Proceedings of the 12th European Conference on Knowledge ...

Type
P=A=L
P=A, L
P, A=L
P=L, A
P, A, L
Example
Tony K. M. Lo and Patrick S.W. Fong
Suppose I mistakenly deleted a file in my computer because I misunderstood a
response from a pop-up message. I got frustrated and wrote down what I felt
and what I did wrong on a “post-it” on my desk. When I encountered <strong>the</strong> same
situation a week later, I knew how I could avoid repeating <strong>the</strong> error. I learned it
from my own lesson. In this case, I am <strong>the</strong> only participant, both author and
learner.
If my colleague John comes to use my computer and notices my “post-it”, he
can learn from my mistake without having to go through my frustrating
experience. In this case, <strong>the</strong> author is <strong>the</strong> same person as <strong>the</strong> participant (me)
but <strong>the</strong> learner (John) is different.
Psychology experiments conducted by psychologists are good examples <strong>of</strong> this
type. By writing reports on participants’ experience, <strong>the</strong> researchers <strong>the</strong>mselves
acquire new knowledge.
The use <strong>of</strong> after action review (AAR) by <strong>the</strong> US army, with <strong>the</strong> help <strong>of</strong> a
facilitator, falls within this type. The facilitator, who is usually not part <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
squad conducting <strong>the</strong> review, records and summarizes what <strong>the</strong> soldiers have
done, what should have been done, and actionable recommendations for <strong>the</strong>
soldiers <strong>the</strong>mselves to follow.
Many lessons learned in <strong>the</strong> form <strong>of</strong> <strong>of</strong>ficial reports investigating accidents by
public organizations are typical examples where <strong>the</strong> participants in <strong>the</strong>
incidents, <strong>the</strong> authors and <strong>the</strong> learners (such as <strong>the</strong> practitioners <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> domain,
<strong>the</strong> monitoring bodies, or even <strong>the</strong> general public) are different entities.
Table 1: Typology <strong>of</strong> relationship among stakeholders <strong>of</strong> lesson learning
3.3 Possible questions checklist on context richness
Our assumption is: <strong>the</strong> richer <strong>the</strong> context <strong>of</strong> lessons learned, <strong>the</strong> better <strong>the</strong> quality <strong>of</strong> its content.
Hence <strong>the</strong> aim <strong>of</strong> asking questions is to examine <strong>the</strong> content for clues about <strong>the</strong> richness <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
context. Based on <strong>the</strong> analysis in sub-sections 2.1 and 2.2, possible questions that may be raised for
this purpose are described below.
What kinds <strong>of</strong> content-independent and content-dependent context does <strong>the</strong> lesson mention?
Does <strong>the</strong> lesson explain how <strong>the</strong> author identified and captured <strong>the</strong> knowledge?
Does <strong>the</strong> lesson describe <strong>the</strong> backgrounds <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> stakeholders and <strong>the</strong> relationships among
<strong>the</strong>m?
Does <strong>the</strong> lesson state who <strong>the</strong> target learners are?
Does <strong>the</strong> lesson mention <strong>the</strong> normal or best practices that <strong>the</strong> participants should have taken?
Are <strong>the</strong>re any instructions for learners on how to use <strong>the</strong> knowledge properly?
Can <strong>the</strong> learners know for how long <strong>the</strong> knowledge is supposed to be valid?
4. Experience sharing
4.1 Experiential learning
Many lessons learned originate from reviews, debriefings, interviews, dialogues, evaluations and
learning histories. Participants share <strong>the</strong>ir experience with o<strong>the</strong>rs and make sense <strong>of</strong> it <strong>the</strong>mselves.
Lessons learned can be supported by narratives or stories that facilitate <strong>the</strong> transfer <strong>of</strong> context and
experience (Milton 2010). Experience consists <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> total response <strong>of</strong> a person to a situation or event
and what <strong>the</strong>y think and conclude at <strong>the</strong> time (Boud 1985). It can also assist hearers’ understanding
and acceptance <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> evidence collected from biographies and narratives (Gibbs 2007). Among
various learning <strong>the</strong>ories for education and training, <strong>the</strong> experiential learning <strong>the</strong>ory (ELT) emphasizes
<strong>the</strong> central role that experience plays in <strong>the</strong> learning process, which is in line with what has been
mentioned in this paper. Unlike cognitive learning <strong>the</strong>ories, which pay greater attention to cognition
1052