{"title":"JVET知识与专业技术特刊社论","authors":"J. Hordern, Yael Shalem, B. Esmond, Dan Bishop","doi":"10.1080/13636820.2022.2028365","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Perspectives on the nature of vocational knowledge and expertise are influential in shaping Vocational Education and Training (VET) systems and programmes in different societies and for different occupations, and reflect contrasting philosophies of the purpose of VET and its relationship to other forms of education. Debates centre around the role of knowledge derived from academic disciplines, the extent to which situated knowledge and practical understanding is key to the development of expertise, and epistemological questions about the relationship between forms of know-that and know-how (see Winch 2010). On the one hand, a creativity-focused ‘epistemology of the hand’ (Brinkmann and Tanggaard 2010) could be seen to imply that vocational expertise has little to do with forms of systematically produced disciplinary knowledge, which could be castigated as ‘inert’ and ‘irrelevant’ to much vocational practice. On the other hand, some commentators have emphasised the role of specialised disciplinary knowledge in shaping expertise in many occupations (Young and Muller 2014) and argued that systematically organised knowledge is indispensable for the making of sound judgements in practice (Winch 2010; Shalem 2014). The advantage of such an approach, one might argue, is that it can foreground knowledge that been ‘tried and tested’ in multiple contexts and held to stringent criteria for inclusion in the occupational knowledge base. The new practitioner can thus be offered a foundation of vocational knowledge that rests on the combined expertise of the wider community of practitioners. Studies of workplace learning and the generation of expertise in work practices have, however, queried the role of systematically organised knowledge in the fluid workplace contexts experienced by a wide range of workers (Guile and Unwin 2019; Virolainen et al. 2021). While systematic occupational knowledge may be an important basis for action, it can be argued that the most significant vocational knowledge is found within informally organised expert practices, often involving teams and complex networks. Suggestions that ‘practice’ should be considered the prime or only locus for the development of","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editorial for JVET special issue on knowledge and expertise\",\"authors\":\"J. Hordern, Yael Shalem, B. Esmond, Dan Bishop\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13636820.2022.2028365\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Perspectives on the nature of vocational knowledge and expertise are influential in shaping Vocational Education and Training (VET) systems and programmes in different societies and for different occupations, and reflect contrasting philosophies of the purpose of VET and its relationship to other forms of education. Debates centre around the role of knowledge derived from academic disciplines, the extent to which situated knowledge and practical understanding is key to the development of expertise, and epistemological questions about the relationship between forms of know-that and know-how (see Winch 2010). On the one hand, a creativity-focused ‘epistemology of the hand’ (Brinkmann and Tanggaard 2010) could be seen to imply that vocational expertise has little to do with forms of systematically produced disciplinary knowledge, which could be castigated as ‘inert’ and ‘irrelevant’ to much vocational practice. On the other hand, some commentators have emphasised the role of specialised disciplinary knowledge in shaping expertise in many occupations (Young and Muller 2014) and argued that systematically organised knowledge is indispensable for the making of sound judgements in practice (Winch 2010; Shalem 2014). The advantage of such an approach, one might argue, is that it can foreground knowledge that been ‘tried and tested’ in multiple contexts and held to stringent criteria for inclusion in the occupational knowledge base. The new practitioner can thus be offered a foundation of vocational knowledge that rests on the combined expertise of the wider community of practitioners. Studies of workplace learning and the generation of expertise in work practices have, however, queried the role of systematically organised knowledge in the fluid workplace contexts experienced by a wide range of workers (Guile and Unwin 2019; Virolainen et al. 2021). While systematic occupational knowledge may be an important basis for action, it can be argued that the most significant vocational knowledge is found within informally organised expert practices, often involving teams and complex networks. Suggestions that ‘practice’ should be considered the prime or only locus for the development of\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2022.2028365\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13636820.2022.2028365","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
摘要
关于职业知识和专业技能本质的观点对不同社会和不同职业的职业教育和培训(VET)系统和计划的形成具有影响,并反映了VET目的及其与其他形式教育的关系的不同哲学。争论的中心是来自学术学科的知识的作用,情境知识和实践理解在多大程度上是专业知识发展的关键,以及关于知识形式和知识之间关系的认识论问题(见Winch 2010)。一方面,以创造力为中心的“手的认识论”(Brinkmann and Tanggaard 2010)可以被视为暗示,职业技能与系统生产的学科知识的形式几乎没有关系,这可能被批评为“惰性”和“无关”的职业实践。另一方面,一些评论家强调了专业学科知识在许多职业中形成专业知识的作用(Young和Muller 2014),并认为系统组织的知识对于在实践中做出合理的判断是不可或缺的(Winch 2010;城东2014)。有人可能会说,这种方法的优势在于,它可以突出那些在多种环境中“经过尝试和测试”的知识,并坚持严格的标准,以纳入职业知识库。因此,可以为新的从业者提供基于更广泛的从业者社区的综合专业知识的职业知识基础。然而,对工作场所学习和工作实践中专业知识生成的研究质疑了系统组织知识在各种工人所经历的流动工作场所环境中的作用(Guile和Unwin 2019;Virolainen et al. 2021)。虽然系统的职业知识可能是行动的重要基础,但可以说,最重要的职业知识是在非正式组织的专家实践中发现的,通常涉及团队和复杂的网络。建议“实践”应该被认为是发展的主要或唯一的场所
Editorial for JVET special issue on knowledge and expertise
Perspectives on the nature of vocational knowledge and expertise are influential in shaping Vocational Education and Training (VET) systems and programmes in different societies and for different occupations, and reflect contrasting philosophies of the purpose of VET and its relationship to other forms of education. Debates centre around the role of knowledge derived from academic disciplines, the extent to which situated knowledge and practical understanding is key to the development of expertise, and epistemological questions about the relationship between forms of know-that and know-how (see Winch 2010). On the one hand, a creativity-focused ‘epistemology of the hand’ (Brinkmann and Tanggaard 2010) could be seen to imply that vocational expertise has little to do with forms of systematically produced disciplinary knowledge, which could be castigated as ‘inert’ and ‘irrelevant’ to much vocational practice. On the other hand, some commentators have emphasised the role of specialised disciplinary knowledge in shaping expertise in many occupations (Young and Muller 2014) and argued that systematically organised knowledge is indispensable for the making of sound judgements in practice (Winch 2010; Shalem 2014). The advantage of such an approach, one might argue, is that it can foreground knowledge that been ‘tried and tested’ in multiple contexts and held to stringent criteria for inclusion in the occupational knowledge base. The new practitioner can thus be offered a foundation of vocational knowledge that rests on the combined expertise of the wider community of practitioners. Studies of workplace learning and the generation of expertise in work practices have, however, queried the role of systematically organised knowledge in the fluid workplace contexts experienced by a wide range of workers (Guile and Unwin 2019; Virolainen et al. 2021). While systematic occupational knowledge may be an important basis for action, it can be argued that the most significant vocational knowledge is found within informally organised expert practices, often involving teams and complex networks. Suggestions that ‘practice’ should be considered the prime or only locus for the development of
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.