2.3.9 Forms of Knowledge and Knowledge Tables

by Duncan Quarless (Chemistry, SUNY College at Old Westbury)

---

The definition of knowledge from a Process Education perspective includes both breadth and depth. Breadth is indicated by five forms of knowledge: concepts, processes, tools, contexts, and taxonomy. Depth is indicated by levels of knowledge use as represented by Bloom’s taxonomy. The five forms of knowledge are the components of a “knowledge table” that can be assembled around any complex knowledge focus or application. The principles for constructing such a table are presented and exemplified to show the flexibility that emerges from this systematic approach to the analysis of knowledge.
 

Knowledge Forms

Donald (2002) proposes that knowledge occurs in two stages: an initial declarative (information) stage and a subsequent procedural (application) stage. There is, however, a growing body of evidence that suggests that there are both declarative and procedural stages in all of the forms of knowledge that ultimately facilitate knowledge construction. Krumsieg and Baehr (2000) argue that learner growth is exhibited in a movement between forms, and that this movement creates some subjectivity (variance) in the classification of knowledge forms. Forman’s (2000) discussion of knowledge-building communities provides strong insights about the social dimensions of the forms and how these social aspects impact the interpretative flexibility between the forms (see the section “Principles for Constructing a Knowledge Table” later in this module). The five basic forms of knowledge are defined and illustrated in Table 1. Also included is a sixth form, rule knowledge. Rule knowledge is perhaps the most trivial but it is included for completeness. All knowledge can be classified as being one of these forms.

Knowledge Construction and the Knowledge Table

Knowledge is dynamic and flexible if the learning process produces growth in the level of knowing (2.2.1 Bloom’s Taxonomy—Expanding its Meaning). Additionally, the five forms of knowledge span the four learning skill domains: cognitive, social, affective, and psychomotor. The implication is that any knowledge table represents substantial complexity even if it is constructed for beginning learners.

Process Education uses a learner-oriented philosophy of education in which construction of knowledge requires the implementation of learning principles (2.1.1 Overview of Learning Theory) as guided by the Learning Process Methodology (2.3.8 Learning Process Methodology). Piaget and other developmental psychologists have recognized that learners must actively develop knowledge within the framework of their cognitive organizational schemes (Liben, 1983), a perspective consistent with Process Education principles. A knowledge table (sometimes referred to as a “knowledge map”) is a tool that guides the process of analyzing specific cognitive schemes or frameworks within any particular area of knowledge.

Fisher, Wandersee, & Wideman (2000) illustrate why knowledge tables are an important and useful tool in a learner-centered pedagogy. They enable educators to identify aspects of knowledge that are externally valid, e.g., facts, theories, models, and also aspects that are unique because of context and way of being. Knowledge mapping produces several significant consequences that include promoting active learning, facilitating conceptual change, and interconnecting and deepening understanding. All of these are important for elevating learner knowledge (2.2.2 Elevating Knowledge from Level 1 to Level 3). Use of the LPM is facilitated or enhanced if a knowledge table is used to present the five forms of knowledge that are relevant to a particular area of knowledge being learned (Krumsieg & Baehr, 2000). Without the knowledge table, it is easy for learners to set learning objectives with only one dimension, e.g., to memorize conceptual facts for a test.

Educators need to be aware of several practical limitations in the way that knowledge tables have sometimes been constructed and applied

1. If there is excessive ambiguity in the distinctions among the five forms of knowledge within a map, e.g., by overlapping concepts with processes, learning activities may also lack appropriate focus.

2. If the descriptions and details used to represent the five forms of knowledge within a knowledge map are disjointed, e.g., lacking in integration or parallelism, multiple problems in learning and assessing performance are likely.

3. If there is not enough detailing or complexity in how the forms in the map are represented, learners may not fully recognize relevant exemplars or models, and educators may find it difficult to provide clear assessments (Fisher, 2000).

4. If educators falsely assume a difference between knowledge maps and knowledge tables, they may create ambiguity in their understanding that impedes curriculum design. It is argued that the term “knowledge table” is more intuitively relevant for practical pedagogical concerns.

Constructing a Knowledge Table

The various knowledge forms move from the basic, declarative kinds of knowledge to procedural or application (skill) types. The methodology for facilitating the elevation of knowledge along this continuum is treated in 2.2.2 Elevating Knowledge from Level 1 to Level 3. Table 2 contains a knowledge table related to home remodeling in which the five forms of knowledge are described for each knowledge level from “Information” to “Research.”

The knowledge table is best thought of as the systematic framework that interlocks the forms. In the example presented in Table 2, it should be recognized that the forms generally interconnect. What may not be as clear is the fact that a particular learner may not demonstrate full integration of these interconnections. For example, an apprentice carpenter might be able to measure and saw straight cuts under supervision but not have an adequate understanding of building plans to make his or her own determinations of how to make the cuts. The apprentice’s process is at a low level of application, and the conceptual understanding is only at the information level. The plan exists and has certain features that the apprentice is aware of, but it does not yet serve as a guide for steps in the building process.

Principles for Constructing a Knowledge Table

1. Planning and Preparation. It is important that particular learning outcomes and behaviors be incorporated in the planning. What variations in levels of knowledge must be assessed? How must the assessments address variations in forms of knowledge? What are the targeted behaviors and outcomes for a good performance?

2. Context and Way of Being. The knowledge-building community establishes the predominant elements of the learning environment that are relevant to the “culture” of each particular discipline. It is important to be mindful of these elements as they impact the forms. For example, argumentation may be a context for dealing with a concept in one knowledge-building community, while consensus building may be a context in another learning community. Consequently, the way of being associated with knowledge-building in each of these communities will likely be different as well.

3. Strengthening the Existing Knowledge Base. The process of constructing the table should activate and strengthen the learner’s prior knowledge base. The learner(s) should be encouraged (motivated) to explore their existing knowledge. This is done in light of the steps that follow.

Table 1  Types of Knowledge and Examples

Knowledge Form	Definition	Examples
Concept	an idea that connects a set of relationships; a generalized idea about something or a classification label such as process methodologies	chemistry – the mole
Process	a sequence of steps, events, or activities that results in a change or that produces something over a period of time	using chemical equations to interconvert and predict masses, moles and number of particles
Tool	any device, implement, instrument, or utensil that serves as a resource to accomplish a task	chemical equation
Contexts	the whole situation, background, or conditions relevant to the process	atomic theory (laws of conservation of mass-energy, definite composition, multiple proportion, classification of matter, use of various representations, e.g., chemical formulas, structural formulas, empirical formulas, molecular formulas)
Way of Being	the set of behaviors, actions, and language associated with a particular discipline or knowledge area; a culture	specificity in the use of language; use of representations; application of skills, e.g., visualizing, problem-solving; validating solutions
Rule	memorized fact or set of facts that govern performance in a knowledge area; may be thought of as a convention that is required within the knowledge construction	the units that are reported as part of the solution when unspecified in the question. In chemistry, bond length would be an illustration, specified typically either in angstroms (e.g., in the U.S.) or picometers (e.g., in Europe)
	Additional examples: driving on the left side of the street in European countries; hand signaling with European cars which have steering wheels on the right side; spelling certain words with the addition of a “u”, e.g., valor – valour