I found it a very useful exercise to examine the different ways of “understanding”, especially when considering the readings/discussions of different learning styles from earlier in the course. The two concepts seem to have a good deal of overlap to them; in other words, I would expect different types of understanding to come easier to different types of learners.
I know, for instance, that the ‘have perspective’ and ’empathy’ facets of understanding usually come pretty naturally to me. I am also keenly aware of my own limits, and able to work through why I am having trouble with a given “text”, and hopefully find ways around my limitations and obstacles. Explaining and applying are weaker areas for me; I know something, but am not always able to translate that understanding effectively to someone who lacks it. A bit of the Expert’s Dilemma, I suppose.
My real question here is: are we supposed to try and apply all these ways of understanding simultaneously? That seems cumbersome and ill-suited to most situations. I find it almost absurd to think I’m supposed to have empathy for a mathematical equation, for instance.
I doubt this was the authors’ intent, but they did not (in this chapter at least) say so explicitly. While it seems intuitively obvious that these different “understandings” are to applied appropriately, it would be nice to have that “from the horse’s mouth” as it were, just to assure that no confusion on the matter is possible.