Automaticity: The Hands And Feet Of Genius By Benjamin Bloom
Critical Analysis of Professional Literature
The article I chose was Automaticity: The Hands and Feet of Genius by Benjamin S. Bloom (1986). I chose the article because I respect the work of Benjamin Bloom and I was not yet familiar with this particular topic. In this article Benjamin Bloom explains the concept of automaticity and how it is achieved. The author also provides specific examples, and theories of automaticity development. The article concludes with specific examples of skills that can be automated and suggestions for how schools can help children in the development of automaticity.
I chose the following four standards from Paul and Elder’s (2009) universal intellectual standards: 1) Depth, 2) Breadth, 3) Logic, and 4) Significance. The article itself is very well written and gives great example however, I felt the topic could have been explored further in the area of child development. In addition, I kept wondering about other aspects of the participant’s lives, which may have contributed to the development of automaticity in their talent field. Though I felt the article was logical, it felt out of order and I found myself questioning its significance.
If I could ask Mr. Bloom some questions regarding this article, I would ask: 1) did this study collect information on the participant’s early development? …show more content…
Did this study collect information about other aspects of the participant’s lives that may have been a factor in their mastery level development of automaticity? How can schools change to help children develop automaticity earlier or at a higher level?
Depth
The author gives great examples of talented participants that have mastered their field, but the article is missing hard numbers and facts.
Why is it so important to start young - for those wishing to master a skill? What is the difference in level of mastery if we begin the learning process later in life? The author does not go into great detail explaining why automaticity is better achieved at a younger age…though he does suggest it. Of course we all know that repetition of any skill will lead to learning, but when in the process does learning move to mastery? I felt that if this question had been answered, the article would have had more
value.
Breadth
The article also does not address what type of information was collected from the participants of the study and whether or not there were any significant correlations that could be made. Is it possible that socio-economic or geographical factors might influence one’s ability to master skills faster, earlier in life, etc.? How about genetics? What role could genetics play in a person’s ability to master skills? The author does not address the possibility of looking at this information from a different perspective.
Logic
I just kept thinking, as I read this article that it couldn’t just be that simple…yes, I am sure most all humans have the ability to become masters of a skill but why do we not all do so? If repetition at an early age is truly the only key to mastering a skill, and there are no other barriers within ourselves to doing so…then why are there not more people with this level of attainment? I would be more inclined to believe that early-age automaticity of a particular skill coupled with the optimal environment is what leads to mastery of that particular skill. At first glance, this article reads well, however after deeper review, I realized that it doesn’t clearly explain all the possible factors that could play a part in achieving automaticity. The author also does not clearly explain why achievement is easier at a younger age…therefore, it is difficult to see the need for the school to change their current practice.
Significance
Even from the beginning of the article I had a difficult time relating to how this article’s importance. And, towards the article’s conclusion, the author lists many of the automatable skills which are skills that most of us learn with minimal effort. I feel the author could have done a better job emphasizing the importance of automaticity by giving the reader facts and figures, but I am not sure that they exist. In conclusion, while I found the article interesting, I also found it lacking. I felt after reading it for the first time, that it was explaining skill development in a very simplistic way, without taking into consideration a person’s environment, social situation, or genetic predisposition. After reviewing it a second and third time, I started to question the lack of data, the ties between the topics, and the overall logic of the article. Since this article is older, its possible that this topic wasn’t well explored at the time it was written (1986), however many of the issues I found with the article would stand regardless of its publication date.
References
Bloom, B. S. (1986). Automaticity: "The Hands and Feet of Genius". Educational Leadership, 43(5), 70-77.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2009). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools (6th ed.). Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
The article I chose was Automaticity: The Hands and Feet of Genius by Benjamin S. Bloom (1986). I chose the article because I respect the work of Benjamin Bloom and I was not yet familiar with this particular topic. In this article Benjamin Bloom explains the concept of automaticity and how it is achieved. The author also provides specific examples, and theories of automaticity development. The article concludes with specific examples of skills that can be automated and suggestions for how schools can help children in the development of automaticity.
I chose the following four standards from Paul and Elder’s (2009) universal intellectual standards: 1) Depth, 2) Breadth, 3) Logic, and 4) Significance. The article itself is very well written and gives great example however, I felt the topic could have been explored further in the area of child development. In addition, I kept wondering about other aspects of the participant’s lives, which may have contributed to the development of automaticity in their talent field. Though I felt the article was logical, it felt out of order and I found myself questioning its significance.
If I could ask Mr. Bloom some questions regarding this article, I would ask: 1) did this study collect information on the participant’s early development? …show more content…
Did this study collect information about other aspects of the participant’s lives that may have been a factor in their mastery level development of automaticity? How can schools change to help children develop automaticity earlier or at a higher level?
Depth
The author gives great examples of talented participants that have mastered their field, but the article is missing hard numbers and facts.
Why is it so important to start young - for those wishing to master a skill? What is the difference in level of mastery if we begin the learning process later in life? The author does not go into great detail explaining why automaticity is better achieved at a younger age…though he does suggest it. Of course we all know that repetition of any skill will lead to learning, but when in the process does learning move to mastery? I felt that if this question had been answered, the article would have had more
value.
Breadth
The article also does not address what type of information was collected from the participants of the study and whether or not there were any significant correlations that could be made. Is it possible that socio-economic or geographical factors might influence one’s ability to master skills faster, earlier in life, etc.? How about genetics? What role could genetics play in a person’s ability to master skills? The author does not address the possibility of looking at this information from a different perspective.
Logic
I just kept thinking, as I read this article that it couldn’t just be that simple…yes, I am sure most all humans have the ability to become masters of a skill but why do we not all do so? If repetition at an early age is truly the only key to mastering a skill, and there are no other barriers within ourselves to doing so…then why are there not more people with this level of attainment? I would be more inclined to believe that early-age automaticity of a particular skill coupled with the optimal environment is what leads to mastery of that particular skill. At first glance, this article reads well, however after deeper review, I realized that it doesn’t clearly explain all the possible factors that could play a part in achieving automaticity. The author also does not clearly explain why achievement is easier at a younger age…therefore, it is difficult to see the need for the school to change their current practice.
Significance
Even from the beginning of the article I had a difficult time relating to how this article’s importance. And, towards the article’s conclusion, the author lists many of the automatable skills which are skills that most of us learn with minimal effort. I feel the author could have done a better job emphasizing the importance of automaticity by giving the reader facts and figures, but I am not sure that they exist. In conclusion, while I found the article interesting, I also found it lacking. I felt after reading it for the first time, that it was explaining skill development in a very simplistic way, without taking into consideration a person’s environment, social situation, or genetic predisposition. After reviewing it a second and third time, I started to question the lack of data, the ties between the topics, and the overall logic of the article. Since this article is older, its possible that this topic wasn’t well explored at the time it was written (1986), however many of the issues I found with the article would stand regardless of its publication date.
References
Bloom, B. S. (1986). Automaticity: "The Hands and Feet of Genius". Educational Leadership, 43(5), 70-77.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2009). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools (6th ed.). Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.