Bloom, Benjamin [Online]. Accessed 2/24/02: .

Many potential transfer of learning situations do not lend themselves to the automaticity approach. There are many problems that are somewhat related, but that in some sense are relatively far removed from each other. A person attempting to make the transfer of learning between two such problems does not automatically "see" or sense the connections between the two problems. Far transfer often requires careful analysis and deep thinking.

Passion, coupled with limitless persistence and perseverance, pays dividends.

The traps for both the researcher and the investigator occur when two or more of the theories influence an investigation and its reports. Both parties need to be aware of the effects of shifts from one theory to another during an investigation or research project, and need to watch for such shifts. This is particularly important with respect to the data generated by “shifty” investigations, and to hypotheses generated from such data. An example of such shifts can be found in many research reports if one is alert to the theories and investigative problems described above. One research report of the development of a comprehensive causal network model contained three such shifts on a single page! The conclusions, by the way, included a call for additional data from new accident investigations, and a study of the time structure to quantify interactions.

Motivation is the reason for people's actions, desires, and needs

Salomon, G., & Perkins, D. (1988, September). Teaching for transfer. Educational Leadership, 22-32.

This example gives us some insight into one type of transfer of learning. Transfer occurs at a subconscious level if one has achieved automaticity of that which is to be transferred, and if one is transferring this learning to a problem that is sufficiently similar to the original situation so that differences are handled at a subconscious level, perhaps aided by a little conscious thought.


This study was motivated by the premise that no nation grows further than the quality of its educational leaders. The purpose of this theoretical debate is to examine the wider context of leadership and its effectiveness towards improving school management. This academic evaluation examines recent theoretical developments in the study of educational leadership in school management. It begins with a concise overview of the meaning and concept of leadership in terms of research, theory, and practice. This is followed by an examination of the theories of leadership, principles and styles of leadership. Each section ends with an identification of contemporary issues and possible means of amelioration. This article concludes that success is certain if the application of the leadership styles, principles and methods is properly and fully applied in school management because quality educational leadership tradition offers great opportunity to further refine educational leadership and management policies and practices by accepting and utilizing the basic principles and styles of educational leadership.


Practical difficulties arise during the investigation and reporting of most accidents. These difficulties include the determination of the scope of the phenomenon to investigate, the identification of the data required, documentation of the findings, development of recommendations based on the accident findings, and preparation of the deliverables at the end of the investigation. These difficulties reflect differences in the purposes for the investigations, which in turn reflect different perceptions of the accident phenomenon. They can lead to questionable data for accident research and other end uses. Five underlying theories about the nature of the accident phenomenon are presented, and the implications of these different theories for accident research are discussed. Increased awareness of accident theories and increased dialogue with investigators is proposed.

Thor: Things You Didn't Know About Loki | Screen Rant

I am an accident investigator. What do you want me to deliver to you at the conclusion of my investigations? What criteria should I use to determine if my deliverables are acceptable or unacceptable to you?