Confidence based learning (CBL)

CBL is a term we make reference to but perhaps reflect upon in a different way at PCC. Following are a few thoughts to consider in relation to instilling confidence in people at work and the class-room:

CBL is focused on the ‘method of learning’ (detailed below), which is similar to the Socratic method.

The Socratic method is a negative method of hypothesis elimination, which means better hypothetical solutions are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions. In CBL the method of improving the ‘method of learning’, appears to be influenced and mixed with the current cultural need to ‘Prove’ knowledge.

We suggest ‘Proof’ is required by a society that continues to lose its capacity for trust with honesty and respect, and thus, empirical studies that provide proof are often missing the opportunity to address root cause issues that reside in how people are being (Honest / Respectful / Trusting / Trustworthy), as opposed to what they are doing (Behaving).

Being unconscious of this gap between being and doing, approaches like CBL fill this gap between trust and proof by making reference to advanced statistical models which take positive hypotheses, and test them with mathematical models to try and ‘Guess’ what may or may not be the outcome before putting the theory into practice (i.e. Six Sigma), as can be seen here.

This is the Wiki intro to CBL –

Confidence-Based Learning or CBL is a methodology used in learning and training that measures a learner's ‘knowledge quality’ by determining both the correctness of the learner's knowledge and confidence in that knowledge.

Additionally, the CBL process is designed to increase retention and minimize the effects of guessing which can skew the results of traditional, single-score assessments. This combination yields a profile of the individual's knowledge base, and identifies the difference between what the individual thinks they know and what they actually know.

Once knowledge and confidence gaps have been identified, the approach in using the methodology is to create a customized learning plan for each learner in order to fix the knowledge gaps once they have been identified.

The process, similar to quality improvement processes such as Six Sigma, is continued until the learner achieves total mastery of the knowledge they need for a particular skill. The CBL methodology defines mastery as the validated achievement of confidence and correctness for 100% of the content. This means that a learner must answer a question with confidence and correctness two consecutive times. Mastery then becomes confidently-held, correct knowledge put into practice.

We acknowledge the findings of CBL but we feel the output is structured to satisfy the prevailing language and expectations in the market rather than digging deeper. In so doing CBL has missed an opportunity to provide greater value.

In regards to the workplace and to the classroom, PCC suggests that ‘learning’ efficacy (speed, sense making and longevity of retention) is increased when individuals are confident, not only in their knowledge, but in themselves.We also understand and posit that creativity, innovation, problem solving and overall organisational development and performance are improved where individuals are fundamentally more confident in themselves and in their relationships with their boss, their peers and with the inert business systems with which they are required to interact.

These relationships and inert systems should be (but seldom are) consciously designed to remove assumption and therefore eliminate blame, relative to measures and judgements against assumed targets (as current standard business systems promote and accept as ‘Good’ – i.e. conducive to control).

In missing the connection between personal confidence (Self-concept) and performance, these systems are often designed in such a way as to provoke emotional reactions based in fear (of failure & rejection) and in their use we unconsciously undermine the performance we are aiming to enhance and improve.

The same logic & systems are used to judge the workforce in Schools and factories, i.e. Teachers are under the same systemic duress as any other worker, and yet our teachers hold the responsibility of leading our children to become our future adults and workforce! In such conditions, our teachers lead by example imprinting children to accept these threat based reactions are par for the course in today’s society.

We (PCC) focus on what constitutes effective communication for humans at a psychological level, to address the issues listed by CBL (below ABCD), but we also go further, recognising the mechanics (in brackets) of existing in conditions in which we are;

A- Uninformed (transferred data is not contextualised and made relevant to our understanding. Our inherent understanding from which we judge anything new is not checked or challenged. We fail to derive meaning from Data)

B - Misinformed (logical targets and drivers are set based on assumptions, often derived from detached, educated / programmed knowledge, rather than tacit intuitive knowledge gained through first-hand experience)

C - In Doubt (Doubt being a resultant emotional condition triggered by sub-conscious fear and uncertainty, provoked by  ‘data only’ relationships with logical systems, which create our prevailing conditions to which we emotionally react / behave / perform)

D - Enjoying a degree of ‘Mastery’ (because, based on our previous knowledge and experience, we enjoy a clear understanding of our environment , we are confident to such a level that we can rationalise meaning from diverse historial experience and use the meaning derived from these other experiences to correlate to the current conditions and ‘Innovatively problem solve’, we know what is expected of us and can respond appropriately, reinforcing our self-concept. We know what is coming and we know how to respond effectively (positive reinforcement).

In this way we hope to convey a challenge to the cultural need for ‘Proof’ that comes from and is satisfied by the overt reliance on logic today, (i.e. answering twice with ‘confidence’ (that can’t itself be measured) = Mastery).

In this way and at this depth, we help others understand that confidence in conjunction with and relative to conditions, has to be considered when designing and accepting the efficacy of standard business systems.

It is at this level that PCC helps organisations design their systems to maximise performance.