Article Gold Open Access 2025

Hermeneutics of complexity and the limits of learning pre-specification

Journal of Philosophy of Education
Journal · Vol. 59 · Issue 3-4 · pp. 434-449
Abstract

Contemporary work confronts researchers and educators with a range of challenges, including those posed by complex environments in which workers grapple with uncertainty in high-stakes situations. A different challenge lies in the assumptions brought to learning design and facilitation, assumptions which together constitute a 'paradigm' concerning how to approach these tasks. Without a paradigm, designers and practitioners may exercise an incoherent practice; but if the paradigm is in some way problematic, then the practice may be compromised. In this article, we focus on work in complex environments, problematizing a particular paradigm - the 'pre-specification' approach - that is often brought to bear on it. The key to this paradigm is that work can be analysed and represented such that it can be specified in advance as a reference point for educational endeavours. We problematize key epistemological and ontological assumptions of this paradigm. Hermeneutics draws attention to the limits of these assumptions regarding what we can understand and represent about work, while complexity theory allows us to recognize ontological features of work that make pre-specification difficult or untenable. We conclude that in complex work, representation-making needs to be a distributed activity rather than a specialty, and it occurs at multiple points on the learning continuum rather that solely at the beginning. © 2025 The Author(s). Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Philosophy of Education Society of Great Britain.

Keywords

Author Keywords

Competency-based training representation complexity hermeneutics pre-specification

Index Keywords

Author Affiliations
Griffith University, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
Funding & Acknowledgements
No funding information
References 10 References
1 Arrow, Holly, Using complexity to promote group learning in health care, Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 16, 4, pp. 861-866, (2010)
2 Bahl, Rachna, Decision-making in operative vaginal delivery: When to intervene, where to deliver and which instrument to use? Qualitative analysis of expert clinical practice, European Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biology, 170, 2, pp. 333-340, (2013)
3 Biesta, Gert J.J., Five Theses on Complexity Reduction and its Politics, Complexity Theory and the Politics of Education, pp. 5-14, (2010)
4 International Journal of Innovation Management, (2001)
5 Clark, Richard E., Cognitive Task Analysis, Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology, Third Edition, pp. 577-593, (2008)
6 Complicity an International Journal of Complexity and Education, (2012)
7 Fenwick, Tara J., Towards socio-material approaches in simulation-based education: Lessons from complexity theory, Medical Education, 49, 4, pp. 359-367, (2015)
8 Pedagogy of the Oppressed, (1970)
9 Truth and Method, (2004)
10 Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction, (1985)
Quick Actions
Full Text via DOI
Citation Metrics
0
Times Cited (Scopus)

References 10
Document Identifiers