And yet another book that is opening my eyes.  Frank Smith's The Book of Learning and Forgetting is providing me with a great deal of interesting knowledge.  For example, I was surprised to learn that by the age of six, most young children have a vocabulary of around 10,000 words.  I knew a six year old could talk but what Smith pointed out, and what I hadn't thought of before was that most of these words were acquired without formal instruction!  Smith also relates the story of a third grade teacher who did a study on her students vocabulary growth.  She found that, in one year, students add an average of 27 new words to their vocabulary every day, 365 days a year!

While I've not finished the book yet, Smith is pointing out how much learning occurs intrinsically and without organized education.  My personal learning theory calls this vicarious absorption and I believe that we never lose that ability.  According to the summary of the book, Smith will build on this premise and use it to build a case that states that our current education system actually inhibits vicarious absorption.  

Not sure I agree that these are mutually exclusive.  I know I learned a lot in the manner in which Smith states, but I also learned through traditional methods.  For example, I am often surprised today when someone CAN'T multiply six by nine in their heads.  Memorizing the multiplication tables was something I had to do a punishment in grades five and six. . . . and it's stuck with me for over 45 years.

Well. . . not really, but Sudoku has really sharpened my pattern recognition skills.  See how by watching the video below.

I have been working on my very own learning theory for a couple of weeks now.  Reading about Dewey, Erikson, Piaget, even Skinner and Pavlov (yikes).  I think naturally, I am drawing upon my own experiences not only as a learner but also as a teacher and administrator.   I've been formulating in my head, and on paper (not paper really - on my computer) my own theories of why and how people learn.  I'm starting to recognize that the 'why' is just as important - stepping out on a limb - perhaps more important than the 'how.'  The how and the why are different, I know that, but they are intertwined and can not be separated - nor should they.  How individuals learn means very little without the motivation to learn (the 'why').  My learning theory is very much based on the why.  I think that, if the motivation is strong enough, learning occurs regardless of how the information is presented.  Perhaps I am taking a little Pavlov, some Erikson, definitely some Maslow and Piaget and mixing it all together in my head to see what comes out.