Drawing the Line: Learning Metrics and Feynman's Perspective

[JC2000]

Lately questions about drawing a reasonable line with regard to learning have been nagging me. I am aware that a range of metrics can be used, from the Feynman technique to more mundane metrics such as the exercise problems at the end of a chapter. Recently I read a chapter explaining multiple integrals and I felt the authors explained the concept in simple terms without loss of precision. While trying to test my understanding I felt that while I had understood the concepts well, I would be unable to explain them as well as the book does. On one hand, I realize this attitude is nit-picky, on the other I am also niggled by Feynman's perspective on learning!

I was wondering where it is best to draw the line with regard to learning something?

Thank you for your perspective.

 

[symbolipoint]

Look for the meaning of "rubric".

Also if you have the chance to read a course outline, look carefully at the listed objectives.

 

[Andy Resnick]

I was wondering where it is best to draw the line with regard to learning something?

I don't think there is a 'line', exactly- at least in the sense of a discontinuous transition from 'not learned' to 'learned'. Rather, there is a gradation of understanding that ranges from ignorant to expert. Even more, learning is not a process with a definite endpoint- there is always more to learn about any particular topic.

That's my perspective...