The Taylor Institute Guide Series cognitive DEVELOPMENT · Galicia Blackman | 3 Cognitive...

TheTaylorInstituteGuideSeries

cognitiveDEVELOPMENT

GaliciaBlackmanSeptember,2016

students’beliefsABOUT KNOWING

AuthorGaliciaBlackmanScholarshipofTeachingandLearning(SoTL)ResearchAssistantTaylorInstituteforTeachingandLearning,UniversityofCalgaryCoverDesignYkjePieraOnlineLearningEnvironmentSpecialist,EducationalDevelopmentUnitTaylorInstituteforTeachingandLearning,UniversityofCalgarySeptember2016TaylorInstituteforTeachingandLearning434CollegiateBlvdUniversityofCalgary,CalgaryABCANADAT2N1N4http://www.ucalgary.ca/taylorinstitute/

RecommendedCitationBlackman,Galicia.“CognitiveDevelopment:Students’BeliefsaboutKnowing.”TaylorInstitutefor

TeachingandLearningGuideSeries.Calgary,AB:TaylorInstituteforTeachingandLearningattheUniversityofCalgary,April2016.http://www.ucalgary.ca/taylorinstitute/guides

ThisguideisdistributedunderthetermsoftheCreativeCommons—AttributionNon-CommercialLicense4.0International(creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/),whichpermitssharingandadaptingofthematerial,providedtheoriginalworkisproperlyattributed(seerecommendedcitationbelow),anychangesareclearlyindicated,andthematerialisnotusedforcommercialpurposes.

TableofContents

Perry’sSchemeofCognitiveDevelopment.............................................................................2Students’UnderstandingofKnowledge...........................................................................................2Students’RelationshiptoAuthority................................................................................................3

BuildingOnPerry...................................................................................................................3Belenky,Clinchy,Goldberger,andTarule:Women’sWaysofKnowing...........................................4BaxterMagolda’sEpistemologicalReflectionModel:AwarenessofWhatandHowOneKnows......4KingandKitchener’sReflectiveJudgmentModel:WaysofThinkingaboutProblemSolving...........5

ApplicationsofPerryinDifferentContexts.............................................................................6

ThePerrySchemeofCognitiveDevelopment:AnAnnotatedBibliography.............................6AccessibleSummaries...............................................................................................................................6UnderstandingtheFullPerryScheme......................................................................................................9UsingPerrytoEvaluateCognitiveDevelopment......................................................................................9

BuildingOnPerry............................................................................................................................9Belenky,Clinchy,Goldberger,&Tarule:Women’sWaysofKnowing......................................................9EpistemologicalReflectionModel:AwarenessofWhatandHowOneKnows.......................................10TheReflectiveJudgmentModel:WaysofThinkingAboutProblemSolving..........................................12

ApplicationsofPerryinDifferentContexts....................................................................................13GeneralApplicationsinEducationSettings.....................................................................................................13Anthropology...................................................................................................................................................13Biology.............................................................................................................................................................13CareerDevelopment.......................................................................................................................................13Chemistry........................................................................................................................................................13CollegeStudentClassroomParticipation........................................................................................................13Counseling.......................................................................................................................................................13Cross-CulturalApplications.............................................................................................................................13Economics.......................................................................................................................................................13Education.........................................................................................................................................................14Engineering......................................................................................................................................................14English.............................................................................................................................................................14GenderandStudentAffairs.............................................................................................................................14GiftedHighSchoolStudents............................................................................................................................14InformationLiteracy........................................................................................................................................14InteriorDesign.................................................................................................................................................15Mathematics...................................................................................................................................................15Medicine..........................................................................................................................................................15Music...............................................................................................................................................................15NaturalSciences..............................................................................................................................................15Nursing............................................................................................................................................................15Philosophy.......................................................................................................................................................15Psychology.......................................................................................................................................................15StudyingAbroad.................................................................................................................................................................15Theology.............................................................................................................................................................................16Writing...............................................................................................................................................................................16

GaliciaBlackman|2CognitiveDevelopmentinPost-SecondaryLearners

Aftera15-yearresearchprojectinvolvinginterviewswithjustover100Harvardmeninthe1960s,educationalpsychologistWilliamPerrytheorizedthatadultlearnersmovethroughdifferentstagesoflearning,ordevelopmentalpositions.Byplacingemphasison“theformsthatstudentvoiceswouldtake”(Knefelkamp,1998,p.xiv),Perrybroughtattentiontothechangesstudentsundergointhepost-secondaryeducationsetting.Perry’sSchemeofCognitiveDevelopment

WhilePerryoriginallyidentifiedninepositions,subsequentscholars(Knefelkamp&Slepitza,1978;Kloss,1994;Moore,1994;Hofer&Pintrich,1997)havecondensedthesepositionstosimplifyhisschemeasfollows:

dualism perceivingknowledgeasfacts,eithercorrectorwrong

multiplicity inadditiontorecognizingthatknowledgeismadeupoffactsandsometimesevensubordinatingfact,recognizingthatopinionsarealsoknowledge--transitioningthroughaprocessofseeingallknowledgeasopinion,tosiftingthroughopinionswithaninclinationtodismissthosethatcontradictone’sunderstandings

relativism recognizingknowledgeascomplexandcontextualandthatmultiple,evencontraryopinionscanco-exist

commitment takingapositionbyharnessingmultipleopinionstoconvergeintoapersonalworldview

Twoimportantthemeswithdirectimplicationsforpost-secondaryteachingandlearningemergefromtheseoverarchingpositions:students’understandingofknowledgeandtheirrelationshiptoauthority.

Students’UnderstandingofKnowledgeTraditionaluniversity-agedstudentstypicallycometotheclassroomthinkingdualistically,

perceivingknowledgeaseitherrightorwrong.Theyexpectthataprofessor(orotherauthorities)willprovidethecontentbyclearlyindicatingwhatisfactualandtrueandimportant.Whentheyattempttoprocessdiverseperspectives,studentsmayrecognizethatknowledgeisconstitutedofconflictingcontentandmoveintoPerry’spositionofmultiplicity.Theymayexperienceconfusioninhowtoprocessconflictingperspectivesand,astheyseesomeauthoritiesasgoodandothersbad,theymaydismissunpalatableideastoresolvethatconfusion.Althoughstudentsareincreasinglyopentouncertaintyinknowledge,theyhaveyettobeabletobetocopewithdiversityinknowledge.

Ifstudentsbecomeabletoholdmultipleperspectivesatthesametimeandrecognizethatknowledgeiscomplexandcontextual,thentheymoveintorelativism.Thisisaqualitativeshiftfromdualisticthinking(whichframesknowledgeonedimensionally—eithertrueorfalse—andcomingfromanexternalsource)andfrommultiplicity(whichperceivesknowledgeasmostlyopinion).

