In his “Connectivism Taxonomy”, G. Siemens enumerates various stages of learning, and he positions Contribution and involvement before Pattern recognition.
Why is active contribution necessary to recognize something? Okay, the latter may be seen as more advanced than the former. But is this true for everybody? People have different preferences, and different thresholds of how much they think they should have listened before they start talking. So, his explanation for the chronological order and dependence did not convince me at once:
“As a dynamic participant in the ecology, the learner has moved from passive content consumption to active contribution. Time in the network has resulted in the learner developing an increased sense of what is happening in the network/ecology as a whole. Having mastered the basics of being a participant, the learner is now capable to recognize emerging patterns and trends.”
“Those who vocally produce more finely, will also perceive more finely.“
(In German: “Wer stimmlich feiner produziert, nimmt auch feiner wahr.” Sorry for my amateur translation.)
This could perhaps apply, similarly, to higher level perceptions, and thus explain why the understanding of the “nuances” usually takes places only after actively participating. I am still not completely convinced that it applies to everybody.