiming to use this. Whilst this might seem like a given, there is often a lot of nuance associated with technique and its use in context that needs to be properly considered in the feedback process. A combination of all three of these elements will provide an appropriate pathway to developing technique in a meaningful and relevant way.
What happens in situations where we require technique but have a limited opportunity to develop this? Interestingly enough, this is a very relevant question as there will be a number of "one-off" situations that require nuance that is unpracticed. In each of these scenarios our best approach is to understand the mental representation of what we are working towards. Having a clear goal of what we are looking to achieve provides clarity of how we prepare and learn the steps required. The second part is going to be the feedback that we receive. Depending on the activity, it is common for feedback to be addressed in the following ways:
Sense perception (sight, hearing, touch, taste, smell). This is an internal process that we rely on heavily to receive feedback.
Comparison of Intent (as we progress, we examine the working results with our original intention). The OAR Approach can be useful in this process.
Cognitive Understanding (we determine the relationship between sense perception and our understanding of what the technique should be to see how this translates)
External Acknowledgement and Guidance (seeking out people who are more advanced in the technique to provide guidance in this area).
It becomes incredibly useful to have feedback from an external source, particularly where we are not familiar with the process or don't have sufficient knowledge to understand if the technique that is being employed meets the three criteria (sustainable, reproducible, applicable). The good news is that once you have met these three aspects, you can look to the next step of development, and this is mastery.
As technique develops from repeatable activities, we can then identify the role that mastery has to play in this process. Mastery is essentially the final step, and is one that requires dedication, discipline and a commitment to the development of the technique in question. The technique allows outcomes that are at a higher level and provide in-depth knowledge and skill to be utilised in a more meaningful way. This may extend to other contexts, although for the most part there will be a specialisation that occurs in this process. Mastery may look different to expertise, but it does provide a clear goal for achievement when we find we can employ the right type of feedback to inform ourselves.
The important step towards developing technique begins with understanding what the repeatable activity is that you are engaged in. If the feedback is not specific enough for you to determine improvement, then this needs to be disregarded in this sense and counted as encouragement. The difference between "you played well today" and "you played well today and it was noticeable how you developed your top spin into the opponents backhand to shut down the other side of the court" provides a clearer picture back to the player of how technique has provided a role in "playing well". You will have developed many techniques of your own over time, and the key question moving forward is what role has feedback played in the development of your specific technique?
Michael.
コメント