Search results

Concept maps have been described as a valuable tool for exploring curriculum knowledge. However, less attention has been given to the use of them to visualise contested and tacit knowledge, i.e. the values and perceptions of teachers that underpin their practice. This paper aims to explore the use of concept mapping to uncover academics’ views and help them articulate their perspectives within the framework provided by the concepts of pedagogic frailty and resilience in a collaborative environment.

Participants were a group of five colleagues within a Biochemical Science Department, working on the development of a new undergraduate curriculum. A qualitative single-case study was conducted to get some insights on how concept mapping might scaffold each step of the collaborative process. They answered the online questionnaire; their answers were “translated” into an initial expert-constructed concept map, which was offered as a starting point to articulate their views during a group session, resulting in a consensus map.

Engaging with the questionnaire was useful for providing the participants with an example of an “excellent” map, sensitising them to the core concepts and the possible links between them, without imposing a high level of cognitive load. This fostered dialogue of complex ideas, introducing the potential benefits of consensus maps in team-based projects.

An online questionnaire may facilitate the application of the pedagogic frailty model for academic development by scaling up the mapping process. The map-mediated facilitation of dialogue within teams of academics may facilitate faculty development by making explicit the underpinning values held by team members.

Experienced firefighters often make important decisions in fast-paced fire ground environments characterised by uncertainty and evolving conditions, mostly under considerable time-pressure. The nature of these environments inadvertently presents firefighters with novel situations that occasionally challenge their expertise, subsequently necessitating a reliance on intuitive as opposed to rational decisions. The purpose of this study is to elicit the tacitly held knowledge and intuitive thought processes that were used by 31 experts while managing a range of complex, non-routine fire incidents.

The study used a formal knowledge elicitation technique known as the critical decision method (CDM). CDM is a qualitative strategy that applies a set of cognitive probes to explore the cognitive processes that aid the performance of a complex task. This method was preferred to other cognitive task analysis methods as it specifically favours the use of retrospective incident accounts and incidents that were both challenging and memorable. Using the full CDM protocol, 31 experienced firefighters were interviewed across various fire stations in the UK and Nigeria (UK = 15, Nigeria = 16). The interview transcripts were coded, categorised and analysed using the emergent themes analysis approach.

The results from the study identified 134 decision points across the 31 incident accounts. A total of 42 salient cues sought by experts at each decision point were revealed and organised into a critical cue inventory. The identified cues were subsequently categorised into five distinct types based on the type of information each cue relayed to an incident commander. The study further developed a decision-making model – information filtering and intuitive decision-making model – that describes how experienced firefighters made difficult fire ground decisions amidst multiple informational sources. The model ultimately showed experts’ preferences for intuitive decisions as the default-thinking mode, with deliberation only required on few instances as conditions warranted. The study also compiled and indexed the cognitive strategies elicited from the expert firefighters into a competence assessment framework.

In light of existing debate about the accessibility of expert knowledge, the current study not only provides empirical evidence detailing the practical application of the CDM as a formal knowledge elicitation method but also delineates a range of cognitive outputs from the elicitation process that ultimately holds relevance for knowledge transfer from expert to novices. The study identified a range of training needs and discussed the practical implications of transferring expert knowledge into learning tasks that could subsequently aid the cognitive development of novices. In particular, the study proposed adopting the four-component instructional design model in organising the CDM outputs for training purposes.

While it is generally taken that experts, because of their extensive domain knowledge and well-developed schema, often perform considerably (and sometimes exceptionally) well when solving complex problems, finding a credible and objective method to model what experts know and do continues to pose a challenge, particularly when such revelation is crucially required for training purposes. This study is therefore timely since its tacit and intuitive knowledge outputs can now be applied to enhance the development of training curricula for novices. The learning tasks developed from the CDM outputs are hoped to facilitate organisational learning not only within the firefighting domain but also across other high reliability organisations. It is extremely important that expert knowledge is preserved in these domains especially in countries such as the UK, where the rate of real fires has been on decline, which in turn suggests that the quality of experiential knowledge required to manage complex non-routine fire cases may also be on decline. The current study also presents and discusses insights based on the cultural differences observed between the UK and the Nigerian fire services.

In many security domains, the ‘human in the system’ is often a critical line of defence in identifying, preventing and responding to any threats (Saikayasit, Stedmon, & Lawson, 2015). Traditionally, such security domains are often focussed on mainstream public safety within crowded spaces and border controls, through to identifying suspicious behaviours, hostile reconnaissance and implementing counter-terrorism initiatives. More recently, with growing insecurity around the world, organisations have looked to improve their security risk management frameworks, developing concepts which originated in the health and safety field to deal with more pressing risks such as terrorist acts, abduction and piracy (Paul, 2018). In these instances, security is usually the specific responsibility of frontline personnel with defined roles and responsibilities operating in accordance with organisational protocols (Saikayasit, Stedmon, Lawson, & Fussey, 2012; Stedmon, Saikayasit, Lawson, & Fussey, 2013). However, understanding the knowledge that frontline security workers might possess and use requires sensitive investigation in equally sensitive security domains.

This chapter considers how to investigate knowledge elicitation in these sensitive security domains and underlying ethics in research design that supports and protects the nature of investigation and end-users alike. This chapter also discusses the criteria used for ensuring trustworthiness as well as assessing the relative merits of the range of methods adopted.

The aim of this paper is to frame the stakeholder-driven system mapping approach in the context of climate change, building on stakeholder knowledge of system boundaries, key elements and interactions within a system and to introduce a decision support tool for managing and visualising this knowledge into insightful system maps with policy implications.

This methodological framework is based on the concepts of market maps. The process of eliciting and visualising expert knowledge is facilitated by means of a reference implementation in MATLAB, which allows for designing technological innovation systems models in either a structured or a visual format.

System mapping can contribute to evaluating systems for climate change by capturing knowledge of expert groups with regard to the dynamic interrelations between climate policy strategies and other system components, which may promote or hinder the desired transition to low carbon societies.

This study explores how system mapping addresses gaps in analytical tools and complements the systems of innovation framework. Knowledge elicitation, however, must be facilitated and build upon a structured framework such as technological innovation systems.

This approach can provide policymakers with significant insight into the strengths and weaknesses of current policy frameworks based on tacit knowledge embedded in stakeholders.

The developed methodological framework aims to include societal groups in the climate policy-making process by acknowledging stakeholders’ role in developing transition pathways. The system map codifies stakeholder input in a structured and transparent manner.

This is the first study that clearly defines the system mapping approach in the frame of climate policy and introduces the first dedicated software option for researchers and decision makers to use for implementing this methodology.

In recent years, there has been a growing dialogue around community-based and systems-based approaches to security risk management through the introduction of top-down and bottom-up knowledge acquisition. In essence, this relates to knowledge elicited from academic experts, or security subject-matter experts, practitioner experts, or field workers themselves and how much these disparate sources of knowledge may converge or diverge. In many ways, this represents a classic tension between organisational and procedural perspectives of knowledge management (i.e. top-down) versus more pragmatic and experience focussed perspectives (i.e. bottom-up).

This chapter considers these approaches and argues that a more consistent approach needs to address the conflict between procedures and experience, help convert field experience into knowledge, and ultimately provide effective training that is relevant to those heading out into demanding work situations. Ultimately, ethics and method are intricately bound together in whichever approach is taken and the security of both staff and at-risk populations depends upon correctly managing the balance between systems and communities.