This is a very useful way of understanding skill acquisition - thanks for explaining it to me! Very happy to see your website so more people can benefit.
I loved that you used the Rubik's Cube as the example. It also got me to think about how something like the commutators technique fits into this model. I do remember learning to solve the Rubiks cube, and it really frustrated me that if I wasn't practicing for a while I would forget one of the moves. At some point I learned a trick where you take 2 moves with certain properties and combine them by applying both and then applying both again but in reverse order. The two moves being combined are simple enough that anyone can figure it out by themselves, and once you know this trick you can basically figure out a solution for any twisty puzzle yourself. What I found interesting is that the deeper understanding of how moves are constructed allowed me to move through the stages faster. I think this is similar to how knowing the rules or practices can help you acquire a skill, but when you have the theoretical understanding you can often accelerate the learning process.
That's a great insight. I know Marian Hartman has also done some work combining her skill acquisition model with Bloom's taxonomy which is an equivalent model for theoretical knowledge.
Hi Emily, I loved the model and your arguments! I do see the value of having a technical coach. But I'm still interested in finding how we can teach mob programming and TDD without technical coaches that are highly available. I think it's possible!
I think it's possible and of course there aren't always technical coaches available. The trouble is it takes a lot longer though and is more frustrating - you can get to level 4 (conscious action) with only peer support but to get to level 5 (proficient) you need such a wide range of experience and to learn so many different recipes or approaches, that to get there without a mentor will be a lot of time spend reading, studying and learning from your own mistakes.
I think with the right teaching materials and some practice that anyone could learn to solve a rubik's cube actually. Keep practicing the TDD though, it's probably a more useful life skill!
I didn't like the video the analogy doesn't work in my opinion. I'm talking as a 15years of experienced profesionnal developper who also solves rubik's cube. About the video: it's 11minute long and at the 3 minute mark you had basically said nothing, repeated 3-4 times what you intended to do in the video yet still hadn't. I almost stopped there, but I was really curious about the title so I kept going. I feel like the only goal of the whole argument is to justify that "you need someone to coach you in learning a new skills", I'm willing to bet you sell coaching/mentoring. The title states "From Rubik’s Cube to Code: A Step-by-Step Guide to TDD Skill Mastery" but nothing in the video is about TDD, it's all about a method of learning a new skills, I don't know how good this method is, it feels very broad and generic in my opinion but like I said I don't know. Maybe a title like "The Hartman method to learn a new skill: applied to learning the rubik's cube" would be more honest. A bit about my personal experience (which will not apply to everyone I know), I learned the rubik's cube on my own when I was ~10 and I developed my own method to solve it, no need for any mentor, noone needed to help me, the only thing that was required was practice and logical thinking. I'm fairly certain that writing code using any method, TDD or otherwise, is the same, it's mostly practice, no need for a mentor, you need to get your hand dirty and do it, and figure it out. Paying a mentor is basically giving money to someone to look at you while doing it.
I'm happy to hear you have worked out the Rubik's cube for yourself. I agree that you can work out TDD for yourself too, I just think it will be a lot harder and take a lot longer than if you had a mentor. In my experience it's worth paying one. Your experience may be different.
I so love how you use the Rubik cube to demo my skill acquisition model! I am humbled that it had a lightbulb moment for you to apply to your work 💜
This is a very useful way of understanding skill acquisition - thanks for explaining it to me! Very happy to see your website so more people can benefit.
I loved that you used the Rubik's Cube as the example. It also got me to think about how something like the commutators technique fits into this model.
I do remember learning to solve the Rubiks cube, and it really frustrated me that if I wasn't practicing for a while I would forget one of the moves. At some point I learned a trick where you take 2 moves with certain properties and combine them by applying both and then applying both again but in reverse order. The two moves being combined are simple enough that anyone can figure it out by themselves, and once you know this trick you can basically figure out a solution for any twisty puzzle yourself.
What I found interesting is that the deeper understanding of how moves are constructed allowed me to move through the stages faster. I think this is similar to how knowing the rules or practices can help you acquire a skill, but when you have the theoretical understanding you can often accelerate the learning process.
That's a great insight. I know Marian Hartman has also done some work combining her skill acquisition model with Bloom's taxonomy which is an equivalent model for theoretical knowledge.
Nice video. This reminds me a lot of the 5 or 6 steps in the Dreyfus module of skills acquisition from the 60s.
Yes, it's a similar concept. I think Hartman's model is easier to understand and more actionable though.
Yeah, they are the same model simply presented slightly differently.
@@rolandfisher actually I disagree, Hartman's model is not the same as Dreyfus. I have found it more useful and insightful.
I can see where the Hartman Model will help me plan training for others outside of coding. Great reference.
Happy to hear that! I think it's a really useful model.
Really nice explanation!
Thanks!
It's been a long time since I solved a Rubik's cube. Must have been last century. But I did do some TDD recently :)
Awsome! Thank you for another very usefull video!
Glad you found it useful!
Thanks.
Hi Emily, I loved the model and your arguments!
I do see the value of having a technical coach. But I'm still interested in finding how we can teach mob programming and TDD without technical coaches that are highly available. I think it's possible!
I think it's possible and of course there aren't always technical coaches available. The trouble is it takes a lot longer though and is more frustrating - you can get to level 4 (conscious action) with only peer support but to get to level 5 (proficient) you need such a wide range of experience and to learn so many different recipes or approaches, that to get there without a mentor will be a lot of time spend reading, studying and learning from your own mistakes.
Wait, I practice TDD but I'm too dumb for Rubiks Cube. Would you like to tell me anything? 😂 I got you on LI!!!
I think with the right teaching materials and some practice that anyone could learn to solve a rubik's cube actually. Keep practicing the TDD though, it's probably a more useful life skill!
I didn't like the video the analogy doesn't work in my opinion.
I'm talking as a 15years of experienced profesionnal developper who also solves rubik's cube.
About the video: it's 11minute long and at the 3 minute mark you had basically said nothing, repeated 3-4 times what you intended to do in the video yet still hadn't. I almost stopped there, but I was really curious about the title so I kept going. I feel like the only goal of the whole argument is to justify that "you need someone to coach you in learning a new skills", I'm willing to bet you sell coaching/mentoring.
The title states "From Rubik’s Cube to Code: A Step-by-Step Guide to TDD Skill Mastery" but nothing in the video is about TDD, it's all about a method of learning a new skills, I don't know how good this method is, it feels very broad and generic in my opinion but like I said I don't know. Maybe a title like "The Hartman method to learn a new skill: applied to learning the rubik's cube" would be more honest.
A bit about my personal experience (which will not apply to everyone I know), I learned the rubik's cube on my own when I was ~10 and I developed my own method to solve it, no need for any mentor, noone needed to help me, the only thing that was required was practice and logical thinking. I'm fairly certain that writing code using any method, TDD or otherwise, is the same, it's mostly practice, no need for a mentor, you need to get your hand dirty and do it, and figure it out. Paying a mentor is basically giving money to someone to look at you while doing it.
I'm happy to hear you have worked out the Rubik's cube for yourself. I agree that you can work out TDD for yourself too, I just think it will be a lot harder and take a lot longer than if you had a mentor. In my experience it's worth paying one. Your experience may be different.