Extracted From: Huglin, L. M. (2003). The relationship between personal epistemology
and learning style in adult learners. Dissertation Abstracts International, 64(03), 759.
The Nature of Epistemology
In their extensive review of epistemological research, Hofer & Pintrich (1997) define
personal epistemology as follows:
Epistemology is an area of philosophy concerned with the nature and justification
of human knowledge. A growing area of interest for psychologists and educators
is that of personal epistemological development and epistemological beliefs: how
individuals come to know, the theories and beliefs they hold about knowing, and
the manner in which such epistemological premises are a part of and an influence
on the cognitive processes of thinking and reasoning (p. 88).
Although there are many different epistemological terms, in general, epistemological
beliefs are seen as ranging on a continuum from objectivism to subjectivism.
Objectivism
Objectivism (also referred to as evaluatism, empiricism, logical positivism, and
dualism) espouses the belief that knowledge of the world is relatively fixed, exists outside
the knower, and that learners can come to know the world as it really is. As Pratt (1998)
puts it, “knowledge exists independent of the learners’ interest in it, or awareness of
it…basic theories, principles, and rules which govern our lives and world exist quite
separately from our experience of them; knowledge about the world exists ‘out there’
waiting to be discovered” (p. 22). Those who subscribe to the objectivist viewpoint
believe that “the mind is…an empty bucket, a blank page, a tabula rasa waiting to be
filled with sense impressions or the results of reasoning” (Ernest, 1995, p. 467). From the
objectivist perspective, knowledge is obtained through experience and observation. One
1
can be said to know something when one can accurately describe or produce a mirror
image of it. The more that one knows about a topic, the closer the representation of
knowledge in that person’s mind is to the reality of the world. This is sometimes referred
to as the “reality constructs the person” paradigm (Evans, 2000, p. 739).
A key point in the objectivist perspective is that objective knowledge can, and should,
be separated from one’s feelings about it; that is, that knowledge is value-free:
From an objectivist point of view, truth is a matter of the ‘goodness of fit,’ or
correspondence, between observation and description. Therefore, whether one is a
scientist, journalist, teacher, or a citizen testifying at a trial, observations are
expected to be neutral and represent no particular interests or purposes;
descriptions, likewise, are to be an objective or detached report of what happened
(Pratt, 1998, p. 23).
Ryan & Aikenhead (1992) elaborate on this point by stating that “one vestige of
(objectivism) is the belief that scientific knowledge connects directly with reality,
unencumbered by the vulgarity of human imagination, dogma, or judgments” (p. 561).
The role of authority in learning is a key feature of objectivism: “Authority is highly
correlated to how much expert knowledge one possesses. The more one has knowledge or
expertise validated through experience, observation, and experimentation, the more
authority one holds over those who wish to have that knowledge” (Pratt, 1998, p. 22).
In the context of teaching and learning, the objectivist model “views the teacher as
the source of knowledge and students as passive receptacles of this knowledge. The
objectivist learning model emphasizes learning by receiving information, especially from
the teacher and from textbooks, to help students encounter facts and learn well-defined
2
concepts” (Howard, McGee, Schwartz, & Purcell, 2000, p. 2). Several learning theories
and techniques are associated with this model, including behaviorism, direct instruction,
cognitive information processing, Gagne’s instructional theory, and the Dick & Carey
and ADDIE models of instructional design (Driscoll, 2000; Wood, 1995).
The objectivist model also provides the theoretical basis for quantitative research.
Those with objectivist leanings will be far more inclined to conduct quantitative, rather
than qualitative, research. As stated by Gall, Borg, and Gall (1996):
Positivist research is grounded in the assumption that features of the social
environment constitute an independent reality and are relatively constant across
time and settings. Positivist researchers develop knowledge by collecting
numerical data on observable behaviors of samples and then subjecting these data
to numerical analysis….Quantitative research is virtually synonymous with
positivist research. (p. 28)
Gall, et al., further state that quantitative researchers “assume an objective social reality,”
“assume that social reality is relatively constant across time and settings,” “take an
objective detached stance toward research participants and their setting,” and “prepare
impersonal, objective reports of research findings” (Gall et al., 1996, p. 30).
