an investigation of core beliefs about knowing and
TRANSCRIPT
An investigation of core beliefs about knowing and peripheral beliefs about learning in preservice graduate diploma teacher education students.
Mrs J.M. Brownlee
School of Learning and Development
Queensland University of Technology
Victoria Park Road
Kelvin Grove Q 4059
Telephone: +61 7 3864 3403
Facsimile: +61 7 3864 3987
A teaching intervention designed to facilitate the development of more sophisticated epistemological beliefs was implemented with twenty-nine preservice graduate teacher education students at the Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. The students were interviewed in relation to their beliefs about knowing and learning at the beginning (Time 1) and conclusion (Time 2) of the intervention. As part of the intervention, students were required to write a number of regular journal entries where they reflected on the nature of the educational psychology course content in relation to their beliefs about knowing and learning. At Time 2, most students described at least some relativistic core beliefs about knowing and transformative beliefs about learning. This perceived consistency between core and peripheral epistemological beliefs has implications for tertiary teaching.
Background
Over the last two decades, cognitive psychology has not been able to fully describe why many students have difficulties learning in a meaningful way (Schommer, 1990). Much of the research into effective teaching and learning has concentrated on the teacher behaviour-student outcome relationship (Fang, 1996). More recently, over the last decade or so, a focus on teacher thinking and teacher beliefs has provided interesting perspectives on the teaching-learning process (Fang, 1996; Richardson, Anders, Tidwell & Lloyd, 1991). In particular, epistemological beliefs or beliefs about knowing and learning, may offer some insights into effective teaching and learning (cf. Hofer, 1994; cf. Schommer, 1990, 1993a, 1993b).
Teachers are increasingly needing to deal with much diversity in classrooms. Indeed, such pluralism is a feature of society in general. Teachers need to manage and interact with a broad range of students, parents, colleagues and administrative personnel. Not only do intending teachers need to be able to facilitate learning that will help children to actively develop personal meaning for themselves, but such learning needs to occur in an
atmosphere of positive interpersonal relationships that promotes sound personal as well as cognitive development in children. Teachers need to be cognitively complex, able to develop professional theory based on both evidence and intuition, and willing to promote similar thinking in their students through support and challenge. Teacher education has been, and still remains, in a process of change with growing pressure for teachers to be critical reflective practitioners rather than technicians able to assemble elements of the learning environment (cf. Colton & Sparkes-Langer, 1993). Critical reflection requires teachers to be cognitively complex and attend to multiple viewpoints within a broader social, cultural and political context (cf. Hatton & Smith, 1995).
The development of cognitive complexity, flexibility, reflective thinking and tolerance may be partly informed by the growing body of research in educational psychology related to epistemological beliefs (e.g. Beers, 1984; Hofer, 1994; Schommer, 1990, 1993a, 1993b). The aim of this study was to investigate the nature of such epistemological beliefs in preservice graduate diploma teacher education students.
An overview of epistemological beliefs
In order to consider the range of students' epistemological beliefs about knowing and learning, this study has drawn on a framework that integrates terminology and perspectives related to the conceptions of learning and personal epistemology literature (Brownlee, 1996). A similar framework has been postulated by Hofer and Pintrich (1997). Using this framework, the structure of beliefs is considered to comprise core and peripheral beliefs whereby the peripheral beliefs are filtered by core beliefs. The more a belief is connected with other beliefs within the belief system, the more central the belief and the more impervious to change (Bem, 1970; Nisbett & Ross, 1980; Pajares, 1992; Peterman, 1991; Rokeach, 1968). Centrality will also determine the nature of the influence of that belief on others in the belief system (Bem, 1970; Rokeach, 1968). Hence, centrality is defined in terms of connectedness with, or underlying importance to, other beliefs.
Epistemological beliefs are considered to have a filtering effect on other knowledge and beliefs (Posner, Strike, Hewson & Gertzog, 1982). Shaver (1992) described these epistemological belief systems as "epistemologies-as-knowledge building" (p.19) which will be referred to as core beliefs about knowing in this study. Core beliefs about knowing reflect a person's beliefs about what knowledge is, how it can be gained, its degree of certainty, and the limits and criteria for determining knowledge (Perry, 1981).
Epistemologies-as-learning (Shaver, 1992) are considered to be beliefs about individual learning which constitute more peripheral beliefs within an epistemology-as-knowledge. This means that beliefs related to individual learning, such as learning strategies, motivation, influences on learning and conceptions of learning are more likely to change depending on the particular learning context. These beliefs are reflected in the student learning literature that describes conceptions of learning (see Marton & Säljö, 1976; Säljö, 1979; Marton, Dall'Alba & Beatty, 1993; Marton, Watkins & Tang, 1995), approaches to learning (see Biggs, 1985, 1992; Entwistle, 1998), and learning outcomes (see Biggs, 1989; Marton & Säljö, 1976). Beliefs about knowing and learning will now be discussed in more detail.
Beliefs about knowing
Developmental epistemological beliefs, described in the work of Baxter Magolda (1993), Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger and Tarule (1986), Perry (1970, 1981, 1988) may be considered to reflect core beliefs which have a filtering effect on all knowledge and beliefs, including the context specific conceptions of learning and teaching (Posner et al., 1982; Sutton, Cafarelli, Lund, Schurdell & Bischel, 1996).
Probably one of the most influential researchers in the area of epistemological beliefs has been William Perry (1970). Perry noticed that Harvard liberal arts students moved through several positions starting from a dualistic view that truths exist and can be transmitted from an authority moving then towards multiplism where personal opinions and ultimate truths are accepted because all truths are not yet established by authorities. In this position, individuals begin to rely less on authorities for absolute truths, however a dualism still exists because personal opinions and truths are still considered to be "right" or "wrong". The next position, relativism subordinate, constitutes a major shift in epistemological thinking because now individuals consider that knowledge is actively and personally constructed, although this occurs in some contexts only. Absolute truths can no longer exist because truth is considered to be relative to individuals' personal interpretations of experiences. The next position, relativism, constitutes a view that knowledge is actively and personally constructed in all contexts. The final positions of commitment, still reflect relativistic thinking. However, particular beliefs are more valued than others and are committed to in a flexible manner.
