Information Overload

[Guest guest]

, " wsheir " <wsheir@a...>

wrote:

 

 

> My style of teaching Materia Medica is much like Al's and retention

> levels are pretty high from the class, but the amount of work the

> student does on their own is 8 to 12 hours a week.I only provide

> them with a template.

 

that is really an extensive amount of outside class time to expect from

students who are taking 18 credits. I spent more than this when I studied

herbs, but admittedly at the expense of acupuncture studies. But if every 18

credits required 72 hours of study and you have to sleep 56 hours per week

and there are 168 hours per week, then you are left with 22 hours to work,

take care of kids, pets, meals, household chores. there is no way that works

for the average person. it is still information overload. this discussionis

about

the students we have, not some ideal.

 

[Guest guest]

The students that learn the herbs spend 8 to 12 hours per week.That's

one and a half hours a day, which is what I recommend doing...not

huge chunks of time. That would be counterproductive. Other subjects

don't take nearly as much time. Not even close.

Warren

 

 

 

In , " " <@i...>

wrote:

>

> for the average person. it is still information overload. this

discussionis about

> the students we have, not some ideal.

>

 

[Guest guest]

, " wsheir " <wsheir@a...>

wrote:

> The students that learn the herbs spend 8 to 12 hours per week.That's

> one and a half hours a day, which is what I recommend doing...not

> huge chunks of time. That would be counterproductive. Other subjects

> don't take nearly as much time. Not even close.

> Warren

 

I still spend more than that each day learning about chinese herbs as I did

when a student. But I would suspect the average student would consider that

an unrealistic demand. If one is in school for 8 hours, does some tai qi,

practices massage and point location, studies basic theory (quite demanding,

IMO), anatomy (extremely demanding for most students) and then 1.5 hours of

herbs plus whatever else is required, cleans the house, sleeps, eats, tends to

life. It just doesn't add up to me.

 

the standard expectation in college level classes is 2 hours of study per 1

hour of lecture. In reality, 1 hour of study per hour of class is more typical.

I

agree that you need more hours to reach the level of knowledge you are

talking about. but what is actually necessary for effective general practice

and

how is it best imparted? I think your quote above is very telling. It implies

that

the students who don't (i.e. are often unable to) spend 12 hours per week on

herbs are out of luck. they won't learn the material. Since only a small

minority of students spend 8-12 hours per week on herbs, this seems

counterproductive. It would seem more effective to design methods of

instruction that produce better outcomes for he majority of students, not only

for the most diligent (which often refers to those with the least outside

commitments) .

 

todd

 

[Guest guest]

All,

 

If we look at the circumstances that produce the problem of information

overload and its consequent challenge for teachers, it is fair to conclude that

is proving to be more complex, more various and deeper

than has previously been understood.

 

Medicinals are a good example. When 300-some were considered a

foundation knowledge, and when the only source of that knowledge was the

few persons who had access to the Chinese materia medica literature, it was

reasonable to think that a book or lectures could deliver the need

information. Classes that were expositions of a materia medica could

reasonably be thought to suffice. However, as our understanding expanded

to include the much larger numbers of medicinals typical of Chinese

practice, the various modern and historic views of medicinal application

and formula composition, as well as the types of questions we see on this list,

which range from manufacturing processes to phytochemistry, we perceive

an overload. In other words, the current transmission model has failed. It

is overly dramatic to compare this to a Khunian paradigm shift but it is a

very similar situation at a smaller scale.

 

What are over-loaded are our early assumptions. Not only is the medicinal

database broader, deeper and more various than was once perceived,

experience has taught us that the knowledge useful to clinical practice is

much greater than just narrowly-defined clinical matters. Of course, since

this applies to much more than just medicinals, the perceived over-load is

even greater.

 

This overload is the result of treating data as if it were information. Put

somewhat differently, trying to cram every potentially useful quality of the

Chinese materia medica into a " present and test " model has already failed.

Otherwise the perception of an information overload would not have

occurred. The solution is a new analysis and a new model of transmission.

While creative teaching methods will certainly improve the student

experience, and are to be broadly praised, they cannot resolve the core

problem.

