The Perry Scheme
of Intellectual Development:
Approaches to Successful Learning
William J. Rapaport
Department of Computer Science & Engineering,
Department of Philosophy,
and Center for Cognitive Science
rapaport@cse.buffalo.edu
http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport
Abstract
I will present William Perry’s scheme of intellectual development. This
scheme identifies a sequence of approaches to learning that students use in
college (and beyond). The Perry “positions” that we will look at include:
• Dualism:
– all questions have right answers
– so, the teacher’s job is to teach them, and the student’s job is to learn them
• Multiplism:
– most questions have no answer, so all opinions are equally good;
– hence, the student’s job is to “shoot the bull” or give the teachers what
they want; and
• Contextual Relativism:
– answers to questions are relative to a background context;
– the student’s job is to see things from different perspectives and come to
a reasoned decision about answers.
We will also look at ways to use your knowledge of a student’s Perry
position to improve your teaching.
My Credentials
•
•
•
•
•
Bachelor’s in math
Masters’ in philosophy & computer science
Ph.D. in philosophy
Taught from 7th grade  Ph.D. students
Taught math, computer science, philosophy,
even English composition!
Survey
• How many of you are TAs?
• How many of you have never taught before?
– You have taught if you’ve ever helped anyone with HW
• But not cheating!
– Giving/telling someone the answers is not teaching!
• How many of you will never teach again after you
get your degree?
– You will eventually teach!
• If not as a TA, then at your job:
– Talking to your boss about your work
– Making oral presentations to colleagues
Intellectual Growth
• How do students think?
• How do they:
– perceive
– organize
– evaluate
experiences & events?
• How do they behave/feel in response to
these experiences/events?
• How do they learn?
• Remember…
– what it was like for you to be a student
– which teachers you had who were:
• good (do what they did)
• bad (don’t do what they did)*
• Try to imagine…
– what a non-science major thinks of science
– what a science major thinks of non-science
*Cf. Ben-Al, Sarah (2004), “Don’t Be That Guy”, Chronicle of Higher Education (Aug. 13): C3
4 Approaches to Successful Learning
• All 4 used by everyone
– At different times in life
– In different areas of life
– Sometimes simultaneously
• Some are more appropriate for some people in
some circumstances
• Identifying a student’s approach can help you to
help the student
The Perry Scheme
• William Perry:
– head of counseling, Harvard, 1950s
• “What stands out for you over the last year?”
• Discovered 9 “positions” from which students
viewed knowledge & learning
• Has been replicated & adjusted
– Cf. Belenky et al. (1986), Women’s Ways of Knowing
A. Dualism / Received Knowledge:
There are right/wrong answers to all questions,
known to Authorities
1. Basic Dualism:
•
All problems are solvable
−
−
•
Solutions on Golden Tablets in sky
Only Authorities (= teachers) have access
Student’s task = to learn right solutions
2. Full Dualism:
• Some authorities (literature, philosophy) disagree
• Others (science, math) agree
 There are correct solutions
but some teachers’ views are obscured
• Student’s task = to learn right solutions
•
And ignore others?
B. Multiplicity/Subjective Knowledge:
There are conflicting answers;
 trust “inner voice”, not external Authority
3. Early Multiplicity
•
There are 2 kinds of questions (a kind of dualism):
–
–
•
Those with answers that we know now
Those with answers that we don’t know yet
Most knowledge is known.
–
–
There are right/wrong ways to find answers to the other
questions (another kind of dualism)
Student’s task =
to learn right ways to find correct solutions
4. Late Multiplicity
a) Less cynical form:
• Most problems have no known solution
 Everyone has a right to their own opinion
b) More cynical form:
• Some problems are unsolvable
 Doesn’t matter which (if any) solution you choose
•
•
Student’s task = to B.S.
Most freshmen?
Possible Response to Multiplism:
ALIENATION
• leading to:
– retreat to earlier, “safer” position:
• “I’ll study math, not literature, because math has clear
answers & not as much uncertainty”
• or to:
– escape: drop out:
• “I can’t stand college; all they want is right answers”
OR
• “I can’t stand college; no one gives you the right answers”
From: New York Times, 19 Aug 2002
“The College Lecture Isn’t Dead”
To the Editor:
Re “Whither College Lectures? Maybe Right Out the Door” (Education page, Aug. 14):
I am an undergraduate at Cornell University. Every lecture course I have taken, no matter how
bad or boring, has taught me more than any of my seminar courses, no matter how good or
interesting.
In a lecture you get taught by an expert, which means the information received is relevant and
credible. But in a seminar, most of the information received is from other students like
yourself, which leads to discussion that is mostly irrelevant and also largely suspect in
accuracy.
Additionally, professors don’t like to tell students directly that they are “wrong”, but then again,
do not say if they are “correct,” so one can leave a seminar completely confused and not
knowing any more than when one entered. (One can of course leave a lecture confused as well,
but there are always office hours.)
I feel that if I have to pay the absurd amount that colleges charge for tuition, I should at least be
taught by someone who knows his stuff.
DAVID KLASS, Concord, NH, Aug. 14, 2002
C. Relativism/Procedural Knowledge
• There are discipline-specific reasoning methods.
• Knowledge can be “connected”
– empathetic knowledge
– “Why do you believe X?”
– “What does this poem say to me?”
• Knowledge can be “separated”:
– “objective” analysis
– “What techniques can I use to analyze this poem?”
• 2 kinds:
– “Contextual Relativism”
– “Pre-Commitment”
5. Contextual Relativism
• All proposed solutions must be supported by reasons
– I.e., they must be viewed in context
and relative to their support
• Within a context, there are:
– Right/wrong (better/worse) answers
– Rules for good thinking
• Student’s task = to learn to evaluate solutions
• Where we’d like most students to be.
• “It is not knowledge, but the act of learning,
not possession but the act of getting there,
which grants the greatest enjoyment.”
– K.F. Gauss (1808; mathematician)
• “The search for truth is more precious than its
possession.”
– Einstein
Beyond the 4 Approaches
6. Pre-Commitment:
•
Student sees necessity of:
–
–
Making choices
Committing to a solution
D. Commitment/Constructed Knowledge:
7. Commitment:
•
Student makes a choice (e.g., chooses thesis topic)
8. Challenges to Commitment:
•
•
Student experiences implications of choice
Student explores issues of responsibility
–
E.g., write & defend dissertation
On responsibility of commitment:
“In science and mathematics,
we do not appeal to authority, but rather
you are responsible for what you believe.”
− R.W. Hamming (1998)
(computer scientist)
9. Student realizes commitment is an ongoing,
unfolding, evolving activity
•
•
E.g., you become a researcher
“We live on an island of knowledge surrounded by a
sea of ignorance. As our island of knowledge grows,
so does the shore of our ignorance.”
 John A. Wheeler (physicist)
•
These 9 “Perry positions” are sometimes repeated!
• What category am I in?
– Dualistic question!
• How many people are in each category?
– Multiplistic question!
• If teacher is at Perry position N,
& student is at Perry position N−2,
then student will not understand teacher!
– because…
Students Make Their Own Meaning:
What Teachers Say vs. What Students Hear
• Teacher: “Today we’ll discuss 3 different…
–
–
–
–
theories of economics
ways to solve this math problem
algorithms for computing Greatest Common Divisor
interpretations of this poem
• Dualist:  Which is the correct one?
 Why bother with the wrong ones?
• Multiplist: − Only 3? Heck, I can think of a dozen!
• Contextual relativist:  What principles underlie each of them?
− Which is the most efficient?
• Commitment: − Which should I believe/use on my project?
− What are the implications of “my” theory/solution/
algorithm/interpretation?
Students make their own meaning (continued)
• (Dualistic) Teacher: “Today I’ll show you…
–
–
–
–
how to solve these problems
these chemical reactions
these physical laws
the names of these stars”
• Dualistic Student: “Great! I’ll learn them.”
• Multiplist: “How boring! I’ll learn them anyway”
OR “I won’t bother to learn them”
• Contextual Relativist:
– “So what?
– Why are these problems/reactions/laws/stars important?
– How do they fit into a bigger picture?”
Students Who Make Their Own Meaning (cont’d)
“They’re not dumb,
they’re different!”
− Sheila Tobias (1990)
Students’ Assumptions about Teachers
• Basic Dualism:
– This teacher knows the answers to my questions.
• Full Dualism:
– Good teachers know the answers; bad ones don’t. This particular teacher may or
may not be that knowledgeable.
• Early Multiplism:
– Discipline X may or may not be advanced enough to answer my questions. I’m
going to this teacher to find out if X knows enough. S/he will tell me the answers, or
give me the procedure (ritual) to work it out on my own.
• Late Multiplism:
– There are no answers to my questions; what I think is as valid as what the teacher
thinks.
• Contextual Relativism:
– There are a number of answers to my question, depending on how you look at it;
maybe this teacher can help me see the alternatives more clearly.
• Pre-Commitment:
– There are a number of answers to my question, depending on how I look at it; maybe
this teacher can help me decide what I should believe (commit to).
• WHAT DO YOU (AS A TEACHER) DO?
Sources of Conflict
• Dualistic teacher, Multiplistic student:
– boredom, alienation
– to be successful in the sciences, do students need to
adapt to the cognitive style of Dualism?
• Multiplistic teacher, Dualistic student:
– no understanding
– to be successful in the arts/humanities, do students need
to reject Dualism and/or adapt (only) to
Multiplism/Contextual Relativism?
• Note: Sciences don’t have to be Dualistic!
– not if taught properly!
– but what about teaching basic facts?
Kinds of Questions
(from ad in CHE (10 Nov 93) for Center for Critical Thinking Workshop)
• Some questions have just one correct answer
– factual questions
– [Dualistic questions ! ]
• Other questions have many correct answers.
– preferences
– [Multiplistic questions ! ]
• For virtually all the crucial questions we face in
life, there are many competing answers, some
objectively better than others.
– questions requiring reasoned judgment
– [Contextually Relativistic questions ! ]
Science vs. Humanities
• Science is often perceived (erroneously!) as a
Dualistic discipline:
– “facts” (vs. “opinions”)
– “hard data”
– problems have right/wrong answers
• BUT: At frontiers of research,
– there are conflicting “opinions”
• i.e., conflicting theories
• or sometimes no theories
– data are relative to theories
• observations are theory-laden
• data have to be interpreted by theories
– problems without clear answers yield new “paradigms”
• formulation of a problem only makes sense with respect to
some theory
We live on an island of knowledge
surrounded by a sea of ignorance.
As our island of knowledge grows,
so does the shore of our ignorance.
− John A. Wheeler
(Physics, Princeton)
Are Math/Science/Engineering Dualistic?
• Leon Henkin (math, UC/Berkeley): NO!
– “One of the big misapprehensions about math that we
perpetrate in our classrooms is that the teacher always
seems to know the answer to any problem that is
discussed.
– “This gives students the idea that there is a book
somewhere with all the right answers to all of the
interesting questions, & that teachers know those
answers, & if one could get hold of the book, one
would have everything settled.
– “That’s so unlike the true nature of math”
• Or science, or engineering, or computer science!
If students make their own meaning,
how can you help them?
• Find out the students’ Perry positions
– What was your favorite/least favorite class?
• Why?
– OR: just listen!
• Then: Help them move to the next position!
For Dualistic students …
• Instructor:
– Seen as the only legitimate source of knowledge
• Themselves:
– Seen as receivers & demonstrators of knowledge
• Other students:
– Not seen as legitimate sources of knowledge
• On evaluation:
– Wrong answer = bad person
– Evaluation should be clear-cut
• Support:
– Need high degree of structure
• Dualistic students like lectures, hate seminars
Voices of Dualism
• “I’m lost in CS 341 [computer architecture];
the professor lacks a clue.”
– I.e., it’s the prof’s fault; he’s the Authority
Voices of Dualism (cont’d)
• “I really enjoyed this course. I had lots of
trouble till about 2/3 into the course, ‘cause
I was looking for answers. Once I realized
there were no answers and you had to
figure things out for yourself, it became
easier.”
– voice of Dualism  Multiplism
Voices of Dualism (cont’d.)
• “Possibly, with specific labs, go over the
labs after they are to be turned in. Review
how you would tackle the lab assignment.”
– “You” = the Authority
– Dualism  Multiplism
Voices of Dualism (cont’d.)
• “TAs should use the Prof’s method of solving
problems rather than using their own, which
confuse us more, but if the method is simpler
and easier to understand, then it’s okay, I
guess, to introduce their own method of
solving.”
– Dualism  Multiplism
Voices of Dualism (cont’d)
• Cornell undergrad (NY Times):
– “Every lecture course, no matter how bad, has taught
me more than any seminar, no matter how good. In a
lecture, you get taught by an expert, which means
the information is credible. But in a seminar, most of
the information is from other students like yourself,
which leads to discussion that is irrelevant & suspect
in accuracy. [In seminars,] profs don’t like to tell
students directly that they are ‘wrong,’ [or] ‘correct,’ so
one can leave a seminar confused & not knowing any
more than when one entered.”
• Dualism confronted by Multiplism
• Alienation?
Voices of Dualism (cont’d.)
• “As far as your course, I still am having problems
with proofs. I had a theory why but I don’t know
if it is true. In my past education, teachers have
told me facts that they showed no proof [for].
These facts also appeared as assumptions.
Therefore my thinking process considers all
assumptions being facts.”
– Dualism confronted with Contextual Relativism in the
form of logical proofs
For early multiplists …
• Instructor:
– Seen as source of right way to get knowledge
• Themselves:
– Seen as learning how to learn
– Seen as working hard
• Other students:
– Seen as in the same boat /OK
• On evaluation:
– Of central concern
– Quantity of work counts
– Fairness is important
• Support:
– from peers, some structure
Late Multiplists …
• Instructor:
– Seen as source of the thinking process,
– Or else (cynical form) seen as irrelevant
• everyone’s entitled to own opinion
• Themselves:
– Seen as learning to think for themselves
– Seen as expressing opinions
• whether believed/supported or not
• Other students: Seen as legitimate (but:
• On evaluation:
)
– Independent thought deserves good grades…
– Or (cynical form): “I’ll do what they want”
• Get support from: diversity; lack of structure
– Late multiplists hate lectures, like seminars
Voices of Multiplism
• “On tests, longer problems maybe should
be worth a little more points, because more
time is put into them.”
– Early Multiplism
Voices of Multiplism (cont’d.)
• “You know, it seems to me that there are
2 different kinds of things we study—
things where there are answers & things
where there aren’t any!”
– clear voice of Multiplism
Voices of Multiplism (cont’d)
• “There are many of us students who spend
from 3−9 hours working on one lab
assignment. When we get our grades back,
they don’t meet our satisfaction. I spend a
lot of time thinking, and trying out my
program. When I get a D, I get upset.
Maybe the grade should include more
effort than if the program runs
properly.”
– quantity is more important than quality
Voices of Multiplism (cont’d)
• “I attend recitation to hopefully gain some
information I did not catch or understand in class.
Regretfully I learn more on my own time than in
recitation…
– Early Multiplism  late Multiplism
• “…I like that there are many ways to solve or
code a program…
– Late Multiplism
• “I feel like I’m programmed to program—not
learning how & why. Why does everyone else
get it? I feel stupid.”
– Late Multiplism? Dislike of Dualism!
Voices of Multiplism (cont’d)
• CS junior/senior in CSE 191 (math/logic):
– “Since the material tends to be subjective, it
helps to see the reasoning of another person
sometimes.”
• Multiplism confronted with Contextual Relativism
Contextual relativists …
• Instructors:
– Seen as source of expertise …
– as long as they follow contextual rules for good thinking
• Themselves:
– Seen as studying different contexts
– Seeing different perspectives
• Other students:
– Legitimate if they follow contextual rules for good thinking
• On evaluation:
– Evaluation of work  evaluation of self
– Evaluation is part of learning
• Get support from:
– Instructor
– Diversity
Voices of Contextual Relativism
• Cliff Stoll @ UB:
– “The answer is Markus Hess; now go home. If you’re
only interested in the solution, leave. If you’re
interested in good science & want to know how I
solved the puzzle, stay.”
• Gauss (1808):
– “It is not knowledge, but the act of learning, not
possession but the act of getting there, which grants
the greatest enjoyment.”
• Einstein:
– “The search for truth is more precious than its
possession.”
Instrument Stimulus
• Describe the best class you’ve taken in your recent
past (high school or college).
– What made it positive for you?
– Be as specific as possible.
• Feel free to go into as much detail as you think will give us a
clear idea of the class
• E.g., you might want to discuss areas such as:
–
–
–
–
–
–
what the teacher was like
the subject matter
the particular content (readings, films, etc.)
the atmosphere of the class
grading procedures
etc.
– We want your thoughts and comments
• a complete description of:
– your experience
– and how you felt about it
Brief Overview of 4 Central Perry Positions
1.
Basic Dualist
•
•
•
2.
all questions have answers
all teachers know right answers & will teach them
student must learn right answers
Full Dualist
•
•
all questions have answers
some teachers know right answers & teach them
•
•
student must learn right answers
•
3.
others don’t, but teach them anyway
and ignore others
Early Multiplist
•
some questions have known answers
•
•
•
4.
others have not-yet-known answers
teachers know right ways to get answers
students must learn how to find right answers
Late Multiplist
•
•
•
most questions have no known answers
teacher is source of thinking process OR is irrelevant
student must learn to think for self (everyone has right to own opinion)
OR doesn’t matter which answer you give
Passage 1
The best class I have taken in recent years
was US history. The class was fun for me
because the teacher would help us outline
her class. We all knew what she expected
of us. Her grading system was the same as
the rest of the school. She had control of
her class. The students got along with her
and had an interesting time learning. We
always knew what to study and what
would be expected of us. Her voice was
never monotone and her appearance was
always bright. She was great and easy to
get along with. Her interesting manner
was fabulous.
Passage 1
The best class I have taken in recent years
was US history. The class was fun for me
because the teacher would help us outline
her class. We all knew what she expected
of us. Her grading system was the same as
the rest of the school. She had control of
her class. The students got along with her
and had an interesting time learning. We
always knew what to study and what
would be expected of us. Her voice was
never monotone and her appearance was
always bright. She was great and easy to
get along with. Her interesting manner
was fabulous.
1. sees Authority as giver who is
responsible for learning (2).
Passage 1
The best class I have taken in recent years
was US history. The class was fun for me
because the teacher would help us outline
her class. We all knew what she expected
of us. Her grading system was the same as
the rest of the school. She had control of
her class. The students got along with her
and had an interesting time learning. We
always knew what to study and what
would be expected of us. Her voice was
never monotone and her appearance was
always bright. She was great and easy to
get along with. Her interesting manner
was fabulous.
1. sees Authority as giver who is
responsible for learning (2).
2. structured, traditional formal
process (familiar to student) is
expected and preferred (2).
Passage 1
The best class I have taken in recent years
was US history. The class was fun for me
because the teacher would help us outline
her class. We all knew what she expected
of us. Her grading system was the same as
the rest of the school. She had control of
her class. The students got along with her
and had an interesting time learning. We
always knew what to study and what
would be expected of us. Her voice was
never monotone and her appearance was
always bright. She was great and easy to
get along with. Her interesting manner
was fabulous.
1. sees Authority as giver who is
responsible for learning (2).
2. structured, traditional formal
process (familiar to student) is
expected and preferred (2).
3. expects/demands high level of
external control (2).
Passage 1
The best class I have taken in recent years
was US history. The class was fun for me
because the teacher would help us outline
her class. We all knew what she expected
of us. Her grading system was the same as
the rest of the school. She had control of
her class. The students got along with her
and had an interesting time learning. We
always knew what to study and what
would be expected of us. Her voice was
never monotone and her appearance was
always bright. She was great and easy to
get along with. Her interesting manner
was fabulous.
1. sees Authority as giver who is
responsible for learning (2).
2. structured, traditional formal
process (familiar to student) is
expected and preferred (2).
3. expects/demands high level of
external control (2).
4. reacts against uncertainty; values
clear, no-nonsense approach (2).
Passage 1
The best class I have taken in recent years
was US history. The class was fun for me
because the teacher would help us outline
her class. We all knew what she expected
of us. Her grading system was the same as
the rest of the school. She had control of
her class. The students got along with her
and had an interesting time learning. We
always knew what to study and what
would be expected of us. Her voice was
never monotone and her appearance was
always bright. She was great and easy to
get along with. Her interesting manner
was fabulous.
1. sees Authority as giver who is
responsible for learning (2).
2. structured, traditional formal
process (familiar to student) is
expected and preferred (2).
3. expects/demands high level of
external control (2).
4. reacts against uncertainty; values
clear, no-nonsense approach (2).
5. in general:
•
•
•
Authority can be Good or Bad;
break between Authority &
absolute Right beginning (2)
will not/cannot connect things,
even to “corral” them (2)
Passage 2
• I prefer a class of 6 or 7 students in a very unstructured
situation…no classroom, no seminar table, no note-taking. We
would meet for dinner once a week and converse over the meal.
When I mean “converse”, I am advocating talking, arguing,
honestly disagreeing. There would be no time limit on the class,
but if you were bored or tired you could bow out without penalty.
There would be an instructor, but his/her role would be to
stimulate discussion, ask honest and probing questions, excite the
group, make it flow. The group would have to consist of close
fiends in which no academic competition would be necessary or
appropriate. We would laugh and interject personal stories, jokes
into the conversation as well.
• The subject of the discussion would be whatever we chose at that
time as the discussion progressed, whatever came to mind.
• The grading would be based on satisfaction level. If the student
found that he found the class to be enjoyable, exciting,
stimulating, and enriching, then he/she got nothing more than the
satisfaction of knowing that. If a student felt less than satisfied,
he/she would drop out.
Passage 3
• I would have to choose Accounting. Now the question is
why? Well, to begin with, I enjoy numbers. I can
remember in high school in my Junior year my
graduating class was given a battery of tests. I, believe it
or not, rated one of the highest in math or numbers.
• So then, what made this class tops? It was that the
teacher was organized and knew where we stood at all
times. I knew what was expected of me and I did my
thing.
• One final aspect of this class that I feel made it a good
class, was that I knew if I was right or wrong. I guess
this is a carry-over of knowing where I stood. It’s the
old grade-system—if you know what I mean.
Passage 4
• The best classes that I have engaged in have been calculus and
philosophy. I have enjoyed these because the instructors touched
something inside myself. I experienced a lot of growth through
personal thought and reflection. The instructor usually stimulated the
thought through questions or phrases which stimulated strong
feelings. The teachers were very open to questions and knew how to
motivate the students. To my surprise these classes always required
the most amount of work. I think it was because I wanted to put
myself into the class that made it so much work for myself.
• The atmosphere was open and there was usually a lot of discussion
among the students. The grading was based on tests, essays, multiple
choice, etc.
• The teacher plays a very important part for me. If I know a good
teacher, usually any class they teach will be excellent. They tell
stories and use clever mnemonic devices to help you remember. You
can tell they love teaching. It is radiated to the students.
To Be Successful in College…
• Students need to adapt to the cognitive style
of Contextual Relativism
– else: student won’t understand instructor!
• BUT:
– This might not happen till senior year…
• or later!
Your Goals as Teacher
• To challenge students,
– So that they will journey from Dualism to
Multiplism to Contextual Relativism
• and beyond
• To support students,
– As they move from the “comfortable home” of
one approach to the strangeness of another
Examples
• CSE 113/115 (Intro CS):
– Different algorithms for same HW can all be “correct”
• But some might be “better”: More efficient, more readable, etc.
• Quantity of effort, length of program are irrelevant (to the grade)
• Possible solution: bug report
• CSE 191 (Discrete Math): Proofs: relative truth
• “How long should the paper/documentation be?”
– Dualistic question!  Give a justified length (challenge & support)
– E.g.: Compare 2 algorithms for computing GCD:
• state the problem (1−2 paragraphs)
• describe each algorithm (2 pages*)
• analyze each algorithm (2 pages*)
• final comparison (1−2 paragraphs)
• total = ~5 pages*
– (* 1 page = 1 “typed”, double-spaced page; ~250 words)
Differential Assignments
• Assume: Student has just read Turing’s
article on Turing Test.
• Assignment:
– Write a 1−2 page description of the TT [Dualistic assignment]
+ either (a) a description of one essay on TT in
Mind’s Eye [Dualistic assignment]
or (b) your reply to the following objection
to TT: (…) [Multiplistic assignment]
or (c) your objections to TT
+ your guess at T’s reply [Late Mult/C.R.]
• Support: Student chooses least threatening option
• Challenge: 2nd assignment = Do “next” alternative
Dualism  Multiplism
• Design situations that invite Dualistic
(R/W) thinkers to:
– accept legitimacy of—and appreciate—multiple
perspectives
– learn to:
• compare & contrast
• explain answers
• analyze
DualismMultiplism (cont’d)
1.
Challenge:
•
2.
have students experience 2−3 conflicting or alternative views
Support:
•
use high degree of structure to present each view:
−
syllabus, explicit assignments with due dates, outline of each class, handouts with
requirements, handouts with hints
3.
If student rejects a view, have student be concrete (support) about basis for
rejection (challenge)
4.
If student appeals to authority or overgeneralizes, ask about instances when
authority’s opinion might be challenged or generalization might not hold.
5.
Draw out student’s own views/ experiences;
reinforce student’s legitimacy
•
•
6.
structured discussions, small groups
responses from teacher on written work
After evidence and rational arguments are presented,
reinforce possibility of changing mind
Dualism Multiplism (cont’d)
• Help students develop strategies to pick out
major concepts or most relevant information
in a section of text:
– challenge: learning how to learn
(rather than learning answers)
– support: there are “correct” answers as to
what’s important
Multiplism  Contextual Relativism
• Design situations that invite Late
Multiplistic students (all opinions are OK)
to:
– understand relative status of views via nonabsolute criteria for judgment
– learn to:
• synthesize views
• relate learning in one context to issues in another
MultiplismContextual Relativism (cont’d)
1.
2.
Support:
•
Have students encounter several views.
Challenge:
•
Evaluate relative merits
−
via non-absolute or imaginative criteria (support)
•
•
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
own experiences (via biographies, stories)
others’ experiences (small groups)
Support:
•
Reinforce that authorities can/do disagree
Challenge:
•
Explicitly identify bases for disagreements among authorities/views
Support:
•
Emphasize non-absolute criteria for generating evidence of support or
criticism
Challenge:
•
Identify and evaluate assumptions
Support:
•
Use low degree of structure
•
Let students take responsibility for structuring own learning:
−
−
negotiate syllabus, course content, due dates
individual contracts; teacher as resource
Contextual Relativism  Commitment
• Design situtations that invite Contextually
Relativistic students to:
– Apply non-absolute criteria to evaluate views
– Give alternative new ways of looking at
complex problems
Contextual RelativismCommitment (cont’d)
1. Have students encounter several views (support) and
take a reasoned stand (challenge)
2. Support:
•
•
Use low degree of structure
Encourage students to take responsibility for:
−
−
structuring own learning (support)
their own stands and decisions (challenge)
3. Recognize that students may have:
•
•
•
anxiety
fear of loss
fear of making a mistake in making a commitment
4. Reinforce that commitments can be—and usually are—
reassessed and changed.
The Perry Scheme, Self-Referentially
• Dualist:
– The Perry scheme is the best way of thinking about college students.
Someone has finally told us how to make students change in the right ways.
• Multiplist:
– Well, it’s some people’s way of talking about student growth and
development, and they have a right to their own opinion, I suppose.
• Contextual Relativist:
– It is one of a relatively few student-development models based on data
collected in a fairly unbiased manner over many years.
• Commitment:
– I have found the Perry scheme, integrated with other theories, extremely
helpful to me as I try to interpret the behavior of people around me, as I
think of my goals as an educator, and, especially, as I interact with my
students.
• The Perry scheme attempts to analyze assumptions about
knowledge, self, and values such as those implicit in the 4
descriptions above and in the ability to write this last sentence.
− Larry Copes
• Hear your students’ voices:
– where are they’re coming from on the Perry scheme?
– then:
• you can reply with answers that challenge and support
• you can design assignments/experiences that help them
journey along the Perry positions
• Be flexible:
– try different teaching styles…
– … to support your students…
– … to challenge your students…
• … and yourself!
Further reading:
• W.G. Perry’s 2 main works:
– Forms of Intellectual & Ethical Development in the College Years
(Holt, Rinehart, Winston, 1970)
– “Cognitive & Ethical Growth”, in Chickering, The Modern American College
(Jossey-Bass, 1981).
• An interesting follow-up study:
– Belenky, M.F., et al. (1986), Women’s Ways of Knowing (Basic Books).
• Good general introduction & application to science teaching,
with many useful further references:
– Finster, D.C., “Developmental Instruction”, Journal of Chemical Education
66 (1989): 659-661 and 68 (1991): 752-756.
• Two of my own papers:
– Rapaport, W.J. (1982), “Unsolvable Problems & Philosophical Progress”,
American Philosophical Quarterly 19: 289−298.
– Rapaport, W.J. (1984), “Critical Thinking & Cognitive Development”,
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Association. 57: 610−615.
• For further information, go to:
– http://www.cse.buffalo.edu/~rapaport/perry.positions.html