Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Toward functional expertise through formal education: identifying an opportunity for higher education

  • Development Article
  • Published:
Educational Technology Research and Development Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we synthesize research on the nature and development of expertise to propose a developmental model that describes four main areas of expert knowledge: procedural, conditional, and conceptual knowledge, along with knowledge generation. We propose that these types of expert knowledge map onto and promote the development of four types of expert performance: procedural, functional, adaptive, and generative expertise. Further, we propose that expertise develops in terms of a fluency dimension consisting of execution, repertoire, and automaticity. We propose that this model highlights a potential opportunity for educators and instructional designers to target the appropriate level of expertise through teaching specific knowledge types in progression and providing practice and feedback to improve fluency. At a minimum, graduates would possess a degree of functional fluency and be better able to enter the workforce. Being aware of the need, and also knowing how, to conditionalize their own knowledge should also accelerate their continued acquisition of expertise throughout their career.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, P. A. (2003). The development of expertise: The journey from acclimation to proficiency. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 10–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, P. A. (2005). Teaching towards expertise. In P. Tomlinson, J. Dockrell, & P. Winne (Eds.), British Journal of Educational Psychology monograph series II: Psychological aspects of education—Current trends: Vol. 3. Pedagogy—Teaching for learning (pp. 29–45). Leicester: British Psychological Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Amolloh, O. P., Lilian, G. K., & Wanjiru, K. G. (2018). Experiential learning, conditional knowledge and professional development at University of Nairobi, Kenya—focusing on preparedness for teaching practice. International Education Studies, 11(7), 125–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., et al. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives abridged edition. White Plains, NY: Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baroody, A. J., Feil, Y., & Johnson, A. R. (2007). An alternative reconceptualization of procedural and conceptual knowledge. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38(2), 115–131. https://doi.org/10.2307/30034952.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. (2003). Teaching for quality learning at university (2nd ed.). Maidenhead, Berkshire: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohle Carbonell, K., Stalmeijer, R. E., Könings, K. D., Segers, M., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2014). How experts deal with novel situations: A review of adaptive expertise. Educational Research Review, 12, 14–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bol, L., & Garner, J. K. (2011). Challenges in supporting self-regulation in distance education environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 23(2–3), 104–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bransford, J., Brown, A., Cocking, R., & Center, E. R. I. (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school (2nd ed.). Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, J. S., Goodnow, J., & Austin, G. A. (1956). A study of thinking. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Catrambone, R. (2011). Task analysis by problem solving (TAPS): Uncovering expert knowledge to develop high-quality instructional materials and training. Paper presented at the Learning and Technology Symposium, Columbus, GA.

  • Chi, M. T., Glaser, R. E., & Farr, M. (1988). The nature of expertise. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chi, M. T., Glaser, R., & Rees, E. (1982). Expertise in problem solving. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Advances in the psychology of human intelligence (Vol. 1, pp. 7–75). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Colhon, M., & Tandareanu, N. (2010). The inference mechanism in conditional schemas. Annals of the University of Craiova-Mathematics and Computer Science Series, 37(1), 55–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crawford, V. M., Schlager, M., Toyama, Y., Riel, M., & Vahey, P. (2005). Characterizing adaptive expertise in science teaching. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Conference, Montreal, Canada.

