The aim has become the learning of the organized whole, through a grasp of the interrelation between the parts which make up that whole. Within this organizational and referential framework, a specific fact is often of no consequence. It often does not matter whether the fact itself has been remembered or not, and it may not even matter if the fact has not been understood. In this section, we shall be concerned with the learning of organized wholes, defined as unities of distinctive parts which are interrelated.
Understanding organized wholes We shall continue with the earlier example of a text about university pass rates to give a description of qualitative differences in the understanding of the best website for essays text as a whole. If one wants to increase the pass rate, one should take selective measures, i. If one wants to increase the pass rate, one should take different measures for different groups.
There are differences in examination pass rates between groups of students. The four categories represent different treatments of the message of the article. They consider a concern for measures as just another unit of meaning.
The specific structure, however, is not the same in each case. The differences between 64 THE EXPERIENCE OF essay cheap LEARNING groups of students mean that in some groups the pass rate is in line with expectations, while for others it is not.
Therefore, if any measures are needed, these measures essay cheap should be directed only towards those groups where pass rates are below expectations. In other words, it is stressed that nothing need be done about certain groups of students, so the measures to be taken should be selective. The four categories of outcome are thus based on four qualitatively different ways of organizing the content of the text when reading and remembering it, i. At the same time there is a more fundamental difference between the skills embodied in categories A and B and those embodied in C and D. It is the difference between organizing the content into an organized whole or merely ordering and grouping parts. In one of the original Gothenburg investigations (Svensson 1976 and 1977), the first way of interacting with the text and organizing the content was called a holistic approach to and understanding of the text and the second way was called an atomistic approach and understanding. Within that investigation, the difference between a holistic and an atomistic approach was found to be the most crucial difference between interactions with complex learning materials.
The difference is one between merely delimiting and ordering parts of the material interacted with, compared to integrating parts by the use of some organizing essay cheap principle.
As our earlier discussion implies, there are usually important differences too within these main categories of approach and organiza- tion.
Within the atomistic approach, the parts may be differently delimited, internally integrated and ordered.
Such differences will also exist within the holistic approach, but here the main difference will concern the principles adopted in organizing the parts into a whole. Several general principles of organization such as narratives, argument- conclusion, principle-example and cause-effect are often commonly recognized as essential to a given material.
This does not exclude the fact that individuals display some degree of consistency in their approach to similar kinds of material, SKILL IN LEARNING 65 a degree of consistency, however, that varies between individuals. To illustrate the fact that a difference other than that between a holistic and atomistic approach may be the most important one in a specific case we shall give an essay cheap example. Unlike the earlier examples, this example does not focus on interaction with a text or message but on relating to and thinking about a physical phenomenon. The students were asked to describe and explain a number of different physical events. The present example, which has also been discussed in Chapter 2, concerned what happens when a car is driven in a straight line on a motorway at a high constant speed. The most general and fundamental principle used to organize the whole phenomenon was that of cause and effect. However, the relevance of a cause-effect relation as the superordinate one is apparent to all of the students in this instance. The difference that does emerge concerns how cause and effect are delimited and related, i. Those two categories represented two different ways of relating arguments and conclusions about university pass rates. As far as the organization of the present example is concerned, the force or causal aspect is related either to velocity in the sense of motion or to change in velocity, i. The first mode of organization, based on motion as effect, represents an Aristotelian conception and the second, based on acceleration as effect, represents a Newtonian conception of motion. The difference is one of the most important ones in the history of the science of physics. The Newtonian conception, although it is more complex, is not more holistic. The complexity involves greater and better distinctions within the description of the whole. Thus, the Newtonian conception not only involves more complexity in terms of differentiation of more aspects or parts (like constant velocity in addition to acceleration as a special case of motion) but also better fidelity to the material organized. While this in no way exhausts the variation in important qualitative differences, these two differences can be considered to be the most important ones.