Although these positions were not intended to focus on specific gender issues, they were derived using male Harvard students. Belenky et al. (1986) have described a similar sequence of epistemological development with a specific focus on females. Belenky et al. (1986) traced the development of epistemological beliefs by interviewing 135 women from academic and non-academic backgrounds. The women were asked to respond to a number of open-ended questions which were intended to reflect moral, cognitive and identity development. Belenky et al. (1986) postulated five stages in the development of epistemological beliefs which closely align with those described by Perry (1981). These include received (dualism), subjective (multiplism), procedural (relativism subordinate) and constructed (relativism and commitment) ways of knowing. Baxter Magolda (1993) also described four stages of epistemological development that suggested changes in terms of complexity and reflective thinking similar to those described by Perry (1981) and Belenky et al. (1986). However within each of these stages she described beliefs about knowing that included ways of knowing typical of both genders.
Schommer (1989, 1990, 1993a, 1993b) researched the influence of epistemological beliefs on learning. Building on the work of the developmental epistemological studies (Baxter Magolda, 1993; Belenky et al, 1986; Perry, 1981), Schommer conceived of epistemological beliefs as more than a uni-dimensional set of beliefs that developed over time. Over a series of studies (1989, 1990, 1993a, 1993b) she described beliefs about knowing as a multidimensional set of more or less independent beliefs. This means that individuals may be sophisticated in some beliefs and yet naïve in others. Schommer (1989, 1990, 1993a, 1993b) has described five dimensions of beliefs about knowing which include (a) omniscient authority, (b) certain knowledge, (c) simple knowledge, (d) quick learning, and (e) fixed ability. More recently, Schommer (1994) has conceptualised such beliefs as a kind of frequency distribution where "for example, sophisticated learners may believe a vast amount of knowledge is evolving, some knowledge is yet to be discovered, and a very small amount of knowledge is unchanging. . .On the other hand, naïve learners may believe a vast amount of information is certain, some knowledge is yet to be discovered, and a very small amount of knowledge is changing." (Schommer, 1994, p.302). This multiplicity of dimensions means "that epistemological beliefs do not necessarily develop in synchrony" (Schommer, 1994,
p.302) and that learning may in fact be determined by individual as well as a combination of beliefs.
Beliefs about learning
Epistemologies-as-learning are considered to be beliefs about individual learning and teaching which constitute more peripheral beliefs within the epistemological belief system (Shaver, 1992). This means that such beliefs are more likely to be context specific. Therefore, beliefs about learning/teaching strategies, motivation, influences on learning/teaching and conceptions of learning/teaching are more likely to change depending on the particular context. The current study is focussed on conceptions of learning, learning strategies, and perceptions of learning outcomes as peripheral beliefs.
Marton et al. (1993), building on the work of Säljö (1979), found that Social Science students at the Open University in Britain experienced the nature of learning in six qualitatively different ways. These are almost identical to those of Säljö's conceptions (1979) except for the sixth conception which represents an existential extension of the fifth conception. The conceptions included (a) Increasing one's knowledge (b) Memorising and reproducing (c) Applying (d) Understanding (e) Seeing something in a different way and (f) Changing as a person.
There are two fundamental differences between these six conceptions of learning. The first involves how knowledge can be gained (Wilkinson, 1989). In the quantitative conceptions (a), (b), and (c) the learner has the intention to acquire external knowledge through transmission of knowledge from an authority which often results in a surface approach to learning. When students adopt a surface approach they may have a failure avoiding intention and use strategies that complement this motivation such as rote learning (Biggs, 1985). A dualistic epistemological orientation to knowledge can be described similarly in terms of categorical, unreflective thinking that is transmitted by an external source (cf. Baxter Magolda, 1993; Belenky et al, 1986; Perry, 1981). Considering the filtering role of beliefs about knowing, it is possible that dualistic core beliefs are likely to facilitate the quantitative or reproductive beliefs about learning described by Marton et al. (1993) where students are not likely to consider they are responsible for actively developing their own meaning and are more likely to engage in surface approaches to learning. It is possible that such beliefs about learning will also be related to an individuals' beliefs about teaching; in particular a reproductive, teacher centred perspective on teaching.
The qualitative conceptions (d), (e) and (f) describe beliefs in learning as a process of active transformation of knowledge by the individual to extract meaning from the learning task. Such beliefs are more likely to influence the use of deep approaches to learning where the learner has the intention to gain personal meaning and uses strategies that complement this intention by making links with prior knowledge (Biggs, 1985). Core relativistic beliefs about knowing may influence these qualitative beliefs about learning where individuals take responsibility for actively reflecting on and transforming information to develop personal meaning. These qualitative beliefs about knowing and learning are then likely to be reflected in a transformative qualitative orientation to teaching.
The second major difference relates to the nature of what is learnt (Wilkinson, 1989) or the structure and certainty of knowledge. Individuals with quantitative beliefs about learning, according to Marton et al. (1993), view knowledge as discrete elements (structure) existing "out there" (certainty of knowledge) that can be absorbed without transformation. Conversely, the qualitative conceptions reflected beliefs that knowledge is complex or interconnected and relative to particular contexts (not absolute). Again, such views of the
nature of knowledge strongly suggest the dualistic-relativistic distinctions made by Baxter Magolda (1993), Belenky et al. (1986), and Perry (1981) in beliefs about knowing.
There is evidence to suggest that many first year student teachers may hold beliefs that learning and teaching involve a process of transmitting information from the teacher to the learner (Lawrence, 1992). This could be considered to be a reproductive view of teaching and learning. When individuals hold such beliefs they are more likely to adopt surface approaches to learning (Marton & Säljö, 1976; Säljö, 1979) which are considered to result in fragmented learning outcomes (Marton & Säljö, 1976). Therefore, preservice teacher education students may need to be encouraged to develop transformative beliefs about learning and teaching. This means that active engagement is required in the process of making meaning both in terms of their own learning and that of the students for whom they will be responsible.
It is likely that core beliefs about knowing, which are considered to filter all knowledge and beliefs, may influence beliefs about learning and teaching in specific learning situations and therefore how a person is likely to approach learning/teaching in that particular context. This has implications for teacher educators who wish to facilitate transformative beliefs in students. If such a consistency between core and peripheral beliefs is likely, then teaching programs may need to focus on transformative beliefs about learning and teaching indirectly through teaching strategies that help students in a personal meaning making process and directly through an explicit reflective process related to students core beliefs about knowing. Only then may students develop beliefs about knowing and learning that may influence transformative teaching practice in primary schools.
