When I'm learning a new skill, there's a technique I often use to quickly gain the basics of the new skill without getting drowned in the plethora of resources that exist. I've found that just 3 resources that cover the skill from 3 separate viewpoints(along with either daily practice or a project) is enough to quickly get all the pieces I need to learn the new skill.
I'm partial to books, so I've called this The 3 Books Technique, but feel free to substitute books for courses, mentors, or videos as needed.
The "What" Book
The "What" book is used as reference material. It should be a thorough resource that gives you a broad overview of your skill. If you run into a novel situation, you should be able to go to this book and get the information you need. It covers the "surface" section of the learning model from nature pictured above.
Positive reviews of this book should contain phrases like "Thorough" and "Got me out of a pinch more than once." Negative reviews of this book should talk about "overwhelming" and "didn't know where to start."
The "How" Book
The "How" Book explains the step-by-step, nuts and bolts of how to put the skill into practice. It often contains processes, tools, and steps. It covers the "deep" part of the learning model covered above.
Positive reviews of this book should talk about "Well structured" and "Clearly thought out." Negative reviews should mention it being "too rote" or "not enough theory."
The "Why" Book
The "WHY" book explains the mindset and intuitions behind the skill. It tries to get into the authors head and lets you understand what to do in novel situations. It should cover the "transfer" part of the learning model above.
Positive reviews of this book should talk about "gaining intuitions" or "really understanding". Negative reviews should contain phrases like "not practical" or "still don't know what steps to take."
The Project or Practice
Once I have these 3 resources, I'll choose a single project or a daily practice that allows me to practice the skills from the "How" book and the mindsets from the "Why" book. If I get stuck, I'll use the "What" book to help me.
"What" Book: The Procrastination Equation by Piers Steel
"How" Book: The Now Habit by Neil Fiore
"Why" Book: The Replacing Guilt blog sequence by Nate Soares
Project or Practice: Five pomodoros every day where I deliberately use the tools from the now habit and the mindsets from replacing guilt. If I find myself stuck, I'll choose from the plethora of techniques in the Procrastination Equation.
"What" Book: A First Course in Calculus by Serge Lange
"How" Book: The Khan Academy series on Calculus
"Why" Book: The Essence of Calculus Youtube series by 3blue1brown
Project or Practice: Daily practice of the Khan Academy calculus exercises.
This is a simple technique that I've found very helpful in systematizing my learning process. I would be particularly interested in other skills you've learned and the 3 books you would recommend for those skills.
I really like the "positive reviews should look like X, negative reviews should look like Y" information. I've never seen it before, and I expect it to actually be useful when looking for resources.
I'm cofused by how "deep" and "surface" are being used in your first picture. From how the "What" and "How" books are described (and from the examples you give), I would have called "What" the deep resource, and "How" as the "surface level" resource. How are you thinking of it?
This may be because of my particular learning style. I tend to get most of my deep learning from the actual application of the skill, which is based on the how resource. I use the what resource in a very surface way, just getting particular facts or techniques when I'm stuck. However, I agree that What books tend to cover material in a deeper way
I think I can relate. You made me notice that there are two things I could point to when talking of "deep learning". One is "making a piece of knowledge or information a deeply ingrained, easily accessible piece of me" and the other is, "not having any whole in my conceptual understanding, every piece of info is well connected in my knowledge graph and well motivated, and things make sense in a powerful way".
Dude, I'm just a guy, but I love this blog. It has changed my head.
Three books! That's great! I gotta tell you...
Here's a practice that I have long used to gain a skill, or just get through a project. I get the three best-looking books on the topic. The classic, the bible, the tome. (I avoid the "for dummies.") Reading them, I determine my favorite AUTHOR, the guy whose outlook and philosophy and depth and commitment to the skill impresses me the most. Then I CALL THAT SUCKER UP ON THE PHONE.
It helps that I'm as personable and likable on the phone as I am in person. I describe my project a little, then I ask where to get the special sauce or the obscure gizmo. That's always an ice breaker. Before long, he's talking; he's asking ME about my project. I keep it fairly short, having the pertinent questions and data at hand, but I always ask if I can call again (never been refused). When I get stuck or something, I call back.
