Although the original authors did not include this graphic element in their research paper, it has become quite popular in certain circles. The graph nominally depicts the progression of a person from zero competence and confidence to a state of more realistic self-assessment earned through the acquisition of real ability. Popular depictions of this graph often include snarky labels, such as being at the top of “Mount Stupid” describing the early point of high confidence/ low competence (Stage 2) and in the “Valley of Despair” the much lower confidence trough following (Stage 4). The model is sometimes used pejoratively to demean the competence of someone. Like most name-calling strategies, this is rarely helpful and certainly does not encourage someone whose self-assessment exceeds their ability to realize and correct that situation.
A genuine increase in competence inevitably exposes the lack of knowledge, unearths questions, sources answers, locates knowledge in higher-order contexts, and develops processes to acquire and validate knowledge. It can also be important to address intention—whether someone truly wishes to learn or not. If a person becomes sufficiently anxious about lack of knowledge and skill they may resort to flight—to run away from the challenge. If someone is not really serious about acquiring knowledge and skill they will likely resort to defensive measures as their incompetence becomes evident.
Along the graph there is a steady progression in:
Depth of knowledge (how much is known about a domain),
The span of knowledge (how this operates across a domain),
The context of the knowledge (the meta-knowledge: what “type” of knowledge it is and how it relates to other domains), and
How the knowledge has been, is, or could be acquired (the learning process).
The table also loosely and unscientifically alludes to the state of mind of the person undergoing these transformations.
