Evolutionary categories for radiologists to gain expertise
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22279/navus.2018.v8n4.p109-124.721Keywords:
Knowledge. Learning. Expertise. Knowledge-intensive organizations.Abstract
The objective of the article is to identify and describe the evolutionary categories for a radiologist to gain the expertise. The study is supported by Bloom's et al. (1956) learning theory, which allows us to verify learning outcomes. From a qualitative study, the learning process of novice radiologists and specialists is presented and explained every step necessary to become a specialist in an area of diagnostic imaging. A total of 43 radiology and diagnostic imaging organizations participated in the study, of whom 21 were specialists and 28 were newcomers. The data were collected through observation, semi-structured interviews and result verification. The results show that: i) for the radiologist to make a decision, it is necessary to articulate declarative, procedural and conditional knowledge; ii) radiologists classified as specialists had at least 8 years of work, from their specialization in diagnostic imaging, which is close to the rule of ten years of preparation to become a specialist, proposed in the study by Ericsson and Lehmann (1996); iii) not every radiologist can achieve the skill; iv) based on Bloom's taxonomy et al. (1956), six categories were identified and described for radiologists. Recommendations for future practice arising from this study include: increasing active learning activities, where the activity is collaborative between beginner (s) and specialist (s); expose newcomers to challenging diagnoses, and share diagnostics with experts to encourage reflection; establish safe learning environments, where mistakes are understood as a learning opportunity.
Downloads
References
ANDERSON, J. R. Cognitive psychology and their acquisition. Psychological Review, Washington, v. 94, n. 1, p. 192-210, 1995.
ANDERSON, L. W. et. al. A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: a revison of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Nova York: Addison Wesley Longman, 2001. 336 p.
BANSAL, M. Knowledge management: capitalizing a hospital's assets. Express Healthcare Management. India's first newspaper for the health care business, 2001. Disponível em: <http://www.expresshealthcaremgmt.com/20010915/editorial2.htm> Acesso em: 18 jul. 2017.
BLOOM, B. S. et al. Taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: David Mckay, 1956. 262 p. (v. 1)
BLOOM, B. S. Innocence in education. The School Review, v. 80, n. 3, p. 333-352, 1972.
BRAUN, Virginia; CLARKE, Victoria. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative research in psychology, v. 3, n. 2, p. 77-101, 2006.
CAMPBELL, Timothy T.; ARMSTRONG, Steven J. A longitudinal study of individual and organisational learning. The Learning Organization, v. 20, n. 3, p. 240-258, 2013.
CHI, M.T.H; GLASER, R.; FARR, M.J. The nature of expert. Psychology Press, 2014.
CHURCHILL, Gilbert A.; IACOBUCCI, Dawn. Marketing research: methodological foundations. New York: Dryden Press, 2006.
CLARK, D. Learning domains or Bloom’s taxonomy: the three types of learning. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 06 julho 2017.
DARROCH, J. Knowledge management, innovation and firm performance. Journal of knowledge management, v. 9, n. 3, p. 101-115, 2005.
DE ANDRADE MARCONI, Marina; LAKATOS, Eva Maria. Metodologia do trabalho científico: procedimentos básicos, pesquisa bibliográfica, projeto e relatório, publicações e trabalhos científicos. Atlas, 2007.
DORAN, D. M.; SIDANI, S. Outcomes‐Focused Knowledge Translation: A Framework for Knowledge Translation and Patient Outcomes Improvement. Worldviews on Evidence‐Based Nursing, v. 4, n. 1, p. 3-13, 2007.
DOROW, Patrícia Fernanda. COMPREENSÃO DO COMPARTILHAMENTO DO CONHECIMENTO EM ATIVIDADES INTENSIVAS EM CONHECIMENTO EM ORGANIZAÇÕES DE DIAGNÓSTICO POR IMAGEM. 2017. Tese de Doutorado. Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina.
DREYFUS, S. E.; DREYFUS, H. L. A five-stage model of the mental activities involved in directed skill acquisition. Berkeley: Operations Research Center, 1980.
ERICSSON, K. A. An Introduction to The Cambridge Handbook of expert and Expert Performance: Its Development, Organization, and Content. 2006.
