Why are different kinds of learning so differently compressible?
If I can work through a textbook in 20 1-hour sittings, I usually get similar results from 10 2-hour or 5 4-hour sessions. But piano isn’t that way at all: a 20x1hr piece simply can’t be learned in 5 sessions IME.
Conversation
One explanation might be that when learning piano pieces, successive sessions rely heavily on previous sessions having been consolidated, whereas many “book-learning” topics are somewhat more breadth-shaped.
Another might be that some tasks drain attention faster.
1
31
Other examples of learning which don’t seem to compress very well:
– learning how to draw
– learning how to design user interfaces
– learning how to write
Ones which seem to compress well:
– learning how to cook
– learning a new programming language
– learning a spoken language
15
5
58
Sounds like the two sets are building literacy vs building expertise.
For example I'd argue that once I can compress learning and memorizing a new piece that's within my skill-level the same way that I would in reading a textbook. No?
1
1
1
Replying to
Ah, maybe! It’s true that if we only consider the set of music which I can sight-read, then it’s highly compressible: I can learn ~2x by spending ~2x hours.