 

Much of what is now taught could very practically be organized so that it

could be accurately and conveniently accessed. The data should be

databased (in the larger sense of being made openly accessible) so that

training in actual clinical application could be emphasized. This is a well-

established approach that fits the situation. For example, the descriptions

of a single applications programming language run to 5,000+ pages -- not

particularly less that the text load of a CM student. Yet, even neophyte

programmers often effectively use a couple of languages and apply them to

dozens of different applications. This is because they are taught the

methods for solving problems and how to find the details they need. When

they need the data, the detail of a program term, function or system call,

they look it up in a well-organized knowledge base that is accessed via a

broadly shared terminology and filled with examples and details. Of course,

over time people look-up less and less as the data is absorbed thorough use.

Different styles evolve as different people get comfortable with different

approaches, but the data is there, is shared, and open to view.

 

The same approach could be used for Chinese medicine, which like the

computing sciences is rich with principles and patterns, as well as a vast

database and a huge " case studies " literature. In fact, it is my opinion that

this realistically models how expert clinicians work - both Eastern and

Western. They have a set of principles and analytic procedures with which

they are skilled and comfortable and they know how to access sources that

provide the necessary details.

 

Organizing the information is a more straight-forward task than figuring

how to apply it in education because we have straight-jacked the schools

and teachers by welding their curriculum to iron-clad licensing procedures

that are tied to particular datasets and accessible only through informal

languages that were never designed to access larger bodies of knowledge.

 

Bob

 

 

bob Paradigm Publications

www.paradigm-pubs.com 44 Linden Street

Robert L. Felt Brookline MA 02445

617-738-4664

 

 

---

[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus]

[Guest guest]

I would like to respectfully disagree with Z'ev et al,

I offer this as a student and what didn't work for me.

 

My reasoning may be similar to Bob Felts argument. (Outcome Basing)

from what I think I know of computer programming no computer programmer

writes a whole program. They piece together smaller programs that have

already been written that now together perform a specific function. Knowing

that this subset works is the key - knowing how it works is not critical.

Successful Computer programmers do not start writing programs at the DOS

prompt!

 

 

Our education spends a great part of the time on individual herbs, and

formula breakdown - and the result is--- most practioners simply take a

patent formula off the shelf.

Why?

1. economics

2. less critical thinking

3. far less liability

4. industry pressure

 

If schools BEGAN with formulas...

I would expect that as a profession we would be better at dispensing the

correct formula. Once the formulas are grasped then they can be tweaked. Its

the formulas that form the foundation of OM. Learning these formulas I

believe will lead to a deeper understanding and ownership of OM. IF it

doesn't - at least we haven't done any harm.

 

I most often was frustrated in school because the functions / category of

the herbs (and acupuncture points) too seldom matched the prescriptions

given in the books.

for example

Want to Strengthen the Yin; Liu Wei Di Wan- No Yin Herbs!

Want to Strengthen the Yang - jin Gui Shen Qi, Si Ni tang, Zhen Wu, Wu Ling

San, Bu Zhong Yi Qi tang, _only one_ Tonify Yang herb in the whole bunch.

 

I felt BEST when I was able to learn " hands on " .

Numerous repetitions of this is " Bu Zhong Yi Qi tang " this is " Gui Pi tang "

rather than the clinicians own creation that looked like Bu Zhong Yi Qi tang

and sometimes like Gui Pi tang.

 

 

Now I would like to further my knowledge.

dui yao, dosage, additions, subtractions, combinations, different outcomes

from preparing the same herb in different ways (pao zhi), treating multiple

syndromes, less crashes ...faster recovery

 

Just my opinion, I feel a brand new student would not be able to fully grasp

the value of Z'ev et al. (teaching additions/subtractions) BUT to one that

knew formulas Z'ev would be Thousand Ducats. (mathematical equations).

 

Ed Kasper,LAc, Santa Cruz, CA

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.459 / Virus Database: 258 - Release 2/25/2003

[Guest guest]

Ed,

I am not sure what you disagree with from your posting. Can you

clarify?

 

I found Bob Felt's post quite inspiring, actually, and agree with his

ideas about databasing Chinese medicinals.

 

Thanks,

Z'ev

On Saturday, March 8, 2003, at 10:08 PM, Ed Kasper LAc.

www.HappyHerbalist.com wrote:

 

> I would like to respectfully disagree with Z'ev et al,

> I offer this as a student and what didn't work for me.

[Guest guest]

At 10:08 PM -0800 3/8/03, Ed Kasper LAc. www.HappyHerbalist.com wrote:

>Our education spends a great part of the time on individual herbs, and

>formula breakdown - and the result is--- most practioners simply take a

>patent formula off the shelf.