Aim and research questions
The aim of this study was to investigate the nature of epistemological beliefs (core and peripheral beliefs) before and after students engaged in a teaching intervention designed to encourage the development of epistemological beliefs.
There are two main research questions that emerged from this aim: (A) What is the nature of epistemological beliefs in preservice graduate teacher education students?; and (B) What relationship exists between core beliefs about knowing and beliefs about learning in the intervention group?
Design of study
This paper reports on the beliefs about knowing and learning espoused by students during
interviews at the beginning (Time 1) and end (Time 2) of a teaching intervention that encouraged
students to develop more sophisticated epistemological beliefs. The following discussion of participants, setting, data collection, and data analysis will provide a more detailed description of the study.
Participants
The teaching intervention took place in a pre-service teacher education context at the
Queensland University of Technology (QUT), Australia, using 29 Graduate Diploma in Education
students. The Graduate Diploma in Education (primary) is a one year course that prepares
individuals with undergraduate degrees to teach in Queensland primary schools. The graduate
students were chosen because they were involved in a year long educational psychology unit
taught by the inquirer. It was anticipated that the longer time frame would offer more opportunities for students to reflect on and possibly reconstruct their epistemological beliefs. Students were assigned to tutorial groups in a random way, informed of the teaching intervention during their first tutorial session and then given the opportunity to withdraw from the tutorial group and the study if they wished. Students came from a variety of disciplines in their undergraduate degrees including Business, Social Science, Leisure Management, Psychology, Visual and Performing Arts, Science, Literature, and Nursing. There were 3 males and 26 females. Their mean age was 27.65 years.
The setting
All Graduate Diploma of Education students at QUT complete the core educational psychology unit, Human Learning and Development. The topics in the unit included theories of learning, motivation, structuring effective learning environments, learning styles, collaborative learning groups, communication skills, child development (cognitive, social and emotional), teaching to difference, and ethnicity. This unit was organised so that each week, over one year, students were engaged in a 21/2 hour tutorial session.
The inquirer asked students to reflect on the unit content in relation to the epistemological beliefs literature and their own epistemological beliefs. For example, when discussing the topic of cognitive development, students also reflected on the development of intellectual functioning from an epistemological perspective (e.g., Perry's work). A relational organisation for the course content was thus provided by encouraging students to link the tutorial content to an epistemological beliefs framework.
Students submitted journal entries, participated in interviews, and transcribed their initial interviews for assessment. The writing of regular journal reflections was a key feature of the teaching intervention. Essentially the journals helped students to reflect explicitly on their epistemological beliefs. Students wrote at least eight required journal entries throughout the year related to specific topics discussed in the educational psychology unit. They were free to complete as many reflections as they wished, but the inquirer assessed only eight journal entries. The inquirer distributed information that offered guidelines for writing journals and considerable discussion took place in tutorials regarding the process of reflection.
Students were repeatedly reminded throughout the intervention that they were not being assessed on the nature of their beliefs. As well as the usual criteria associated with appropriate writing style, the inquirer assessed students on the degree to which they reflected on their personal beliefs about learning and knowledge, their demonstrated understanding of key concepts, the sophistication of their reflections (descriptive, dialogic, critical) and their ability to link theory to personal beliefs and experiences. In this way the inquirer hoped that students would not perceive the need to reflect on particular sophisticated epistemological beliefs described in their readings to achieve higher grades. The various constructions related to epistemological beliefs that emerged in the journal reflections were selected to represent a range of epistemological beliefs and then presented anonymously to the students as a whole group through the tutorial discussions to stimulate further thought.
Data collection
Qualitative data was collected at Time 1 and Time 2 using a semi-structured interview format. At Time 1, the interviews took between 35 and 60 minutes, with the average being approximately 40 minutes in duration. They were audio taped for later transcription by the students. The inquirer conducted the Time 1 interviews in the first two weeks of semester before any discussions about learning and teaching took place in the tutorial sessions. The Time 2 interviews took place at the end or the unit. These interviews were between 30 and 70 minutes with an average of about 60 minutes in duration. They were conducted and transcribed verbatim by the inquirer.
The questions used in both interviews related to beliefs about knowing which were similar to those used by Belenky et al's. (1986) in their study of women's epistemological beliefs. The inquirer also asked students to describe their beliefs about learning using similar questions to those used in the T&LiTE Project (1992). See Attachment 1 for details of interview questions.
Data analysis
Analysis of the qualitative data was conducted using an inductive approach which drew
heavily on the developmental epistemological literature to interpret results. This descriptive-interpretative approach to analysis made it possible to take account of many viewpoints before deriving theory (cf. Maykut & Morehouse, 1996). It is preferable to have theory that is grounded in the data because it is unlikely that any a priori theory will be able to fully consider the multiple perspectives that may exist. The categories that emerged from the data were audited by a second inquirer to establish trustworthiness and credibility of the categories (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). QSR NUD*IST (Non-numerical Unstructured Data Indexing Searching and Theorising) (Richards & Richards, 1994) was used to assist in the organisation of data emerging from the transcriptions of the audio tapes. The results are presented in two distinct sections: the first section is a description of the categories of beliefs about knowing and learning while the second is a report of the relationships between core and peripheral beliefs.
Results
Categories of beliefs about knowing and learning
The major categories of beliefs that will be discussed include beliefs about knowing and beliefs about learning. These categories emerged in both Time 1 and Time 2 because the same questions were posed across time phases. These results address the first research question (A) What is the nature of epistemological beliefs in preservice graduate teacher education students?
Beliefs about knowing
Overall, the comments made by students regarding their core beliefs about knowing could be divided into five main categories: CON, INCONSISTENT, CONREC, SUBREC and REC beliefs. These categories are described and exemplified in Table 1. In the context of this
study, such core beliefs about knowing refer to an individual's dominant or default beliefs. Students were asked to comment on their beliefs about knowing in a global manner with regard to their own general beliefs about knowing. Therefore, it was expected that responses that were not focussed on a specific domain of knowledge would be indicative of their default or dominant core beliefs about knowing.