Awordaboutterminology:While“development”suggeststhatmovingforwardtoanotherpositionisimprovement,Perryemphasizedthatstudentsmayreverttoapreviousstagewhenconfrontedwithneworchallenginglearningsituations,aresponsethatcanhelpinadjustingtothesenewsituations.Hisword“positions”alsoreflectsthisdynamicmovement,ratherthananabsolutestateofbeingorafixedidentity.


Ifstudentsarriveataworldviewshapedbythemultipleperspectivestheyhavebeenexposedtoovertime,theymaymoveintoapositionofcommitment.Here,studentsrecognizethattheycanbeproducersofknowledge.Fewstudentswereidentifiedatthefinalstagesofthescheme.

Students’RelationshiptoAuthorityIntheearlystages,studentsfeeldependentonauthorityfigures.Whenconfrontedwithnew

learningsituations,studentsindualisticmodesexpecttheinstructortotellthemwhattheyneedtodo,andeveniftheymovetomultiplicity,theystilltendtoexpecttheinstructortoclearlysetmostoftheparametersoftheirlearning.Inthelatterpositions,studentsaremorereflectiveaboutwhattheyknowandmorelikelytomaketheirowndecisionsaboutknowledge.Eventually,theytakeresponsibilityandapplytheirknowledge,perhapsevencommittotheirownbeliefsandcreatenewknowledge.

Perry’sresearchwasimportantforitsinsightabouthowyoungadultsconfrontunfamiliarcontentinnewlearningenvironments.AccordingtoHoferandPintrich(1997,p.93),Perrywasthefirsttosuggestthathowuniversitystudentsmakemeaningoftheireducationalexperiencesisnotsimplyareflectionoftheirpersonalitiesbutinsteadanevolvingdevelopmentalprocess.Previousmodelsofhowstudentslearnhadsimplisticallypresentedstudentsaspassiverecipientsofknowledge.Perry’sinterviews,whichfocusedonhowthestudentsunderstoodtheirlearningcontexts,resultedinindicationsthatthesestudentsactivelyengageintheirlearning,providinganalternativemodelforinterpretingstudents’responsestotheuniversityenvironment.

Perry’sresearchencourageseducatorstoreconsidersomecommonassumptionsaboutadultlearners.Adultlearnersarenotnecessarilyindependentlearners,norabletorecognizethatknowledgeisdiverse,eventhoughtheymayhavehadmanyyearsofformalschooling;neitheraretheyblankslates.Innewlearningsituations,evenmaturelearnerswillresemblethedualisticstudentswhoarehighlydependentonauthorityuntiltheybecomemorecomfortablewiththesubjectmatterandslightlymoreindependentlearners.Perry’sdevelopmentalmodelofferseducatorstoolsforevaluatingstudents’varyinglevelsofreadinessforsubjectmatterandskills.

ThePerryschemehasfoundmultipleiterationsinitsapplicationsinspecializedstudiesofhowpost-secondarystudentslearn.Thelimitationsoftheoriginalschemehaveledresearchersandeducatorstomodifyhiscategories,buttheframingprinciplesthatstudentsmovefrompassive,dependentstages,tomoreassertive,independentstagesisaconsistentapplicationofthePerryscheme.

BuildingOnPerrySomeofthemostwell-knowndevelopmentalworkonhowstudentslearnhadbeenpredominantly

aboutchildren,conductedbypsychologistssuchasLevVygotsky,JeanPiaget,andJeromeBruner.Perryshiftedthefocustoadultlearnersandlearninginnewandchallengingsituationsforevenexperiencedstudents.Hisworkhascontributedtoatleastnoticeablethreebranchesofthoughtaboutadultlearners:

• MaryFieldBelenky,BlytheMcVickerClinchy,NancyRuleGoldberger,andJillMattuckTaruleextendPerry’sworkbyfocusingon“women’swaysofknowing,”astheytitledtheirbook,

• BaxterMagoldaintroducesawayofrecognizinglearners’awarenessofwhatandhowtheyknow,and

• PatriciaKingandKarenKitchenerfocusonwaysofthinkingaboutproblemsolving.


AllofthesebranchespivotonPerry’semphasisofhowstudentsarticulatetheirunderstandingoftheirlearningprocessesandknowledge.Thethemes“students’understandingofknowledge”and“students’relationshiptoauthority”aretakenuptovaryingdegreesbyeachofthesebranches.

Belenky,Clinchy,Goldberger,andTarule:Women’sWaysofKnowingWomen'sWaysofKnowing:TheDevelopmentofSelf,Voice,andMind(1986)reportsonthe

researchofBelenky,Clinchy,Goldberger,andTarule,allofwhomhadpreviouslybeenstudyingstudentdevelopment.BelenkyandTarulehadstudiedwithPerry,andBelenkyhadalsoworkedwithCarolGilliganinlookingatwomen’svoiceinhumandevelopment.

Concernedwithfemalestudents’complaintsabouttheireducationalexperiences,thefourresearcherssetouttostudywomenbecausePerry’songoingresearchconcludedthatwomenconformedtohisschemebasedonhisworkwithmalestudents.Intheearlystagesoftheirresearch,manyoftheanswerswomengavetoPerry’sinterviewquestionsdidnoteasilyfithiswell-acceptedscheme,sowhilePerry’semphasisonepistemologyor“waysofknowing”becamethemainorganizingprincipleofthedatathatemergedfromtheirinterviews,theyexpandedthescopeofinfluencebyselecting135womenfromdiverselearningcontexts:collegewomen,alumnae,andwomeninwhattheycalled“invisiblecolleges”orhumanserviceagencies.

Belenky,Clinchy,Goldberger,andTarulefoundthatthewomen’sassumptionsabouttheirknowledgeultimatelyinfluencedhowtheyperceivedthemselves.Thewomenintheirstudydidnotdescribetheirlearninginlinearways;insteadtheydescribedlearningintermsofspeakingandlistening.Theirfindingsthusfocusontheinterrelatednessofwomen’sminds,voices,andselves—asindicatedintheirsubtitle—identifyingfivewaysofknowing:

silence identifyingthemselvesasmindless,voiceless,andatthewhimofexternalauthority

receivedknowledge believingthemselvescapableofreceivingknowledge

subjectiveknowledge believingthemselvescapableofintuitingknowledge

proceduralknowledge investinginpursuingknowledge

constructedknowledge seeingthemselvesasproducersandconsumersofknowledge

Althoughthisworkwasgroundbreakingasitdrewattentionexplicitlytowomen’swaysofprocessingknowledge,theauthorsarecarefultopointoutthatsimilarcategoriescanbefoundinmen’sthinkingandresistessentialistorbinarialcharacterizationsofwomenandmen.

