I'm not convinced by this closet analogy for subject matter experts. Domain experts tend to have fully integrated, very differentiated and subjective ways to think about what they do.
It's not like a pile either but I think more like a network of associations, a mesh. When you hear chess grandmasters talk, they don't go by "the rook is worth 5 and the knight is worth 3 points" or some neat system, they trust on intuition that often brings together particular positions, old games, calculation and so on. Just like an expert programmer doesn't sit there with her copy of the Gang of Four in hand.
Experts often don't really think as much as they simply do, and they're process oriented. Which I think is also more important to teach.
>> It's not like a pile either but I think more like a network of associations, a mesh.
That's exactly the point. Their knowledge has some organization and structure, it's not just random pile of information. The author is advocating that we help people to organize information so that it is more useful to them. They even go so far as saying to try understanding how the person models other thing to leverage that. In other words, the closet thing is a metaphor, but also can be a starting point.
isn't the point (of the pile) that you tug on this thing - and it's attached to that, you tug on that... etc - ie: brain associations are more complex than a mesh. I remember tidying up my daughter's room and destroying her ability to find her clothes - she had no place to start...
If I could rely an external system to "empty" my mind, then clean out the cobwebs and build some mental shelves... and then reintroduce those contents... I'd pay for that.
Also by reorganizing the closet you would be physically changing and modifying the objects into different forms. Nothing touched by recall remains the same.
If anybody wants to read a more fleshed out description of this same concept, but without the mental limitation of being stuck in a small closet, they should research the method of loci also popularly known as the 'memory palace.'
I think it's an oversimplification to argue that the mind as a whole is like a closet, but I do think memory specifically works a bit in this way--hence the well-established utility of memory palace methods. Giordano Bruno's memory garden idea is something I've been working on, but it does take time to put in place.
It's not like a pile either but I think more like a network of associations, a mesh. When you hear chess grandmasters talk, they don't go by "the rook is worth 5 and the knight is worth 3 points" or some neat system, they trust on intuition that often brings together particular positions, old games, calculation and so on. Just like an expert programmer doesn't sit there with her copy of the Gang of Four in hand.
Experts often don't really think as much as they simply do, and they're process oriented. Which I think is also more important to teach.