Table 1
Descriptions and exemplars for categories of core beliefs about knowing
Categories Descriptions Example statements
Construct reasoned truths
CON
How: individuals construct personal truths that are supported with evidence; this means that individuals actively create their own truths rather than passively receive truths that are a direct representation of reality. Experts facilitate the construction of reasoned truths
What: individuals have opinions that are reasoned hence some opinions are better than others because they are informed by current research and experience; the CON-T beliefs in this category represent an overarching, differentiated structure that integrates all of an individual's beliefs about the nature of truth
I think that is all tied in with my beliefs on not being an absolute right or an absolute wrong and people are entitled to their own opinions as long as their opinions are valid, are reasoned out, they are not just an opinion off the top of their head. They have actually reasoned out their opinions and said well I think it is because of such and such so I think knowledge is a very personal thing as well. (52)
Construct reasoned truths and receive absolute truths
INCONSISTENT
CONREC
How: individuals construct personal truths that are supported with evidence and individuals receive absolute (right/wrong and universal) truths from an external source; this means that individuals actively create their own truths and passively receive truths that are a direct representation of reality. Experts facilitate the reception of absolute truths
What: individuals have opinions that are reasoned and truths that are absolute (right/wrong and universal); CON-T and REC-T
I still think that. . . there are some things that are, you know obviously true, maybe like some of the maths, like some things are black and white but generally truth still for me comes from taking what is around you and putting your own interpretation on lots of things, so I guess listening to other people and making some judgements I suppose about what you believe about that. (32)
beliefs represent separate structures in this category hence beliefs are not integrated by an overarching, differentiated structure
Construct subjective truths and receive absolute truths
SUBREC
How: individuals construct personal truths but these truths are not supported with evidence and individuals receive absolute (right/wrong and universal) truths from an external source; this means that individuals actively create their own truths which are intuitive rather than informed and passively receive truths that are a direct representation of reality. Experts facilitate the reception of absolute truths
What: individuals have opinions that are not reasoned but are subjective in nature and truths that are absolute (right/wrong, universal); the SUBREC-T and REC-T beliefs in this category represent separate structures which are not integrated by an overarching, differentiated structure
I still think truth is made up of personal opinion so I strongly still believe that it is one's opinion, truth is. And it can change to varying sort of different situations and things like that. So I think it is a personal sort of thing. . . [An opinion is] something you may not know much about but you have sort of a feeling inside. . . (43).
Receive absolute truths
REC
How: individuals receive absolute (right/wrong and universal) truths from an external source; this means that individuals passively receive truths that are a direct representation of reality. Experts facilitate the reception of absolute truths
What: individuals have truths that are absolute (right/wrong, universal) truths; the REC-T beliefs in this category represent a single organising structure that is undifferentiated
When I talk about truth I guess. . .things that are pretty much laid out as in I believe in absolute not relativistic truths. . . The best way I can give it is as an analogy - if you have a white board and you look at the white board it is white but if somebody else looks at the white board through rose coloured glasses they think it is rose where in fact it hasn't changed the fact that the white board is still white. (48)
From REC through to CON beliefs there is an increase in focus on beliefs that truth is constructed and reasoned and corresponding decrease in focus on truths as absolute and received. REC beliefs present the most naïve perspective in this study because individuals only describe truths as received and absolute. SUBREC beliefs constitute a progression
from REC beliefs because individuals now recognise that at least some truths are individually constructed. However, students with SUBREC beliefs still do not recognise that constructed truths may also need to be reasoned. In the next category, CONREC beliefs, students believe that some truths are constructed and reasoned. However, these students still have a strong focus on core beliefs in the reception of absolute truths. Next, students who are described as being INCONSISTENT also have mixed beliefs about knowing which involve both the construction of reasoned truths and the reception of absolute truths. However, these students hold stronger beliefs throughout their interview responses in the construction of reasoned truths than those with CONREC beliefs. Finally, students with CON beliefs are aware that truths are predominantly constructed and reasoned. Overall, in this study, there appeared to be a progression in terms of sophistication of core beliefs from REC through to CON beliefs.
Beliefs about learning
The second major category to emerge was beliefs about learning which comprised beliefs about learning strategies, conceptions and outcomes. These categories are described and exemplified in Table 2. Such beliefs about learning refer to an individual's beliefs about their own learning in an academic context.
