Explanation modelling and competence management

1
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
• ioan.rosca_at_licef.teluq.uquam.ca
• INSCIT2006, Merida, 27 October 2006

2
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
3
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)

• concept identification reference systems and
  semantic coordinates (UKL -universal knowledge
  locator)
• (1a) kdNk, 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, k2kn)

• 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 MB 0/1
• (2d) cSb(p,K)S,B,bk1,bk2.bkn where bki0/1 if
  p knows/doesnt know ki

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)
4
2 From learning to explanation
5
3 Modeling explanations (www.ioanrosca.com/educati
e/these)
6
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 "knowledgeextending 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/transformatio
  n, 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.

7
5 Orientations and propositions

• 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.

• Competence conditions and matching services for
  resource retrieval or concretisation
• (3a) (c1 lt c2 si m1ltm2), usable for selecting
  resources on emergent mode
• (3b) c(p/r,k)gtc(a/i,k), for concretisations of
  abstract actor a by participants p on planned
  mode
• (3c1) e1ltcltolte2 or d1ltcltoltd2 a support
  element is sufficient
• (3c2) e1ltcltd1lte2ltoltd2 the assistant can lead
  the learner in the document efficiency range

8
6 Referencing and retrieving for emergent
activities
9
7 Adapting orchestrations
10
8 Competence optimization