  • Dreyfus, H. L., & Dreyfus, S. E. (2008). Beyond expertise: Some preliminary thoughts on mastery. In K. Nielsen (Ed.), A qualitative stance; Essays in honor of Steiner Kvale (pp. 113–124). Aarhus: Aarhus University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durso, F. T., Dattel, A. R., & Pop, V. L. (2018). Expertise and transportation. In K. A. Ericsson, R. R. Hoffman, A. Kozbelt, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 356–371). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elvira, Q., Imants, J., Dankbaar, B., & Segers, M. (2017). Designing education for professional expertise development. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 61(2), 187–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endsley, M. R. (2018). Expertise and situation awareness. In K. A. Ericsson, R. R. Hoffman, A. Kozbelt, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 633–651). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2014). Expertise. Current Biology, 24(11), R508–R510.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2017). Expertise and individual differences: The search for the structure and acquisition of experts’ superior performance. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 8(1–2), e1382. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2018a). The differential influence of experience, practice, and deliberate practice on the development of superior individual performance of experts. In K. A. Ericsson, R. R. Hoffman, A. Kozbelt, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 745–769). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2018b). An introduction to the second edition of The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performance: Its development, organization, and content. In K. A. Ericsson, R. R. Hoffman, A. Kozbelt, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 3–20). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, K. A. (2018c). Superior working memory in experts. In K. A. Ericsson, R. R. Hoffman, A. Kozbelt, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 745–769). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fadde, P. J. (2009). Instructional design for advanced learners: Training recognition skills to hasten expertise. Educational Technology Research and Development, 57(3), 359–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-007-9046-5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feltovich, P. J., Prietula, M. J., & Ericsson, K. A. (2018). Studies of expertise from psychological perspectives: Historical foundations and recurrent themes. In K. A. Ericsson, R. R. Hoffman, A. Kozbelt, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 59–83). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garikano, X., Garmendia, M., Manso, A. P., & Solaberrieta, E. (2019). Strategic knowledge-based approach for CAD modelling learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(4), 947–959. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9472-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gobet, F. (2005). Chunking models of expertise: Implications for education. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19(2), 183–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gobet, F., & Charness, N. (2018). Expertise in chess. In K. A. Ericsson, R. R. Hoffman, A. Kozbelt, & A. M. Williams (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (2nd ed., pp. 597–615). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, M., & Guo, P. J. (2015). Codepourri: Creating visual coding tutorials using a volunteer crowd of learners. Paper presented at the 2015 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-centric Computing (VL/HCC).

  • Hatano, G. (1988). Social and motivational bases for mathematical understanding. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 1988(41), 55–70. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219884105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1984). Two courses of expertise. Research and Clinical Center for Child Development Annual Report, 6, 27–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatano, G., & Oura, Y. (2003). Commentary: Reconceptualizing school learning using insight from expertise research. Educational Researcher, 32(8), 26–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, R. R. (1998). How can expertise be defined? Implications of research from cognitive psychology. In R. Williams, W. Faulkner, & J. Fleck (Eds.), Exploring Expertise (pp. 81–100). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoffman, R. R. (2016). How can expertise be defined? Implications of research from cognitive psychology. In J. Fleck, W. Faulkner, & R. Williams (Eds.), Exploring expertise: Issues and perspectives (pp. 81–99). London: Macmillan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hovious, A. (2016). Reality check revisited: Sage on the stage vs. guide on the side. Retrieved May 1, 2020 from https://designerlibrarian.wordpress.com/tag/conditional-knowledge/

  • Kallio, H., Virta, K., & Kallio, M. (2018). Modelling the components of metacognitive awareness. International Journal of Educational Psychology, 7(2), 94–122.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, G. A. (1955/1963). Theory of personality: The psychology of personal constructs. New York: WW Norton & Company.

  • Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Le Maistre, C. (1998). What is an expert instructional designer? Evidence of expert performance during formative evaluation. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(3), 21–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, S. P. (1995). Schemas in problem solving. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCormick, R. (1997). Conceptual and procedural knowledge. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 7(1–2), 141–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mussa-Ivaldi, F. A., & Solla, S. A. (2004). Neural primitives for motion control. IEEE Journal of Oceanic Engineering, 29(3), 640–650.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nathan, M. J., Koedinger, K. R., & Alibali, M. W. (2001). Expert blind spot: When content knowledge eclipses pedagogical content knowledge. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on Cognitive Science, Beijing, China.

  • Nathan, M. J., & Petrosino, A. J. (2003). Expert blind spot among preservice teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 40(4), 905–928.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novick, L. R. (1992). The role of expertise in solving arithmetic and algebra word problems by analogy. In J. I. D. Campbell (Ed.), Advances in psychology (Vol. 91, pp. 155–188). Amsterdam: Elsevier B.V.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostermann, A., Leuders, T., & Nückles, M. (2018). Improving the judgment of task difficulties: Prospective teachers’ diagnostic competence in the area of functions and graphs. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 21(6), 579–605. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-017-9369-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plummer, K., Swan, R. H., & Lush, N. (2017). Introduction to decision-based learning. Paper presented at the 11th International Technology, Education and Development Conference, Valencia, Spain.

  • Raymond, K. M. (2019). First-year secondary mathematics teachers’ metacognitive knowledge of communication activities. Investigations in Mathematics Learning, 11(3), 167–179.

