The theory behind encyclopedic knowledge

Totally agree with you DadDude.

While things look completely different it is mostly in the way of advancements and new understanding.

Knowing the historical evolution that discoveries etc have taken has multiple benefits both in moving forward and in sometimes going backwards to move forward again (imagine if we had stuck to the electric car, I dare say the battery industry would look quite different had we taken that course and had the necessity to develop the technology down such a path).

The more knowledge one has, even if said knowledge is “outdated”, the better equipped we are for our trek down the path of the future.

((Forgive me, I am new to his forum and some of the early learning concepts and have none of the hard facts you asked for in the original post. Also I’m all opinion and no credentials.)

Firstly I am doing EK mainly for the supposed cognitive benefits of stimulation and “brain building”, which I have just assumed is the real purpose in doing it.
Two main questions in this thread have stood out to me:

  1. Do they remember what they learn?

  2. Is it beneficial considering they can’t possible fully grasp what they are “memorizing”?
    I have had (and do have) some of the same questions however I have decided to do the EK. Here’s the way I look at it;

As for question 2, When we talk to a newborn, we talk to them about all kinds of things that they can’t understand at all but clearly that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t talk to them. We are also told to read read read to our babies. Surely most of what we read (at least initially) is way over their heads as well, but it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t read, even when they are in the womb! I approach EK with similar reasoning and expectations.

I also think it’s similar to learning words. My baby learned to say the word “time” at about 10 months old. It was cute and exiting but I really wondered if she had any understanding of the concept behind that word. However I still repeated the word over and over for her to learn, trusting that at some point she will have a basic understanding of “time” and that later she will gain an even more expanded and abstract understanding of it. First we learn what something is, then we learn about that thing, and only then can we understand it. When broken down like that an image of something and a word to call it seem like the logical place to start. Bits cards and POI (in my view) are stages 1 and 2. Where else would you start?

I do try to make my cards as relevant to my baby’s life as I can. I also try to picture her as a teenager or young adult and think of what kinds of “bits” she would enjoy sharing so I have chosen some topics like “drinks from around the world”- information that might be cool to share someday.

But do they remember the info? I believe Doman says it is not a memorization program. I don’t expect my baby to remember any of it without some reminders, and I thought that was the whole purpose of retiring the cards and then bringing them back with more info each time and then eventually making books out of them so your children could bring them to a doctors’ appointment and sit quietly reading them while the other children are giving their parent’s headaches.

Obviously the human mind is dynamic, that’s what makes it so much more flexible than a computer- and we can’t expect that we just file this info in with no refreshers and it is downloaded forever. My dad was from Austria and spoke German every day of life for twenty some years, but after living in the states for a few decades he started to forget some of the language. If you don’t use it you lose (or at least misplace it) but that doesn’t necessarily mean it has been of no benefit to you.

I’m not doing it expecting literal encyclopedic knowledge but after all the effort I do plan on reviewing the info from time to time as she grows up. Then, once the knowledge becomes a part of a person’s understanding it doesn’t really have to be remembered, it becomes part of a whole picture and a world view.

Perhaps a third question is- is it worth the time effort and expense. Considering the enormous effort it takes to do the cards and the time that might be spent with the child they come at a high price indeed.

Since I started my reply- left it to take care of a teething infant, returned to it and posted it the thread has really changed. Sorry if I’ve been redundant. :blush:

I realize this thread was inadvertently bumped the other day, and I read through it as a result.

OMG… the link that ShenLi posted above was quite profound.

The article discusses Tachistoscope training done in WWII fighter pilots and how some of those that went through the training developed a keen “photographic memory”.

Now, I should pause a moment here to define how they used this term. As used in the article, photographic memory meant that a person could see an image for a split second and then begin describing it in detail as though they were still looking at the image. In the article, it mentions that some pilots could view a page in a book for a micro second and THEN read the page as if they were still viewing the page itself.

