When should we train learners to become learning-design experts (From what age? In which way? To what depth and width?)?

On the field of learning design (instructional design), at least a teacher or designer have the legitimate access to ID (instructional design) community resources : learn theories of learning, learn instructional design theories, do some ID projects etc.

For a common learner, it might be rare. Maybe some learners are lucky enough, to access to some knowledge and skills of learning how to learn. However, most learners will not deal with their own learning, in the same way of how a professional instructional designer conducts a systematic ID practice.

Although a learner has accumulated many years of practice of learning, it does NOT mean that he knows the rules/patterns about how to learn, it does NOT mean that he knows the sign/language system of how to learn, so it would be impossible to self-improve his learning guided by theories.
From very young, a learner might start learning many things: some things are closely related to his daily life, for example, healthy eating. What about for one of the most important daily practice - learning?

How much is explicitly taught to him about how to learn? How much reflective practice opportunity is offered to him? Can he visualize how his strategies and effort make a difference in his daily learning?

Year after year, day after day, is he on the road of becoming an expert learner? Is he making the best use of his thousands of hours of practice, in terms of his profession as a learner?
According to spiral-curriculum, any content can be designed in some format of understandable to young learners, so teaching one on how to learn should start from young age.

What dimensions and approaches can be used to synthesize learning outcomes?

Step 1: to get the dimensions of learning outcomes in different learning theories, for example,

1. From Gagne’s theory, the dimensions might be width, depth, and sequence of learning outcome.
1. higher-order rules are wider rules
2. the intellectual skills reflect both the depth and the sequence: from discrimination, to concrete concepts, to defined concepts, to rules, to higher order rules
2. From Bloom’s theory, the dimensions focus more on the sequence and depth (the hierarchy), but also on width.
1. the hierarchy part: from knowledge (remembering), to comprehension, to application, to analysis, to synthesis, to evaluation.
2. analysis and synthesis might be wider than simple application
3. From Bruner’s m-mode theory, educational semiotics theory, and CIP theory, the dimension is the type of mode, depth of the mode, and sequence of building m-mode.
1. type of mode: for Bruner, the enactive-mode, the iconic-mode, and symbolic-mode; for educational semiotics theory, sign as an index, sign as an icon, sign as a symbol.
2. sequence of building: Bruner’s m-mode hierarchy
4. More dimensions in more theories, such as
1. the attitude (afffective) outcomes: type, depth, and sequence
2. the motor skills (pyschootor) outcomes: type, depth, and sequence
3. self-regulated learning, metacognition, conditional knowledge, cognitive strategies: type and depth
4. solving ill-structured problem: include higher order rule and go beyond higher order rule
5. Piaget’s type of knowledge: physical knowledge, logical-mathematical knowledge, and social knowledge.
6. From learn something to evaluate, to contribute to invent something new.
7. Receptive learning by Ausubel and discovery learning by Bruner: the sequence of learning
8. Whether be able to solve problems in meaningful, authentic, and complicated environment
9. Spiral curriculum, from sub-model to whole-model: about scope and sequence.

Step 2: Create the dimension-list, and for each dimension, to gather all related theory-part.
Step 3: For a given dimension, try to do some addition.
Step 4: Try to create a Dashboard for Learning Outcomes. In this dashboard, we can keep some traditional-widely-used taxonomies; meanwhile, we can try to create some newly synthesized by-dimension tool part.

• Like a car’s dashboard, different dimensions can be used to monitor the car’s performance, for a learning outcomes dashboard, different dimensions can be used to monitor how well a set of learning outcomes have been achieved.
• Or like a physical examination, different indexes can be used to evaluate one person’s health situation, a dashboard of learning outcome can be used to monitor a learner’s learning behavior, in terms of different dimensions.

What analogies can be built between human intelligence and artificial intelligence? Why do we need these analogies?

Why do we want to compare and contrast intelligence by human and by machine?

• The development of artificial intelligence get inspirations from the development of human intelligence.
• In reverse, the computer analogy model of human intelligence illustrates the efforts of using artificial intelligence to discover about human intelligence.