ERICSSON, K. A.; LEHMANN, A. C. Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual review of psychology, v. 47, n. 1, p. 273-305, 1996.
ERICSSON, K. A.; SMITH, J. Toward a general theory of expert: Prospects and limits. Cambridge University Press, 1991.
ERICSSON, K. Anders; CHARNESS, Neil. Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American psychologist, v. 49, n. 8, p. 725, 1994.
ERICSSON, K. Anders; KRAMPE, Ralf T.; TESCH-RÖMER, Clemens. The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of exper performance. Psychological review, v. 100, n. 3, p. 363, 1993.
ERICSSON, K. Anders; LEHMANN, Andreas C. Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual review of psychology, v. 47, n. 1, p. 273-305, 1996.
FITZGERALD, R. Radiological error: analysis, standard setting, targeted instruction and teamworking. European radiology, v. 15, n. 8, p. 1760-1767, 2005.
GIACOMINI, Diogo Schüler; SILVA, Erick Godinho; GRECO, Pablo Juan. Comparação do conhecimento tático declarativo de jogadores de futebol de diferentes categorias e posições. Revista Brasileira de Ciências do Esporte, v. 33, n. 2, 2011.
GUNDERMAN, R.; CHAN, S. Knowledge Sharing in Radiology 1. Radiology, v. 229, n. 2, p. 314-317, 2003.
GUSKEY, T. R. Benjamin S. Bloom’s contributions to curriculum, instruction, and school learning. In: ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH ASSOCIATION, 2001, Seattle. Proceedings... Seattle: AERA
HAYES, John; ALLINSON, Christopher W. Cognitive style and the theory and practice of individual and collective learning in organizations. Human relations, v. 51, n. 7, p. 847-871, 1998.
INKINEN, H. T.; KIANTO, A.; VANHALA, M. Knowledge management practices and innovation performance in Finland. Baltic Journal of Management, v. 10, n. 4, p. 432-455, 2015.
IPÊ, M. Knowledge sharing in organizations: A conceptual framework. Human resource development review, v. 2, n. 4, p. 337-359, 2003.
ISIK, Ö.; MERTENS, W.; VAN DEN BERGH, J. Practices of knowledge intensive process management: quantitative insights. Business Process Management Journal, v. 19, n. 3, p. 515-534, 2013.
JONASSEN, David H.; GRABINGER, R. Scott. Problems and issues in designing hypertext/hypermedia for learning. Designing hypermedia for learning, p. 3-25, 1990.
JORRITSMA, Wiard; CNOSSEN, Fokie; VAN OOIJEN, Peter MA. Adaptive support for user interface customization: a study in radiology. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, v. 77, p. 1-9, 2015.
KIM, Daniel H. The link between individual and organizational learning. The strategic management of intellectual capital, p. 41-62, 1998.
KIM, Y. W.; MANSFIELD, L. T. Fool me twice: delayed diagnoses in radiology with emphasis on perpetuated errors. American Journal of Roentgenology, v. 202, n. 3, p. 465-470, 2014.
LOMENA, M. Benjamin Bloom. Disponível em: . Acesso em: 06 julho 2017.
MARZANO, R. J. et al. Dimensions of thinking: A framework for curriculum and instruction. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 125 N. West St., Alexandria, VA 22314-2798, 1988.
MILES, I. Knowledge intensive business services: Prospects and policies. Foresight, v. 7, n.6, p. 39-63, 2005.
NONAKA, I.; TAKEUCHI, H. The knowledge-creating company: How Japanese companies create the dynamics of innovation. Oxford university press, 1995.
PATTI, Giuseppe et al. Point-of-care measurement of clopidogrel responsiveness predicts clinical outcome in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Journal of the American College of Cardiology, v. 52, n. 14, p. 1128-1133, 2008.
PETTY, Nicola J.; SCHOLES, Julie; ELLIS, Lorraine. Master's level study: learning transitions towards clinical expertise in physiotherapy. Physiotherapy, v. 97, n. 3, p. 218-225, 2011.
PIZZI, N. J. Information processing in biomedical applications. In: Human-Centric Information Processing Through Granular Modelling. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2009.
