Ironically, I did not get really good at learning until I was already half-way through my graduate career at Cornell University. It was only then that I started to receive the higher quality
instruction from professors who were paid to share practical tips,
useful advice, and easy-to-follow templates.
For much of my life, I had assumed that learning was supposed to be hard, confusing, and solitary. I had come to believe that enduring poor quality teaching was actually good for me.
 |
| Peeled Orange - 2016 by John C. Drew, Ph.D. |
The biggest break-through for me occurred after I earned my Ph.D. At that point, I started taking post-graduate classes in statistics and something inside of me snapped. I realized that if the professors explained something to me and I did not understand them, then that was their failure not mine.
One of the best
ideas I picked up at the University of Michigan while I was there studying
statistics was the idea that I should read at least three statistics textbooks
at a time.
This way, I found
it a lot easier to make sense of a topic. In my experience, reading just one
textbook makes study difficult, in part, because it does not give me any
sense of what was crucial to know, good to know, or simply useless detail. By
reading about the same topic in three different textbooks, I found that I
started getting a better fix on the priorities attached to any given topic.
This approach made it easier for me to concentrate on the important stuff I
really needed to know immediately and to only memorize the details that I would
need to hold on to for the future. Looking back, I wish I had an instructor in
high school who might have suggested this same idea to me while I was studying
physics or mathematics. (I also wish I would have had a high school teacher who
explained that learning math and science was a long road to follow, but that it
was quite beautiful when it all came together during graduate work.)
As a grant
writing consultant, I use triangulation to help me quickly understand the
client's field of interest.
Typically, I
start by reading the client's literature, reviewing their website, and
interviewing their staff. Then, I search on-line to see what other
experts have to say about the topic and then supplement this with my own
library research.
I have found that
this technique of using multiple sources makes me a much more knowledgeable
participant in the grant writing process. For example, I have found that the
federal government keeps track of role-model programs, measurement techniques,
and other things that will improve your grant application. There are resources
out there for example on the issues of
responsible fatherhood and healthy marriage.
The main thing,
in my experience, is to not rely on a single source of information. There is
safety and insight in accessing multiple sources of information on the same
topic. At the very least, you quickly learn what it is okay to forget.
I recommend the
same sort of broad based immersion for someone seeking to learn grant writing.
I think it pays, for example, to read multiple books on the topic.
I think it helps
to attend multiple workshops - not just one. It pays to try to learn this
material using multiple channels including on-line learning, reading, and audio
tapes.
If your
experience is like mine, then I think you will quickly find that there are
certain bedrock, common sense principles behind any endeavor. These principles
cover about 80% of what you need to know to succeed. It may take a lifetime to
figure out the other 20%, but you can certainly get the 80% you need to prosper
quickly and effectively using these techniques.
If you use
multiple sources of information, then you quickly get a solid idea of who
is teaching the real stuff and who is just offering fluff that will not lead to
lasting results.
By accessing
multiple sources of information, you will quickly figure out how to sort
the good from the bad teachers when it comes to consuming grant writing
instruction.
No comments:
Post a Comment