How do you know that your child is whole-to-parts vs parts-to-whole learner ?

[Ummto4]

The title says it all ...

 

Thanks

[Momling]

When I think about the idea of whole-to-parts or part-to-whole learning, it usually is in the context of language learning materials.

 

Is it better to introduce to students a text to translate or a conversation to listen to and then focus on the structure?

Or is it better to present the structure first and then give a context for it in a text?

 

(Personally, I think it doesn't matter much... as long as both the "whole" and the "parts" get in there...)

[Peaceful Isle]

:bigear:

[wapiti]

http://www.visualspatial.org/vslasl.php

[Ummto4]

Are VSL kids always whole-to-parts learners ?

 

My son fits the characteristic of VSL kids, and he's indeed a VSL (V/S is his strength). But how do I know that he's a whole-to-parts learner ?

[Lori D.]

how do I know that he's a whole-to-parts learner ?

 

 

The following is just my 2 cents worth, based on our almost-12 years of homeschooling our VSL DS -- so take it or leave it, for what it's worth. :)

 

In the context of VSL, "whole-to-parts" has to do with how a person PROCESSES information, not so much how they take in information. The whole-to-parts aspect of brain processing means a person tends to see patterns and big-pictures quickly/first, and details/steps later and in context of the big picture.

 

Does your DS constantly:

- intuitively seem to know the answer to a question, without having to work it out

- come up with (correct) "guesses" of what will happen next in a story or movie

- find patterns or make patterns with math manipulatives, the 100 number chart, or in assortments of physical items

- find connections between seemingly unconnected topics, objects, etc.

- see many possibilities -- for example: easily and naturally invents new and unusual ways of using something (not it's typical/intended use)

 

 

Does your DS:

- like to jump straight to the end, the conclusion, the "ah-ha"

- find details, especially once he's had the "ah-ha" moment, boring and/or unnecessary

- get frustrated when forced to go through all the detailed steps of a process

- get confused by very many small incremental steps (i.e., "loses the forest -- end purpose -- because of the trees -- incremental steps -- in his way")

 

 

All of the things I listed above are signs of a whole-to-parts thinker. The connection with VSL is the preferred method of taking-in information -- visually and hands-on -- because those methods are concrete, easy to see and manipulate, allowing the whole-to-parts processing to more easily and quickly find those patterns, "big-pictures", and out-of-the-box/innovative ways of using things.

 

Just like being right-handed or left-handed, while most people tend to prefer and favor one hand over the other, we DO use the other hand, too. And in the long run, it is GOOD for us to exercise and strengthen the weaker hand, or practice doing things with that other hand to increase its usefulness to the whole body.

 

So, too, with the VSL, and with the whole-to-parts processing. It's very helpful to use curriculum for first exposure to a topic that is visual and hands-on, and that starts with the big idea, delves into the details, and keeps coming back to the big "ah-ha". But it is also very good to review or supplement with resources that are NOT a VSL's primary method of taking in information, or processing: programs that are logical/sequential, abstract, auditory, and parts-to-whole. Why do this? Because it really helps the student strengthen that "weaker hand" (i.e., the less natural method of brain processing) -- and THAT will really help the student be better equipped to tackle those topics (math processes; algebra; spelling, etc.) that are step-by-step and just have to be done in a specific order.

 

 

We have been so blessed to have a VSL in our family, even though it has meant struggling through figuring out the accompanying learning disabilities and how to address them. Our VSL has taken our family to places we never would have thought of -- and we are SO glad to have had the opportunity to go there! :)

 

BEST of luck in your VSL adventures! :) Warmest regards, Lori D.

Edited January 19, 2012 by Lori D.

[forty-two]

Learning styles wise, it seems that the most direct correlation is sequential (parts-to-whole) or global (whole-to-parts). Also, the sensing/intuitive preference seems to be pertinent - it seems like people who are on the Sensing side are more parts-to-whole, and people who are more on the Intuitive side are more whole-to-parts. (For reference, the other two learning styles mentioned on the linked page are visual/verbal, and active/reflective.)

 

Some questions from the Myers-Briggs personality test for kids that seem to touch on S/N:

 

When given a division math problem to work on, which of the following approaches better describes this child's method to solving the problem:

a) the child notes that this is a division problem, refers to the list of steps (mental or written) that must be taken to solve a division problem, then works the problem step-by-step until they get an answer (S)

b) the child notes that this is a division problem, reminds himself or herself of what division means, perhaps by drawing a picture (mental or written) of dividing objects into parts, then uses their understanding of the goal to solve the problem (N)

 

When the child is really interested in something (for example, a Tree), are they more likely to:

a) ask a million questions about all of the details related to their interest, such as 'How many leaves are on that tree?' and 'how tall is the tree?' (S)

b) ask a few deep, global questions about their interest, such as 'Where did trees come from?' (N)

 

I'm pretty strongly N, and while I can learn parts-to-whole well enough, I need to know the *point* of each little part and how it fits into the whole right off, or my eyes glaze over and I have a hard time caring (or, alternatively, I get stuck on this one point until I grasp how it fits in). I just *hate* to do things without understanding *why*, without grasping how it fits into the big picture. My understanding of very parts-to-whole learners is that there isn't a big picture at all without the parts, and they are fine with learning just a part by itself - it can exist on its own and doesn't have to be plugged into the big picture to have a meaning.

