Substances hazardous to health:the nature of the expertise associated with competent risk assessment

This research investigated expertise in hazardous substance risk assessment (HSRA). Competent pro-active risk assessment is needed to prevent occupational ill-health caused by hazardous substance exposure occurring in the future. In recent years there has been a strong demand for HSRA expertise and a shortage of expert practitioners. The discipline of Occupational Hygiene was identified as the key repository of knowledge and skills for HSRA and one objective of this research was to develop a method to elicit this expertise from experienced occupational hygienists. In the study of generic expertise, many methods of knowledge elicitation (KE) have been investigated, since this has been relevant to the development of 'expert systems' (thinking computers). Here, knowledge needed to be elicited from human experts, and this stage was often a bottleneck in system development, since experts could not explain the basis of their expertise. At an intermediate stage, information collected was used to structure a basic model of hazardous substance risk assessment activity (HSRA Model B) and this formed the basis of tape transcript analysis in the main study with derivation of a 'classification' and a 'performance matrix'. The study aimed to elicit the expertise of occupational hygienists and compare their performance with other health and safety professionals (occupational health physicians, occupational health nurses, health and safety practitioners and trainee health and safety inspectors), as evaluated using the matrix. As a group, the hygienists performed best in the exercise, and this group were particularly good at process elicitation and at recommending specific control measures, although the other groups also performed well in selected aspects of the matrix and the work provided useful findings and insights. From the research, two models of HSRA have been derived, an HSRA aid, together with a novel videotape KE technique and interesting research findings. The implications of this are discussed with respect to future training of HS professionals and wider application of the videotape KE method.

Parsing mathematical constructs:results from a preliminary eye tracking study

The semantic model described in this paper is based on ones developed for arithmetic (e.g. McCloskey et al. 1985, Cohene and Dehaene 1995), natural language processing (Fodor 1975, Chomsky 1981) and work by the author on how learners parse mathematical structures. The semantic model highlights the importance of the parsing process and the relationship between this process and the mathematical lexicon/grammar. It concludes by demonstrating that for a learner to become an efficient, competent mathematician a process of top-down parsing is essential.

The development of a semantic model for the interpretation of mathematics including the use of technology

The semantic model developed in this research was in response to the difficulty a group of mathematics learners had with conventional mathematical language and their interpretation of mathematical constructs. In order to develop the model ideas from linguistics, psycholinguistics, cognitive psychology, formal languages and natural language processing were investigated. This investigation led to the identification of four main processes: the parsing process, syntactic processing, semantic processing and conceptual processing. The model showed the complex interdependency between these four processes and provided a theoretical framework in which the behaviour of the mathematics learner could be analysed. The model was then extended to include the use of technological artefacts into the learning process. To facilitate this aspect of the research, the theory of instrumentation was incorporated into the semantic model. The conclusion of this research was that although the cognitive processes were interdependent, they could develop at different rates until mastery of a topic was achieved. It also found that the introduction of a technological artefact into the learning environment introduced another layer of complexity, both in terms of the learning process and the underlying relationship between the four cognitive processes.