Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Expert / Edutool 2012


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Expert / Edutool 2012

  1. 1. EXPERT – theoretical and empirical background Pirkko Hyvönen, Post-doc researher KTK/ LET, Oulun yliopisto
  2. 2. AFTER THIS LECTUREExplain, why is expertise and expertperformance important to learn inhigher education.Describe different types of expertiseand particularly differences betweenroutine and adaptive expert.Reflect, what kind of expertise isneeded in work life today.Understand, that learning expertisecan be designed. Pirkko Hyvönen, Tutkijatohtori KTK/ LET, Oulun yliopisto
  3. 3. BACKGROUND Universities are expected to educate experts, who are competent to excel in changing and complex circumstances in work life, but education does not provide competencies for it. (Hyvönen, Impiö, Järvelä, 2010). LET master’s program aims to educate experts in learning and educational technology. The students will be competent to work in schools and work places and use their expertise in adapting to changing situations, solving problems, creating social innovations and integrating technologies in practices. Education is based on LET research and it provides a strong support for learning. Education is also one of the research contexts.
  4. 4. STEREOTYPES related to EXPERTISEGenderAge Talent Expertise is more than generalEducation Skills intelligence: ”Capasity to perform consistentlyObjective Specialist at a superior level” (Weisberg, 2006)truth Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993
  5. 5. DEFINITIONS IN DICTIONARIESFROM 1968-20111968: One who is very skillful and well-informed in some special field (Webster)2005: Characteristics , skills andknowledge that distinguishes expertsfrom novices and less experienced people(Wikipedia)2011: person, who in certain domain canrecognise problems and solve themefficiently. Expertise includesknowledge, experiences and skills forexpressing. (Wikipedia)
  6. 6. DOMAIN-SPECIFIC EXPERTISE - Informal and formal domainsSalomon (1997). Wine expertiseNorman et al. (2006). Medicine andsurgeryDurco & Dattel (2006). TransportationSonentag et al. (2006). Software designKellogg (2006). Professional writingRoss et al. (2006). Decision makingLehman & Gruber (2006). MusicHodges et al. (2006). SportsButterworth (2006). MathematicsCobet & Charness (2006). ChessVoss & Wiley (2006). HistoryBrennenkmeyer & Spillane (2008).Problem-solving
  7. 7. TYPES OF EXPERTISEBransford, 2001; Bransford et al., 2000; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986Which kind of expertise is valued and aimed; and how to design learningprocesses, evaluations, learning outcomes and instructions.EXPERTS and experienced non-experts (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993) Career may conform merely to the routines, not advancing expertise and problem-solvingEXPERTS and novicesROUTINE EXPERTS Everyday skills, routines, are developed in familiar environments and in familiar tasks. Routine experts can develop their accuracy and fluency.ADAPTIVE EXPERTS Set of cognitive, meta-cognitive, social, and emotional strategies, where individuals abandon ‘routine’ problem-solving strategies Adaptive experts are more flexible, inventive, spontaneous, encouraging and creative. They deal with novel, unexpected situations and problems, and build knowledge at the same time. They increase their core competencies plus and go beyond their comfort zone!