Because of my personal experience ( try to visualize how we think and learn), my attention tends to focus on: how to use the machine-processing-information, and machine-network-performance to visualize human’s learning and thinking.
For me, the computer-metaphor ( or a broader machine-metaphor ) is a potential powerful visualization-model to make sense of human intelligence.

• The components of human intelligence
• The internal structure of human intelligence
• in a hypothetical way,
• more in terms of psychology and semiotics than in terms of neural structure
• in the way of perceivable and visualized analogy-based physical model
• How are the intelligence developed and used?

For learning, what analogies can be built in terms of "tree"?

Four seasons, trees-with-leaf, and trees-without-leaf

1. a tree experiences the cycle of dropping leafs in Fall and Winter, and grows new leafs in Spring.
2. a schema-tree has both the abstracted structure, and the case-application. The abstracted structure tree is like the tree-without-leaf; the case-application tree is like the tree-with-leafs. Each time of applying is like the tree grows new leafs. In Schema Theory, accretion is about this process of using the schema in a new interpretive context

Grow bigger and bigger

1. year after year, the tree becomes bigger.
2. time after time, the the abstracted structure might become bigger if new features are added to the abstracted structure tree. In Schema Theory, attuning of schema is about this process of modifying the structure tree to make it more adapt to the new interpretive context.

Grow a new tree

1. a new tree might grow from a seed, or from transplanting from other trees.
2. for a schema tree, the new tree might grow from induction, or from reason-with-analogy.

Link/weave a few trees together

1. in a garden, a set of trees ‘work together’ to create the nice garden.
2. for schema-tree, a few schema-trees might ‘work together’ to function. A few theories and models describe this process:
1. the reconstructing of schema in Schema Theory
2. in Gagne’s outcome of learning, the hierarchy structure of building intellectual skills: from distinguishable stimuli, to concrete concept, to defined concept, to rule, and to higher-order rule.

In learning related activities (such as instructional design, learning, etc.), what questions about 'documenting' can be asked?

Documenting

• What is documenting?
• Who document?
• Why document?
• When to document?
• Where to document?
• How to document?

Tools for documenting

• What tool is needed for documenting?
• Who need the tool?
• Why need the tool?
• When does one need the tool?
• Where does one need the tool?

Inventing, designing, & developing of tools for documenting

• What tool to be invented, designed, and developed?
• Who invent, design, and develop the tool?
• why invent, design, and develop the tool?
• When to invent, design, & develop the tool
• Where to invent, design, & develop the tool?

To learn & use the tools for documenting

• What tool to learn & use?
• Who learn & use the tool?
• Why learn & use the tool?
• When to learn & use the tool?
• Where to learn & use the tool?
• How to learn & use the tool?

Sign-tool for documenting (the language/sign system used to represent events of learning)

• What sign-tool for documenting?
• who need, invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?
• Why need, invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?
• When does one need, invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?
• Where does one need, invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?
• How does one invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?

What interactive interface & dashboard tool for documenting

• who need, invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?
• Why need, invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?
• When does one need, invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?
• Where does one need, invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?
• How does one invent, design, develop, learn & use this tool?

More questions

• What practice can support documenting?
• Who need and do the practice?
• Why need this practice?
• When to practise?
• Where to practise?
• How to practise?
• What are theories about documenting?
• What fields do documenting?
• What themes are related to documenting?

Why are learning, teaching, & designing about both profession and a specific role in an activity?

A full time learner has a profession of learning
For a learner,

• in an activity of learn-by-teaching, teacher is his role
• in an activity of learn-by-designing, design is his role
• In a similar way, a learner might be a researcher, collaborator, explorer etc.

In learning theory, what terms are about "between-person"?

Some terms are:

• Peer tutoring
• Teaching
• Tutor tools
• Tutor teachers (for teachers to observe and evaluate learners’ performance)
• Collaboration
• Social negotiation
• Inter-subjectivism
• Bi-directional transformation
• Learning by teaching
• Intersubjectivism
• Coach
• Mentor
• Scaffold
• Model