Expertise in work life and education


Published on

Two types of expertise
Expertise in work life
Expertise in higher education: how to educate adaptive experts

Published in: Education, Career
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Strong faith that everything goes well
  • “People are dissimilar, which should be acknowledged”. Another group of problems deals with inadequate technical tools. Although many ICT tools are in use, there are still lack of tools and software that solve very compound problems. This is evident especially in very complex organizations with multiple processes and people in local and international contexts. The dilemma is that actual needs are exceptionally complicated, there is not yet any system invented to solve them. All in all knowledge management is a challengeDecision-making problems (Johnson, 1988; Jonassen, 2007) where stated in many cases. Experts at times have to make decisions without the necessary information. In such cases, they may take risks that could cost millions of Euros or theten people’s health. The question is how to enhance Edutool students’ decision-making skills, i.e. decision-making expertise already during their education? According to Yates and Tschirhart (2007) quality of decisions along with satisfying results of the actions in domain area should be acknowledged. The team is formed of people with relevant expertise in house construction, for instance architecture, legislation, economics and technologies. Each member in the team is highly educated and must have at least 20 years experience and evaluated as key persons before acceptance. The expert team works intensively trying to construct new knowledge and innovations, and also share tacit knowledge that is difficult to articulate and transfer. In order to succeed, participants should be able to conscious deliberation and reflection in their interaction. Such engagement involves making explicit the tacit knowledge that they have gained from experience (Tsui, 2009).
  • Her utterance reveals the fact that as ‘adaptive’ experts, individuals become better at perceiving the whole entity and hidden factors (see, Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993). ‘Routine’ experts know how to care for a coughing patient and prescribe medicines, and send the patient away without thinking about the whole person, and without considering more important factors behind the symptoms. In the beginning of the problem-solving episodes experts try to understand the problem, to problematize unproblematic (Glaser & Chi, 1988; Tsui, 2009). Laila’s case is important to notice here, because it tells about the cycle that integrates development of expertise and affordances of environment: individual’s expertise increases  her ability to perceive augments (e.g., Crawford, 2007); her ability to make decisions augments  environment can provide complexity in relation to her abilities and edge of competence. Medical domain is a complex multifaceted and knowledge-rich (Norman, Eva, Brooms, & Hamstra, 2007; Patel, Glaser, & Aroha, 2000), where problems are different than in many other domains. Theory-based reasoning and simultaneous reflecting on visible and non-visible, and measurable and non-measurable symptoms with various possible schemas (Barnes & Koslowsky, 2002; Patel et al., 2000) are intertwined in a situation.Hatano and Inagaki (1986) validate that perception by stating that playfulness is highly relevant factor to education, which influences whether individuals will engage in active experimentation (see also Lin, Schwartz & Bransford, 2007).
  • Expertise in work life and education

    1. 1. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE AND EDUCATION Pirkko Hyvönen Post doc research fellow University of Oulu Educational Sciences and Teacher Education LET (learning and Educational Technology Research Team)
    2. 2. CONTENT • Two types of expertise: routine and adaptive • Expertise in work life: what is it like in different fields? • Expertise in higher education: How to learn adaptive expertise?
    3. 3. YOUR TASK In the end of the lecture, draw conclusions. At least three main points. 11.11.2013 3
    4. 4. TYPES OF EXPERTISE Bransford, 2001; Bransford et al., 2000; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986 EXPERTS and EXPERIENCED NON-EXPERTS (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993) Career may conform merely to the routines, not advancing expertise and problemsolving. EXPERTS and novices Which kind of expertise is valued and aimed; and how to design learning processes, evaluations, lear ning outcomes and instructions. ROUTINE 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, metacognitive, social, and emotional strategies, where individuals abandon ‘routine’ problem-solving strategies. Adaptive experts are more flexible, inventive, spontaneous, encour aging 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!
    5. 5. ROUTINE EXPERTS: Acting and dealing with problems  Surface level perceptions  Do not see hidden messages, do not see problems  Weak skills to solve new problems, but can solve familiar problems.  See one suitable way to solve problems  Want to solve the problem quickly, and move to next tasks.  Sparce knowledge base -> may think quickly  Mainly procedural knowledge  When situation unexpectably changes, efficiency decreases, because they try to solve problem by imitating familiar solutions that are not suitable for the situation. Routine experts are competent to solve problems that are familiar and expected. Name some concrete situations or problemsolving processes in work life (choose domain), where routine expertise is useful.
    6. 6. Adaptive experts are competent to solve problems that are novel and unexpected Name some concrete situations or problem-solving processes in work life (choose domain), where adaptive expertise is useful. ADAPTIVE EXPERTS Holoyok: truly expert, Bransford: competencies plus  Make perceptions of problem and its context; dissect various different perspectives  See a problem as an opportunity to learn, learn in problem-solving and produce new knowledge same time  Classify, label, analyse problems  Perceive patterns and differencies  Start to organise problem around central concepts or idea  Ponder forward, theoretical reasoning  Dence knowledge base  thinking may take time  Think and identify novel solutions and possibilities  Strong conceptual understanding  Flexible in using knowledge  Evidence-based argumentation
    7. 7. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE (Hyvönen, Impiö & Järvelä, submitted) Expertise is commonly valued phenomena; it is also recognised as an essential competence in contemporary work life. Individuals need more and more tackle with problems and tasks that require adaptive expertise.
