Learning Styles

I know I saw some article recently saying that the famed "learning styles" idea has been overhyped, but whatever. Here's the story. For a variety of reasons, including a class that kicked out half of its 680 students and a lingering stomach bug, I have myself set up to take a midterm in a high-math-content microecon class this Thursday, having gone to only two lectures of that class thus far. This has inspired me to disregard my roommate's advice that the textbook was really not necessary for him when he took the class, and seek out a copy of said textbook; for more various reasons I don't have my hands on it yet.

But when I was explaining to my roommate what I want the textbook for, namely, to see a few examples of each of the several algorithms we're supposed to know how to use, he responded that he doesn't think the textbook has examples. It has problems, but you're supposed to do them for yourself. I think it's possible that there's sort of an ideology that this is a good thing, that you're not supposed to show someone how to do it but rather make them figure it out, and they learn it better. But I know that I at least feel that the quickest and easiest way to learn an algorithm like the kind that a microecon class uses lots of, and I do mean learn it, quite properly, is to see it done. Once I've seen what's supposed to happen, it's rather easy for me to remember what I am then supposed to do. Trying to figure it out for myself, though, is often just really, really frustrating, and takes a hell of a lot longer. I'm not sure what that says about my learning style, but I definitely think that a textbook that just presents you with an algorithm and never shows you examples of using it is not targeted to me. (Also, this might tie in with a post I'll be writing shortly, also about learning.)