Based on the personality quiz determining I'm an auditory learner, and my bookish disposition, I think I'd learn best with lots of little packets and so on.

I'm able to absorb theory when it's simple, but with a job, other commitments, and expanded personal life, it's harder to focus. The material I'm usually exposed to is also more technical and domain-specific, so demands more focus.

I learn best when there is a method laid out (a proof for a theorem, checklist for a procedure) or a basic explanation with citations so I can learn more. I think I'm almost a visual learner, but I need to get how/why something is the way it is, and to learn that on my terms. Having things written out for me helps in that regard.

 I certainly like to have a theoretical link as to the task, its importance, hints/tips etc. I but I won't learn something effectively from textbooks or static images. I need to watch it happen in real time and then do it myself. For purely theoretical topics (eg. pharmacodynamics) if I'm given a static picture of movement of substrates across a cell wall I will get lost in all the arrows. Have the image animated with explanations as to what is happening as it happens and I will pick it up  much easier. 

I found this particularly noticable in the difference between when I did my first and second degree. My first degree was completed in the early 2000 and was face to face lectures, textbooks and notes. My second degree, I learned 90% from youtube sources like khanacademy where I could be SHOWN the steps, not read about it.

Good training depends on the learner and training should be adapted where possible to suit the leaners needs. For me, that is plenty of demonstration and application of learned concepts.

Based on the personality quiz determining I'm an auditory learner, but i think iam both a visual learner and an auditory learner .

i hope learn a lot from this course