BaxterMagolda’sEpistemologicalReflectionModel:AwarenessofWhatandHowOneKnowsBelenky,Clinchy,Goldberger,andTaruleinfluencedotherresearcherstolookatgender-based

distinctionsinhowadultslearn.InKnowingandReasoninginCollege:Gender-RelatedPatternsinUndergraduates’IntellectualDevelopment(1992),MarciaBaxterMagoldasoughttoclosethegenderdividesintheresearchconductedbyPerryandBelenkyandcolleagues.ShemodeledherresearchonPerry’sinterviewingstyleoflisteningtostudents’voicesbutsetouttorevealgenderpatternsinstudents’waysofknowing,soshestudiedabout100students(halfmenandhalfwomen).LikeBelenkyandcolleagues,shefounddimensionsofstudentdevelopmentnotaccountedforinPerry’sscheme,but


shealsofoundmoresimilaritiesinwomen’sandmen’swaysofknowing,soherbookultimatelyspendsverylittletimelookingatgender-relateddifferences.

Herresultingworkfocusesinsteadonrecognizinglearners’awarenessofwhatandhowtheyknow.HerEpistemologicalReflectionModel(ERM)identifiesfourstagesdescribingspecificconditions(ordomains)wherelearnersidentifytheirknowledge:inrelationtowhatthelearnerbelievesherroletobe,inrelationtopeers,inrelationtotheinstructor,andfinallyinrelationtowaysofevaluatingherknowledge.

absoluteknowing

believing• knowledgeisabsoluteorcertain• theirpeershavelimitedknowledge,butshouldsharematerials• authoritieshavethatabsoluteknowledgeandshouldcommunicateit• evaluations(i.e.,tests)areopportunitiestoshowwhattheyknowby

reproducingtheauthority’sknowledgetransitionalknowing

believing• transitionalunderstanding,sosomeknowledgeiscertain,butthereare

limitationstowhatonecanknow• peersoughttoexchangeideas• authoritieshavelimitedknowledgeandshouldfacilitaterapportwith

students• evaluationsmayfocusonunderstandingratherthanmemorization

independentknowing

believing• knowledgeisuncertainbecauseallpeoplehavetheirownbeliefsandcan

createknowledge• peersarenowasourceofknowledge• authoritiespromoteindependentthinkingandexchangeofopinions• evaluationsrewardindependentthinking

contextualknowing

believing• knowingdependsonanalyzingcontextuallysignificantevidence,andthey

canmergetheirknowledgewithothersafterthisanalysis• peersandauthoritiesenhancelearningthroughdiscussionandcritique• evaluationcanactuallymeasurecompetenceasstudentsandteachers

worktowardsharedgoalsKingandKitchener’sReflectiveJudgmentModel:WaysofThinkingaboutProblemSolving

KingandKitchener’sDevelopingReflectiveJudgment:UnderstandingandPromotingIntellectualGrowthandCriticalThinkinginAdolescentsandAdults(1994)emphasizeshowpeoplemakedecisionstoresolvedifficultsituations.TheycreditJohnDewey’snotionof“reflectivejudgment,”someofPiaget’sdevelopmentalconcepts,andworkdonebyarangeofotherdevelopmentaltheorists,includingPerry,whoseworkwasbeingwidelydiscussedintheacademiccommunityasKingandKitchenerwereconductingtheirresearch.Theywereinspiredtoaskquestionsaboutthenatureofintellectualdevelopment,focusingonanalyzingresponsestoproblemswhichdonothaveexplicitsolutions.Theyconductedresearchwitharangeofadultlearnersincludingbutnotlimitedtocollegestudents(fromhighschoolstudentstomiddle-agedadults)anddevelopedtheReflectiveJudgmentModel(RJM).

Framedbytheanalysisofpeople’sresponsesto“vexingproblems”(King&Kitchener,1994,p.2),theRJMdescribeshowbeliefsofwhatknowledgeisandhowitcanbejustifiedchangethroughout


lifeandaffecttheabilitytoprocessthesevexingproblems.TheirmodelcanbeseenasanelaborationofthelatterpositionsofthePerryscheme(commitmentinrelativism),whenpeopleareawareoftheirknowledgeandcanmakedecisionsbasedonthescopeoftheirknowledge.

TheRJMlooksathowpeoplemakejudgments,solveproblems,andthinkcriticallythroughsevendevelopmentalstages:

pre-reflectivethinkingstages1-3

learnersbelievethatknowledgeisabsoluteandderivedfromexperience,sotheyhavedifficultyevaluatingcompetingclaimsandmakingdecisionstosolveproblems

quasi-reflectivethinkingstages4and5

learnersdescribeknowledgeinself-centered,subjectivewaysandarelimitedintheirabilitiestoresolveproblems

reflectivethinkingstages6and7

learnersrecognizeknowledgeasconstructedandareabletointegrateperspectivestodrawandmakedecisionsforproblem-solving

KingandKitchenerareimportantadditionstothediscussionofdevelopmentalmarkersoflearningbecausetheyaddtotheongoingdiscussionofhowweunderstandstudents’developmentalpatternsofknowingandlearning,herewithemphasisoncriticalthinkinginthefaceofcomplexity.

ApplicationsofPerryinDifferentContexts

Perry’sworkandthesubsequentresearchwhichbuiltonhisfindingshavecontributedtoabodyofthinkingwhichcontinuouslyconsidershowpost-secondarystudentsengageinnewlearningsituations.ManyresearchershaveusedthetenetsofPerry’sworktocriticallyexaminestudents’learningprocessesinspecificdisciplinesandotheracademiccontexts.

Seepages12to16foralistofresourcesarrangedbydisciplineorcontext.

ThePerrySchemeofCognitiveDevelopment:AnAnnotatedBibliographyThisbibliographyprovidesreferencestoarangeofbooks,editedcollections,andjournalarticles

thatprovidesounddiscussionsandapplicationsofthePerryscheme.Themainresearchthatbranchedofffromtheschemeisalsoincluded.

AccessibleSummariesSomeofthebestgeneralintroductorysummariestoPerry,inorderofsimplicitytocomplexityin

thediscussions,areasfollows:

Perry,W.G.Jr.(2014).Cognitiveandethicalgrowth:Themakingofmeaning.InP.G.Altbach,K.Arnold,&I.C.King(Eds.),Collegestudentdevelopmentandacademiclife:Psychological,intellectual,social,andmoralissues.(pp.48-88).NewYork,NY:Routledge.

TheOriginalTextPerry,W.G.,&HarvardUniversity.(1968).Formsofintellectualandethicaldevelopmentinthecollegeyears:Ascheme.Cambridge,Mass:BureauofStudyCounsel,HarvardUniversity.


ThissynopsisofthecollaborativeworkthatcametobecalledthePerryschemeispresentedinsignificantdetail,butthelanguageisfairlyaccessible.Thereareseveralexamplesofstatementsfromstudentswhichrepresentthevariouspositions.AsareportpresentedbyPerryhimself,thisasoundstartingpointforunderstandingthefundamentalsoftheschemeandhowothershavebuiltuponthis.