Okay, so one of my favorite classes in college was Cognitive Psychology, taught by one of the most well known and well respected memory experts in psychology (#58 Most Eminent psychologists, #20 Most frequently cited in introductory psychology text books). In this class, one of the areas that the professor had researched (and that we studied in class as a result) was the iconic memory.

Iconic memory is basically like a shadow image that lasts for a few moments after the stimulus is removed. This is what the Tachistoscope training was all about. I’ve never heard of training to extend iconic memory or using it to read pages off a book only glanced at for a micro second.

I think I’m going to have to email my professor and ask about this. If I get a decent response, I’ll post. I haven’t emailed that prof in about 2 years (my class was a decade ago!)

Encyclopedic Knowledge in children is possible but you mustn’t fall into the trap of putting the cart before the horse. You can teach a child their basic skills of addition, subtraction, multiplication and division by starting with an algebra book. At least I could do that but I am a specialist in teaching and curriculum design. I would not do it because it puts so much material in the child’s head that they are not ready to comprehend yet while marginalizing the priority information that they are ready for.

The problem with Doman’s approach is that so much of the material he advocates is not primary information, not even secondary information, it is also presented out of context as DadDude emphasized. Visual stimulation via pictures is critical to learning and increases a child’s brain capacity. But why not use pictures to teach the keys to the universe, letters and their sounds and numbers and their quantities. Once reading and doing math the key has been put in the door and it has been opened and all encyclopedic knowledge is there for them.

Start with a reading primer not an encylopedia. I am all for Encyclopedic Knowledge but doing it in a scattershot disorganized way will yield little. Priority skils first and furious. Once the door to reading and math has been opened then all things are possible. Build on their knowledge in a consistent fashion focusing on things they find motivating. We have been discussing memory systems. Natural memory does not hold a candle to Trained Memory as far as how easy it is to remember and recall info. Trained Memory uses visual mnemonics since 80% of the input cortex of the brain is devoted to the visual. Those Trained Memory skills should be woven into the early learning so they become second nature.

I think this video is relevant!
Just a simple comprehensive EK video cater to young children. =)
They have other videos available on their channel.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06RfE7LZer0&feature=related

I think the exposure to multiple bits of learning definitely makes a difference. Yes, they should be easier to relearn or recall later on. Even more important, exposure to a subject area even via bits of information make it more familiar and less threatening when approached later. I think DadDude is right that kids who are brainiacs are not necessarily so just because they did EK flashcards when they were infants. Probably the more relevant causal factor is having parents that are focused on your education in an intelligent fashion.

This dialog parallels the historical development and recording of knowledge. Once you get to a certain level the most important factor becomes how it is organized and categorized so that you can locate it and use it effectively. Imagine a huge library with no cataloging system, just lots of books on lots of shelves with no order to it. Not very effective.

The organization of the presentation of information is critical here. Does anyone doubt that dumping massive bits of relatively unrelated knowledge on a child is not nearly as effective as an organized, well thought out approach? What that organization of information should be is what I think we should discuss. Any ideas?

Dr. Jones–I think you ask an excellent question. It does seem fruitful to think of the main advantage of the various early learning programs we are using is that they organize knowledge in a way that is both conducive to knowledge and intellectual skill, while still being attractive to small children. If that’s true, then we really ought to take a step back and ask what the best way to organization knowledge is.

I don’t have any grand theories off hand, but I did want to say that the question seemed like the right one to me.

Thanks DadDude,

Unless I am wrong - I believe we have a consensus that encyclopedic knowledge is possible. Moving on to what order of information we should teach and how seems appropriate.
I have made the case for reading and math skills being the top two blocks on the organizational pyramid. Many of the others will tend to follow basic curriculum prescriptions.
Not that we shouldn’t enumerate them but they will differ depending… Then it becomes a question of how to do it all effectively, something we are all neck deep in anyway.

