The Structured Process Modeling Method (SPMM) : what is the best way for me to construct a process model?

More and more organizations turn to the construction of process models to support strategical and operational tasks. At the same time, reports indicate quality issues for a considerable part of these models, caused by modeling errors. Therefore, the research described in this paper investigates the development of a practical method to determine and train an optimal process modeling strategy that aims to decrease the number of cognitive errors made during modeling. Such cognitive errors originate in inadequate cognitive processing caused by the inherent complexity of constructing process models. The method helps modelers to derive their personal cognitive profile and the related optimal cognitive strategy that minimizes these cognitive failures. The contribution of the research consists of the conceptual method and an automated modeling strategy selection and training instrument. These two artefacts are positively evaluated by a laboratory experiment covering multiple modeling sessions and involving a total of 149 master students at Ghent University

Guidelines: The do's, don'ts and don't knows of direct observation of clinical skills in medical education.

IntroductionDirect observation of clinical skills is a key assessment strategy in competency-based medical education. The guidelines presented in this paper synthesize the literature on direct observation of clinical skills. The goal is to provide a practical list of Do's, Don'ts and Don't Knows about direct observation for supervisors who teach learners in the clinical setting and for educational leaders who are responsible for clinical training programs.MethodsWe built consensus through an iterative approach in which each author, based on their medical education and research knowledge and expertise, independently developed a list of Do's, Don'ts, and Don't Knows about direct observation of clinical skills. Lists were compiled, discussed and revised. We then sought and compiled evidence to support each guideline and determine the strength of each guideline.ResultsA final set of 33 Do's, Don'ts and Don't Knows is presented along with a summary of evidence for each guideline. Guidelines focus on two groups: individual supervisors and the educational leaders responsible for clinical training programs. Guidelines address recommendations for how to focus direct observation, select an assessment tool, promote high quality assessments, conduct rater training, and create a learning culture conducive to direct observation.ConclusionsHigh frequency, high quality direct observation of clinical skills can be challenging. These guidelines offer important evidence-based Do's and Don'ts that can help improve the frequency and quality of direct observation. Improving direct observation requires focus not just on individual supervisors and their learners, but also on the organizations and cultures in which they work and train. Additional research to address the Don't Knows can help educators realize the full potential of direct observation in competency-based education

Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for thought

Cognitive load is a theoretical notion with an increasingly central role in the educational research literature. The basic idea of cognitive load theory is that cognitive capacity in working memory is limited, so that if a learning task requires too much capacity, learning will be hampered. The recommended remedy is to design instructional systems that optimize the use of working memory capacity and avoid cognitive overload. Cognitive load theory has advanced educational research considerably and has been used to explain a large set of experimental findings. This article sets out to explore the open questions and the boundaries of cognitive load theory by identifying a number of problematic conceptual, methodological and application-related issues. It concludes by presenting a research agenda for future studies of cognitive load

Brain enhancement through cognitive training: A new insight from brain connectome

Owing to the recent advances in neurotechnology and the progress in understanding of brain cognitive functions, improvements of cognitive performance or acceleration of learning process with brain enhancement systems is not out of our reach anymore, on the contrary, it is a tangible target of contemporary research. Although a variety of approaches have been proposed, we will mainly focus on cognitive training interventions, in which learners repeatedly perform cognitive tasks to improve their cognitive abilities. In this review article, we propose that the learning process during the cognitive training can be facilitated by an assistive system monitoring cognitive workloads using electroencephalography (EEG) biomarkers, and the brain connectome approach can provide additional valuable biomarkers for facilitating leaners' learning processes. For the purpose, we will introduce studies on the cognitive training interventions, EEG biomarkers for cognitive workload, and human brain connectome. As cognitive overload and mental fatigue would reduce or even eliminate gains of cognitive training interventions, a real-time monitoring of cognitive workload can facilitate the learning process by flexibly adjusting difficulty levels of the training task. Moreover, cognitive training interventions should have effects on brain sub-networks, not on a single brain region, and graph theoretical network metrics quantifying topological architecture of the brain network can differentiate with respect to individual cognitive states as well as to different individuals' cognitive abilities, suggesting that the connectome is a valuable approach for tracking the learning progress. Although only a few studies have exploited the connectome approach for studying alterations of the brain network induced by cognitive training interventions so far, we believe that it would be a useful technique for capturing improvements of cognitive function