Furthermore,Altbach,Arnold,&King(2014)isavolumeofworkondevelopmentaltheoriesoflearning.Theintroduction“ReflectionsonStudentDevelopment”prefacesthevariousdevelopmentaltheoriesandlocatestherelevanceofeachofthetheoreticalorientationswhichbranchedofffromPerry.Thevolumecontainschaptersthatgiveanoverviewofthethreebranches:“Women’sWaysofKnowing”(p.89-116),“Students’EpistemologiesandAcademicExperiences:ImplicationsforPedagogy”(p.117-140)and“TheReflectiveJudgmentModel:TransformingAssumptionsaboutKnowing”(p.141-159).(Theanthologyalsosummarizesothertheoriesofdevelopment,suchasArthurChickering’spsychosocialtheoryofstudents’development,MinorityIdentityDevelopmentmodel,andHomosexualidentityformation).

Widick,C.(1977).ThePerryscheme:Afoundationfordevelopmentalpractice.TheCounselingPsychologist,6(4),35-38.doi:10.1177/001100007700600415

ThisisabriefintroductiontothePerryschemewithastraightforwardsummaryofthevariouspositions.ThisarticleisagentleintroductiontoanyonereadingaboutPerryforthefirsttimeandisusefulforunderstandingthepracticaluseofthetheorywhenappliedtoteaching.Thearticlegoesontolookattheutilityoftheschemeforeducationalcounselingpractice.

Moore,W.S.(1994).Studentandfacultyepistemologyinthecollegeclassroom:ThePerryschemaofintellectualandethicaldevelopment.InK.W.Prichard&R.MSawyer(Eds.),Handbookofcollegeteaching:Theoryandapplications(pp.45-67).Westport,CT:GreenwoodPress.

ThischapterclaimsthatthePerryschemeoffersa“powerfulframework”forunderstandingstudentperspectivesonknowledgeandlearningwithinthecomplexanddynamicnatureofthecollegesetting.MooreprovidesasuccinctoverviewofthePerryschemeonpages47-51,lookingatthepositionsinthecategoriesofdualism,multiplicity,contextualrelativism,andcommitmentwithinrelativism.Thenthechaptergoesontolookattheimplicationsforfacultyandstudents.

King,P.M.(1978).WilliamPerry'stheoryofintellectualandethicaldevelopment.InL.Knefelkamp,C.Widick,&C.A.Parker(Eds.),Newdirectionsforstudentservices:Applyingnewdevelopmentalfindings(pp.35–51).SanFrancisco,CA:Jossey-Bass.

PatriciaKing,whoworkedwithKarenKitcheneronthereflectivejudgmentmodel,providesabriefreviewandcritiqueofthescheme.ThisusefulforunderstandingtheearlyreactionstothetheoryandcontextualizingthewayotherresearchersbuiltonsomeofPerry’sconcepts.

Evans,N.J.,Forney,D.S.,Guide,F.M.,Patton,L.D.&Renn,K.A.(2010).Studentdevelopmentincollege:Theory,researchandpractice.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Thiscollectionofessayslooksatarangeoftheories.Chapterfive,“Perry’sTheoryofIntellectualandEthicalDevelopment,”beginswithanecdotesofprofiledstudents(pp.88-98).Thishelpsthereaderrecognizethetypesofstudentsthatrepresentthevariousstagesofthescheme.ThechapterprovidesahistoricaloverviewofPerry’sresearchandconsidershowithasbeeninstrumentalinunderstandingstudentaffairs.Thechapteralsoincludesclassroomapplicationsofhisworkandanoverviewofotherworkinfluencedbyhisresearch.Itcloseswithacritiqueandconsiderationsoffuturedirectionsforthescheme.

Knefelkamp,L.L.(1998).Introduction.InW.G.J.Perry,Formsofethicalandintellectualdevelopmentinthecollegeyears:Ascheme(pp.xi-xxxviii).SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

IntheintroductiontothisrepublicationofPerry’swork,KnefelkampstatesthatthereareatleastthreedistinctbutrelatedusesofthePerryschemeasmetaphor:GeneralPerry–anoverviewofindividuals’developmentbasedonanalysisfromseveralinterviewsaboutknowing,andeducation;ContextualPerry–awayofthinkingwithinaparticularcontext,inaparticulardisciplineorcourse;FunctionalPerry–whenadultlearnersundertakenewlearningexperiencesandfunctionallyregressuntiltheyfeelcomfortable(p.


xviii).ThiswayoflookingatthePerryschemeisusefulforeducatorswhowouldliketomakesenseofthediversityofadultlearners,notjustthetypeoflearnerrepresentedinthelimiteddemographicofPerry’soriginalresearch.KnefelkampiscarefultoaddthatPerry’sschemedoesnotclaimuniversalityorapplicabilityacrosscultures,andtheresearchinstrumentsusedbyPerryhavehadtobeadjustedforvaryingkindsofresearchparticipants.

Love,P.G.&GuthrieV.L.(1999).Understandingandapplyingcognitivedevelopmenttheory.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Thisbookprovidesanoverviewofseveraltheoriesofcognitiveandintellectualdevelopment.Chapterone,“Perry’sIntellectualScheme,”beginswithanoverviewoftheactualtheoryandgoesontolookatitinrelationtoothertheoriesofcognitivedevelopment(pp.5-16).Thisisadetailedlookatthevariouspositionsandthetransitionsbetweenthepositions.ItalsoanalyzestherelevanceofPerry’sideasmanyyearsafterthedevelopmentofthetheory.Thischaptercanbeaccessedasanonlinearticle:

Love,P.G.,&Guthrie,V.L.(1999).Perry'sintellectualscheme.NewDirectionsforStudentServices,88,5-15.doi:10.1002/ss.8801

ThebookisalsoastrongintroductiontotheinterconnectednessoftheresearchthatbuiltonPerry’sideaswithchaptersthatsummarizeWomen’sWaysofKnowing(pp.17-28),BaxterMagolda’sEpistemologicalReflectionModel(pp.29-40),andKingandKitchener’sReflectiveJudgmentModel(pp.41-52).

Moore,W.S.(2009).Understandinglearninginapostmodernworld:ReconsideringthePerryschemeofintellectualandethicaldevelopment.InB.K.Hofer,&P.R.Pintrich(Eds.),Personalepistemology:Thepsychologyofbeliefsaboutknowledgeandknowing(pp.16-36).NewYork:Routledge.

Inchaptertwoofthiscollection,MoorereviewsthePerryschemeandevaluatesitseffectivenessasatheorytounderstandcollegestudents30yearsafterthetheoryarrivedontheacademicscene.HecritiquesthemodelthatwasgroundedinthewhiteprivilegedworldofHarvard1950s-1960sandclaimsitistimeforareviewtoposethequestion,“whatisthecontinuingrelevanceofsuchamodelfortoday’spostmodernworld”(p.18).Heconsiderstheworkthatbuiltonthemodelandexaminesrecenttheoreticaldevelopmentsineducationalresearchwhichcanbenefitfromtheideasinthescheme.HeconcludesthatthePerryschemestillhasacriticaldimensionthatcanhelpeducatorsunderstandstudents’learning.

