A Knowledge Elicitation Technique for Educational Development: The Critical Decision Method.
Saved in:
| Title: | A Knowledge Elicitation Technique for Educational Development: The Critical Decision Method. |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Freeman, Jar |
| Peer Reviewed: | N |
| Page Count: | 12 |
| Publication Date: | 1991 |
| Document Type: | Reports - Research Speeches/Meeting Papers |
| Descriptors: | Critical Incidents Method, Data Collection, Debugging (Computers), Educational Development, Heuristics, Interviews, Knowledge Level, Measurement Techniques, Programers, Training Methods |
| Abstract: | The Critical Decision Method (CDM) is a structured interview method for eliciting expert knowledge. The method was used in a study of computer programmers who were experts at debugging complex computer systems. Fifteen programmers who were identified by their supervisors as experts were asked to describe an experience in which their expertise made a difference. The CDM interviewer used a set of questions to elaborate the programmers' responses. Two non-expert programmers were interviewed for comparison. Each subject told the story of a debugging experience four times with varying degrees of intervention by the interviewers. Data were validated by a panel of eight subjects who reviewed the findings of the interviews. The results show that the CDM facilitated the identification and description of expert skills (critical knowledge) as well as resources and heuristics for selection and use of skills and resources by the experts. The stories produced have the potential to enhance training materials for other programmers. A 32-item list of references is included. (SLD) |
| Entry Date: | 1991 |
| Accession Number: | ED334223 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| Abstract: | The Critical Decision Method (CDM) is a structured interview method for eliciting expert knowledge. The method was used in a study of computer programmers who were experts at debugging complex computer systems. Fifteen programmers who were identified by their supervisors as experts were asked to describe an experience in which their expertise made a difference. The CDM interviewer used a set of questions to elaborate the programmers' responses. Two non-expert programmers were interviewed for comparison. Each subject told the story of a debugging experience four times with varying degrees of intervention by the interviewers. Data were validated by a panel of eight subjects who reviewed the findings of the interviews. The results show that the CDM facilitated the identification and description of expert skills (critical knowledge) as well as resources and heuristics for selection and use of skills and resources by the experts. The stories produced have the potential to enhance training materials for other programmers. A 32-item list of references is included. (SLD) |
|---|