>Why?

>1. economics

>2. less critical thinking

>3. far less liability

>4. industry pressure

--

 

You've missed an item:

 

5. the student/practitioner's intention.

 

If the intention is strong, then the difficulties can be surmounted.

 

If students are not finding the support at their school, then they

should find a personal teacher/mentor. Any serious student of Chinese

herbs should do this, and I'm pretty sure most of us who give

individualized prescriptions have done so.

 

>

>If schools BEGAN with formulas...

--

 

This would probably just lead to a different set of difficulties.

 

What is most lacking in the programs I've seen is volume of

experience in student clinic. Without a radical increase in volume of

patients seen, changing the way materia medica and formulae are

taught is unlikely to improve confidence in prescribing. That's what

students in Chinese programs get that American students don't, unless

they seek it out themselves.

 

Rory

--

[Guest guest]

, Rory Kerr <rorykerr@w...>

wrote:

 

> What is most lacking in the programs I've seen is volume of

> experience in student clinic. Without a radical increase in volume of

> patients seen, changing the way materia medica and formulae are

> taught is unlikely to improve confidence in prescribing.

 

I agree and we are talking about a quadrupling to get the desired effect. I

posted the math a few months back to show that a typical intern handles

probably less than 15 long term cases during their internship (one patient for

over 15 treatments over 3 months), half of which may be musculoskeletal and

another 25% their classmates suffering from the stress of their studies and

taking advantage of low cost student clinic fees. This is not much exposure.

 

Rory is right about finding a mentor or working for low wages to be around

teachers and patients and clinical discussion after one graduates. I did these

things. In fact, it was while working for OCOM in their pharmacy overseeing

the filling of formulas by students when I learned the most. It was like each

formula was a living case study right in front of me exemplifying the particular

doctor's approach to TCM. I personally studied and explained about 5000

formulas to my students during a 30 month period after I graduated. And I got

paid dirt for it. But I had the constant ear of a half dozen very experienced

TCM docs, including the doc with whom I did my entire internship. I also

worked with Heiner Fruehauf for a year at ITM's HIV clinic.

 

One can thus create one's own post grad quasi-residencies if one is willing to

forego practice building and getting rich for a few years after school. I do

not

think I could have done more during school. I suppose this is a case for the

entry level DAOM which I am supposedly against. hmmm. low blood sugar.

gotta go now. :-)

 

[Guest guest]

Z'ev, I suggest learning standard classical formulas first.

First year students should be expected to be able to execute simple

diagnosis = formula.

Understandable patients don't present simple classical cases but the

Principle of which Formula is applicable. There may be 2-3 formulas with

additions and subtractions. The First year students would ID the Principle

Formula and the Action (s) intended. Second and third year students would

have to indicate combination of formulas and the individual herbs needed and

why.

The progression from first year is form the simple to the complicated.

Beginning from the basics the students would experience the evolution from

simple to elegant formulas.

With 3-4 years experience with Standard formulas as a foundation. They would

" see " the patient (the pattern) as " a formula "

The base-line student would equate " pattern " to " formulas " and not know the

individual herbs or try to modify them at all. Like taking a patent formula

off the shelf. Like most graduates and practioners do now...

The high end achievers would study more into the composition of the formulas

and tear the formulas apart to see how they worked. Like mixing single herbs

together into formulas. The teacher would be able to help both and explain

how both could be right.

 

 

 

Rory, let the Buyer (student) beware.

Even a bad teacher can not hold back a over-achiever. But a good teacher

will make a mediocre student excel. And that's what schools should be for.

Personally I attended THREE California Accredited Acupuncture Schools. A lot

of wasted time.

Much of the same continues in the California C.E.U programs.

It is the few good teachers that lead - and mark the difference.

 

Ed Kasoer, LAc, Santa Cruz, CA

 

 

 

Sat, 8 Mar 2003 22:13:26 -0800

" " <zrosenbe

Re: RE: Information Overload

 

Ed,

I am not sure what you disagree with from your posting. Can you

clarify?

 

I found Bob Felt's post quite inspiring, actually, and agree with his

ideas about databasing Chinese medicinals.

 

Thanks,

Z'ev

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.459 / Virus Database: 258 - Release 2/25/2003

[Guest guest]

Personally I attended THREE California Accredited Acupuncture Schools. A lotof wasted time.>>>Ed which three?

alon