Tacit Knowledge Implications for Implicit Learning and Teaching with an Emphasis on the View of Michael Polanyi

Document Type : پژوهشی

Authors

• Mohsen Bohlooli Faskhoodi ¹
• Saeid Zarghami Hamrah ²

¹ Iran Encyclopedia Compiling Foundation

² Kharazmi University

10.22067/fedu.v8i1.70812

Abstract

The main purpose of this study is to examine the implications of tacit knowledge in the field of teaching and learning. The argument is that tacit knowledge cannot be described explicitly in the form of propositions. Tacit teaching and learning is based on factors such as personal experience, relation to text, and subjectivity of knowledge than being dominated by scientific objectivity and rationalism on a series of fixed and predetermined rules and principles. In this research, conceptual analysis method with the aim of clarification was used through the analysis of the concepts of teaching and tacit learning. In this method, the concepts used in a new structure are analyzed and redefined. The results of this research are that belief in the existence of a tacit and implicit dimension of knowledge can lead to a new attitude in the education system. Therefore, the purpose of learning and teaching in the tacit approach is not the transfer of knowledge but the discovery and creation of knowledge in the close relationship between the teacher and the student.

Keywords

• Tacit knowledge
• Implicit Learning
• Implicit Teaching
• objectivity
• Procedural Knowledge

---

References

Bagheri, Kh. (2014). A Second-Order Implicit Knowledge: its implications for e-learning. E-Learning and Digital Media, 11(6), 633-643. (In Persian)

Beijers, R. P. (2000), Knowledge management in small and medium sized companies: Knowledge management from entrepreneurs. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(2). 162-79.

Berry, D. (1997). How implicit is implicit learning? New York: Oxford University Press.

Burbles, Nicholas. C. (2008). Tacit Teaching, Educational Philosophy and Theory, 40(5). 666-677.

Bush, P, (2008). Tacit Knowledge in Organizational Learning, New York: IGIP.

Collins, (2010). Tacit and Explicit Knowledge. Chicago: Chicago.

Coombs, J & Daniels, Le, (1991). Philosophical Inquiry: Conceptual Analysis. in Form of Curriculum Inquiry. (Eds.) Edmund C Short, New York,

Duffy, J. (2000). Knowledge Management: to be or not to be? Information Management Journal, 34(1), pp. 64-7.

Fleck, J. (1996). Informal Information Flow and the Nature of Expertise in Financial Services, International Journal of Technology Management, 11(1-2), .104-128.

Gadamer, (1989). Truth and Method. Trans. By Weinsheimer and D. G.

Galbreath, J. (2000). Knowledge Management Technology in Education: An Overview. Educational Technology, 40(5). 28-33.

Gascoigne, N., and T. Thornton (2013). Tacit Knowledge. Durham: Acumen.

Nonaka & Takeuchi, (1995). The Knowledge Creating Company, New York: Oxford University Press.

Polanyi, M. (1998), Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy, Routledge.

Polanyi, M. (2009). The Tacit Dimension, London Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Polanyi, M. (2014). The Study of Man, London Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Rexwhite & Ndubuisi, (2012). The Effect of Tacit Knowledge for Effective Teaching and Learning Processes among Lectures at the Delta State University, Abraka, Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), University of Nebraska.

Ryle, G, (2009). Collected Papers, Volume 2, Routledge.

Shim, H., & Roth, G. L. (2006). Expert professors and sharing tacit knowledge with mentees. In Human Resource Development in Asia: Thriving on dynamism and change. University Putra. Malaysia. 492- 500

Tsoukas, H. (2002). Do we really understand tacit knowledge? Paper presented in the Knowledge Economy and Society Seminar, LSE, Department of Information System, June 14, 2002.