However, I have skipped the top block on the pyramid. If we were teaching a class this top rung, sine qua non, subject to be taught would be called “classroom management”.
At home this top block on the pyramid I suppose should be tagged spiritual and/or behavioral values. I have learned, the hard way, that unless children begin to learn self discipline
from their parents, or teachers, little in the way of education is going to happen. Teaching self discipline translates into the ability to concentrate. Concentration, the ability to
focus on a task until completion, is the major factor in accomplishing anything in learning, or life for that matter. Learning to concentrate is more important than any other individual skill.
Anyway, this may all seem quite obvious to you and I don’t know where I am going with this thread of thought but it has always been the first consideration to me over the years.

I personally neglected it at first because my daughter made it seem so easy. She was an intelligent cooperative child and because I had wide ranging interests and provided her lots of opportunities to share them with me she naturally picked up on them. I would suspect many of you are in the same situation so you may never have paused to think about it either.

So let’s assume you have an intelligent cooperative child, rather than a spoiled uncooperative child, what should we be doing in this first rung along the way to EK? Again, since this seems to have developed naturally with activities that I engaged in with my daughter so that I have never paused to develop specific concentration games. An important aspect of concentration is motivation. Motivation is not necessarily enough to create concentration but without it there won’t be any. It is a skill (rather than a data base) but every skill has an informational content.
How to do it, for example.

Have you done anything specific to practice or develop skill at concentration? This would differ widely depending upon age but any thoughts would be appreciated.

I mentioned a couple of days ago I am doing a free online seminar “Formula for Guaranteed Success in Any Subject”. It will be Friday March 23 from 1-2 pm CST.
All participants will receive a free eBook “Formula for Guaranteed Success in Any Subject”. (I had put the wrong date down in a previous post, my apologies)
It does focus on motivation as one of the primary elements of guaranteed success so it relates very strongly to our subject of encyclopedic knowledge.
In any case, to register for the free online seminar: email chris@jonesgeniuses.com.

We will send the free eBook to anyone who requests it (email drjones@jonesgeniuses.com) but we are not releasing it before the online seminar next Friday.
The next online seminar “Natural Memory Versus Trained Memory” will take place on the following Friday, March 30 from 1-2 pm CST. This is also a part of
our exploration of encyclopedic knowledge that I feel strongly is a must, training the memory. Anyway, there are limited places so you do need to register,
just drop a line to Chris and he will send you the link. I am working on a free eBook to go with that one as well. These are listed on the Brillkids announcements.

Via my non-profit institute I am trying to give away as much as I can of the valuable insights and materials I have developed over the years. Short seminars,
short eBooklets to accompany them that people can grasp quickly and implement right away to good advantage.
Please help me give stuff away by referring anyone who is interested to participate.

I will register for the seminars, looks good.

Going back to the question of how EK or knowledge in general ought to be organized, could it be that the optimal would vary from individual to individual?

I’m just thinking of those Tony Buzan books I read way back when - the associations are almost purely based on an individual’s perception, but then that perception is shaped by how information is introduced or equated to schema; schema can pre-exist new content being introduced, or have been introduced systematically by the same content that is being introduced (ie, chapter 1 coming before chapter 2). Yes? No?

Good discussion. I’ll ponder myself for a while.

PokerDad,

Surely that is true, different parents will have different values. I taught my daughter languages. Amy Chua taught her daughters piano and violin.
Many black parents in the inner city will focus their children on sports, a significant avenue of success for many inner city kids.

Granted the basics are behavior, reading, math. How high do we set the bar on these and where do we go afterward.
The selection, order, and pacing of skills either serve to enhance learning or restrict and retard them.
From my perspective as a specialist in accelerated learning I feel strongly we should, from the start, teach speed reading, memory training,
and rapid mental calculation skills. These are not normally taught but they result in a vast improvement in learning & processing ability.

You may have read the post on Peter Wozniak who invented SuperMemo and has carried on Ebbinghaus work on natural memory:

http://www.wired.com/medtech/health/magazine/16-05/ff_wozniak?currentPage=all

It is a bit depressing because the work on natural memory via recall and review of material on a regular basis concludes that we forget
most of what we learn (80%) and there does not seem to be much we can do about it. So what does that say about our quest for
encyclopedic knowledge?

One need not be limited to natural memory. We know how to train memory.