The Nonlinear Nature of Learning - A Differential Learning Approach

Abstract

Traditional learning approaches are typically based on a linear understanding of causality where the same cause leads to the same effect. In recent years there has been increasing interest in the complexity of nature and living phenomena, with significant insights provided by models of change that are based on a nonlinear understanding of causality, where small causes can lead to big effects and vice versa. In this vein, learning processes seem to be more successful for inducing behavioral change when teaching processes deviate from a linear approach. The differential learning approach takes advantage of fluctuations in a complex system by increasing them through 'no repetition' and 'constantly changing movement tasks' which add stochastic perturbations. Previous research has provided much evidence on the superiority of a differential learning approach for learning single movement techniques, in comparison to repetition-and correctionoriented approaches. In this pilot study, the parallel acquisition and learning of two movement techniques in the sport of football are the objective of investigation. One traditionally trained group and two differentially trained groups (blocked and random) trained for 4 weeks, twice a week, on ball control and shooting at goal tasks. Results supported previous work and revealed significant advantages for both differential groups in the acquisition phase as well as in the learning phase, compared to the traditional group. These data suggest that, instead of following a direct linear path towards the target of a 'to-be-learned' movement technique by means of numerous repetitions and corrections, a differential approach is more beneficial because it perturbs learners towards more functional movement patterns during practice.Keywords: Differential Learning, complex systems, fluctuations, football, movement variability. INTRODUCTIONTraditional models of learning have recently been questioned because of their principles that all learners typically start with the same exercise followed by other identical teaching exercises in order to build up a methodical sequence of exercises followed by all students in order to achieve stipulated learning goals [1]. A similar logic underpins the interpretation of traditional pedagogical principles that all learners need to progress "from easy to hard" or "from simple to complex" exercises. In principle this logic implies the understanding of linear causality as fundamental basis for a linear pedagogy. In a weak version of this approach to learning, linear causality assumes that same causes will lead to same effects. In the strong version (because much more mathematical conditions have to be fulfilled) similar causes will lead to similar effects. In reality these assumptions are associated with models of linear equations in which the result is just a sum of weighted parameters of influence. In practice this approach is accompanied by the breaking up of a sports movement into certain phases or anatomical focuses that are all trained separately...

Sample Entropy-Based Analysis of Differential and Traditional Training Effects on Dynamic Balance in Healthy People

“…This result corresponds to classical memory effects that follow learning procedures mainly characterized by performance repetitions (Schöllhorn, Hegen, & Davids, 2012) and the hysteresis phenomena (Frank et al, 2008). Traditional practice through repetition, with short periods without practice between sessions, generates more consistent motor patterns in the short-term memory that fade after long periods without practicing.…”

Overcoming acculturation: physical education recruits' experiences of an alternative pedagogical approach to games teaching

“…This traditional approach is characterised by a conventional practice sequence which starts with the introduction of technical skill(s), followed by students' repetitive attempts to reproduce teacher-prescribed movement 'templates' in isolated drills, finishing with a game (Hopper et al 2009). This decontextualised approach to practice is not compatible with the aim of developing intelligent, thinking performers, a central theme in physical education curriculum documents worldwide The traditional 'one-way-fits-all' pedagogical approach, which erroneously assumes that one movement pattern acts as an optimal template suitable for all individual learners Schöllhorn et al 2012), is also failing physical education students on a psychological level. Emphasising the mastery of specific techniques in drills and competitive games can sometimes humiliate, marginalise and exclude less gifted and confident individuals (Ennis 1999;Light and Georgakis 2005).…”

“…The traditional 'one-way-fits-all' pedagogical approach, which erroneously assumes that one movement pattern acts as an optimal template suitable for all individual learners Schöllhorn et al 2012), is also failing physical education students on a psychological level. Emphasising the mastery of specific techniques in drills and competitive games can sometimes humiliate, marginalise and exclude less gifted and confident individuals (Ennis 1999;Light and Georgakis 2005).…”

The acquisition of pedagogical expertise in dance : a constraints-led approach

“…From a nonlinear pedagogy perspective, the importance of implementing practice in unstructured environments to promote informal learning opportunities is supported by the work of Schöllhorn and colleagues (2012) in sport, who demonstrated that there is sufficient evidence of the differential approach's greater benefits for learning particular movement techniques, in contrast with other approaches that are based on repetition and correction. For instance, in football, three groups, one traditionally trained with repetition and correction oriented approaches; and the other two trained with the differential approach, with blocked and random sequences of training on shooting at a goal and ball control tasks, occurring twice a week, for a period of four weeks (Schöllhorn, et al, 2012). The findings showed noteworthy benefits for both differential groups in the learning and acquisition phases in comparison with the traditional group.…”

“…The findings showed noteworthy benefits for both differential groups in the learning and acquisition phases in comparison with the traditional group. This suggests that the differential approach is superior to the traditional approach for learning movement technique because the former perturbs individuals towards learning more functional patterns during unstructured practice; whereas the latter is more limited for learning because it follows a direct linear path, by means of implementing repetition and correction (Schöllhorn, et al, 2012). This utilization of unstructured learning environments is distinct from Hilda's engagement in highly structured activity; therefore, it might provide an alternative model to that of the pedagogic development of movement performance educators .…”