Lochrie,J.S.(1989).Perryrevisited—AfreshlookatFormsofIntellectualandEthicalDevelopmentintheCollegeYears.StudiesinHigherEducation,14(3),347-350,doi:10.1080/03075078912331377723

Thisisareviewofthetheory20yearsafterthefirstpublication.Afterabriefreviewofsomeofthecriticisms,Lochrieconcludesthatinspiteofthelimitationsoftheresearchandtheresultanttheory,theworkremainsrelevantforunderstandinglearninginhighereducationsettings.

AnAllegoricalSummary

Domholdt,E.&Preusz,G.(1987).Randi,theround-the-clockrabbit:AnallegorybasedonPerry'stheoryofcognitivedevelopment.InnovativeHigherEducation,12(1),42-46.doi:10.1007/BF00892447

ThisquirkystoryisanallegoricalsummaryofPerry’sstagesofdevelopment.FramedbyquotationsfromPerry’soriginalpublication,thisallegoryprovidesanentertainingapplicationofthestagesofdevelopmentinafablestyle,butitrequiressomepriorunderstandingofPerry.Thethemes“whatisknowledge”andone’s“relationshiptoauthority”areprominentinthisallegory.Althoughthestoryputsafairy-talespinontheconceptualizationofthetheory,itisavaluablereadingforremindingeducatorsthatPerry’stheoryofferedinsightintostudents’learning.


UnderstandingtheFullPerrySchemeThefollowingresources(arrangedchronologically)includecondensedexplanationsofthefull

nine-positionscheme:

Knefelkamp,L.L.,&Slepitza,R.(1976).Acognitive-developmentalmodelofcareerdevelopment:AnadaptationofthePerryScheme.CounselingPsychologist,6(3),53–58.doi:10.1177/001100007600600310

or

Knefelkamp,L.L.&Slepitza,R.(1978).Acognitive-developmentmodelofcareerdevelopment:AnadaptationofthePerryscheme.InC.A.Parker(Ed.),Encouragingdevelopmentincollegestudents.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress.

KlossR.J.(1994).Anudgeisbest:HelpingstudentsthroughthePerryschemeofintellectualdevelopment.CollegeTeaching,42(4),151-158.doi:10.1080/87567555.1994.9926847

Hofer,B.K.,&Pintrich,P.R.(1997).Thedevelopmentofepistemologicaltheories:Beliefsaboutknowledgeandknowingandtheirrelationtolearning.ReviewofEducationalResearch,67(1),88–140.doi:10.3102/00346543067001088

UsingPerrytoEvaluateCognitiveDevelopmentThefollowingresources(arrangedchronologically)indicatesomeoftheresearchthathas

soughttostrengthentheresearchinstrumentsfordeterminingstudents’cognitivedevelopment.

Mentkowski,M.,Moeser,M.,&Strait,M.J.(1983).UsingthePerryschemeofintellectualandethicaldevelopmentasacollegeoutcomesmeasure:Aprocessandcriteriaforjudgingstudentperformance.Milwaukee,WI:AlvernoCollege,OfficeofResearchandEvaluation.

Moore,W.S.(1988).Thelearningenvironmentpreferences:Aninstrumentmanual.Olympia,Washington:CenterfortheStudyofIntellectualDevelopment.

Moore,W.S.(1989).Thelearningenvironmentpreferences:ExploringtheconstructvalidityofanobjectivemeasureofthePerryschemeofintellectualdevelopment.JournalofCollegeStudentDevelopment,30(6),504-514.

Brooks,G.P.(1998).Perry:fact,fiction,andoutcomesassessment.ApaperpresentedattheannualmeetingoftheMidwesternEducationalResearchAssociation,Chicago,IL.

BaxterMagolda,M.B.(2001).Aconstructivistrevisionofthemeasureofepistemologicalreflection.JournalofCollegeStudentDevelopment,42(6),520-534.

BuildingOnPerryThefollowingresources(arrangedchronologically)examinethethreebranchesofthoughtthat

builtonPerry’sfoundationalresearch.

Belenky,Clinchy,Goldberger,&Tarule:Women’sWaysofKnowing

Brookes,A.(1988).ReviewofWomen'sWaysofKnowing:TheDevelopmentofSelf,Voice,andMind.CurriculumInquiry,18(1),113-121.Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1179565

TheOriginalTextBelenky,M.F.,Clinchy,B.M.,Goldberger,N.R.&Tarule,J.M.(1986).Women'swaysofknowing.NewYork:BasicBooks.


Thissuccinctreviewoutlinesthestrengthsandlimitationsoftheresearchandisasimplesummaryofthestudy.

Holland,M.(1988).ReviewofWomen'sWaysofKnowing:TheDevelopmentofSelf,Voice,andMind.Hypatia,3(2),177–179.Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3809967

Thisisatwo-pagesnapshotstyleofthemainideasoftheresearch.

Ashton-Jones,E.,Thomas,D.,&Belenky,M.(1990).Composition,collaboration,andWomen'sWaysofKnowing:AconversationwithMaryBelenky.JournalofAdvancedComposition,10(2),275-292.Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20865731

ThisinterviewwithBelenkyprovidesinsightintotheresearchprocessreportedinWomen'sWaysofKnowingandcontextualizesthefindingsofthatresearch.

Tedesco,J.(1991).Women'swaysofknowing/Women'swaysofcomposing.RhetoricReview,9(2),246-256.doi:10.1080/07350199109388931

ThisarticlepointsouthowBelenkyetal.’sresearchconnectstoPerry’sscholarshipandindicatesthatbothstreamsofresearchmakeeducatorsawareoftheimportanceofpersonalteachingstyle.

Handlin,D.(1993).Structuringthesilence:AninterviewwithMaryBelenkyandBlytheClinchy.NewIdeasinPsychology,11(2),245-251.doi:10.1016/0732-118X(93)90037-E

Handlinbeginswithasynopsisoftheresearchandthevariousstagesofwomen’swaysofknowingandthenprovidesaninterviewwithBelenkyandClinchy.

Goldberger,N.R.(1996).Knowledge,difference,andpower:EssaysInspiredbyWomen'sWaysofKnowing.NewYork,NY:BasicBooks.

Inthiscollectionofessays,theresearchersofWomen’sWaysofKnowingextendtheirdiscussionsabouttheirfindingsandpresentnewquestionsthatemergefromtheimpactoftheirresearch.Somechaptersexplorethethemeof“knowing”indiversecontexts,suchasGoldberger’s“CulturalImperativesandDiversityinWaysofKnowing”(pp.335-371).

Love,P.G.,&Guthrie,V.L.(1999).Women'swaysofknowing.NewDirectionsforStudentServices,88,17-27.doi:10.1002/ss.8802

Thissummaryexplainsthebackgroundtotheresearch,thevariousinfluences(includingPerryandCarolGilligan)andprovidesacomprehensiveoverviewofthestagesofwomen’swaysofknowing.

Hartog,M.,&UniversityofBath.(2004).Aself-studyofahighereducationtutor:HowcanIimprovemypractice?Bath:UniversityofBath.

ChapterthreeofthisdoctoraldissertationprovidesastrongreviewandcritiqueofWomen’sWaysofKnowing.Itbeginswithasummaryandthengoesintomoredetailaboutthevariousstages.

Khine,M.S.,&Hayes,B.(2010).Investigatingwomen’swaysofknowing:AnexploratorystudyintheUAE.IssuesinEducationalResearch,20(2),105-117.

Thiscross-culturalapplicationofWomen’sWaysofKnowingtotheUnitedArabEmiratescontextindicatestheimportanceofadevelopmentalwayofinterpretinglearning.

EpistemologicalReflectionModel:AwarenessofWhatandHowOneKnows

TheOriginalTextBaxterMagolda,M.(1992).Knowingandreasoningincollege:Gender-Relatedpatternsinundergraduates’intellectualdevelopment.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.


McEwen,M.K.(1994).KnowingandReasoninginCollege:Gender-RelatedPatternsinStudents’IntellectualDevelopmentbyMarciaB.Baxter-Magolda.NaspaJournal,31(2),153-157.

Thisisaquickandeasyintroductiontothework.

Smith,D.G.(1994).ReviewofKnowingandReasoninginCollege:Gender-relatedpatternsinstudents'intellectualdevelopment.TheJournalofHigherEducation,65(4),513–515.doi:10.2307/2943859

Thisisatwo-pagesynopsisofBaxterMagolda’sresearch.Smithoffersapertinentcritique:thatBaxterMagolda’stitlesuggestsafocusongenderbutbytheendofthebook,genderdoesnotemergeasathemeofthepublication.

Hofer,B.K.&Pintrich,P.R.(1997).Thedevelopmentofepistemologicaltheories:beliefsaboutknowledgeandknowingandtheirrelationtolearning.ReviewofEducationalResearch,67(1),88-140.doi:10.3102/00346543067001088

HoferandPintrichpointoutthatBaxterMagolda’sworksawgenderimplicationsbuttheemphasisofherresearchwasontheepistemologicaldevelopmentswhereshesawfewgenderdistinctions.TheirarticlelooksathowBaxterMagolda’smodelallowseducatorstoseewhyconsideringhowstudentsviewtheirknowledgeiscriticaltostudents’progress.

BaxterMagolda,M.B.(1999).Constructingadultidentities.JournalofCollegeStudentDevelopment,40(6),629-644.

Subsequenttothe1992publication,BaxterMagoldacontinuedproducingworkwhichfurtherdevelopedunderstandingoftheepistemologicalreflectionmodel,withemphasisonhowstudentsconstructarguments.Thisarticleexaminestheepistemologicaldevelopmentofthesamegroupofstudentsfromcollegetoage30.

Bock,M.T.(1999).BaxterMagolda'sepistemologicalreflectionmodel.InP.G.Love&V.L.Guthrie(Eds.),Understandingandapplyingcognitivedevelopmenttheory(pp.29-40).SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

Bockprovidesathoroughoverviewoftheresearchwithdetailedexplanationsofthevariousstagesofknowingandappliesthemodeltostudentaffairs.Thisresourcecanalsobeaccessedasanarticle:

Bock,M.T.(1999).BaxterMagolda'sepistemologicalreflectionmodel.NewDirectionsforStudentServices,88,29-40.doi:10.1002/ss.8803

Hofer,B.K.(2001).Personalepistemologyresearch:Implicationsforlearningandteaching.EducationalPsychologyReview,13(4),353–383.doi:10.1023/A:1011965830686

Thisessayfollowsthebasicpremisethatwhatstudentsthinkknowledgeisandhowtheythinktheyknowarecriticalcomponentsofunderstandingstudentlearning.Thearticleaddressesthreequestions:Whatispersonalepistemologyresearch?Howareindividuals’conceptionsofepistemologyrelatedtolearningandinstruction?Whatmighteducatorsdo?

Shaw,J.D.(2001).AnapplicationofBaxterMagolda'sepistemologicalreflectionmodeltoblackandlatinostudents (OrderNo.3001673).AvailablefromProQuestDissertations&ThesesGlobal.(230929871).Retrievedfromhttp://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/230929871?accountid=9838

ThisstudyaimedtodeterminetheextenttowhichBaxterMagolda'sEpistemologicalReflectionModelisapplicabletoBlackandLatinostudents.Thestudyusedsemi-structuredinterviewsandtheMeasureofEpistemologicalReflectionquestionnaireinordertounderstand,fromthestudents'perspectives,theirwaysofknowing.

Torres,V.&BaxterMagolda,M.B.(2004).ReconstructingLatinoidentity:TheinfluenceofcognitivedevelopmentontheethnicidentityprocessofLatinostudents.JournalofCollegeStudentDevelopment,45(3),333-347.TheJohnsHopkinsUniversityPress.doi:10.1353/csd.2004.0043


InthisarticleemergingfromaqualitativelongitudinalstudyofLatina/ocollegestudents,TorresandBaxterMagoldalookatcognitivedevelopmentanditsinfluenceonethnicidentitydevelopment.Thisarticleoffersawayoflookingatcognitivedevelopmentbeyondtheculturalparametersofpreviousworks.

TheReflectiveJudgmentModel:WaysofThinkingAboutProblemSolving

King,P.M.,&Kitchener,K.S.(1994).Thedevelopmentofreflectivethinkinginthecollegeyears:Themixedresults.NewDirectionsforHigherEducation,84,25-42.

Thisarticleisasummaryoftheirlongerwork.Theauthorsincludestatementsthatstudentswouldmakeatthevariousstages,citefromotherexamplesoftheirownresearch,andthensuggestquestionsthatinstructorscanusetopromotereflectivethinkinginstudents.

Brabeck,M.M.(1994).AreviewofDevelopingReflectiveJudgment:UnderstandingandPromotingIntellectualGrowthandCriticalThinkinginAdolescentsandAdults.JournalofAdultDevelopment,1,4,261-263.doi:10.1007/BF02277586

ThisreviewoftheKingandKitchener’spublicationgoesbeyondasimplesummarytoendorsewhatthereflectivejudgmentofferscollegeadministrators,faculty,andresearchers.Italsodiscussestheinstrumentsusedtoevaluatereflectivejudgmentsoastogiveresearcherswhoareinterestedinthetheorysomesenseofhowtouseit.

