Epistemic complexity

Draft

Definitions

The term epistemic complexity is used in several contexts. In various learning science, epistemic complexity often refers to the cognitive challenge of a task, in particular in constructivist whole task settings such as inquiry-based learning. (e.g. Lakkala, 2010). It is also used to describe the complexity of student productions.

• In Biology, “Biological evolution is a progressing process of knowledge acquisition (cognition) and, correspondingly, of growth of complexity. The acquired knowledge represents epistemic complexity.” (Kováč, 2007). Bailly and Longo (2003) provide a similar definition: {{quotation|“By this notion we mean the global functions of a system, the external description of it as given by the knowing subject (thus "epistemic").”.

• In artificial intelligence, epistemic complexity could be defined in terms of the “complexity of the decision problem for epistemic logics” (Vardi, 1989).

• In systems theory, “Rescher (1998) distinguished three 'modes', namely

epistemic, ontological and functional complexity. Among these modes of complexity, the epistemic embraces three categories: descriptive, generative and computational complexity” (Schlindwein et al., 2004).

• In constructivism, epistemic complexity could be related to epistemic fluency, i.e. be able to communicate across epistemic divides using different epistemic games. (Morrison and Collins, 2996).

Bibliography

• Bailly, Francis and Giuseppe Longo, (2003). Objective and Epistemic complexity in Biology, Invited lecture, International Conference on Theoretical Neurobiology, National Brain Research Centre, New Delhi, INDIA, February 2003. PDF

• Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic reasoning in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175–218.

• Kováč, Ladislav (2007). Information and Knowledge in Biology, Time for Reappraisal, Plant Signal Behavior 2(2): 65–73. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19516970

• Kováč L. Fundamental principles of cognitive biology. Evolution and Cognition. 2000;6:51–69.

• Giovanni B. Moneta (1993), A model of scientists’ creative potential: The matching of cognitive structure and domain structure, Philosophical Psychology Volume 6, Issue 1. DOI 10.1080/09515089308573075

• Lakkala, Minna (2010). How to design educational settings to promote collaborative inquiry: Pedagogical infrastructures for technology-enhanced progressive inquiry, Dissertation, Institute of Behavioural Sciences, University of Helsinki, Finland. PDF

• Morrison, D. and Allan Collins (1996), Epistemic Fluency and Constructivist Learning Environments, in Brent Gayle Wilson (ed.) Constructivist learning environments: case studies in instructional design, out of print. Google books

• Schlindwein, Sandro Luis and Ison, Ray (2004). Human knowing and perceived complexity: implications for systems practice. Emergence: Complexity and Organization, 6(3), pp. 27–32. http://oro.open.ac.uk/58/

• Rescher, N. (1998). Complexity A Philosophical Overview, New Brunswick: Transaction publishers.

• Vardi, M.Y. (1989). On the complexity of epistemic reasoning, Fourth Annual Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, 1989. LICS '89, Proceedings, 243-252.