    8. 8. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE Informants (N=13) are experts in different formal domains On what ground they are considered experts?  They are in a leading and demanding position.  They are key persons in their field.  They are considered as more competent than other people in the field.  They have a long career and high education.  They are skillful and successful learners.  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, submitted) /
    9. 9. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE  How experts define expertise? 1) Expertise is future-oriented having a developmental and advancing perspective. They are expected to innovate new or re-new existing practice, processes and products. 2) Developmental perspective and performance is conjugated with need of constant learning and understanding things and processes (Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993). - Factual, procedural and selfregulative knowledge - Tacit knowledge - Multifaceted domains / 9
    10. 10. 3) Expertise is increasingly a social and collaborative phenomenon, which lay both opportunities and challenges for the path of 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 / 10
    11. 11. 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, sub; Tsui, 2009) / 11
    12. 12. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE  What are the problems like? Situations are always complex and difficult, and you can never be fully prepared for them. Problems in working life involves more than running through ‘routines’. 1) Understand people and interacting with them. Problems with people are related to communication, social interaction, shared understanding and emotional constrains, such as envy and hostile atmospheres, which tend to prevent developing innovations and also expertise. 2) Inadequate technical tools. Although many ICT tools are in use, there are still lack of tools and software that solve very compound problems. 3) Decision-making problems (Johnson, 1988; Jonassen, 2007): experts at times have to make decisions without the necessary information. 4) Sharing tacit knowledge 5) Dealing with time, motivation, prioritization and overlapping tasks / 12
    13. 13. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE  How do the experts perform ‘routine’ and ‘adaptive’ expertise in their work? “There is no such thing as routines in my work.” 1) Degree of routines declines, when complexity of work and experience of individual increases: “The more I have experience in this work, the less there are routine cases.” Cycle: ability to make perceptions and decisions augments  environment can provide complexity in relation to her abilities and edge of competence 2) 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 / 13
    14. 14. 11.11.2013 14
    15. 15. EXPERTISE IN WORK LIFE  How useful education has been for their current position? 1) Overall, formal education has not satisfactorily provided resources for their current work; instead, it has provided basic general knowledge. Education is lacking of important areas that are needed in work life, such as communication, negotiation and presentation, even writing and discussing skills were not adequately provided. 2) Only exception was education in engineering, that has provided skills in problem-solving and foreign languages, which are essential in expert work. / (Hyvönen, Impiö & Järvelä, 2010) 15
    16. 16. HOW TO LEARN ADAPTIVE EXPERTISE? Bransford, 2001; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986 1. Help students to understand their own processes of knowing and problem-solving! (Collaborative problems-solving method and expert profiles) 1. Help novices to expand knowledge and understanding in the areas of their interests (Islands of expertise)
    17. 17. Help students to understand their own processes of knowing and problem-solving! 1. EXPERT PROFILES  Monitoring, documenting and reflecting learning experiences, and writing expert profile along studies. (Bransford, 2001; Brophy, Hodge, & Bransford, 2004; Crawford, 2007; Hatano & Inagagi, 1986) 2. COLLABORATIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING METHOD     Theoretical basis is in expert studies, collaborative learning and self-regulated learning. Learning of adaptive expertise requires several cycles of problem-solving processes Problem-solving processes are long-lasting Problem-solving includes knowledge construction, self-regulation and expert performance
    18. 18. COLLABORATIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING METHOD Problems are authentic cases from work life; they are not as in work life, but real assignments are new for the individuals are open: ill-structured and messy, where multiple solutions are possible.
    19. 19. Examples of open problems Elektrobit (EB) 2010 (Six different open problems) 1. Open Source & Developer Communities Various developer communities are now important in software designing. Many software adaptations are based on open source platform (eg. Linux, Symbian, Qt, Android, MeeGo), while various informal communities work as developers. One temporal question is how open source culture and joining in developer communities can be promoted? Heiss, Janice J. (2007) 2. Motivation and managers Managers face questions and situations that are linked to motivation and flow of work. In order to help managers to coach team members they need to understand, what motivation means and what affect to motivation. How to increase understanding among coaching managers? How manager could help experts to maintain their motivation through work career?
    20. 20. Business Kitchen (2012) Environment for creative collaboration was needed. Pudasjärvi (2009) Pudasjärvi is sparcely populated municipal, where politicians decided to close many of the schools. That caused even 2-hours bus trip for school children to get from home to the nearest school.