I have gotten an incredible amount of tutoring and mentoring over the years. Enough to completely restore wood-and-canvas watercraft, build a couple of mandolins, rebuild vintage guitar amps, build a bicycle frame from SCRATCH, install a solar system, sew a full set of outdoor gear, and install a slate roof. More, too. The wood-and-canvas canoe guy actually took to calling ME, asking how things were going, checking on my progress, adding tips he forgot to mention. He sent me a gallon of the obsolete historically correct dope. I have straddled a roof ridge, on a cell phone with the world's number one slate guru talking me through an origami copper flashing technique. To this day, no leaks.
So there--I feel like I have contributed something to acknowledge all the great stuff I have read here.
Goddamn that is a great idea! This style totally suits how I learn in that I A) am personable, B) Immensely enjoy phonecalls, and C) Strongly, strongly prefer projects when I can verbally ask questions of someone who has done before.
How long does it generally take you to find the person's number? Have you had more difficulty getting them to pick up now that VOIP spam is so common?
I would offer $20 to anyone who can give examples for the three different books in an area, that they actually read, up to a maximum of $60. (e.g. three books in Linear Algebra, or three books in carpeting, or three books about programming).
Buddhism: What: What Makes You Not a Buddhist by Dzongsar Jamyang Khyentse Rinpoche (There are probably books with more detail and a more broad view, but I love this one for how it contrasts ideas from popular culture with Buddhism to highlight similarities and differences, making it very accessible); How: Meditation Is Not What You Think by Jon Kabat-Zinn; Why: Bring Me the Rhinoceros by John Tarrant (It's not explicit in explaining the why, but presents zen koans that cause you to enter the mindset of letting go of assumptions)
Crisis Intervention Counseling: What: Interviewing for Solutions by Insoo Kim Berg and Peter De Jong; How: Motivational Interviewing by Miller and Rollnick; Why: On Living by Kerry Egan
Teaching: What: Understanding by Design; How: Made to Stick by Dan and Chip Heath (not strictly a "How" book, but an excellent book to develop strategy for presenting curriculum); Why: Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire
I don't want your money - as soon as I finished this article I started thinking about the topics that I study the most and what books I would recommend to people. Also, I am a suicide intervention trainer by trade, so I have an obsession with figuring out how to teach people about empathy. :D
I love your thoughts on this. As someone who has studied educational design and psychology, I'd like to offer a perspective on what you're describing.
In educational psychology, there are three categories of educational goals: knowledge, skills, and attitudes. (Presently, there is a bias against teaching attitudes, so the "KSA" is frequently changed to "knowledge, skills, and abilities," which is incorrect and redundant.)
It seems that your "What" book represents the knowledge of the field, the "How" the skills, and the "Why" the attitude.
I think you would be interested in reading about Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. I think it would integrate well with the model you are creating, especially in light of the comments earlier about what "depth" means in this context and whether "What" or "How" is of greater depth. Either one can be shallow or deep as they relate to different kinds of learning.
Ok. I have read the first two, guess I gotta read the third. I wonder what sort of project one could apply these to. I remember when I read Thinking Fast and Slow I tried to use it to earn more tips, but the application, while seemingly useful, wasn't an excellent fit.
I curated this for being a handy abstraction for learning. As comments downthread have said, things like distinguishing positive from negative reviews, and the actual examples you gave (procrastination and calculus), were both really helpful. And the post was as short+simple as it could be.
3blue1brown has a series on the essence of linear algebra as well. It's pretty great, and could do well as the Why.
I also like Linear Algebra Done Right a lot, but it doesn't fit neatly into this framework. It's a bit too rigorous to be Why, not practical enough to be How, and it's approach differs enough from other books to make it difficult to look things up in.
Linear Algebra Done Right wins the prize for books which deliver on their title, as promised imho. The typical approach with determinants front and centre is a pedagogical dead end. I find Axler's approach tracked more closely to the uses of linear algebra, rather than historic proof techniques. I'd say it covers the how and why sections - although perhaps the 'how' book is the Matrix Cookbook ;). The what will probably have to come from some other discipline: are you working on stats, or differential equations, or something else?
