From ‘Expertise’ to Situated Reason

Abstract

A considerable number of experienced scientists were not successful on different aspects of three graphing tasks, despite their provenance from and frequency in undergraduate textbooks of their domain. The results suggest that only parts of some session protocols are consistent with existing cognitive models of graph interpretations. The chapter first unfolds a traditional analysis of interpretation and then provides details from one protocol to show why and in which way such an analysis has shortcomings. Even if not made thematic in a protocol, successful performance occurs against a background of a meaningful totality, a dense web of signification, in which graphs are used for the sake and in the service of particular purposes. The analyses show that the less successful non-university scientists also considered the graphs as unrelated to real ecological systems and therefore as useless.