DD303 TMA06
Critically evaluate why experts are better problem solvers than novices. What do experts have that novices lack?
A novice is defined in an English dictionary as a person who is new to a field or an activity. In sum, a beginner. This explanation seems to suggest that the progression towards becoming experienced in a given area is simply a matter of amassing the necessary knowledge which will eventually lead to a different status- one in which the skill or comprehension of the once novice will be judged to have improved to a level akin to that of someone in the same field who is already considered an expert.
The definition not only points to the notion of mere accumulation of knowledge, but also to the fact that expertise is something that, aside from being “inside the head”, is an attribute that can be estimated both externally and in objective terms. And while the measurable quality that is also part of what constitutes what we understand by talent shouldn’t be ignored, it encompasses other, more internal elements that have to do with specific skills acquired through training, a formalised aggregation of knowledge, and even individual differences. In contrast to experts, novices not only don’t know much about the formal particularities of a discipline, but they also seem to lack an understanding of the more internal organisation and the underlying structures of the subject at hand.
Expertise is a know-how that is not only based on knowledge and erudition, but more importantly on the ability to solve problems. An expert must be able to adeptly deal with specific goals and clearly define solution paths. One of the main questions is whether knowledge in a particular field increases the likelihood someone has of solving a problem effectively, or if this has more to do with certain internal capabilities and singular mental aptitudes that would enable a person to better get through the different levels of depth leading to an optimal solution. If this were the
A novice is defined in an English dictionary as a person who is new to a field or an activity. In sum, a beginner. This explanation seems to suggest that the progression towards becoming experienced in a given area is simply a matter of amassing the necessary knowledge which will eventually lead to a different status- one in which the skill or comprehension of the once novice will be judged to have improved to a level akin to that of someone in the same field who is already considered an expert.
The definition not only points to the notion of mere accumulation of knowledge, but also to the fact that expertise is something that, aside from being “inside the head”, is an attribute that can be estimated both externally and in objective terms. And while the measurable quality that is also part of what constitutes what we understand by talent shouldn’t be ignored, it encompasses other, more internal elements that have to do with specific skills acquired through training, a formalised aggregation of knowledge, and even individual differences. In contrast to experts, novices not only don’t know much about the formal particularities of a discipline, but they also seem to lack an understanding of the more internal organisation and the underlying structures of the subject at hand.
Expertise is a know-how that is not only based on knowledge and erudition, but more importantly on the ability to solve problems. An expert must be able to adeptly deal with specific goals and clearly define solution paths. One of the main questions is whether knowledge in a particular field increases the likelihood someone has of solving a problem effectively, or if this has more to do with certain internal capabilities and singular mental aptitudes that would enable a person to better get through the different levels of depth leading to an optimal solution. If this were the
References: Baddeley, A. (1986). “Working memory”. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Charness, N. (1992). “The impact of chess research on cognitive science”. Psychological Research, 54, 4-9. De Groot, A.D. (1966). “Perception and memory versus thought: Some old idea and recent findings”. In B. Kleinmuntz (Ed.), Problem solving, research, method and theory. New York: Krieger, 1966. Didierjean, A. & Gobet, F. (2008). “Sherlock Holmes- An expert’s view of expertise”, British Journal of Psychology, 99, 109-125. Ericsson, K.A Ericsson, K.A. & Chanders, N. (1994). “Expert performance: its structure and acquisition”. Science Watch, online. Green, A. J.K & Gilhooly, K., (2005) “Problem solving”, in Cognitive Psychology. Blackwell Publishing, The Open University. Gobet, F., (1998). “Expert memory: A comparison of four theories”. Cognition , 66, 115-152. Gobet, F et al., (2001). “Chunking mechanisms in human learning”. Trends in cognitive science, vol. 5, no.6. Posner, M. I. (1988). “Introduction: what is it to be an expert?” In M. T. H. Chi, R. Glaser & M. J. Farr (Eds.), The nature of expertise, (pp. xxix – xxxvi). Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers. Rumelhart, D.E., Lindsay, P., & Norman, D.A. (1972). “A process model for long-term memory”. In E. Tulving & W. Donaldson (Eds.), Organization of memory. New-York: Academic Press. Toker, S., (2012). “The mental model comparison of expert and novice performance improvement practitioners”. Wayne State University Dissertations, online