Cognitive Flexibility Theory, Literary Criticism and Reference Interviews

Cognitive flexibility theory (CFT) “is a constructivist learning paradigm which emphasizes real-world complexity and ill-structuredness of knowledge.” (Fitzgerald, Wilson & Semrau, 1997, p. 49). CFT was developed to serve as a more suitable means to approach advanced learning in complex and ill-structured domains, rather than introductory learning approaches that tend to over-simplify complex material and emphasize rote memorization (Jacobson & Spiro, 1995, p.303). These statements resonated with me because I'm always weary of developing training for adults that is better suited to developing skills in children or young adolescents.

Jacobson & Spiro (1995) offer 5 principles derived from CFT:

• Use multiple conceptual representations of knowledge (varied perspectives)
• Link and tailor abstract concepts to different case examples (crisscross themes and cases)
• Introduce domain complexity early
• Stress the interrelated and web-like nature of knowledge
• Encourage knowledge assembly (construct meaning) (p.303-304)

Fitzgerald et al suggest in more concrete terms that CFT may be applied in practice through the use of “authentic case scenarios, providing factual and procedural knowledge within the discipline, scaffolding the learner through guided activities, and modeling the reasoning processes of experts” (1997, p. 51)

Although both Jacobson and Fitzgerald emphasized hypertext and multimedia environments, CFT reminded me of my undergraduate studies in American Literature – which did not use hypertext, but merely printed texts – mind you by the end of the course my copies were always filled with sticky notes and cross-references. But the model was still pretty much the same – we discussed different themes and critical perspectives in class, and applied them across the texts selected for the course. I had a great professor who would introduce much of the themes and critical perspectives through provocative questions applied to the course texts – but eventually at the end of class or unit, she would offer her own (expert) perspective. This experience makes me think that cognitive flexibility theory would work well in literary studies. I also think it is a good match for reference work. While there are some aspects to reference questions that can be fairly well-structured, often reference interviews are required to figure out what exactly the patron needs and then figure out where to search for it. If anything, it seems that reference interactions have become much less-structured with an increase in the diversity of information formats, storage devices and retrieval tools. I'm less sure about how this applies to training students in finding, evaluating and using business information...

“The program resides on six floppy disks to enable easy distribution” (Fitzgerald, Wilson & Semrau, 1997, p.52)

This was my favorite line in the Fitzgerald et al. article. Despite some of the outdated aspects of the technologies used, I was impressed by the overall design of the program. I imagine such programs are not meant to be developed by teaching instructors but administered by them – I guess they are created by instructional technologists and I wonder what the industry standard is in terms of the turnaround for developing and implementing such a program. I think one of the key challenges will be to capture or access real-world examples in order to develop authentic cases. I guess you'd have to work closely with practitioners and institutions to obtain internal documentation. You'd also have to identify and interview experts to weigh in on the cases that are developed. Planning out branching scenarios and anticipating learner questions and preparing responses ahead of time are likely critical in delivering a successful learning experience.

References

Fitzgerald, G. E., Wilson, B., & Semrau, L. P. (1997). An interactive multimedia program to enhance teacher problem-solving skills based on cognitive flexibility theory: Design and outcomes. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 6(1), 47-76.

Jacobson, M. J., & Spiro. R. J. (1995). Hypertext learning environments, cognitive flexibility, and the transfer of complex knowledge: An empirical investigation. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 12 (4), 301-333.

Jacobson, M. J., Maouri, C., Mishra, P., & Kolar, C. (1996). Learning with hypertext learning environments: Theory, design, and research. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 5(3/4), 239-281.