Anyone successfully approached this with computer programming? It's a subject I think I have reason to believe I would be talented at (I have exhibited strong aptitude for mathematics and languages), but I don't see a good path forward on working at it, so I learn other things. I think the "how" book might be something like codeacademy or khanacademy, but how about the "what" book or the "why" book?
SICP is a "Why" book, one of the few timeless texts on the topic. It's subsumed by studying any healthy functional programming language to a sufficient extent (idiomatic use of control operator libraries, not just syntax), but it's more straightforward to start with reading the book.
Petzold's CODE might be another good "Why" book. Its focus is a little more on computer architecture than programming per se, but that's an important topic for programmers to understand. It's a pretty easy read. I'd call it more of a pop book than a textbook, but it still covers important concepts. If you're looking to learn programming, I'd highly recommend reading it.
For programming, I think starting with a project and using that to decide what books to read my work best. Assuming you want to learn to program rather than learn Computer Science, the books that will be helpful will depend highly on the area in which you're interested.
Do you just generally want to see if you'll be good at programming? Even if so, is there a specific area which you'd be interested in writing a program, e.g. an operating system, a server, a web app, etc.?
I agree with the comment below that SICP is a good "Why" book but did want to note that I personally didn't find SICP nearly as enlightening when I started programming as many others seem to. I've gone back to it since and loved it, but it definitely was not the thing that motivated me to practice programming a lot. Like everything else, it depends on your personality.
Other than suspecting I may have an aptitude, my interest in computer programming is driven by finding two fields cool and fun sounding: data science and applications of blockchain technology to stuff like verifying carbon sequestration and other changes in reality. Quite a bit of social science I deeply admire has been done using data science, and I have a couple of friends working to improve the world using blockchain technologies whom I also admire. I want to see if I am good at programming to see if I can participate in these endeavors I admire—or at least use my skills as a wordsmith and communicator to aid such endeavors.
If it is relevant, my own background is in social sciences and math.
Thank you so much for all your advice. You guys are awesome. Like An1lam and Mr.-hire point out though, I would actually need a project to work on. A practical, immediate application makes skills learnable much faster. Any advice on that?
Try making a simple video game. Think Tetris, not Skyrim. I personally made variants of Pong, Joust, and Asteroids when I was learning programming. You can learn a lot from making video games because it requires a variety of programming techniques. You need to understand basic algorithms, some mathematics, and you can't be too inefficient about it or you'll notice performance problems. And seeing your little world come to life is very motivating. This kind of thing is not terribly difficult to do in Python or Racket.
Note that many of the textbooks we've been recommending include exercises. Some of the more difficult ones count as small projects.
I think CLRS is a pretty questionable book for someone who hasn't programmed. I don't think it's great as a reference for writing algorithms, e.g. I think internet searching will often help you find better resources. And in terms of a straight read-through, it's one of the more theoretical algorithms texts, and a large fraction of its exercises are proofs.
I will second Hazard's comments on the way to approach the reviews. Seems so obvious after you said it.
I am wondering what you were considered in terms of skills.
I think the general approach should work really well in some settings. I do wonder what the limits might be. For instance, I could probably use this approach well to learn how to write in a programming language, or how to weld or how to machine parts. I'm not sure it's as helpful for, say, learning a new language.
Perhaps the distinction is between skill and knowledge?
This is an interesting question. I can imagine the technique being useful for acquiring the general skill of language learning, but a language itself I can only really see the "what" and "how" books being useful, not the why.
Nor can I imagine this technique being very helpful to learn how to ride a bike, although I imagine it could be useful to become a competitive bike racer.
The distinction between skill and knowledge seems a good start, but it seems like there's more going on here.
Maybe the "why" book for a language would be something like reading manga for someone wanting to learn Japanese - something that makes the language and culture seem cool and something that you want to learn. :)
Given that learning a language also includes a fair chunk of learning the culture (e.g. knowing which forms of address are appropriate at which times), reading literature from that culture is probably actually useful for accomplishing the "Why" book's goal of explaining the mindset and intuitions behind the skill.