conceptions out there, so many unresolved issues, and so much conflicting evi-
dence. And every day there are new discoveries, new artifacts, and new interpre-
tations that bring accepted lore into question.”
Jason, Evie, and Bruce are three individuals with varied understandings and
personal associations with the domain of history. Their differences are even
apparent to the untrained eye. For Jason, history is little more than a label at-
tached to a book in the classroom. There appears to be little breadth and
depth to his base of history knowledge, and his feelings about history are un-
formed. In Evie, we find an individual for whom history has a personal rele-
vance. She is a knowledge-seeker and apparently enjoys sharing her knowl-
edge with others, both in and out of the classroom. Bruce is someone that we
might readily identify as an expert—a recognized authority who has devoted
himself to the study of history. That devotion and Bruce’s labors in the field
have not only brought about a change in him over the years, but have also
contributed to the field itself.
What I see in Jason, Evie, and Bruce are three people at very different
points in a life-long journey toward expertise in an academic domain. For in-
dividuals like Evie and Bruce, that journey has been on-going for some time
and has brought them to places that are personally rewarding and profession-
ally enriching. Jason, by comparison, is an individual who has just begun this
challenging journey. We do not know how the years ahead will alter Jason’s
knowledge of history or transform his current attitudes toward that domain.
For all the obvious contrasts between Jason, Evie, and Bruce, it is precisely
this transformational process that captivates me the most, both as a teacher
and as a researcher. It is also this transformational process that is understud-
ied and underrepresented in the literature on expert–novice differences.
When I became a teacher decades ago, it was to help students like Jason
grow in their knowledge and skills in academic domains, like history, read-
ing, mathematics, or science. As with Dewey (1916/1944), I retain the belief
that one of the fundamental missions of formal education is to help the citi-
zenry become more knowledgeable and thoughtful in a range of subject-
matter domains. In effect, I believe strongly in the academic development of
students (Alexander, 2000). To achieve that end, however, educators must
understand the nature of the process that can potentially transform a true
neophyte, like Jason, into a recognized authority, like Bruce. What system-
atic cognitive and motivational developments should we expect in individuals
if we, as educators, are contributing to their continued growth in academic
domains, the foundations of the formal educational system?
In this chapter, I offer the Model of Domain Learning (MDL) as a means
of conceptualizing the critical journey toward academic competence. There
are many literatures that underlie the MDL, including theory and research on
human development, domain-specific learning, motivation, and strategic
274 ALEXANDER