The purpose of our presentation is to introduce a theoretical pedagogical model for the purposes of vocational and professional learning both in educational and working life contexts. The model is based on recent accounts on the structure of professional expertise (Bereiter, 2002; Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Eraut, 1994, 2004a: Le Maistre & Paré, 2006; Tynjälä, 2008a,b), studies of expertise from psychological and educational perspectives  (e.g. Amirault & Branson, 2006; Ericsson, 2006; Feltovich et al., 2006) theories of expertise and intelligence (Horn & Masunaga, 2006); concept of connective model of work experience (Guile & Griffiths, 2001; Griffiths & Guile, 2003), and studies of integrative thinking (Demick & Andreoletti, 2003;  Hoare, 2006; Basseches, 2005).

The model of integrative pedagogy we are proposing integrates the three main components of professional expertise: theoretical, practical and self-regulative knowledge. It also integrates abstract and pragmatical thinking and intelligence, learning and working, conceptual understanding and practical doing. In the conference we will further elaborate this idea and present examples how the model can be realised in formal education and in workplace learning..

Integrative pedagogy for developing vocational and professional expertise

The purpose of our presentation is to introduce a theoretical pedagogical model for the purposes of vocational and professional learning both in educational and working life contexts. The model is based on recent accounts on the structure of professional expertise (Bereiter, 2002; Bereiter & Scardamalia, 1993; Eraut, 1994, 2004a: Le Maistre & Paré, 2006; Tynjälä, 2008a,b), studies of expertise from psychological and educational perspectives  (e.g. Amirault & Branson, 2006; Ericsson, 2006; Feltovich et al., 2006) theories of expertise and intelligence (Horn & Masunaga, 2006); concept of connective model of work experience (Guile & Griffiths, 2001; Griffiths & Guile, 2003), and studies of integrative thinking (Demick & Andreoletti, 2003;  Hoare, 2006; Basseches, 2005).

Briefly, professional expertise can be described as consisting of three basic elements which are closely integrated with each other: 1) theoretical or conceptual knowledge, 2) practical or experiential knowledge and 3) regulative or self-regulative knowledge. Theoretical knowledge is universal, formal and explicit in nature. It can easily be explicated, for example, in books and lectures. In contrast, practical knowledge that we gain through practical experiences is case-specific – it is not universal in the way theoretical knowledge is. Practical knowledge (often referred to as procedural knowledge or simply as skills) is often not so easy to explicate; rather it is intuitive, implicit or tacit in nature. Many accounts on the development of professional expertise have emphasized the importance of interaction and integration of these modes of knowledge.  For example, Leinhardt and her colleagues (1995) have stated that professional education should involve both the transformation of theoretical knowledge into a form where it becomes available for use in particular cases, and the explication and conceptualisation of tacit knowledge derived from work experience.  In other words, theories should be considered in the light of practical experience and practical experience in the light of theories. While traditional education has treated them separately (e.g. theoretical courses and practice periods have been carried out separately without any connection), modern pedagogical thinking emphasises the unity of theory and practice (see, for example, Guile & Griffiths, 2001; 2003; Tynjälä, 2008; Tynjälä et al., 2003; 2006).

Besides theoretical and practical knowledge, the third constituent of expertise is regulative knowledge or self-regulative knowledge, including metacognitive and reflective skills (e.g. Bereiter and Scardamalia 1993; Bereiter 2002). This form of professional knowledge and skills can be integrated with theory and practice using different kinds of mediating tools. All activities that enable students to make tacit knowledge explicit or analyze theoretical knowledge and practical experience are potential mediating tools. These include, for instance, discussions with a tutor, mentor or a small group, or writing assignments, such as analytic tasks, portfolios and self-assessments. Alternatively, during their apprenticeship students may write a learning journal to reflect on their work and learning. These kind of activities allow students to develop their self-regulatory knowledge in a context provided by the knowledge and problem domain of their future profession.

According to Bereiter and Scardamalia (1993) it is through problem-solving that formal knowledge acquired in education is transformed into an expert’s flexible informal knowledge. The process of integrating theory, practice and self-regulation can be seen as a problem-solving process where students simultaneously need to solve practical problems and related conceptual problems, that is, problems of understanding. In terms of Sternberg’s (2004) triarchic theory of intelligence, this could be described as using analytic, creative and practical intelligence in an integrative way. Formal knowledge is turned into skills when it is used to solve practical problems and into informal knowledge when it is used to solve problems of understanding (Bereiter & Scardamalia 1993, 66). The result may be a creative solution tor the problem.  Accordingly, instead of traditional forms of delivering knowledge, problem-solving tasks should form the core of the education.

The studies of integrative thinking support the ideas described above. For many decades, there has been ongoing discussion of the highest intellectual capacities emerging in the adulthood, named variously according to each scholar in the developmental psychological field (Demick & Andreoletti, 2005; Hoare, 2006). The main issue has been the claim that in early adulthood, epistemic relativism is born. This means that understanding extends to fields where there are no clear-cut solutions to problems and knowledge is understood to be relative (Kitchener & King). Many models have been created to describe and explain the phenomenon; it can bee argued, however, that there is one common component in all of them: integrative thinking (Kallio, 2009 forthcoming). There is general consensus that connection of different fields – intra-, inter- or extrapersonal-, logical-, or psychological  - is the ‘highest’ form of cognitive development in adulthood (though having its roots already in the youth, and  the most mature forms emerging in the adulthood). Integration may thus mean connectivity between pragmatical and academic knowledge, conscious and unconscious material, actions of will with thinking and emotions, different logical systems, life experiences and tacit knowledge to factual knowledge. It is also claimed that in this integration process something new is created, which may innovative in its nature (Benack, Basseches & Swan, 1987). In sum, studies on the development of thinking support the idea of the importance of integrating different elements of professional expertise in pedagogical situations.

The model of integrative pedagogy we are proposing integrates the three main components of professional expertise: theoretical, practical and self-regulative knowledge. It also integrates abstract and pragmatical thinking and intelligence, learning and working, conceptual understanding and practical doing. In the conference we will further elaborate this idea and present examples how the model can be realised in formal education and in workplace learning..