Explanation modelling and competence management
Ioan Rosca, PhD. in educational technology telecommunication, computer, information and instructional systems engineer
researcher and conceptual architect at LICEF, Teleuniversity, Montréal
INSCIT’2006, Merida, 27 October 2006
Summary
1 From information to knowledge: competences
2 From learning to explanation as competence operators
3 Difficulties in modeling explanations
4 Principle observations about the explanation phenomena
5 Consequences :pedagogical competences, posture indexation, matching services
6 Competence indexation for the emergent mode
7 Concretization for adapting orchestration mode
8 Competence optimization problems
1 Information, knowledge, competence• from information to knowledge embodied in persons and reflected in documents- involved in
material-cognitive processes
• from live knowledge to reified “concept spaces”; natural language discourses and structured knowledge domains (text and hypertext collections, thesaurus and dictionaries, classifications, relational databases, declarative languages, notional graphs, ontologies)
• competences: descriptions of someone (p) relation (R) relative to concepts (k) :(2a) cR(p,k)=[MR,m(MR)], MR- mastering scale for R (0-1, 0-10, 0-100, A-F etc.) ; m(MR)-measure on this scale (2b) cR[](p,k)= [R, M, mr1, mr2…..]– in the case of vectors of relations R[], as Bloom “abilities”:
Rbloom[]= [observeK, understandK, applyK, analyseK, synthesiseK, evaluateK] (2c) cS(p,K) = [S(k1, ….kn), M, mk1, mk2….mkn]- for decomposed knowledge kS,
for example for a binary scale M=B= 0/1:(2d) cSb(p,K)=[S,B,bk1,bk2….bkn] where bki=0/1 if p knows/doesn’t know ki
• concept identification: reference systems and semantic coordinates (UKL -universal knowledge locator) (1a) kd=[Nk, d(Nk), a(d)] (Nk organisation norm, d(Nk) domain organised on Nk norm, a(d) internal address of k in d)(1b) kD= [kd1, kd2…] - multi-referenced knowledge
•concept refinement (decomposition) : notional subspace S organised on a norm Ns:(1c) kS= [Ns, s(k1, k2…kn)]
For the general case (2e) cRS(p,k)=)= [M, m(ri,kj) R, S] or , using some global competence calculus formulas:(2f) c(p,k)=[M,m(M)]=f (m(r1),m(r2)…)=g (m(k1),m(k2)…)=h( m(ri,kj) R, S)
2 From learning to explanation
learning topologies
participate consultdialog
CiCf
Ci,Cf
consult
a simple model for explanation
NoviceExpert
Instrument
Subject
12
3
4
56
7
89
1011
12
13 14
15
i
f
ka kb kc kd ke
M
0%
100%
learning: activities as competence operators i-f
mastershipmeasured
competences
c1ic1f
explain
Ci?Cf?
c2ic2f
explain
c3ic3f
explain
effects of explanationon various learners
kk1
k2 k3
k1.1k1.2
knowledgerefining
competences
i
k1.3
k1.3.1 k1.3.2k3.1 k3.2
f
3 Modeling explanations (www.ioanrosca.com/educatie/these)
?explanation
unitarymodel
aspect space
sociology, human development studies
computers, telecommunications
methodology, epistemology
sciences of education
information science
diagrams
semiotics
rhetoric
multimedia
action,negotiation
system theory
logics
ITS, AI, CBT, CAL, CSCL, CSCW, DSS
psychology and cognitive science
communication science
language
paradigmslanguage
interestscriteria
view filters
involved domains
methods
ARITM, CPElectro, MAT (training and education experiences- Romania)
Metamorph, Stereopresentation (adaptable multimedia composition)
NOVEX,SAFARI (expert- computer- novice action and decision sharing)
NUAC(services management
on INTERNET)
TELOS (facilitating semantic and technical interoperation between knowledge management sites)
MOT,GEFO (orchestrating pedagogical procedures)
personal projects
ADISA (planning instructional systems)
EASE (retrieval and matching)
4 Principles • Bipolarity of explanation. Explanation phenomenon is based on the cognitive consonance lived by a
human pair. Synchronous or asynchronous, sonorous, textual or graphical, direct or remote, realized through communication, resource sharing or co-operation, exploiting the physical interaction through objects and the innate or cultivated human communication capacities (language etc.)- the explicative relationship between an "expert" and a "novice" is essentially a bipolar phenomenon, based on the collaboration between two free-will centres .
• Knowledge as a communicational system. We obtain a systemic meaning of "knowledge“extending the phenomenology vision about the unity of the (observed object – observing subject) pair, taking into account the shared character of knowledge and including, in a single whole, the represented subject, the representing symbol and the human pair using the representation to communicate on the subject.
• Person in society: cognitive duality. The individual cognitive metabolism interferes with that of the community- in which it is "situated". The communication between two persons can be seen as a relation between two distinct cognitive systems, but also as a manifestation of the cognitive physiology of the species' system, ensuring spiritual evolution, through knowledge propagation.
• Structure/process duality: existence/transformation, adaptation/evolution, ontogenesis/phylogenesis. The physical and conceptual entities, tied by relationships, create systemic units and determine their behavior (physiology). Conversely, the physical and cognitive processes sediment structures (entities and relations). A complete systemic vision must reveal the existence-becoming duality, using "structures in processes" models.
• Conservation and change: circular relationships between "model" and "reality". The reality must be observed and understood (modeled)- even if we wish to conserve it. A reciprocal influences loop is blend between "reality" and "model" (accentuated- when the phenomena's "model" is used as an instrument by the participants)- with major behavioral consequences. A such "reality-model" system has its global physiology.
5 Orientations and propositions
• Competence conditions and matching services for resource retrieval or concretisation
(3a) (c1 <= c2 si m1<=m2), usable for selecting resources on emergent mode
(3b) c(p/r,k)>=c(a/i,k), for concretisations of abstract actor a by participants p on planned mode
(3c1) e1<=c<o<=e2 or d1<=c<o<=d2 – a support element is sufficient
(3c2) e1<c<d1<e2<o<=d2 – the assistant can lead the learner in the document efficiency range
• The wide specter of "assistance". The concept of "assistance" - covers a large range of significations ("information“, "clarifications“, “guiding”, “teaching”, ”supporting”, "equipping“ etc.) The advanced "support" systems allow the combination of these possibilities.
• Distributed intelligence and synaptic tele-informational systems. The intrinsic qualities of a human assistant (appropriate, available and well-disposed) are difficult to mechanize. The posture of information "emitter" is multipliable (through the diffusion of the conceiver's "message"), but that of a learner "listener" or interactive partner- much harder. But prior to cooperating or communicating, the partners must equip, find and agree themselves. The synaptic "matching" infrastructure, based on the computer network, can provide contact, contract and management services, forming a "synaptic" (matching) infrastructure for the collective brain's physiology
• Explicative capacities and pedagogical indexation. In order to observe the competence equilibrium around pedagogical operations, I have organised the competences space of a person P on "postures": (knowK, aimK, explainK(x,y), describeK(x,y), recommendK(x,y), evaluateK(x,y))- where the parenthesis show a predicate depending on the detained (x) or aimed (y) "mastering level" of the person to which P could explain directly (transmit by a document, evaluate, recommend etc) the knowledge k. The indexation of explicative documents poses similar problems to that of referencing support persons. They can be partially considered the author's representative towards the expected user (minus the interactivity limitations). That is why I have also characterises their explicative potential by (c1,c2) increases.
exp
descriptors
k
1 declareknowledge
rec
Knowledgereferencesystem
K
descriptors
o
Operations
rec
1 declareexplicativepotential
6 Referencing and retrieving for emergent activities
descripteurs
d
1 declareexplicativepotential
rec
pedDocuments
4 react
descriptors
p
Participants
1 declareexplicativecompetence
rec
recordset
searchengine
2 find, choose
3 use (index)
4 react
record
recordset
searchengine
record
2 find,choose
3 use (dialog)
4 react
recordset
searchengine
record
2 find,choose
3 use (participate)
4 react
recordset
searchengine
record
2 find,choose
3 use (consult)
use
ob2ob1 ob3o1 o2
p2
a primary procedure
p1
rsps
persons
objectsoperations
supportresource support person
b abstract procedure model
o1i1 i2
is1
o2 i3
as2
a1 a2
composemodel
author Functioneditor
function operationsdirectoriesabstract actors
abstractinstruments
adapter
concretiseelements
Functionadaptor
resources repositories
person directories
knowledge reference system
o1
is1
o2
as2
a1 a2
ob x
rs x ps x c model with concretised elements
user
finds andexecutes
Functionexecutor
e1
is1
e2
as2
a1 a2
d secondary procedure based on function execution
ob x
rs x ps x
ob y ob z
executedoperation
px py
analyst
Functionanalyser
recordreact
e meta-procedure of functional cycle
7 Adapting orchestrations
O
O
E
a state changesfor Toedatopology
O
D
E
A
d a
e
o
D
E
A
d a
e
O
D
E
A
e
O
D
E
A
a
e
O
D
E
A
d
e
O
D
E
A
d a
O
D
E
A
O
D
E
A
a
O
D
E
A
d
O
E
ed n
c1 c2
?
f2
R
b global allocationproblem
f1
8 Competence optimization
Recommended
