Graham Attwell 2 (ga.cred@dial.pipex.com)
Sun, 16 May 1999 17:08:18 +0100
Date: Sun, 16 May 1999 17:08:18 +0100 From: Graham Attwell 2 <ga.cred@dial.pipex.com> Subject: (no subject)
List address to send message to everyone: ifets-discuss@LISTSERV.READADP.COM
Details of current discussion: http://ifets.gmd.de/discuss.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Nicholas - in common with a number of contributors brings together
entry level learners, vocational learning and behaviouralist pedagogies.
This approach stems from traditional rationalistic approaches to
knowledge - from the idea that things behave in predictable ways and
that there is a given body of knowledge that can be learned. Moreover it
is based on a traditional and outmoded hierarchical taxonomy of
knowledge - assuming that higher levels of learning are concerned with
ideas - and therefore lend themselves to constructivist pedagogic
approaches - whilst vocational learning - or learning about doing things
- are lower level learning activities and require lower levels of
knowledge. This can be traced back to the Renaissance with the
separation of thinking from doing. It could be argued that the great pre
Renaissance thinkers and doings - Da Vinci etc. - did not make such a
distinction. The changes taking place in our society today render such a
divide redundant. I would go further and say that the Universities are a
bulwark against modernism - against new and challenging taxonomies and
usage of knowledge.
Our society today requires applied knowledge - higher levels of
knowledge and thinking which can be applied in new and unpredictable
situations. German pedagogists have called this Work Process Knowledge.
Other researchers in vocational education and training have developed
the idea of cognitive apprenticeship.
I am reproducing here a short part of a recent paper by myself and Alan
Brown on this subject. If readers would like the full paper please do
contact me.
This debate has important repercussion for how we implement ICTs for
learning - especially in the field of education and training.
Different types of knowledge
When thinking about knowledge development in a richer way, it may be
useful to distinguish between different types of knowledge. Lundvall and
Johnson (1994) identify four different kinds of knowledge, each
requiring different types of mastery: know-what, know-why, know-how, and
know-who.
Know-what refers to knowledge about `facts': it can be considered as
equivalent to what is normally called information and related to the
knowledge `corpus' that each category of experts must possess.
Know-why refers to scientific knowledge, influencing technological
development and the pace and characteristics of its applications in
industries of every kind.
Also in this case, knowledge production and reproduction take place
within organised processes, such as university teaching, scientific
research, specialised personnel recruiting, and so on.
Know-how refers to the capability to operate skillfully in different
contexts (e.g. judging the market prospects for a new product, operating
a machine tool, etc.).
Know-how is typically developed at the individual level, but its
importance is evident also if one considers degree of co-operation
taking place within organisations and even at the inter-organisational
level (for instance, the formation of industrial networks is largely due
to the need for firms to be able to share and combine elements of
know-how).
Know-who is another kind of knowledge which is becoming increasingly
important, referring to a mix of different kinds of skills, in
particular the social skills, allowing the access and use of knowledge
possessed by someone else, often through a combination of professional
and personal networks (Eraut et al, 1998).
Vickstroem and Normann (1994) argue a similar line in their attempt to
develop a new perspective of corporate transformation. They distinguish:
information, skill (or know-how), explanation, and understanding.
Information is knowledge of an objective kind whose importance is mainly
related to its `factual' nature but is not limited to that. For
instance, the addition of new information about a certain topic can
modify the pattern in which this topic was conceived letting a new
intellectual structure emerge. Skill or know-how, unlike information, is
embedded in individuals, as they are able to behave purposively in a
particular situation in order to achieve a certain result. Explanation
refers to scientific knowledge, it is not person-based and can be found
in articles, textbooks, and so on. Explanatory knowledge very often
provides the basis for problem-solving activities. Understanding is the
most profound form of knowledge, arising when principles and connections
are recognised.
Understanding is thus embedded in individuals and is central to the
creation of new knowledge.
Each kind of knowledge is characterised by different channels through
which learning takes place. The easiest cases are those of know-what
and know-why, that can be obtained through the typical channels of
knowledge acquisition (reading books, attending lectures, accessing data
bases), while the other two categories are rooted primarily in practical
experience and are more problematic insofar as they require the
availability of informal social channels. They are also the types of
knowledge upon which dynamic organisations depend and companies are
particularly interested in whether new recruits will be able to
contribute to the creation and development of such forms of knowledge.
Apprenticeship and other forms of VET which involve on the job learning
are fundamental channels for acquiring know-how knowledge: they
represent the most important way for skilling newcomers in an
organisation, but these protracted processes of learning by doing are
also frequently the responsibility of those who are considered the
experts in an organisation, capable of above-average performance.
Simulations are sometimes used as shortcuts for reproducing the many
aspects of the know-how acquisition available in real situations.
Know-who too - as Lundvall and Johnson (1994) point out - is socially
embedded knowledge which cannot easily be transferred through formal
channels of information.
It is learned in social practices and through participation in
particular networks (like those taking place in the professional
communities giving the participants access to information bartering with
professional colleagues), although some of it can be learned in
specialised educational environments."
Best wishes
Graham Attwell
Pontydysgu
---------------------------------------------------------
Forum website: http://ifets.gmd.de/
Forum's contact person: kinshuk@ieee.org
Info on Join/Leave List: http://ifets.gmd.de/maillist.html
---------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Sun 16 May 1999 - 18:45:39 MET DST