Love,P.G.,&Guthrie,V.L.(1999).KingandKitchener'sreflectivejudgmentmodel.NewDirectionsforStudentServices,88,41-51.doi:10.1002/ss.8804

Thisisacomprehensivesummaryofthekeyelementsofthereflectivejudgmentmodel.

King,P.M.,&Kitchener,K.S.(2004).Reflectivejudgment:Theoryandresearchonthedevelopmentofepistemicassumptionsthroughadulthood.EducationalPsychologist,39(1),5–18.doi:10.1207/s15326985ep3901_2

KingandKitchenerdescribesomeconceptsintegraltounderstandingthereflectivejudgmentmodel(RJM):complexreasoninginlateadolescentsandadults,epistemology,andjudgmentsaboutcontroversial(ill-structured)issues.Thisarticledescribesthetheoreticalgroundingsthathaveshapedthedevelopmentofthereflectivejudgmentmodelwithemphasisontheresearchinstrumentsusedtoapplythetheory.ThedevelopersoftheRJMgoontoprovidesuggestionsforevaluatingreflectivethinking.

SynopsesoftheThreeBranchesAfterPerry

West,E.J.(2004).Perry'slegacy:Modelsofepistemologicaldevelopment.JournalofAdultDevelopment,11(2),61-70.doi:10.1023/B:JADE.0000024540.12150.69

West’sarticleoffersacomprehensivesynopsisofhowthethreebranchesofthoughtareinterrelatedandtheimplicationsofteacher-studentrelations.Westgoesontoaddyetanotherdimensionofanalysisbyevaluatingthecomplexitiesofthestagesofeachtheory.Thisarticleisrecommendedforreaderswithsomefamiliaritywithallofthetheories.

TheOriginalTextKing,P.M.&Kitchener,K.S.(1994).Developingreflectivejudgment:Understandingandpromotingintellectualgrowthandcriticalthinkinginadolescentsandadults.SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.


ApplicationsofPerryinDifferentContextsBelowareworksthatapplyPerry’sschemeindifferentcontexts,arrangedalphabetically.

GeneralApplicationsinEducationSettingsLove,P.G.,&Guthrie,V.L.(2011).Understandingandapplyingcognitivedevelopmenttheory.NewdirectionsforStudentServices.Hoboken:JohnWiley&Sons.

Marra,R.,&Palmer,B.(2004).Encouragingintellectualgrowth:Seniorcollegestudentprofiles.JournalofAdultDevelopment,11(2),111-122.doi:10.1023/B:JADE.0000024544.50818.1f

AnthropologyMcDonald,M.(2003).Duelingwithdualists:Encouragingintellectualgrowthintheintroductorylevelanthropologycourse.TeachingAnthropology:SocietyforAnthropologyinCommunityCollegesNotes,10(1),27–30.doi:10.1525/tea.2003.10.1.27

BiologyKatung,M.,Johnstone,A.H.,&Downie,J.R.(1999).Monitoringattitudechangeinstudentstoteachingandlearninginauniversitysetting:AstudyusingPerry'sdevelopmentalmodel.TeachinginHigherEducation,4,43-59.doi:10.1080/1356251990040103

CareerDevelopmentKnefelkamp,L.L.,&Slepitza,R.(1976).Acognitive-developmentalmodelofcareerdevelopment:AnadaptationofthePerryscheme.CounselingPsychologist,6(3),53–58.doi:10.1177/001100007600600310

ChemistryFinster,D.C.(1989).DevelopmentalinstructionPart1:Perry'smodelofintellectualdevelopment,JournalofChemicalEducation,8(66),659-661.doi:10.1021/ed066p659

Finster,D.C.(1991).DevelopmentalinstructionPart2:ApplicationofthePerrymodeltogeneralchemistry.JournalofChemicalEducation,9(68),752–756.doi:10.1021/ed068p752

Lavis,C.C.(2005).Evaluatingintellectualdevelopmentofhorticulturalstudents:TheimpactoftwoteachingapproachesusingPerry’sschemeofintellectualdevelopmentasmeasuredbythelearningenvironmentpreference.(Doctoraldissertation,KansasStateUniversity).

CollegeStudentClassroomParticipationMyers,S.A.(2010).UsingthePerryschemetoexplorecollegestudentclassroomparticipation.CommunicationResearchReports,27(2),123-130.doi:10.1080/08824091003738016

CounselingWidick,C.(1977).ThePerryscheme:Afoundationfordevelopmentalpractice.TheCounselingPsychologist,6(4),35-38.doi:10.1177/001100007700600415

WidickC.,Knefelkamp,L.L.,&Parker,C.(1975).Thecounselorasadevelopmentalinstructor.CounselorEducationandSupervision,14(4),286-296.doi:10.1002/j.1556-6978.1975.tb00882.x

Cross-CulturalApplicationsZhang,L.-F.(1999).AcomparisonofUSandChineseuniversitystudents'cognitivedevelopment:Thecross-culturalapplicabilityofPerry'stheory.TheJournalofPsychology,133(4),425-439.doi:10.1080/00223989909599753

Zhang,L.-F.,&Watkins,D.(2001).Cognitivedevelopmentandstudentapproachestolearning:AninvestigationofPerry'stheorywithChineseandU.S.universitystudents.HigherEducation,41,239-261.doi:10.1023/A:1004151226395

EconomicsThoma,G.A.(1993).ThePerryframeworkandtacticsforteachingcriticalthinkingineconomics.JournalofEconomicEducation,24,128–136.doi:10.1080/00220485.1993.10844786


EducationAkerson,V.L.,Buzzelli,C.A.,&Donnelly,L.A.(2008).Earlychildhoodteachers'viewsofnatureofscience:Theinfluenceofintellectuallevels,culturalvalues,andexplicitreflectiveteaching.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,45(6),748-770.doi:10.1002/tea.20236

EngineeringAhmad,N.,Yusof,K.M.,Kosnin,A.M.,&Daniel,S.K.M.(2012).Comparisonbetweentwomodelsofengineeringstudents’intellectualdevelopment.Procedia-SocialandBehavioralSciences,56(2),617-626.doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.696

Felder,R.M.,&Brent,R.(2004).Theintellectualdevelopmentofscienceandengineeringstudents.Part1:Modelsandchallenges.JournalofEngineeringEducation,93(4),269-277.doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00816.x

Felder,R.M.,&Brent,R.(2004).Theintellectualdevelopmentofscienceandengineeringstudents.Part2:Teachingtopromotegrowth.JournalofEngineeringEducation,93(4),279–291.doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00817.x

Irish,R.(1999).Engineeringthinking:UsingBenjaminBloomandWilliamPerrytodesignassignments.LanguageandLearningAcrosstheDisciplines,3(2),83-102.