Table 2
Descriptions and exemplars for categories of beliefs about learning
Categories Description Example statements
Learning strategies
transformative
learning strategies
strategies that transform information in order to derive personal meaning; these strategies are espoused with a clear preference for transformative learning strategies overall, although they may indicate that in certain contexts reproductive strategies are appropriate
I guess I look at it more, I integrate other aspects of life or other knowledge that I have rather than it just being this new sort of isolated piece of knowledge. That for me is the deeper level when I integrate it into some sort of whole in terms of my life and my other knowledge I have. (33)
reproductive learning strategies
strategies that reproduce information in order to avoid failure; no or few connections are made with prior knowledge; strategies are often focussed on memorising or reproducing facts or studying without reflection; facilitates reproductive learning
What I have done in the past - particularly if there is something I don't understand, I just relate it to something I will remember when the times comes to recall it. You can do patterns, like taking the first letter of the word. (36 Time 1)
Conceptions of learning
changing as a learning is a transformative in . . .the way I am learning now has
person nature; learning changes you as a person; an existential conception of learning
changed me as a person not only because its a whole new way of learning but I think what I am learning has changed me as a person. (30)
changing world views
learning is a transformative in nature; learning changes your views or perspectives on things
I guess the easiest way I can say it now is that learning is when you have basically changed your world view. (48)
broader view of learning
learning is a transformative in nature; learning is being open to other ideas; generally describes a broader view of learning than just 'understanding'
I think is learning is just being open to other ideas and other suggestions and other opinions. (43)
understanding learning is a transformative in nature; learning is a process of active knowledge construction by the individual to extract meaning from the learning task
Learning to me is a personal process of making meaning. And I don't think that has really changed, everybody has their own preferred way of learning (62)
changing behaviour
learning is a change in an individuals' behaviour; not clearly transformative in nature
Learning is probably about changing thoughts and behaviours. Once again it happens without us being aware of it, it is something that is happening all the time.(50)
acquisition learning is reproductive in nature; learning is acquiring information without making the information meaningful to the individual
Learning is a process you go through when you come to know something new. Maybe just reinforcing something you already knew. Just expanding your mind, or your skills whatever it might be that your learning about. (36)
Learning outcomes
changing views individuals know they have learnt something when their views change and become a part of the person's knowledge; clearly transformative in nature
When it's your own, when it's knowledge. . . it's become a part of you. (45)
being open to further learning
individuals recognise that learning will never be complete; reflects a view that truth is constructed and hence not absolute and completely 'knowable'; clearly transformative in nature
I understand that I will never ever learn everything about anything. . . I can never say that I have learnt everything that there is to know, I know that (55)
being able to understand & apply
individuals know they have learnt something when they can make meaning of the information and apply the new knowledge to other contexts; clearly transformative in nature
I have learnt more about it and that is just because I know because I can apply it and explain it to other people and I understand it. It fits in well and I can fit it into my history and background. (55)
relating to other issues
individuals know they have learnt something when they can make connections to other ideas, concepts, theories; clearly transformative in nature
I know I have learnt something when I can make connections with my other knowledge, when I can see how it fits into the bigger picture and when I can actually apply it in a different context. (62)
relating to epistemological beliefs
individuals know they have learnt something when they can come to an understanding of the truth or question such "truths"; clearly transformative in nature
I think that if you do fully understand something you probably begin to question it. So if you understand something you think well what if this happened and it wouldn't be true so I think when you do understand something you wouldn't just take it as the truth. (40)
being able to explain
individuals know they have learnt something when they are able to explain what they had learnt to others; not always clearly transformative in nature
I suppose usually either when I feel confident enough to discuss it with other people or to explain it to someone, to teach it to someone else. (52)
changing behaviour
individuals know they have learnt something when their behaviour changes in some way; not clearly transformative in nature
. . .being able to use the information or to change your behaviour (50)
being able to recall & apply
individuals know they have learnt something when they are able to remember, recall, retell information and then use that information in some context; reproductive in nature
It is only really by testing yourself on it in some way or by using your knowledge in some way that you know it. . . .so I realise that I know these things about it by seeing what I can recall and use. (48)
evidenced by results
individuals know they have learnt something when their results indicate success; reproductive in nature
[You know you have learnt something when you have] passed an exam. I mean I guess that is probably one way, you learn as much that you can put it down on paper. (32)
evidenced by automatic responses
individuals know they have learnt something when knowledge simply emerges without any
I say you just know. (48)
awareness of how this occurs; not clearly transformative in nature
being related to affective issues
individuals know they have learnt something when there is an inner feeling of confidence, comfort or satisfaction associated with the learning outcome; not clearly transformative in nature
when I have learnt something I am really comfortable with it. . . (54)
Within each of the categories for learning, there emerged clear distinctions in subcategories between transformative and reproductive perspectives of learning. Although these perspectives are broad, they allowed for overall differences to be noted in students' responses. Transformative learning beliefs reflected the perspective that learning is a process of active, personal construction of meaning. Such beliefs are transformative in nature because understanding emerges from a transformation of the information in relation to the learners' prior knowledge rather than a focus on aggregating quantities of information that remained unconnected to prior knowledge. Reproductive learning beliefs reflected an orientation that learning is a process of reproducing rather than transforming knowledge. Therefore, there was no transformation of the information and limited or no connection to the learner's prior knowledge. The learner with a reproductive perspective aimed to acquire and transfer quantities of information without any transformation of the information to develop personal meaning.
Relationship between core beliefs about knowing
and beliefs about learning
In response to research question (B) What relationship exists between core beliefs about knowing and beliefs about learning? students' beliefs about learning are compared with their core beliefs about knowing to examine the nature of relationships between beliefs. Only the Time 2 interviews were used for this part of the analysis because students were able to articulate their beliefs more clearly at this time phase. This clarity was possibly the result of prolonged reflection on their epistemological beliefs over the course of the year.
In order to consider relationships between beliefs, it was necessary to categorise individuals, rather than responses. With regard to core beliefs about knowing, mostly students described a single set of beliefs. At Time 2, there were 18 students with CON beliefs, three with CONREC beliefs, and one with REC beliefs. Only seven students described multiple beliefs and were subsequently categorised as having INCONSISTENT core beliefs about knowing. However, it was necessary to deal with beliefs about learning differently because nearly all students held multiple beliefs about learning. Therefore, in order to simplify the consideration of relationships between core beliefs about knowing and beliefs about learning, individuals were categorised according to the most sophisticated belief espoused. This meant that it was then possible to consider individuals' most sophisticated beliefs about learning conceptions and learning outcomes in relation to their core beliefs about knowing.
Sophistication of beliefs about learning was determined by using Marton's et al. (1993) conceptions of learning research as a guide. Marton et al. (1993) described six qualitatively different conceptions of learning which formed a hierarchy from reproductive through to
more transformative conceptions of learning. These conceptions of learning are described in more detail in the literature review.
It could be expected that individuals who have CON beliefs about knowing that reflect the construction of reasoned truths might conceive of learning as a process of construction of knowledge or hold a transformative view. Similarly, those who have REC beliefs that individuals receive absolute truths, might be expected to conceive of learning from a reproductive perspective where individuals receive information rather than construct personal meaning. These assumptions emerge from a framework of core-periphery beliefs (Bem, 1970; Nisbett & Ross, 1980; Pajares, 1992; cf. Peterman, 1991; Rokeach, 1968) and the notion that core beliefs about knowing filter other beliefs and knowledge (cf. Posner et al., 1982; cf. Sutton et al., 1996).
Learning strategies
Students commented on the use of a range of learning strategies which were mostly transformative in nature. Only a few students described the use of learning strategies other than transformative learning strategies. It could be expected that students with some CON beliefs might espouse the use of at least some transformative learning strategies considering such core beliefs indicate construction of individual truths. This was certainly the case in the Time 2 analysis because students (n=28) with CON, INCONSISTENT and CONREC beliefs all described such strategies. It is interesting to note that even the student with REC beliefs espoused transformative learning strategies. There was only one student with CON beliefs and two who held CONREC beliefs who were less focussed on transformative learning strategies at Time 2.
