My post yesterday on how much I like to sing, then Stephanie's comment got me thinking about why I pick the hobbies I pick. I love to sing and knit (and type, i.e., blog).
It dawned on me that both singing and knitting are things I use my kinesthetic learning style on. Both I learn by how it feels to do an action I may have mentioned before that the reason I don't often forget a harmony part is that my throat remembers the feelings of each note in a song--I don't remember the note values; I remember the pitches relative to each other.
And I remember how to knit various patterns by how they feel when I do them. The fact that I learn patterns better from a chart than from written-out knitting instructions also has to do with learning physically--I can see the direction the decreases or increases go in on a chart, so I don' t have to thinking "K2tog" or "SKP" -- I just do the "thing that leans left" or the "thing that leans right," physically, as depicted in the chart without having to translate into the words for what I am doing, which is an extra step in my mind.
Certainly, one reason I like doing these things, and also why I like typing, is that I enjoy the fact that I can get my body to be so precise and do exactly what is needed to create something of high quality--a song in tune, a sock, a quickly typed email with few errors. It feels good to be physically adept at something.
Anyway, just a short insight into how I do things and why I like them.
OK, we all know we have a mix of learning styles in us, and that there's more than one way that people define learning styles. Robin (see comments) suggested that some of my liking for knitting and singing might be due to being a visual-spatial style learner. Are you? If you want to know, here's a set of questions and here's an interesting comparison. I found it interesting to look at, because I do share many (probably most) characteristics of someone with that style, but with a few marked exceptions: I am an excellent speller and I like to speak in public. However, sure enough, I visualize words to spell them, like the comparison mentions.
Enough about me--what truly struck me was how the descriptions fit Beccano, and the comparison, which I think is intended to show why folks with this learning style might not fit in well in a traditional academic setting--fit my boy Beccano. To a "t" even. Makes a lot of sense. Really makes it clear how he can be so "gifted" and have such a high IQ but not be a great traditional student.
So, thanks, Robin, you educator, you!