Search

In keeping with recent research findings in the areas of constructivist learning and affective mediation of complex behavior, the authors assert that the conduct of task analysis should reflect the holistic nature of this performance. Although a common practice in special education is for teachers to instruct parents on how to teach exceptional children at home, the differing values that teachers and parents hold regarding the “best practice” for the children often lead to strikingly different implementations of the same teaching approach. Using knowledge representation theory, we attempt to better understand how and why such discrepancies happen. In this paper we explore the theoretical dimensions of a modified task analysis model that purports to integrate cognitive-affective-behavioral dynamics underlying teacher and parental teaching behaviors. Applied in a qualitative study conducted in a special educational program in Taiwan, this model reveals the differences between teachers’ and mothers’ mental representations of teaching at the (a) conceptual orientation, (b) values, (c) reasoning, and (d) behavioral levels. With more applied research, we believe that this model will help trainers and trainees to reach a better understanding of the cognitive and psychological roots of complex value laden performance.

This article considers three aspects of the knowledge management (KM) literature that have the potential to enhance human performance technology (HPT) research and practice. First, we believe the recent attempt by economists to describe and quantify intellectual capital can help HPT to better evaluate and defend organizational expenditures/investments for performance improvement initiatives. Second, the emerging KM literature explores the linkages between information, learning and performance, provides a common point of intersection for our fields, and can enhance our analysis and implementation of information (as opposed to training) solutions as well as inform and expand our conceptual and theoretical understanding. Third, we have observed that both KM and HPT practitioners are increasingly concerned with the learning that takes place outside the confines of traditional formal training environments. We briefly review the electronic performance support systems literature from HPT and KM, noting the similarities in epistemology, design, and interventions. Finally, we highlight the KM research agenda and suggest related opportunities for HPT research.

Does the way instructions for carrying out elementary operations are presented affect the time required to complete those procedures, student’s critical thinking ability, and student’s final grade? This investigation sought answers by presenting prescriptions — or algorithms — in three ways to university students in an introductory laboratory-chemistry course. Differences in the effects of the three representation modes — flow charts, lists, and standard prose — were complex and changed over the 10 lab sessions. There was no evidence that representation mode affected either critical thinking ability or final grade.

The following case study has been severely edited due to space constraints. An effort was made to maintain the flavor of the case study, to ensure the results are presented and to mention the statistical procedures used. A complete report of the project is available from the authors. JBJ

Many questions remain to be answered about the role of individual differences in learning. In the area of mathematics learning, do spatial and general reasoning abilities interact with instructional treatment? This study extends a series of earlier studies examining the interaction between aptitudes and instructional treatment. One treatment was strong in verbal-pictorial-numeric content; the other treatment was strong in verbal-symbolic-numeric content. Interactions between instructional treatment and the aptitudes are reported.

If one is satisfied with present performance, development can legitimately be dismissed as unnecessary. On the other hand, if qualitative improvement is an objective, concern with development is by definition imperative. Both internal and external pressure places education in the second category (Schutz, 1970). The process of development may be regarded as an activity involving "the systematic use of scientific knowledge directed toward the production of useful materials, devices, systems or methods, including design and development of prototypes and processes" (National Science Foundation, 1965). Ins t ruct ional development is that same activity when it results in useful instructional materials, devices, systems, methods, prototypes, and processes. Specifically, instructional development is concerned with the design, validation, revision, dissemination, installation, operation, and evaluation of instructional products or systems. In all its phases, development is a decision process. From the total population of components which potentially comprise the ideal learning environment for a given learner and learning task, the developer makes his selections, testing them with actual learners. He performs a similar task with a multitudinous set of potential dissemination mechanisms, and with a set of plausible evaluation instruments, and so on

DEFINITION AND BRIEF HISTORY OF THE LEARNER ANALYSIS FUNCTION There are many structures or schemata that could be used to describe a complex phenomenon such as instructional development. In any description of instructional development there would necessarily be some misrepresentation of the reality. But in an adolescent profession, discrepancies in definition may be viewed as positive attributes (Davies & Schwen, 1972). The resulting professional controversies may create an environment for increased understanding and improved practice. It is in this spirit that the following perspective is offered.