    Google Scholar 

  • Renkl, A., & Mandl, H. (1996). Inert knowledge: Analyses and remedies. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittle-Johnson, B., & Schneider, M. (2015). Developing conceptual and procedural knowledge of mathematics. In R. C. Kadosh & A. Dowker (Eds.), Oxford handbook of numerical cognition (pp. 1118–1134). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosch, E. (1999). Principles of categorization. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: Core readings (pp. 189–206). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sansom, R. L., Suh, E., & Plummer, K. J. (2019). Decision-based learning:″If I just knew which equation to use, I know I could solve this problem!″. Journal of Chemical Education, 96(3), 445–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaal, S. (1999). Is imitation learning the route to humanoid robots? Trends in Cognitive Science, 3(6), 233–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schaal, S. (2006). Dynamic movement primitives: A framework for motor control in humans and humanoid robotics. In H. Kimura, K. Tsuchiya, A. Ishiguro, & H. Witte (Eds.), Adaptive motion of animals and machines (pp. 261–280). Tokyo: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schack, T. (2004). The cognitive architecture of complex movement. International Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 2, 403–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidmaier, R., Eiber, S., Ebersbach, R., Schiller, M., Hege, I., Holzer, M., et al. (2013). Learning the facts in medical school is not enough: Which factors predict successful application of procedural knowledge in a laboratory setting? BMC Medical Education, 13(1), 28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schraw, G. (2001). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction (pp. 3–16). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stark, R., Kopp, V., & Fischer, M. R. (2011). Case-based learning with worked examples in complex domains: Two experimental studies in undergraduate medical education. Learning and Instruction, 21(1), 22–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, R. J. (1999). Intelligence as developing expertise. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 24(4), 359–375. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1998.0998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sugiharto, B., Corebima, A. D., & Susilo, H. (2018). A comparison of types of knowledge of cognition of preservice biology teachers. Paper presented at the Asia-Pacific Forum on Science Learning & Teaching.

  • Svihla, V. (2019). Design thinking and agile design. In R. E. West (Ed.), Foundations of learning and instructional design technology: edtechbooks.org. Retrieved May 1, 2020 from https://edtechbooks.org/lidtfoundations/design_thinking_and_agile_design.

  • Swan, R. H. (2008). Deriving operational principles for the design of engaging learning experiences. (Doctoral Dissertation), Brigham Young University, Provo. Retrieved May 1, 2020 from https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/1829/

  • Swan, R. H. (2010). Feedforward as an essential active principle of engagement in computer games. In R. Van Eck (Ed.), Gaming and cognition: Theories and practice from the learning sciences (pp. 1–375). Hershey: IGI Global.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sweller, J. (2011). Cognitive load theory. In J. P. Mestre & B. H. Ross (Eds.), Psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 55, pp. 37–76). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turns, S. R., & Van Meter, P. N. (2011). Applying knowledge from educational psychology and cognitive science to a first course in thermodynamics. Paper presented at the American Society for Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition, Vancouver, Canada.

  • Tynjälä, P., Nuutinen, A., Eteläpelto, A., Kirjonen, J., & Remes, P. (1997). The acquisition of professional expertise—A challenge for educational research. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 41(3–4), 475–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/0031383970410318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uesaka, Y., & Manalo, E. (2006). Active comparison as a means of promoting the development of abstract conditional knowledge and appropriate choice of diagrams in math word problem solving. Paper presented at the International Conference on Theory and Application of Diagrams, Berlin, Heidelberg.

  • Van Merriënboer, J. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Kester, L. (2003). Taking the load off a learner's mind: Instructional design for complex learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 5–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, A. (2007). An exploration of Biggs’ constructive alignment in the context of work-based learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 32(1), 79–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walsh, A., & Kotzee, B. (2010). Reconciling ‘graduateness’ and work-based learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 4–1, 36–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education and other essays. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for supervision and curriculum development.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, X., Lee, Y., Simon, H. A., & Zhu, D. (1996). Cue recognition and cue elaboration in learning from examples. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 93(3), 1346–1351.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Brigham Young University, Provo, UT, USA

    Richard H. Swan, Kenneth J. Plummer & Richard E. West

Authors
  1. Richard H. Swan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kenneth J. Plummer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Richard E. West
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard E. West.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors claim no conflict of interest in this work, nor human subjects research. This paper has not been previously submitted or published in other locations.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Swan, R.H., Plummer, K.J. & West, R.E. Toward functional expertise through formal education: identifying an opportunity for higher education. Education Tech Research Dev 68, 2551–2568 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09778-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-020-09778-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation