Transcript
Page 1: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

How do we know what we know?Why do we believe?

How do we know what we know?Why do we believe?

Piaget to King & Kitchener

Piaget to King & Kitchener

Page 2: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

Piaget’s stages of Development

Piaget’s stages of Development

Stage Major AccomplishmentsSensorimotor (0-2)

Object permanenceBeginning of capacity to use mental images and symbols

Preoperational (2-7)

Accelerated use of symbols and language

Concrete operations (7-12)

Understanding of conservationUnderstanding of identityUnderstanding of serial ordering

Formal operations (12-)

Abstract reasoningAbility to compare and classify ideas.

Assimilation is what you do when you fit new information into your present knowledge and beliefs (schemas)

Assimilation is what you do when you fit new information into your present knowledge and beliefs (schemas)

Accommodation is the modification of existing schema in response to new knowledge or experience..

Accommodation is the modification of existing schema in response to new knowledge or experience..

Equilibration - the term for the process of maintaining balance between our environment and the mental structures we use to represent that environment.

Equilibration - the term for the process of maintaining balance between our environment and the mental structures we use to represent that environment.

Page 3: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

Criticisms of PiagetCriticisms of Piaget

1.The changes from one stage to another are neither as clear cut nor as sweeping as Piaget implied.

2.Children can understand far more than Piaget gave them credit for.

3.Preschoolers are not as egocentric as Piaget thought.

1.The changes from one stage to another are neither as clear cut nor as sweeping as Piaget implied.

2.Children can understand far more than Piaget gave them credit for.

3.Preschoolers are not as egocentric as Piaget thought.

Page 4: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

• Piaget’s theory ends at 12+ years of age. • Piaget’s theory fails to address higher

order thinking skills.• King, K.M. and Kitchener, K.S. (1994) .

Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and Promoting Intellectual Growth and Critical Thinking in Adolescents and Adults

• Pre-Reflective Thinking

• Piaget’s theory ends at 12+ years of age. • Piaget’s theory fails to address higher

order thinking skills.• King, K.M. and Kitchener, K.S. (1994) .

Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and Promoting Intellectual Growth and Critical Thinking in Adolescents and Adults

• Pre-Reflective Thinking

Beyond PiagetBeyond Piaget

Page 5: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

• Stage 1 Knowledge is assumed to exist absolutely and concretely; it is not understood as an abstraction. It can be obtained with certainty by direct observation.

• "I know what I have seen."

• Stage 2 Knowledge is assumed to be absolutely certain or certain but not immediately available. Knowledge can be obtained directly through the senses (as in direct observation) or via authority figures.

• "If it is on the news, it has to be true."

• Stage 3 Knowledge is assumed to be absolutely certain or temporarily uncertain. In areas of temporary uncertainty, only personal beliefs can be known until absolute knowledge is obtained. In areas of absolute certainty, knowledge is obtained from authorities.

• "When there is evidence that people can give to convince everybody one way or another, then it will be knowledge, until then, it's just a guess."

• Stage 1 Knowledge is assumed to exist absolutely and concretely; it is not understood as an abstraction. It can be obtained with certainty by direct observation.

• "I know what I have seen."

• Stage 2 Knowledge is assumed to be absolutely certain or certain but not immediately available. Knowledge can be obtained directly through the senses (as in direct observation) or via authority figures.

• "If it is on the news, it has to be true."

• Stage 3 Knowledge is assumed to be absolutely certain or temporarily uncertain. In areas of temporary uncertainty, only personal beliefs can be known until absolute knowledge is obtained. In areas of absolute certainty, knowledge is obtained from authorities.

• "When there is evidence that people can give to convince everybody one way or another, then it will be knowledge, until then, it's just a guess."

Stages of Pre-Reflective Thinking

Stages of Pre-Reflective Thinking

Page 6: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

• Stage 4 Knowledge is uncertain and knowledge claims

are idiosyncratic to the individual since situational

variables (such as incorrect reporting of data, data lost

over time, or disparities in access to information)

dictate that knowing always involves an element of

ambiguity. • "I'd be more inclined to believe evolution if they had proof .It's just like the

pyramids: I don't think we'll ever know. Who are you going to ask? No one was there."

• Stage 5 Knowledge is contextual and subjective since it is filtered through a person's perceptions and criteria for judgment. Only interpretations of evidence, events, or issues may be known. • "People think differently and so they attack the problem differently.

Other theories could be as true as my own, but based on different evidence."

• Stage 4 Knowledge is uncertain and knowledge claims

are idiosyncratic to the individual since situational

variables (such as incorrect reporting of data, data lost

over time, or disparities in access to information)

dictate that knowing always involves an element of

ambiguity. • "I'd be more inclined to believe evolution if they had proof .It's just like the

pyramids: I don't think we'll ever know. Who are you going to ask? No one was there."

• Stage 5 Knowledge is contextual and subjective since it is filtered through a person's perceptions and criteria for judgment. Only interpretations of evidence, events, or issues may be known. • "People think differently and so they attack the problem differently.

Other theories could be as true as my own, but based on different evidence."

Quasi-Reflective Thinking

Quasi-Reflective Thinking

Page 7: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

• Stage 6 Knowledge is constructed into individual conclusions about ill-structured problems on the basis of information from a variety of sources. Interpretations that are based on evaluations of evidence across contexts and on the evaluated opinions of reputable others can be known.• "It's very difficult in this life to be sure. There are degrees of sureness.

You come to a point at which you are sure enough for a personal stance on the issue."

• Stage 7 Knowledge is the outcome of a process of reasonable inquiry in which solutions to ill-structured problems are constructed. The adequacy of those solutions is evaluated in terms of what is most reasonable or probable according to the current evidence, and it is reevaluated when relevant new evidence, perspectives, or tools of inquiry become available. • "One can judge an argument by how well thought-out the positions are,

what kinds of reasoning and evidence are used to support it, and how consistent the way one argues on this topic is as compared with other topics."

• Stage 6 Knowledge is constructed into individual conclusions about ill-structured problems on the basis of information from a variety of sources. Interpretations that are based on evaluations of evidence across contexts and on the evaluated opinions of reputable others can be known.• "It's very difficult in this life to be sure. There are degrees of sureness.

You come to a point at which you are sure enough for a personal stance on the issue."

• Stage 7 Knowledge is the outcome of a process of reasonable inquiry in which solutions to ill-structured problems are constructed. The adequacy of those solutions is evaluated in terms of what is most reasonable or probable according to the current evidence, and it is reevaluated when relevant new evidence, perspectives, or tools of inquiry become available. • "One can judge an argument by how well thought-out the positions are,

what kinds of reasoning and evidence are used to support it, and how consistent the way one argues on this topic is as compared with other topics."

Reflexive ThinkingReflexive Thinking

Page 8: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

• In order for either Piaget’s theory or King’s theory to apply there needs to be a level of self-efficacy.

•Sources of Self-Efficacy:1.Mastery Experiences2.Vicarious experiences3.Social Persuasion (the most difficlult

and least effective)

• In order for either Piaget’s theory or King’s theory to apply there needs to be a level of self-efficacy.

•Sources of Self-Efficacy:1.Mastery Experiences2.Vicarious experiences3.Social Persuasion (the most difficlult

and least effective)

Self-EfficacySelf-Efficacy

Page 9: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

•There are four major psychological processes through which self-beliefs affect functioning.•Cognitive Processes - thought and

forethought.•Motivational Processes - attribution

theory• causal - attribution theory

• outcome expectancies - expectancy-value theory

• cognized goals - goal theory

•There are four major psychological processes through which self-beliefs affect functioning.•Cognitive Processes - thought and

forethought.•Motivational Processes - attribution

theory• causal - attribution theory

• outcome expectancies - expectancy-value theory

• cognized goals - goal theory

Efficacy-Activated Processes

Efficacy-Activated Processes

Page 10: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

•Affective Processes - processes regulating emotional states and eliciting emotional reactions.

•Selection Processes - the types of activities we choose are influenced by our personal sense of efficacy.

•Affective Processes - processes regulating emotional states and eliciting emotional reactions.

•Selection Processes - the types of activities we choose are influenced by our personal sense of efficacy.

Efficacy-Activated Processes

Efficacy-Activated Processes

Page 11: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

Attribution TheoryAttribution Theory

Stability Locus ControlThe causes of outcomes are stable (fixed across situations and over time) or unstable (variable over situations and over time)

The causes of outcomes are internal (due to the individual) or external (due to forces outside the individual)

The causes of outcomes are controllable (within the individual’s control) or uncontrollable (beyond the individual’s control)

Attributions - inferences we make about the causes of behavior.Attributions - inferences we make about the causes of behavior.

Page 12: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

Attribution TheoryAttribution TheoryAssumptions:

1. Individuals are motivated by a goal of understanding and mastering the environment and themselves.

2. Individuals try to understand the causal determinants of their own behavior as well as the behavior of others.

Assumptions: 1. Individuals are motivated by a goal of understanding and

mastering the environment and themselves.2. Individuals try to understand the causal determinants of their own

behavior as well as the behavior of others.

Locus

Internal External

ControllableUncontrollable

Controllable

Uncontrollable

StableLong-Term Effort/Self-

handicappingAbility/Aptitude

Teacher bias/Favoritism

Difficulty of task, activity, or course

UnstableSkills/

Knowledge/Situational Effort

Health/Mood Receiving help Luck/Chance

Pages 193-195 GlassmanPages 193-195 Glassman

Page 13: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

Typical AttributionsTypical AttributionsAptitude/ Ability

“I got a good grade because I’m smart.”“I failed because I’m dumb.”

stable, internal, uncontrollable

Long Term Effort

“I got a good grade because I always work hard.”“I failed because I never try.”

stable, internal, controllable

Situational Effort

“I got an A because I worked hard on the project.”“I failed because I didn’t try this time.”

unstable, internal, controllable

Luck“I got a good grade because I was lucky.”“I failed because I had bad luck.”

unstable, external, uncontrollable

Mood“I got a good grade because I felt great that day.”“I failed because I had a bad day.”

unstable, internal, uncontrollable

Task Difficulty

“I got a good grade because the exam was easy.”“I failed because it was hard.”

unstable, external, uncontrollable

Teacher bias

“I got a good grade because the teacher likes me.”“I failed because Mr. Young hates me.”

stable, external, controllable

Help from others

“I got a good grade because someone helped me.”“I failed because no one would help me.”

unstable, external, controllable

These are typical academic attributions.These are typical academic attributions.

Att

ribu

tio

n

Locu

s, S

tab

ility

, C

on

trol

Page 14: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

Attribution ErrorsAttribution Errors

AttributionStudent

PerspectiveTeacher

PerspectiveFundamental Attribution Error.Attributing the behavior of others to a trait.

Student perceives teacher behavior as function of disposition.“Mr. Young is always mean.”“Mr. Jones is prejudiced.”

Teacher perceives student behavior as function of disposition.“Petula is lazy. She never works.”“Susan has no aptitude for science..”

Self-serving biasAccepting personal responsibility for success; denying responsibility for failure.

Student perceives success is due to behavior; failure is due to other factors.“I am doing well in Math because I am good at it, I am failing English because Mrs. Whomever is impossible to understand.

Teacher perceives their success is due to their behavior but failure is other factors.“I worked hard and really put together a great unit on photosynthesis, but there’s just no way to motivate most of those kids.”

Studies by Miller 1984, Weisz et al. 1984 indicate there is a cultural difference it’s not a trait common to all.

Studies by Miller 1984, Weisz et al. 1984 indicate there is a cultural difference it’s not a trait common to all.

Page 15: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

Expectancy-Value TheoryExpectancy-Value Theory

•Behavior is a function of the expectancies a person has the value of the goal one is working toward.

•When more than one behavior is possible the behavior chosen will be the one with the largest combination of expected success and value.

•Behavior is a function of the expectancies a person has the value of the goal one is working toward.

•When more than one behavior is possible the behavior chosen will be the one with the largest combination of expected success and value.

B = f(E V)B = f(E V)

Social behaviors, achievement motivation and work motivation.Social behaviors, achievement motivation and work motivation.

Page 16: How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? How do we know what we know? Why do we believe? Piaget to King & Kitchener

• Goal theory is an extension of attribution theory.

• Students pursue goals and those goals are associated with certain behaviors and beliefs.

• Mastery oriented students want to increase their knowledge and competence. They are intrinsically motivated.

• Performance motivated students believe ability is the cause of success. Intelligence is viewed as a fixed trait. They use fewer strategies and attribute success to uncontrollable factors.

• Goal theory is an extension of attribution theory.

• Students pursue goals and those goals are associated with certain behaviors and beliefs.

• Mastery oriented students want to increase their knowledge and competence. They are intrinsically motivated.

• Performance motivated students believe ability is the cause of success. Intelligence is viewed as a fixed trait. They use fewer strategies and attribute success to uncontrollable factors.

Goal TheoryGoal Theory


Top Related