Conceptions of learning
In Time 2, individual students often described a range of beliefs in response to the question "What is learning?". These included one or more of the following subcategories: namely, learning as changing as a person, changing world views, a broader view of learning, understanding, changing behaviour, and acquisition.
Students who described learning as changing as a person, changing world views, a broader view of learning, and understanding essentially described learning as transformative in nature. This means that when students espoused such conceptions of learning they were clearly indicating a view that learning needed to involve a process of making personal meaning.
When students commented on learning as changing behaviour and acquisition they were considered to be describing a more reproductive perspective of learning because they were not clearly articulating learning as a process of making personal meaning.
Students often espoused a range of conceptions of learning within their responses, however in Table 3 only their most sophisticated conception is presented in order to simplify the process of considering their conceptions of learning in relation to the core beliefs about knowing.
Table 3
Relationship between students' most sophisticated conception of learning and core beliefs about knowing at Time 2
Students' most sophisticated conception
of learning
Core beliefs about knowing
CON
beliefs
INCONSISTENT
beliefs
CONREC
beliefs
REC
beliefs
changing as person (n=2)
2
--
--
--
changing world views; broader view of learning; understanding (n=21)
12
7
1
1
changing behaviour (n=1)
1
--
--
--
acquisition (n=3)
1
--
2
--
no response (n=2)
2
--
--
--
Note. The dashes indicate that there were no data available for the subcategory.
It noted in Table 3 that students' conceptions of learning seem to reflect their core beliefs about knowing to some extent. That is, students with CON or INCONSISTENT beliefs mostly described the transformative learning conceptions of changing as a person, changing world views, a broader view of learning and understanding (n=21). Perhaps the most surprising inconsistencies involve the student with REC beliefs who espoused a transformative conception of learning and the student with CON beliefs who described acquisition as a conception of learning.
Learning outcomes
Students were asked to describe how they knew they had learnt something. The responses to this question at Time 1 and Time 2 included knowing one had learnt by: changing views, being open to further learning, being able to understand and apply, relating to other issues, relating to epistemological beliefs, being able to explain, changing behaviour, being able to
recall and/or apply, being evidenced by results, being evidenced by automatic responses, and being related to affective issues.
Table 4
Relationship between students' most sophisticated learning outcome and core beliefs about knowing at Time 2 (n=28)
Most sophisticated beliefs about learning outcomes as. . .
CON
beliefs
INCONSISTENT
beliefs
CONREC
beliefs
REC
beliefs
changing views (n=4)
4
--
--
--
being open to further learning (n=2)
2
--
--
--
relating to other issues (n=8)
relating to epistemological beliefs (n=1)
being able to understand & apply (n=6)
4
--
3
3
--
3
1
1
--
--
--
--
being able to explain (n=4)
2
1
--
1
changing in behaviour (n=1)
1
--
--
--
being able to recall & apply (n=2)
1
--
1
--
Note. The dashes indicate that there were no data available for the subcategory.
It can be seen in Table 4 that only students with CON beliefs described learning outcomes related to changing views and being open to further learning. The outcomes of relating to other issues, relating to epistemological beliefs and being able to understand and apply were espoused by students with a range of core beliefs (except the student with REC beliefs). Therefore, it is clear that, in keeping with the notion that nearly all students espouse at least some CON core beliefs, most students also described transformative learning outcomes. Only a few students (n=6) describe being able to explain, change in behaviour and being able to recall and apply as a learning outcome which appeared to be more reproductive in nature.
Consistency between core beliefs about knowing and overall beliefs about learning
It is important to consider students' espoused learning strategies, conceptions and outcomes holistically to develop an overall picture of whether students held transformative or reproductive beliefs about learning. This means that strategies, conceptions and outcomes may be used to support an overall categorisation of learning as transformative or reproductive.
When considering overall beliefs about learning, students' responses were described as transformative or reproductive if they responded consistently regarding learning strategies, conceptions and outcomes. If students had a combination of transformative and reproductive responses they were described as having mixed beliefs about learning. Their most sophisticated conception was used in each category regarding conceptions and learning outcomes. The relationship noted between students' core beliefs about knowing and their overall beliefs about learning is presented in Table 5.
Table 5
Relationship between overall beliefs about learning and core beliefs about knowing at Time 2
Overall beliefs about learning
Core beliefs about knowing
CON
beliefs
INCONSISTENT
beliefs
CONREC beliefs
REC
beliefs
transformative beliefs
14
6
--
--
mixed beliefs
4
1
3
1
Note. The dashes indicate that there were no data available for the subcategory.
It can be seen in Table 5 that three students who held CONREC beliefs and mixed overall beliefs about learning indicated some consistency between their core and peripheral beliefs. That is, it might be expected that students with CONREC beliefs that include mixed beliefs in both the construction of reasoned truths and the reception of absolute truths might espouse mixed beliefs (reproductive and transformative) about the nature of learning. Twenty students were also considered to evidence some consistency across core beliefs about knowing and beliefs about learning because they held CON or INCONSISTENT beliefs and overall transformative beliefs about learning. It is likely that students with CON or INCONSISTENT beliefs, who espouse strong beliefs in the construction of reasoned truths, would also describe overall transformative beliefs about learning that involve personal meaning making.
There are six students who do not appear to evidence consistency between their core beliefs about knowing and their overall beliefs about learning. Four students held CON beliefs and mixed overall beliefs about learning. It is possible that these students have not really developed the CON beliefs that they espoused and may be reflecting on knowledge gained through participation in the teaching intervention. If students have knowledge of, rather than beliefs about, CON beliefs then it might be expected that this will not necessarily reflect in their beliefs about learning. One other possible explanation for the lack of consistency is that some of these students may have failed to clearly articulate their beliefs in the interviews. So for example, one student, whilst explaining a potentially sophisticated conception and outcome of learning as a change in behaviour, did not elaborate on this and was coded as reproductive in perspective.
There were two other students with REC and INCONSISTENT beliefs who espoused mixed beliefs about learning and do not seem to evidence consistency between their core and peripheral beliefs. It could be expected that the student with REC beliefs might hold a predominance of reproductive views of learning and that the student with INCONSISTENT beliefs might hold predominantly transformative views of learning. This was not the case for either student.