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION. Bloom’s Taxonomy: cognitive domain. Disponível em: <http://www.olemiss.edu/depts/ educ_school2/docs/stai_manual/manual8.html>. 06 julho 2017.
SCHUNK, D. H. Learning theories. Printice Hall Inc., New Jersey, 1996.
SENGE, Peter M. The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. Broadway Business, 2006.
SHOLES, Eric C. The effect of conative and affective traits on the development of occupational expertise of civilian Department of Defense scientists and engineers. The University of Alabama in Huntsville, 2011.
SIMON, Herbert A. Bounded rationality and organizational learning. Organization science, v. 2, n. 1, p. 125-134, 1991.
SMITH, P. L.; RAGAN, T.J. Instructional design. New York: Wiley, 1999.
SPECTOR, J. Michael; DAVIDSEN, Pål I. How can organizational learning be modeled and measured?. Evaluation and program planning, v. 29, n. 1, p. 63-69, 2006.
STERNBERG, Robert J. Psicologia Cognitiva. Porto Alegre: Artmed Editora, 2000.
STERNBERG, Robert J.; GRIGORENKO, Elena L. (Ed.). The psychology of abilities, competencies, and expertise. Cambridge University Press, 2003.
TARDIF, J., Pour un Enseignement Stratégique: L’apport de la Psychologie Cognitive. Montréal: Editions Logiques, 1997.
TRIVIÑOS, Augusto Nibaldo Silva. Introdução à pesquisa em ciências sociais: a pesquisa qualitativa em educação. São Paulo: Atlas, 1987. Outros números do Informe Rural ETENE: ANO, v. 3, p. 25, 2009.
WIEL, Margaretha; SZEGEDI, Kim; WEGGEMAN, Mathieu. Professional learning: Deliberate attempts at developing expertise. Professional learning: Gaps and transitions on the way from novice to expert, p. 181-206, 2004.
WILLIAMSON, Kenneth B. et al. Learning theory in radiology education. Radiology, v. 233, n. 1, p. 15-18, 2004.
Published
Issue
Section
License
O conteúdo da revista é de acesso público e gratuito, podendo ser compartilhado de acordo com os termos da Creative Commons Atribuição-Uso não-comercial-Vedada a criação de obras derivadas 4.0 Brasil. Você tem a liberdade de compartilhar — copiar, distribuir e transmitir a obra, sob as seguintes condições:
a) Atribuição — a atribuição deve ser feita quando alguém compartilhar um de seus artigos e deve sempre citar o nome da revista e o endereço do conteúdo compartilhado.
b) Uso não-comercial — você não pode usar esta obra para fins comerciais.
c) Vedada à criação de obras derivadas — você não pode alterar, transformar ou criar em cima desta obra.
Ficando claro que:
Renúncia — qualquer das condições acima pode ser renunciada se você obtiver permissão do titular dos direitos autorais. Domínio Público — onde a obra ou qualquer de seus elementos estiver em domínio público sob o direito aplicável, esta condição não é, de maneira alguma, afetada pela licença.
Outros Direitos — os seguintes direitos não são, de maneira alguma, afetados pela licença:
- Limitações e exceções aos direitos autorais ou quaisquer usos livres aplicáveis;
- os direitos morais do autor;
- direitos que outras pessoas podem ter sobre a obra ou sobre a utilização da obra, tais como direitos de imagem ou privacidade.
Aviso — para qualquer reutilização ou distribuição, você deve deixar claro a terceiros os termos da licença a que se encontra submetida esta obra.
A revista se reserva o direito de efetuar, nos originais, alterações de ordem normativa, ortográfica e gramatical, com vistas a manter o padrão culto da língua, respeitando, porém, o estilo dos autores.
Os trabalhos publicados passam a ser propriedade da revista Navus: Revista de Gestão e Tecnologia que deve ser consignada a fonte de publicação original. Os originais não serão devolvidos aos autores.
As opiniões emitidas pelos autores nos artigos são de sua exclusiva responsabilidade.
Esta obra está licenciada sob uma Creative Commons Atribuição-Uso não-comercial-Vedada a criação de obras derivadas 4.0 Brasil.