  8. 8. Acting and ROUTINE EXPERTS ADAPTIVE EXPERTSdealing with Holoyok: truly expert,problems Bransford: competencies plusCOMPETENT TO SOLVE PROBLEMS THAT ARE COMPETENT TO SOLVE PROBLEMS THAT ARE NOVELFAMILIAR AND EXPECTED AND UNEXPECTEDSurface level perceptions, Make perceptions of problem and its context;Do not see hidden messages, does not see dissect various different perspectivesproblems See a problem as an opportunity to learn,Weak skills to solve new problems, but can learn in problem-solving and produce newsolve familiar problems knowledgeSee one suitable way to solve problems Classify, label, analyse problemsWant to solve the problem quickly, and move Perceive patterns and differenciesto next tasks Start to organise problem around centralSparce knowledge base -> may think quicly concepts or ideaMainly procedural knowledge Ponder forward, theoretical reasoningWhen situation unexpectably changes, Dence knowledge base  thinking may takeefficiency decreases, because they triy to solve timeproblem by imitating familiar solutions that are Think and identify novel solutions andnot suitable for the situation possibilitiesDo not learn in problem-solving Strong conceptual understanding Flexible in using knowledge Evidence-based argumentation
  9. 9. EXPERTS EXCELL AND FALL SHORT (Chi, 2006) DOMAIN-LIMITEDGENERATING THE BEST - Have not necessarily knowledge about- Find the best solution other domainsDETECTION and RECOGNITION OVERTLY CONFIDENT- Detect and perceive features that - eg. in music and physicsnovices cannot GLOSSING OVERQUALITATIVE ANALYSIS - Sometimes they overlook details-Analyse problems, develope problem CONTEXT-DEPENDENT WITHIN Arepresentations DOMAINMONITORING - Sometimes rely too much for- Have good self-monitoring and contextual cuespredicting skills INFLEXIBLESTRATEGIES INACCURATE PREDICTION, JUDGMENT- Use the best and effective strategies in AND ADVICEa given situation - Cannot always take the perspectives ofOPPORTUNISTIC novices- Can use whatever sources of BIAS AND FUNCTIONAL FIXEDNESSinformation that are available - Analyse problems in other domainCOGNITIVE EFFORT through the priciples of their ownCan retrieve relevant domain knowledge domain
  11. 11. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFEInformants (N=13) are experts in different formal domainsOn what ground they are considered experts?  They are in a leading and demanding position  Key persons in their field  Considered as more competent than other people in the field  Long career and high education  They consider themselves as experts  Each of them are experts at least on two domains ”Expertise is easiest to identify when it differs most dramatically from what ordinary people can do” (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993)(Hyvönen, Impiö & Järvelä, 2010) /
  12. 12. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE How experts define expertise?1) Expertise is future-oriented havinga developmental and advancingperspective. They are expected toinnovate new or re-new existingpractice, processes and products.2) Developmental perspective andperformance is conjugated with needof constant learning andunderstanding things and processes(Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993).- Factual, procedural and self- regulative knowledge- Multifaceted domains / 12
  13. 13. 3) Expertise is increasingly a social and collaborativephenomenon, which lay both opportunities and challenges for the pathof expertise.- Opportunity: social view, collaboration and even technologies in collaboration can enhance construction of shared expertise- Challenge: collaboration is effective way of learning, but does not happen easily - Social skills, communication, use of technologies - Learning from and with other people - Understanding other people: without it domain-specific expertise cannot be exploited / 13
  14. 14. 4) Experts  Have a strong self-confidence, and trust on their team to develop, create and construct new solutions  Knows how to act rationally in certain situations  Have sensibility to perceive situations  Are diligent, curious, flexible, self-initiative, and modest  Expert’s work is not automatic nor easy. (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Hyvönen, Impiö & Järvelä, 2010; Tsui, 2009) / 14
  15. 15. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE What are the problems like?Situations are always complex and difficult, and you can never be fullyprepared for them. Problems in working life involves more than runningthrough ‘routines’.1) Understand people and interacting with them. Problems with people arerelated to communication, social interaction, shared understanding andemotional constrains, such as envy and hostile atmospheres, which tend toprevent developing innovations and also expertise.2) Inadequate technical tools. Although many ICT tools are in use, there are stilllack of tools and software that solve very compound problems.3) Decision-making problems (Johnson, 1988; Jonassen, 2007): experts at times haveto make decisions without the necessary information.4) Sharing tacit knowledge5) Dealing with time, motivation, prioritization and overlapping tasks(Hyvönen, Impiö & Järvelä, 2010) / 15
  16. 16. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE How do the experts perform ‘routine’ and ‘adaptive’ expertise in theirwork?“There is no such thing as routines in my work.”1) Degree of routines declines, when complexity of work and experience ofindividual increases: “The more I have experience in this work, the less thereare routine cases.”Cycle: ability to make perceptions and decisions augments  environment canprovide complexity in relation to her abilities and edge of competence2) Creativity, insight and playfulness (see, Brophy et al., 2004; Hyvönen, 2008;Weisberg, 2006) seems to play a role in adaptive expertise.3) To some extend adaptive experts can adjust the complexity / 16
  17. 17. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE How useful education has been fortheir current position?1) Overall, formal education has notsatisfactorily provided resources for theircurrent work; instead, it has providedbasic general knowledge. Education islacking of important areas that areneeded in work life, such ascommunication, negotiation andpresentation, even writing and discussingskills were not adequately provided.2) Only exception was education inengineering, that has provided skills inproblem-solving and foreignlanguages, which are essential in expertwork. / 17
  18. 18. HOW TO LEARN TO BE AN ADAPTIVE EXPERT? Bransford, 2001; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986Help students to understand their own processes of knowing and problem-solving!