The Structured Process Modeling Theory (SPMT): a cognitive view on why and how modelers benefit from structuring the process of process modeling

After observing various inexperienced modelers constructing a business process model based on the same textual case description, it was noted that great differences existed in the quality of the produced models. The impression arose that certain quality issues originated from cognitive failures during the modeling process. Therefore, we developed an explanatory theory that describes the cognitive mechanisms that affect effectiveness and efficiency of process model construction: the Structured Process Modeling Theory (SPMT). This theory states that modeling accuracy and speed are higher when the modeler adopts an (i) individually fitting (ii) structured (iii) serialized process modeling approach. The SPMT is evaluated against six theory quality criteria

Performance of a cognitive load inventory during simulated handoffs: Evidence for validity.

BackgroundAdvancing patient safety during handoffs remains a public health priority. The application of cognitive load theory offers promise, but is currently limited by the inability to measure cognitive load types.ObjectiveTo develop and collect validity evidence for a revised self-report inventory that measures cognitive load types during a handoff.MethodsBased on prior published work, input from experts in cognitive load theory and handoffs, and a think-aloud exercise with residents, a revised Cognitive Load Inventory for Handoffs was developed. The Cognitive Load Inventory for Handoffs has items for intrinsic, extraneous, and germane load. Students who were second- and sixth-year students recruited from a Dutch medical school participated in four simulated handoffs (two simple and two complex cases). At the end of each handoff, study participants completed the Cognitive Load Inventory for Handoffs, Paas' Cognitive Load Scale, and one global rating item for intrinsic load, extraneous load, and germane load, respectively. Factor and correlational analyses were performed to collect evidence for validity.ResultsConfirmatory factor analysis yielded a single factor that combined intrinsic and germane loads. The extraneous load items performed poorly and were removed from the model. The score from the combined intrinsic and germane load items associated, as predicted by cognitive load theory, with a commonly used measure of overall cognitive load (Pearson's r = 0.83, p < 0.001), case complexity (beta = 0.74, p < 0.001), level of experience (beta = -0.96, p < 0.001), and handoff accuracy (r = -0.34, p < 0.001).ConclusionThese results offer encouragement that intrinsic load during handoffs may be measured via a self-report measure. Additional work is required to develop an adequate measure of extraneous load

Applying science of learning in education: Infusing psychological science into the curriculum

The field of specialization known as the science of learning is not, in fact, one field. Science of learning is a term that serves as an umbrella for many lines of research, theory, and application. A term with an even wider reach is Learning Sciences (Sawyer, 2006). The present book represents a sliver, albeit a substantial one, of the scholarship on the science of learning and its application in educational settings (Science of Instruction, Mayer 2011). Although much, but not all, of what is presented in this book is focused on learning in college and university settings, teachers of all academic levels may find the recommendations made by chapter authors of service. The overarching theme of this book is on the interplay between the science of learning, the science of instruction, and the science of assessment (Mayer, 2011). The science of learning is a systematic and empirical approach to understanding how people learn. More formally, Mayer (2011) defined the science of learning as the “scientific study of how people learn” (p. 3). The science of instruction (Mayer 2011), informed in part by the science of learning, is also on display throughout the book. Mayer defined the science of instruction as the “scientific study of how to help people learn” (p. 3). Finally, the assessment of student learning (e.g., learning, remembering, transferring knowledge) during and after instruction helps us determine the effectiveness of our instructional methods. Mayer defined the science of assessment as the “scientific study of how to determine what people know” (p.3). Most of the research and applications presented in this book are completed within a science of learning framework. Researchers first conducted research to understand how people learn in certain controlled contexts (i.e., in the laboratory) and then they, or others, began to consider how these understandings could be applied in educational settings. Work on the cognitive load theory of learning, which is discussed in depth in several chapters of this book (e.g., Chew; Lee and Kalyuga; Mayer; Renkl), provides an excellent example that documents how science of learning has led to valuable work on the science of instruction. Most of the work described in this book is based on theory and research in cognitive psychology. We might have selected other topics (and, thus, other authors) that have their research base in behavior analysis, computational modeling and computer science, neuroscience, etc. We made the selections we did because the work of our authors ties together nicely and seemed to us to have direct applicability in academic settings