Marra,R.M.,Palmer,B.,&Litzinger,T.A.(2000).Theeffectsofafirst-yearengineeringdesigncourseofstudentintellectualdevelopmentasmeasuredbythePerryscheme.JournalofEngineeringEducation,89(1),39-45.doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2000.tb00492.x

Pavelich,M.J.,&Moore,W.S.(1996).MeasuringtheeffectofexperientialeducationusingthePerrymodel.JournalofEngineeringEducation,85(4),287–292.doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.1996.tb00247.x

Zhu,J.,&Cox,M.F.(2015).EpistemologicaldevelopmentprofilesofChineseengineeringdoctoralstudentsinU.S.institutions:AnapplicationofPerry'stheory.JournalofEngineeringEducation,104(3),345-362.doi:10.1002/jee.20080

EnglishKlossR.J.(1994).Anudgeisbest:HelpingstudentsthroughthePerryschemeofintellectualdevelopment.CollegeTeaching,42(4),151-158.doi:10.1080/87567555.1994.9926847

GenderandStudentAffairsBock,M.T.(1999).BaxterMagolda'sepistemologicalreflectionmodel.InP.G.Love&V.L.Guthrie(Eds.),Understandingandapplyingcognitivedevelopmenttheory(pp.29-40).SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.

or

Bock,M.T.(1999).BaxterMagolda'sepistemologicalreflectionmodel.NewDirectionsforStudentServices,88,29-40.doi:10.1002/ss.8803

GiftedHighSchoolStudentsThomas,J.(2008).RevivingPerry:Ananalysisofepistemologicalchangebygenderandethnicityamonggiftedhighschoolstudents.GiftedChildQuarterly,52(1),87-98.doi:10.1177/0016986207311422

InformationLiteracyJackson,R.(2007).Cognitivedevelopment:Themissinglinkinteachinginformationliteracyskills.Reference&UserServicesQuarterly,46(4),28-32.

Jackson,R.(2008).Informationliteracyanditsrelationshiptocognitivedevelopmentandreflectivejudgment.NewDirectionsforTeachingandLearning,114,47-61.doi:10.1002/tl.316

Whitmire,E.(2003).Epistemologicalbeliefsandtheinformation-seekingbehaviorofundergraduates.Library&InformationScienceResearch,25(2),127-142.doi:10.1016/S0740-8188(03)00003-3


InteriorDesignCarmel-Gilfilen,C.,&Portillo,M.(2010).Creatingmaturethinkersininteriordesign:Pathwaysofintellectualdevelopment.JournalofInteriordesign,35(3),1-20.doi:10.1111/j.1939-1668.2010.01043.x

Karlson,R.W.(2014).Perry'sschemeofintellectualandethicaldevelopmentinfluenceonDuckworth'sshortgritscoreininteriordesignstudents(OrderNo.1585588).AvailablefromProQuestDissertations&ThesesGlobal.(1667750475).Retrievedfromhttp://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1667750475?accountid=9838

MathematicsCopes,L.(1982).ThePerrydevelopmentscheme:Ametaphorforlearningandteachingmathematics.FortheLearningofMathematics,3(1),38–44.

MedicineGogan,C.M.,&Davis,E.L.(1997).Anassessmentoftheintellectualdevelopmentofdentalstudents.JournalofDentalEducation,61(10),781-786.

Musicdel’Etoile,S.K.(2008).ApplyingPerry'sschemeofintellectualandethicaldevelopmentinthecollegeyearstoundergraduatemusictherapyeducation.MusicTherapyPerspectives,26(2),110-116.doi:10.1093/mtp/26.2.110

NaturalSciencesClarkeburn,H.M.,Downie,J.R.,Gray,C.,andMatthew,R.G.S.(2003).Measuringethicaldevelopmentinlifesciencesstudents:astudyusingPerry'sdevelopmentalmodel.StudiesinHigherEducation,28(4),443-456.doi:10.1080/0307507032000122288

Markwell,J.,&Courtney,S.(2006).Cognitivedevelopmentandthecomplexitiesoftheundergraduatelearnerinthescienceclassroom.BiochemistryandMolecularBiologyEducation,34(4),267-271.doi:10.1002/bmb.2006.49403404262

Nelson,C.(1999).Onthepersistenceofunicorns:thetrade-offbetweencontentandcriticalthinkingrevisited.InB.A.Pescosolido&R.Aminzade(Eds.),TheSocialWorldsofHigherEducation:HandbookforTeachinginaNewCentury(pp.168-184).ThousandOaks,CA:PineForgePress.

NursingThomas,P.A.(1990).Cognitivedevelopmentinatraditionalandnontraditionalnursingstudentpopulation(OrderNo.9032094).AvailablefromProQuestDissertations&ThesesGlobal.(303845731).Retrievedfromhttp://ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/303845731?accountid=9838

PhilosophyRapaport,W.J.(1982).Unsolvableproblemsandphilosophicalprogress.AmericanPhilosophicalQuarterly,19(4),289–298.Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/20013970

PsychologyJohnson,D.D.(1994).Dualistic,multiplistic,andrelativisticthinkingasitrelatestoapsychologymajor.HonorsTheses,202.

Zhang,L.(2002).Thinkingstylesandcognitivedevelopment.TheJournalofGeneticPsychology,163(2),179–195.doi:10.1080/00221320209598676

StudyingAbroadMcKeown,J.S.(2009).Thefirsttimeeffect:Theimpactofstudyabroadoncollegestudentintellectualdevelopment.Albany,NY:SUNYPress.


Palmer,N.W.(2015).Invertingtheobjectofstudy:Recalibratingtheframeofreferenceinstudyabroadexperiences.TeachingTheology&Religion,18(1),63-72.doi:10.1111/teth.12264

TheologyHenze,M.E.(2006).Re-examiningandrefiningPerry:EpistemologicaldevelopmentfromaChristianperspective.ChristianEducationJournal,3(2),260-277.

Locklin,R.B.(2013).Teachingwithcomplicatingviews:Beyondthesurvey,behindtheproandcon.TeachingTheology&Religion,16(3),201-220.doi:10.1111/teth.12043

WritingBurnham,C.C.(1986).Teachingwithapurpose:ThePerryschemeandtheteachingofwriting.RhetoricReview,4,152-158.doi:10.1080/07350198609359117

Hays,J.N.(1987).Modelsofintellectualdevelopmentandwriting:AResponsetoMyraKogenetal.JournalofBasicWriting,6(1),11.

Martinez,J.G.,&Martinez,N.C.(1987).Reconsideringcognitionandthebasicwriter:AresponsetoMyraKogen.JournalofBasicWriting,6(2),79-82.Retrievedfromhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/43443485

Shapiro,N.S.(1985).RhetoricalmaturityandPerry'smodelofintellectualdevelopment:Astudyofcollegestudents'writingandthinking.Washington,D.C.:EducationalResourcesInformationCenterERIC.

The Taylor Institute Guide Series cognitive DEVELOPMENT · Galicia Blackman | 3 Cognitive...

Documents

Transcript of The Taylor Institute Guide Series cognitive DEVELOPMENT · Galicia Blackman | 3 Cognitive...