First, experience mainly refers to things that are both active and passive, and not mainly refers to cognitive things.

Second, the evaluation of the value of an experience lies in the understanding of various relationships and continuity caused by the experience.

The first conclusion reminds me of Manabu Sato's view of learning, while Manabu Sato thinks that learning is a passive and active behavior. Husserl's phenomenology also talked about the concept of active and passive. Perhaps this is a basic form of human existence.

"It doesn't mainly refer to cognitive things", this sentence may refer to a kind of embodied cognition, that is to say, cognition is sometimes not symbolic and not completely expressed by symbols. This truth can be explained by singing experience. When you hear an old song, when that old song is being sung or when you are listening, those scenes, those past events and the scenes at that time will make people think, make people think, and there will be very complicated emotions in their hearts. These experiences are not necessarily a kind of cognition, and this kind of emotion is often unable to be expressed or expressed by symbols.

The second conclusion is the evaluation of experience value, which lies in its richness and whether it can form rich connections and continuity. What kind of method does such an assessment need to take? This is an interesting and challenging topic. This second conclusion, how to evaluate the value of experience, can also be confirmed by the performance evaluation of the course. Because performance evaluation is a task-driven behavior, let students fully demonstrate their continuity to show the continuity of their experience. Moreover, this task involves many aspects and needs rich contacts. This is also the requirement of comprehensive practical activities.