There seems to be some link between the tendency to subscribe to objectivist beliefs
and the subject matter that is to be taught. Roth & Roychoudhury (1994), for example,
maintain that
at present, most science teaching is based on an objectivist view of knowing and
learning. Here objectivism subsumes all those theories of knowledge that hold
that the truth value of propositions that can be tested empirically in the natural
3
world. Science provides us with a methodology, the scientific method, that allows
us to transcend subjective limitation of individuals to test propositions and, in this
way, to ascertain absolute truths. (p. 6)
Subjectivism
The opposite end of the epistemological continuum is known as subjectivism (also
referred to as interpretivism, absolutism, relativism, postpositivism, and social
constructionism). Whereas objectivism is based on the logic of discovery, subjectivism is
based on the logic of interpretation. Subjectivists discard the notion that reality is “out
there” and instead endorse the idea that reality is what each person interprets it to be. As
Pratt points out:
Subjectivists are committed to quite different beliefs about knowledge and truth
(than are objectivists)….knowledge (and truth) is dependent upon what
individuals bring to the moment of perception. Knowledge and truth are created,
not discovered; the world is only known through people’s interpretations of
it…truth is arrived at not by seeking correspondence, but by seeking consensus;
not by looking for a perfect match, but by finding a reasonable fit; not by
assuming detachment but by assuming commitment. Truth, therefore, is relative
rather than absolute; it depends upon time and place, purpose and interests (Pratt,
1998, p. 23).
Contrary to the principles of objectivism, the learner’s feelings and emotions are an
integral part of the subjectivist view. Learners are seen to be active makers of meaning,
and do so in the context of the learning situation. A person’s background, prior
experiences, and value system are crucial to their interpretation and construction of
4
knowledge. Individual meaning is tested against that of others through the process of
social negotiation. Indeed, subjectivists believe that knowledge cannot be value-free since
all incoming information is filtered through “the lens of our beliefs. We cannot detach
our experience from the purposes and values that bring us to that experience. Believing
determines what is seen. The separation of mind and world, observer and observed,
subject and object, or learner and content must be rejected” (Pratt, 1998, p. 24). This
general outlook has been called the “person constructs reality” paradigm, as opposed to
the “reality constructs the person” paradigm that is aligned with objectivism (Evans,
2000, p.739)
The roles of teacher and learner take on new meaning under the subjectivist
viewpoint. “Teaching should be concerned with students’ construction of knowledge,
with conscious thinking, and reflective practice that cannot be accomplished by methods
that reflect ‘flat declarations of fixed factuality’…opportunities for learning occur during
the social interaction in which participants are expected to take the perspective of
another” (Wood, 1995, p. 332). Learning theories and methodologies that are associated
with subjectivism include group problem-solving tasks, Piaget’s developmental theory,
constructivism, critical thinking techniques, and model development—in general,
approaches that create an atmosphere of active learning (Driscoll, 2000; Howard et al.,
2000).
Those who lean toward the subjectivist end of the epistemological spectrum are also
far more likely to conduct qualitative research than are their objectivist counterparts. As
Gall et al. explain,
5
Postpositivist research is grounded in the assumption that features of the social
environment are constructed as interpretations by individuals and that these
interpretations tend to be transitory and situational. Postpositivist researchers
develop knowledge by collecting primarily verbal data through the intensive study
of cases and then subjecting these data to analytic induction….While the terms
positivist research and postpositivist research appear in the literature, it is more
common to see the terms quantitative research and qualitative research,
respectively, used to refer to the distinctions we made above. (Gall et al., 1996, p.
28)
In addition, Gall et al. further state that qualitative researchers “assume that social reality
is constructed by the participants in it” and “assign human intentions a major role in
explaining causal relationships among social phenomena” as well as “study(ing) the
meanings that individuals create and other internal phenomena” (Gall et al., 1996, p. 30).
6
References
Driscoll, M. P. (2000). Psychology of learning for instruction (2nd ed.). Boston, MA:
Allyn and Bacon.
Ernest, P. (1995). The one and the many. In L. P. Steffe & J. E. Gale (Eds.),
Constructivism in education (pp. 459-486). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
Evans, W. J. (2000). Construct validity of the Attitudes About Reality Scale.
Psychological Reports, 86(3, Pt1), 738-744.
Gall, M. D., Borg, W. R., & Gall, J. P. (1996). Educational research: An introduction
(6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers USA.
Hofer, B. K., & 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.
Howard, B. C., McGee, S., Schwartz, N. H., & Purcell, S. (2000). The experience of
constructivism: Transforming teacher epistemology. Journal of Research on
Computing in Education, 32(4), 455-465.
Pratt, D. D. (1998). Five perspectives on teaching in adult and higher education.
Malabar, FL: Krieger Publishing Company.
Roth, W. M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1994). Physics students' epistemologies and views
about knowing and learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 31(1), 530.
Ryan, A. G., & Aikenhead, G. S. (1992). Students' preconceptions about the
epistemology of science. Science Education, 76(6), 559-580.
7
Wood, T. (1995). From alternative epistemologies to practice in education: Rethinking
what it means to teach and learn. In L. P. Steffe & J. E. Gale (Eds.),
Constructivism in education. (pp. 331-339). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates.
8