  19. 19. Normal learning does not provide expertise, but can leadto ”good enough” tai ”satisfying” level. Normal learning can reach satisfying basic level. Then itis possible to free mental resources in order to use themfor higher level activities (in knowledge construction, skillsand self-regulation)Formal education produces the users of experts, but notexperts! (Geisler, 1994)Formal education does not nesessarily produceexperts, rather experienced non-experts (Bereiter &Scardamalia, 1993)
  20. 20. Learning expertise is a path or journey of competence building, including also regressions (Alexander, 2003; Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1986; Lajoie, 2003) Learning expertise comprices of three overlapping dimensions:  knowledge construction (Bransford et al, 2000; Sawyer, 2006)  expert-like performance (eg., Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Tynjälä, 2007)  self-regulation (Boekaerts, Pintrich & Zeidner, 2000; Lin, Schwarz & Hatano, 2005) It is a transitional learning process where goals are set, monitored, reflected and scaffolded (Lajoie, 2003)
  21. 21. How to learn to be an adaptive expert? Bransford, 2001; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986Structured collaborative problem-solving method (Hyvönen & Impiö)1. To establish the basis for collaborative problem solving process: to get to know each others, to acknowledge mental resourses and to construct common understanding of the task and underlying theories (activating prior knowledge) To design virtual and face-to-face phases and technological tools to be used.2. To understand the context of the problem, and the problem and to define learning goals Problems are authentic cases from work life; they are new and ill- structured, where multiple solutions are possible The core of a problem should be analysed and defined Reseach-based approach3. To find possible solutions by constructing new knowledge based on the learning sciences, but adapted to authentic work life.4. To choose the solution and work (play) with it until the problem will be solved
  22. 22. How to learn to be an adaptive expert? Bransford, 2001; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986FEATURES OF THE COLLABORATIVE PROBLEM- SOLVING METHOD1. Problems are not as in work life, but real assignment from work life..2. Collaboration is enhanced all way long.3. Working takes place as expert teams by students, work life persons and other invited experts.4. Evaluation, monitoring, reflection and planning are central in the process.5. Playfulness and creativity are encouraged to free cognitive resources6. Autonomy in designing blended model to work and use technologies meaningfully (AC, Skype, GoogleDocs, mind maps etc.)  For rich interaction  For making thinking visible and audible  For knowledge construction7. Academic, research-based approach and understanding8. The outcomes as social innovations, such as novel models to carry on
  23. 23. How to learn to be an adaptive expert? Bransford, 2001; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986Examples of open problems by Elektrobit (EB) 20101. Open Source & Developer CommunitiesVarious developer communities are now important insoftware designing. Many software adaptations are basedon open source platform (eg.Linux, Symbian, Qt, Android, MeeGo), while variousinformal communities work as developers. One temporalquestion is how open source culture and joining indeveloper communities can be promoted?2. Motivation and managersManagers face questions and situations that are linked to Heiss, Janice J. (2007)motivation and flow of work. In order to help managers tocoach team members they need to understand, whatmotivation means and what affect to motivation. How toincrease understanding among coaching managers? Howmanager could help experts to maintain their motivationthrough work career?