    21. 21. COLLABORATIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING METHOD Approaching the problem ① What is the core of the problem? Explore, learn about the problem; analyse and define it. ② What is the context of the problem? You need to understand the context of the problem. Find information adequately. ③ What do you need to know about the problem? Learn more about the problem – core concepts, reseach-based approach. Useful questions: What do you know about the problem and what more you need to know/define in order to solve the challenge? (Brophy et al., 2004) How do you know what you know? (Explaining) (Calin, Jagerman, & Ratner, 2005) Is some previous situation similar to this? What is common? Explain why it works. What are the next steps: goals and strategies?
    22. 22. 2 1 3 6 4 5 11.11.2013 22
    23. 23. 1. GROUP FORMATION Common grounding - Knowing each others - Strengths of the groups - Norms and policies Creative collaboration: Athmosphere: egual, thrustworthy Power-relations: not disturbing by causing anxiety or fear Expert - Socio-emotional challenges - Commitment, participatio n - Recognise expertise 11/11/2013 23
    24. 24. 2. NEED / PROBLEM - Explore widely problem space: discuss and analyse various needs/challenges/problems, where new solutions, change, or processes are needed - Use various brainstorming methods: shared drawing, maps etc. - Allow playfulness and creativity: atypical thinking, funny ideas, weird associations - Creative collaboration: creativity/playfulness integrated to analytical and practical thinking 11/11/2013 Expert - Perceptions of context and problem - Various perspective - Hypotheses - Organisation of elements of problem around central concepts - Categorisation of knowledge - Decisions and groundings for them 24
    25. 25. 3. DEFINING THE PROBLEM / GOAL SETTING - After analysing and understanding the problem space, group defines exactly the problem, for which they start to look for solutions. Various hypotheses will be discussed. - Transfer: what we already know from previous experiences? - Group states aims and actions on how to proceed in order to find solutions. 11/11/2013 Expert - What we already know about the problem? - What perspectives are important to explore? - What resources we need, what kind of expertise we need to work with us? - How this problemsolving case resembles previous experiences of problem-solving cases? - How do we proceed from now? 25
    26. 26. 4. UNDERSTANDING and DESCRIBING THE CONTEXT - Group looks for information about the context using different recourses, eg., scientific articles, other documents and communities. - They deal and construct knowledge together. Expert - Distinguishes relevant knowledge from nonrelevant. - Monitor and reflect constantly: actions, goals, socioemotional climate, understanding 11/11/2013 26
    27. 27. 5. BUILDING NEW SOLUTION and DEFINING NEW OPERATIONS MODEL - Group keeps on looking for relevant knowledge in order to find the best solution to the problem at hand. Earlier studies, discussions with other experts (transferable knowledge about similar problems). Ponder causative relations, test various alternatives, use different Expert methods. - Uses research-based methods: adopts - newest knowledge about how people learn. Takes risks, be creative and innovative. Combines theory with practice. - - 11/11/2013 Adapts to changing situations. Uses various strategies, methods and approaches Uses various recourses Constructs new knowledge. 27
    28. 28. 6. DISPLAYING RESULTS Expert - “Answers” for the problem - Groundings Photo: N. Impiö 11/11/2013 28
    29. 29. Examples of results for problems by Elektrobit (EB) 2010 Posters and booklets
    30. 30. CONCLUSIONS Drawn by the students Adaptive and routine expertise are two types of expertise. They approach and define problems differentetly, adaptive experts more in detail. Adaptive experts look forward and backwards in their learning. Adaptive experts see problems as challenges. In work life, tools for collaborative learning are needed. Combining playfulness with analytical and critical thinking is important. Creativity is important in problem-solving. The only ’routine’ for adaptive experts is a continuous change of situations. Being experienced does not necessasarily mean being an expertise. 11.11.2013 30
    31. 31. THANK YOU! 11.11.2013 31
    32. 32. References Alexander, 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 and implications of expertise. Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company. Bransford, J. (2001). Thought on adaptive expertise. Retrieved June 15, 2008, from Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L. & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.) (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, and school. Washington: National Academy Press. Brenninkmeyer, L. D. & Spillane, J. P. (2008). Problem-solving processes of experts and typical school principals: A quantitative look. School Leadership & Management, 28(5), 435–468. Brophy, S., Hodge, L., & Bransford, J. (2004). Work in progress – Adaptive expertise: Beyond apply academic knowledge. Frontiers in Education 3 (FIE): S1B/28S1B/30, Chi, 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 Expert Performance (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: Its development, 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.
    33. 33. 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 using insight 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-novice understanding of complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 16(3), 307 – 331. Holoyoak, 1991 Johnsson, 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 to solve 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 implicit lessons 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 and Practice, 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 expertise and expert performance (Eds.), (pp. 761-787). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zimmerman, B. J. (2006). Development of adaptation of expertise: The role of self-regulatory processes and beliefs. In K. A. Ericsson, N. Charness, P. J. Feltovich & R. R. Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 705–722). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Yates and Tschirhart (2007).