Topic : The Role of tacit knowledge in Expertise.

	According to (Expertise, Anders Ericsson) Expertise refers to the mechanisms underlying the superior achievement of an expert, 
	that is, "one who has acquired special skill in or knowledge of a particular subject through professional training and practical experience" 
	(Webster's, 1976: 800). The term expert is used to describe highly experienced professionals such as medical doctors, accountants, teachers, 
	and scientists, but has been expanded to include individuals who attained their superior performance by instruction and extended practice: 
	highly skilled performers in the arts, such as music, painting, and writing; sports, such as swimming, running, and golf; and games, 
	such as bridge, chess, and billiards. 
	
	Tacit knowledge : tacit knowledge, knowledge whose origins and essential epistemic contents were simply not part of one's ordinary 
	consciousness (Polanyi, 1958) and Friedrich von Hayek (1962) . In more informal terms , it is the kind of knowledge that is owned by people,
	but they themselves can not represent or explicity state that , means it is not easily articulatable. The kind of knowledge is difficult to 
	transfer explicitly. It's transfer requires a good amount of interaction , experience , feedback and practice. 
	eg. driving a car, playing guitar, playing cricket, chess etc.
	
	As expertise is related to being superior in some perticular domain , As mentioned in the definition to become an expert a lot of amount of 
	practice , training , knowledge is required. As in case of chess player , amount of expertiese havily depends on knowledge of pattern 
	recognisation which improves on training and experience. Though initially all the knowledge that a person gains is learned explicitly , 
	but after a lot of amount of practice , it forms a solid structure , pattern in one's mind. So most of part of being an expert relies on
	the after practice which is implicit learning. This kind of knowledge gained comes into category of tacit knowledge.
	
	Amount of response time for experts in their expertise is really low. If the method of tacit knowledge is used , then the person is mapping
	his mind to different - different representations and his representations of knowledge depends on amount of experience, practice etc., 
	which can not be done in case of explicit learning technique. In the later case he has to take eventually the same amount of time 
	to logically deduce the move in the example of chess.
	
	As mentioned in the experiment mentioned by (Expertise, Anders Ericsson) , Even experts can not really articulate what they are thinking , 
	which would have been possible if knowledge used for representation was of explicit knowledge. This shows us why we should consider tacit
	knowledge as an important aspect of expertise.
	As interviews of experts in different areas tell us that they can not really give you an explicit rules for being expert. 
	
	The idea of having coach and practice is really important. Guidance is really important part in amount of time to learning, 
	eg. In the case of example shown in the class of picture of dog , pool etc made by dots was not really easy to recognise , 
	But when corrected and told about that picture will make the person aware of that pattern. Here probing a person and hinting him 
	significantly reduce the amount of time needed in learning , which would have been really much in self learning.
	
	On the idea of nativism and empiricsm on learning, a point was raised in the group of a person born with inheridatory capablities has
	already has some representation of his ability and will take really less time in become a expert in that area [eg. son of a professor 
	being a professor ,son of a farmer being farmer, No special training is needed to give to farmer's son (or really less ), But by 
	observation and analyzation of environment , He learns that.]  
	It was discussed whether we should consider this kind of learning as part of nativism or empiricism. As 
	this could be argued that this learning has some relation to his organisation of brain and herediatory system, But should we consider then
	that part as implicit learning ?? . This idea of implicit learning merges nativism and empiricism a slight.
	It was discussed that the person is actually doing an implicit learning in that environment for sure , but we can not surely state about 
	the how much hereditory factors affect learning.
	
	Do the persons being expert in research ares (scientific) also use tacit knowledge or explicit knowledge in coming up with new ideas. 
	Same question was discussed with respect to Artists also. As research knowledge is finally well articulated , well represented piece of 
	information, It is finally part of being explicit knowledge . Is the process of creating ideas also deals with explicit or tacit learning ??. 
		We discussed a common approach. The process of learning and understanding the scienetific symbols has to be very well 
		implicitly learned,the meanings of symbols has to be grounded and their concept should be very well formulated in one's mind. 
		So while creating new ideas a researcher essentially uses it's implicit learning , irrational thinking and keeps on verifying it 
		with scientific understanding or explicit rules. So one has to have a combined approach for creating scientific research because it has to 
		be ultimately well representable, but during the ideation process it can be different.
	
	manifold learning system:
		We discussed manifold learning system to understand the learning process. If one gets better in doing perticular task , then dimension 
		of his sample space decreases which eventually helps him to have faster decisions. eg. A man learning piano , initially has to keep his 
		attention on which wire is being strung, but later with practice this knowledge becomes implicit in him.
	
	
	Can we use word "expert" for computer systems ??
		We argued that if we consider the defintion of expert as being one capable of doing one task better than majority, we can consider that
	to be an expert. So in this regard computers could be said to be experts. eg. computers can perform the task of playing chess as efficently as
	man , even better than that. During the process they make use of their super computing powers and keep evaluating the entire states of the game,
	We argued that chess has only finite no of rows and coloumns , So the entire information required to encode the entire game is not so much. 
	So for this kind of tasks , computers can be said to be experts and they even do not need any tacit learning.
		But for tasks having much more difficult state system, much more intuition , feedback system, It is essential to have tacit learning.
	
	Do the experts have super talents ??
		The paper (Expertise, Anders Ericsson) suggests that there was no general superiority found in speed , memory or intelligence. 
	Superiority was only found in the domain specific areas. Even their transfering of their knowledge to other areas was not so much.
	eg. Chess players usually found to be good in chess, but it really did not help him to general pattern solving problems.
	
	One question who was left unanswered : Is mapping of our mind is explicit or implicit , Is representation of data in our mind is 
	really thourgh implicit learning or through explicit learning. We considered that it might be of both kinds, We proposed of a 
	circular model, in which main part of intuition generating was through implicit learning and further it was verified by explicit learning,
	if the task is not simple enough.
	
	Learning vs Unlearning:
		We discussed that unlearning is as important as learning is. I had different perspective from the group over this topic. 
			"I really do not consider unlearning and learning as two different things. I think that unlearning is just a corrective measure 
		in learning. Actually I consider unlearning as learning , because we are modifying our initial knowledge map or representation to 
		assimiliate or include the new concepts, So corrective features of learning are neccessary. But I do not find this to be a part of 
		unlearning. Because I consider unlearning as a term used in scientific community to denote about how they undertstood scientific 
		concepts in wrong manner , So they have to re-think , re-map their values, hence called unlearning.
			But actually in a broader sense about learning tacit knowledge , I consider unlearning as also a part of learning"
	
	The whole discussion can be used practically and is being used in a lot of organisation eg. in schools, institutes for learning perspective.
	Various ogranisations also create atmosphere for open sharing , working environment. As for a self learner , it is 
	difficult to come up with right piece of information and right ideas , So one needs to be guided. So through open environment , implicit 
	learning is encouraged.
	
	
	
	References:
		1.  [Ericsson, 1999] Ericsson, K. (1999). Expertise. In Wilson, R. A. and Keil, F. C., editors, MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive 
		Sciences (MITECS), pages 298–300. MIT Press.
		2.[Reber, 1996] Reber, A. S. (1996). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge : an essay on the cognitive unconscious. 
		Oxford psychology series ; 19. Oxford Univ. Press [u.a.], New York, NY [u.a.]. Arthur S. Reber. graph. Darst ; 24 cm. Literaturverz. S. 163 - 181.