  24. 24. How to learn to be an adaptive expert? Bransford, 2001; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986Examples of results for problems by Elektrobit (EB) 2010Posters and booklets
  25. 25. ReferencesAlexander, P. A. (2003). The development of expertise: The journey from acclimation to proficiency.Educational Researcher, 32(8): 10–14.Bereiter, C. & Scardamalia, M. (1993). Surpassing ourselves. An inquiry into the nature andimplications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company.Bransford, J. (2001). Thought on adaptive expertise. Retrieved June 15, 2008, from, J. D., Brown, A. L. & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, andschool. Washington: National Academy Press., L. D. & Spillane, J. P. (2008). Problem-solving processes of experts and typical schoolprincipals: A quantitative look. School Leadership & Management, 28(5), 435–468.Brophy, S., Hodge, L., & Bransford, J. (2004). Work in progress – Adaptive expertise: Beyond applyacademic knowledge. Frontiers in Education 3 (FIE): S1B/28-S1B/30,, M. T. H. (2006). Two approaches to the study of experts’ characteristics. In K. A. Ericsson, N.Charness, P. J. Feltovich & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and ExpertPerformance (pp. 21–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Chi, M.T.H., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem-solving. In R.J. Sternberg (Ed.),Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (pp. 7–75).Chi, M. T. H. & Koeske, R. D. (1983). Network representation of a child’s dinosaur knowledge.Developmental Psychology, 19(1): 29–39.Crawford, V, M, (2007), Adaptive expertise as knowledge building in science teacher’s problem solving.Paper accepted for the proceedings of the European Cognitive Science Conference. Delphi, Greece.Ericsson, K. A. (2006). An introduction to Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance: Itsdevelopment, organization, and content. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich & R. R.Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 3–19). Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
  26. 26. Hatano, G. & Inagagi, K. (1986). Two courses of expertise. In H. Stevenson, H. Azuma & K. Hakuta(Eds.), Child development and education in Japan (pp. 262–272). New York (N.Y.): Freeman.Hatano, G. & Oura, Y. (2003). Commentary: Reconceptualizing school learning usinginsight from expertise research. Educational Researcher, 32(8): 26–29.Hmelo-Silver, C., Marathe, S. & Liu, L. (2007). Fish swim, rocks sit, and lungs breathe: Expert-noviceunderstanding of complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 307 – 331.Holoyoak, 1991Johnsson, E. J. (1988). Expertise and decision under uncertainty: Performance and process. In T. H.Michele, H. Chi, R. Glaser & M. T. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. 209–228). Hillsdale (N.J.):Lawrence Erlbaum.Jonassen, D. H. (2007). What makes scientific problems difficult? In D. H. Jonassen (Ed.), Learning tosolve complex scientific problems (pp. 3–23).Lajoie, S. P. (2003). Transitions and trajectories for studies of expertise. Educational Researcher, 32(8):21–25.Lin, X., Schwartz, D.L., & Bransford, J. (2007). Intercultural adaptive expertise: Explicit and implicitlessons from Dr. Hatano. Human Development, 50, 65–72.Posner, M. J. (1988). Introduction: What is it to be an expert? In M.T.H. Chi, R. Glaser, & M.J.F. Farr(Eds.), The nature of expertise (pp. xxix–1). Hillsdale (N.J.): Lawrence Erlbaum .Tsui, A.B.M. (2009). Distinctive qualities of expert teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory andPractice, 15(4), 421–439.Weisberg, R. W. (2006). Modes of expertise in creative thinking: Evidence from case studies. In K. A.Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertiseand expert performance (Eds.), (pp. 761-787). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Zimmerman, B. J. (2006). Development of adaptation of expertise: The role of self-regulatory processesand beliefs. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridgehandbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 705–722). Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.Yates and Tschirhart (2007).