It is possible that students with core beliefs about knowing that do not appear to be consistent with their peripheral beliefs about learning may be explained by either a lack of clarity or a lack of development in CON beliefs. Overall, however, it is interesting to note that the there is mostly a relationship between core beliefs about knowing and peripheral beliefs about learning for 23 students in this study.
Discussion
What is the nature of epistemological beliefs in preservice graduate teacher education students?
With regard to the first research question this study has identified that
• core beliefs about knowing may present as a continuum of multidimensional beliefs (with some transitional beliefs in the progress towards CON beliefs); and
• overall beliefs about learning are mostly transformative in nature.
Core beliefs about knowing. The results of this study suggest a continuum of epistemological beliefs similar to the progression noted by Perry (1970), Baxter Magolda (1993) and Belenky et al. (1986). The recognition of CONREC and INCONSISTENT beliefs is a variation to the positions postulated by the developmental theories because such categories of beliefs offer a more differentiated view of students' beliefs in transition from multiplism to relativism (Perry, 1970); subjectivist to procedural (Belenky et al., 1986) and transitional to independent (Baxter Magolda, 1993) ways of knowing. The ceiling effect experienced in this study, where most students held at least some relativistic beliefs, has possibly enabled a more detailed description of the transitional phases into relativism.
Students' core beliefs about knowing reflected a range of beliefs from REC through to CON beliefs. Mostly students held multiple beliefs but it was the perceived focus of these beliefs that caused individuals to be assigned to a particular category. For example, students with SUBREC beliefs described the construction of subjective truths but also described beliefs in the reception of absolute truths. Students with CONREC beliefs had some beliefs in construction of reasoned truths but had a stronger focus on the importance of absolute truths in their responses than those described as INCONSISTENT. This suggests that multiple beliefs may be available to individuals but that some beliefs are more focussed upon than others.
Schommer (1994) believed that epistemological beliefs were multidimensional and could be described more effectively as frequency distributions. Forexample, students with sophisticated beliefs about the nature of truth may believe that truth is relativistic but hold some beliefs in the absolute nature of truth. It is also probable that individuals who espouse naïve beliefs about the nature of truth may believe that truth is absolute whilst minimally they may hold some beliefs that truths are relativistic (Schommer, 1994). This notion of frequency distributions suggests that some beliefs may be a dominant or focal in an individual's core beliefs.
Beliefs about learning. The main finding in this study with regard to beliefs about learning is that students mostly report transformative perspectives of learning. The transformative and reproductive strategies described by students are similar to the deep and surface strategies described by Biggs (1985, 1992). According to Entwistle (1998) a deep approach transforms information through an intention to make meaning and involves strategies such as linking ideas to previous knowledge; looking for patterns and integrating ideas; considering evidence, logic and arguments carefully; and becoming actively interested in the course content from a critical perspective. Conversely, the surface approach reproduces information through an intention to avoid failure in courses and involves strategies that require studying without making meaning, treating information as isolated pieces of knowledge, and rote learning. The students in this study referred mostly to the strategy component of their approach to learning when they described how they went about learning. Therefore, although not specifically referring to an overall approach, the strategies described in this study may still be described as deep and surface.
What relationship exists between core beliefs about knowing and beliefs about learning and teaching in the intervention group?
With regard to the second research question, the main finding of this study is that by Time 2, most students (n=28) held at least some CON beliefs about knowing and variously described transformative learning strategies, conceptions of learning (understanding and change as a person) and learning outcomes.
It could be expected that individuals who have CON beliefs about knowing that reflect the construction of reasoned truths might conceive of learning as a process of construction of knowledge or hold a transformative view. Similarly, those who have REC beliefs that individuals receive absolute truths, might be expected to conceive of learning from a reproductive perspective where individuals receive information rather than construct personal meaning. Overall, a ceiling effect was evident with nearly all students in the intervention group reporting at least some relativistic beliefs at Time 2. Most students, by the end of the teaching intervention, held relativistic core beliefs, described deep approaches to learning (often also context specific) and transformative conceptions and learning outcomes. This offers some evidence of consistency between core and peripheral beliefs, although it is not clear whether such consistency would be evident in a group of students with a broader range of core beliefs about knowing.
Teaching implications
There is ongoing debate within epistemological beliefs research regarding the context specific nature or otherwise of core beliefs about knowing (cf. Scheurman, 1995). Whilst some researchers would argue that epistemological beliefs can not be considered to be separate from a particular domain of knowledge (cf. Debold, Tolman & Brown, 1996; Mori, 1997), there are also others who believe that such beliefs are generalisable across a number of domains. Ruddick (1996) believed that individuals may have different epistemological beliefs in different contexts with a dominant way of knowing occurring across such contexts. This point is also made by Perry (1970). For example, he stated that individuals who have moved into position 5, relativism, may still have minimal beliefs in dualism in certain contexts. Perry (1981), Scheurman (1995), and Schommer and Walker (1995) have suggested that core beliefs about knowing are likely to be held across a range of discipline areas. If epistemological beliefs are considered to be central within a system and thus filter knowledge and other beliefs, then it is likely that these epistemological beliefs will be evident across a range of learning contexts. Therefore, teaching interventions that require students to reflect on dominant epistemological beliefs may be beneficial.
If there is consistency between core beliefs about knowing and beliefs about learning, then it may be important to focus onboth aspects of epistemological beliefs in teaching interventions. Teacher education programs may need to focus explicitly on both core beliefs about knowing and beliefs about learning in order to facilitate knowledge and/or development of epistemological beliefs. Beliefs about knowing and learning which are transformative in nature, may be facilitated directlythrough explicit reflections on beliefs about knowing and learning and indirectly through the use of transformative teaching and assessment strategies in tertiary learning environments that help students take responsibility for their own learning as a personal meaning making process. This means that teaching interventions that wish to effect changes in students' learning may need to focus both on dominant or default epistemological beliefs and those that are context specific.
References
Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1993). The convergence of rational and interpersonal knowing in young adults' epistemological development. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Research Association, Atlanta, April 12-16.
Beers, S. E. (1984). An analysis of the interaction between students' epistemological assumptions and the composing process. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication, 35th, New York City, March 29-31.
Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Womens' ways of knowing: The development of self, voice and mind. USA: Basic Books.
Bem, D. J. (1970). Beliefs, attitudes, and human affairs. California: Brooks/Cole.
Biggs, J. B. (1985). The role of metalearning in study processes. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 55, 185-212.
Biggs, J. B. (1989). Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching. Higher Education Research and Development, 8, 7-25.
Biggs, J. B. (1992). From theory to practice: A cognitive systems approach. Paper presented at the annual conference of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia, Churchill Campus, Monash University.
Brownlee, J. (1996). The relationship between epistemological beliefs and learning outcomes: Developing a teaching intervention for tertiary students. Unpublished PhD confirmation report, Faculty of Education, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
Colton, A., & Sparks-Langer, G. (1993). A conceptual framework to guide the development of teacher reflection and decision making. Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 45-56.
Debold, E., Tolman, D., & Brown, L. (1996). Embodying knowledge, knowing desire: Authority and split subjectivities in girl's epistemological development. In N. Goldberger, J. Tarule, B. Clinchy, & M. Belenky (Eds.), Knowledge, difference and power (pp. 85-125). New York: Basic Books.
Entwistle, N. (1998). Approaches to learning and forms of understanding. In B. Dart & G. Boulton-Lewis (Eds.),Teaching and learning in higher education (pp. 72-101). Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational Researcher, 38, 47-65.
Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Facilitating reflection: Issues and research. Forum of Education, 50, 49 -65.
Hofer, B. (1994). Epistemological beliefs and first year college students: Motivation and cognition in different instructional contexts. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association, 102nd. Los Angeles, August 12-16.
Hofer, B., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67 (1), 88 -140.
Lawrence, C. L. (1992). Preservice teachers' development of pedagogical understandings and epistemological frameworks. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Educational Research Association.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. California: Sage.
Marton, F., Dall'Alba, G., & Beaty, E. (1993). Conceptions of Learning. International Journal of Educational Research,46, 4-11.
Marton, F., & Säljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning: Outcome and process. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 46, 4-11.
Marton, F., Watkins, D., & Tang, T. knowledge. W. (1995). Discontinuities and continuities in the experience of learning: An interview study of high-school students in Hong Kong. Paper presented at the 6th European Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, August 26-31, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning qualitative research. A philosophic and practical guide. London: The Falmer Press.
Mori, Y. (1997). Epistemological beliefs and language learning: What do language learners believe about their learning? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago IL, March 24-28.
Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Pajares, M. F. (1992). Teacher's beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307-332.
Perry, W. G. (1970). Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Perry, W. G. (1981). Cognitive and ethical growth: The making of meaning. In A. W. Chickering (Ed.), The Modern American College (pp. 76-116). San Francisco: Jossey-Boss.
Perry, W. G. (1988). Different worlds in the same classroom. In Improving learning: New perspectives (pp. 145-161). London: Kogan Page.
Peterman, F. P. (1991). An experienced teacher's emerging constructivist beliefs about teaching and learning. Paper presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL, April 3-7.
Posner, G., Strike, K., Hewson, P., & Gertzog, W. (1982). Accommodation of a scientific conception: Toward a theory of conceptual change. Science Education, 66, 211-227.
Richards, T., & Richards, L. (1994). QSR NUD*IST. Alladin Systems Inc, California.
Richardson, V., Anders, P., Tidwell, D., & Lloyd, C. (1991). The relationship between teachers' beliefs and practices in reading comprehension instruction. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 559-586.
Rokeach, M. (1968). Beliefs, attitudes and values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Inc.
Ruddick, S. (1996). Reason's "femininity": A case for connected knowing. In N. Goldberger, J. Tarule, B. Clinchy, & M. Belenky (Eds.), Knowledge, difference and power (pp. 248-273). New York: Basic Books.
Säljö, R. (1979). Learning in the learner's perspective: Some common sense conceptions. Report from the Institute of Education University of Gothenberg, No 76.
Scheurman, G. (1995). Constructivism, personal epistemology, and teacher education: Toward a social-developmental model of adult reasoning. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, April, 1995.
Schommer, M. A. (1989). Students' beliefs about the nature of knowledge: What are they and how do they affect comprehension? Technical Report No. 484. Bolt, Beranek and Newman, Inc., Cambridge, Mass.; Illinois University, Urbana, Center for the Study of Reading.
Schommer, M. A. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498-504.
Schommer, M. A. (1993a). Comparisons of beliefs about the nature of knowledge and learning among postsecondary students. Research in Higher Education, 34, 355-370.
Schommer, M. A. (1993b). Epistemological development and academic performance among secondary schools. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 406-411.
Schommer, M. A. (1994). Synthesising epistemological belief research: Tentative understandings and provocative confusions. Educational Psychology Review, 6, 293-319.
Schommer, M. A., & Walker, K. (1995). Are epistemological beliefs similar across domains? Journal of Educational Psychology, 87, 424-432.
Shaver, J. P. (1992). Epistemology and the education of social science teachers. Paper presented at the International Conference on Subject-Specific Teaching Methods and Teacher Education, Santiago de Compostela, Spain, July 6.
Sutton, R. E., Cafarelli, A., Lund, R., Schurdell, D., & Bischel, S. (1996). A developmental constructivist approach to preservice teachers' ways of knowing. Teaching and Teacher Education, 12, 413-427.
T&LiTE. (1994). The Teaching and Learning in Tertiary Education (T&LiTE) Project. A report prepared for the Teaching and Learning Committee, Queensland University of Technology by the Research Concentration in Cognition in Learning and Development, School of Learning and Development, Queensland University of Technology.
Wilkinson, W. K. (1989). A contrast of Perry and Royce: Implications for the study of college students' epistemological orientations. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 14, 87-96.
Attachment 1
1. Beliefs about knowing.
In learning about something you really want to know, can you rely on experts?
How do you know someone is an expert? What do you do when experts disagree?
If experts disagree on something today, do you think that some day they will come to some agreement? Why or why not?
How do you know what is right/true?
Do you agree with this person who says that where there are no right answers anybody's opinion is as good as another's?
2. Beliefs about learning.
What is learning?
How do you go about learning in general?
What strategies do you use?
How do you know when you have learnt something?