 

ETA: Though I score VSL on tests, I don't really think I'm actually VSL - I'm visual (more than auditory) but far more verbal, and really not all that spatial at all :giggle:. It's just that I am a global, intuitive thinker, as apparently are VSLs, and so I score highly on VSL tests.

Edited January 19, 2012 by forty-two

[Lori D.]

Qualifier to my response: again, this is only my opinion -- and I am not at all trying to pick a fight or disagree with you, forty-two, because I actually find this quite interesting and very much enjoyed the thoughts and quotes in your post :) On with my response:

 

 

Learning styles wise, it seems that the most direct correlation is sequential (parts-to-whole) or global (whole-to-parts).

 

I agree -- I make that same correlation.

 

 

Interesting, throwing the Meyers-Briggs into the mix. :)

 

I actually don't entirely agree with M-B's assessment of "N" as being part of the VSL "label" rather than "S", because from the VSL reading I've done, an "S" tends to base his/her intake of information on the senses: on the concrete, on what he/she can SEE and TOUCH. In addition, a VSL also processes RANDOMLY, which means a VSL can process QUICKLY -- he/she doesn't need to take a moment to sequence or put external order on something; but rather, is just taking in what is there and observing an order or pattern in apparent randomness. This makes a VSL's "jump to answers" seem intuitive or like "uncanny good guessing".

 

However, I totally DO agree about the extreme importance in needing to see the "why" or the purpose in something in order for a VSL to care enough to learn it. And also why, VSL students with issues such as dyslexia or ADD have no patience for what seems like "petty details" -- but can spend hours pouring over the minutia of a topic of their interest and choosing, seeing how all the little details fit into the beloved overall big picture topic. Now that all sounds much more like M-B's "N" trait.

 

That explains why the parents of so many VSL struggle to get them to learn math facts (just as an example) -- "what is the point, why should I care about these meaningless, abstract facts?" thinks the VSL. That's where using a discovery-based curriculum, a 100-number chart, or other manipulatives, allow a VSL to discover patterns. And then using visual, story-telling resources for those math facts that don't seem to have as recognizable patterns to make use of the strong visual and out-of-box aspects to send the facts straight into long term memory.

 

 

Just thinking as I type -- I wonder if VSL tend to actually be a close split (ambidextrous) between parts of the "S" and "N" traits? The need for in-taking through the concrete senses, but processing so quickly to see a big picture pattern it appears like intuition; and then also having that big picture "need to see relevance" of the "N" trait... Still musing...

 

 

In the end, while I find the VSL way of thinking about DS useful (especially when DS was younger), in the end, he is a much more complex person than just 1 of 2 labels (visual-spatial learner, or auditory-sequential learner).

 

Connecting back with your musings about your own M-B's traits and whether you are a VSL or not... I am I-N/S-F-J (a tie in the N/S when tested, and depending on the situation, I am sometimes more N, sometimes more S). Looking back at my own educational journey, I also think I was pretty ambidextrous to begin with -- many auditory-sequential AND many visual-spatial traits. And I think I have become even more "balanced" in the last years -- having two DSs, one who is highly visual-spatial, and the other who is highly auditory-sequential, has forced me to work in BOTH directions, resulting in moving me pretty solidly to the center point of a continuum with visual-spatial and auditory-sequential as the two extremes. I think it has had a balancing effect on DSs, too; by working all together in homeschooling, has moved each DS a bit closer to the center, and away from being on one *extreme* end of the continuum or the other that they started out at in our first years of homeschooling...

 

Interesting food for thought! Warmest regards, Lori D.

Edited January 19, 2012 by Lori D.

[Embassy]

I wrote about my whole-to-part learners on my blog and how we do things.

 

My kids have found:

 

Reading easy and phonics hard.

Writing easy and grammar hard.

Math concepts easy and fact memorization hard.

[LittleIzumi]

She can hear a phonics rule a hundred times and still not get it/apply it. Leave her alone with no rules/instruction and just read to her for several months, and she intuits the rules and can read a ton. She can understand the huge concepts in math--infinity, negative numbers, multiplication, geometric ideas--but has trouble with the procedural math--addition facts, the steps to adding with regrouping, etc. She can give me the answers to hard math without writing/practicing/thinking about it, but has trouble with 7+2. Etc. Etc. Etc.

 

(She learns whole to parts, if that was unclear, lol.)