Understanding Students’ Intellectual Development
WebCT 3 Comes to UGA!
more about WebCT 3 at UGA
Instructional Technology Leadership Program

Understanding Students’ Intellectual Development:
Implications for Classroom Teaching

Contributed by Laurie Bellows, Ph. D.

About the author: Laurie Bellows earned her Ph. D. in Educational Psychology from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln (UNL) in 1994. That same year, she joined UNL's Teaching and Learning Center as a faculty/ TA instructional consultant. At UNL, she coordinates the campus-wide TA program and the Institute for International Teaching Assistants. She also facilitates workshops on a variety of teaching and learning issues and consults individually with both TAs and faculty.

"I wish we could get some kind of direction in this course. I feel totally in the dark. The instructor depends too much on the views of other students. He doesn't seem to have the answers. I have no idea what to look for in the reading assignments and I don't know what points are impor-tant to talk about. There's too much dis-cussion. I just wish he'd tell us what the point is… what he's looking for."

"This is a great course! There's a good combination of both lecture and class discussion. I find I can relate a lot of the things I've learned in here to the rest of the world. I really like hearing from other students. They bring in different viewpoints and it makes me think."

These comments represent two students' perspectives from the same class. Their perceptions of the course are so different that it may leave you scratching your head, wondering how two students in the same course could have such different viewpoints of the learning process.

One possible explanation for such different views may be found in the ways each student interprets and makes meaning of the world. In the above example, the first student's epistemological assumptions about knowledge and meaning-making are simplistic, limiting his ability to understand more complexissues. The second student's assumptions about knowledge are more reflective, tolerant, and diverse, allowing her to question, examine, and create more complex, rational world views. Both students are speaking from separate developmental positions that characterize their assumptions as well as their expectations about the teaching and learning processes.

How students view the nature and origins of knowledge and learning can profoundly affect their classroom learning experiences. Recent cognitive-structural models provide a map for understanding undergraduate students' intellectual journeys during college (Baxter Magolda, 1992; Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule, 1986; Perry, 1970). Although these models differ slightly in their explanations of students' intellectual development, there is general agreement that: 1) college students possess implicit epistemological theories that range from simplistic to mature, and 2) the developmental process involves a series of "constructions and reconstructions" of knowledge and the way in which the world is perceived (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Understanding the general principles behind the theories can help us understand how students in the same course can view the instructor and course materials from entirely different perspectives.

A Brief Overview of Three Cognitive Development Theories

The Perry Scheme of Intellectual Development (Perry, 1970, 1998), based on studies conducted at Harvard University, describes a pattern of increasing cognitive complexity where college students move from an intellectual framework based on "right versus wrong" dualistic structures to a more balanced "relativistic" form of thought. Perry recognized nine positions, which can be collapsed into four general categories: dualism, multiplicity, relativism, and relativism in commitment. The lowest position is characterized by an almost complete reliance on authorities, whereas the higher positions are characterized by fundamental shifts in students' ability to think in contextual terms.

Drawing on Perry's Scheme of Intellectual Development, Belenky and her colleagues (1986) studied women's "ways of knowing" and developed a theory that describes five epistemological perspectives by which women understand and make meaning of their worlds. These perspectives are: silence, received knowledge, subjective knowledge, procedural knowledge, and constructed knowledge. Four of the five positions are structurally similar to Perry's scheme (see Table 1 on page 5 of this newsletter for a summary of the three models).

More recently, Marcia Baxter Magolda (1992) interviewed both female and male undergraduate students about their perceptions of the nature of knowledge. From these interviews, Baxter Magolda developed a model describing four types of knowing: absolute, transitional, independent, and contextual. Students in the lowest position (absolute knowing) viewed knowledge as certain while students in the more advanced position (contextual knowing) judged knowledge on the basis of evidence in context.

Taken together, the above theories provide a rich frame of reference for understanding the preferences expressed in the students' comments cited above. Most first-year students enter college as dualistic or absolute thinkers, expecting the instructor to have definite answers. The majority of students move away from simplistic forms of reasoning between the first and second

years of college; however, this developmental process takes time and often requires a planned effort on the part of educators. Baxter Magolda (1999) urges us to "be good company for the journey" by using these theories to think about and design effective teaching approaches to promote complex forms of thinking.

A Nudge is Better than a Shove: Implications for Classroom Instruction

A major assumption underlying college student development theories is that intellectual growth is something we want to have happen in college. For growth to occur, however, a delicate balance of challenge and support must be achieved; too much support can cause students to escape or stagnate while too much challenge can cause students to retreat. A supportive environment reduces the threat of failure and helps students cope with the insecurity of not knowing. In contrast, appropriate challenges encourage students to stretch current cognitive structures while developing new ones.

There is sufficient evidence to suggest that we can intervene and stimulate students' movement toward more developed structures of knowing and perceiving the world (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Moshman (1999) provides a framework useful for designing learning activities that promote students' epistemological development: reflection, coordination, and peer interaction. Reflection on one's own perspective is essential for understanding others' perspectives; as students continually reflect on what they know and what they are learning, they are able to adjust their knowing accordingly. Coordination of multiple perspectives teaches students to negotiate meaning by taking others' ideas and perceptions into account. Peer interaction fosters the collaborative development of knowledge through connection and contradiction.

The developmental roles of reflection, coordination, and peer interaction suggest the following strategies to help facilitate students' intellectual development:

• Present multiple points of view; expose students to ambiguity and multiple interpretations and perspectives.
• Teach students how to contrast and compare, perform basic analyses, justify statements, and evaluate evidence.
• If necessary, break points of view into smaller units.
• Reinforce the idea that alternative points of view may be legitimate.
• Require students to explain their reasons for rejecting other viewpoints.
• Reinforce the legitimacy of students' personal experiences.
• Reinforce that it's always possible to change one's mind.
• Provide opportunities to practice more complex thinking skills.

References

Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1999). Journeys of the mind, voice, and self: Charting a path through the twenties. Address presented at the meeting of the American College Personnel Association, Atlanta,
Georgia, March 1999.

Baxter Magolda, M. B. (1992). Knowing and reasoning in college: Gender-related patterns in students' intellectual development. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.

Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Women's ways of knowing: The development of Self, Voice, and Mind. New York: Basic Books.

Kloss, R. J. (1994). A nudge is best: Helping students through the Perry scheme of intellectual development. College Teaching, 42( 4), 151-158.

Moore, W. S. (1994). "The Perry schema of intellectual and ethical development: Student and faculty epistemology in the college classroom." In Handbook on College Teaching: Theory and Applications. K. Prichard, & R. M. Sawyer (eds.). Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Moshman, D. (1999). Adolescent psychological development: Rationality, morality, and identity. Mahwah, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Pascarella, E. T. & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.

Perry, W. G. (1970, 1999). Forms of ethical and intellectual development in the college years: A scheme. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tips for Matching Learning Experiences to Student Developmental Positions

To help you design learning experiences that match (or challenge) students' developmental positions, ask them to respond to the following questions:

• Based on your experiences as a student, is there a teacher or class that has made learning special? Why?
• What has been your worst educational experience? What was negative about this situation?
• What types of learning situations are the best for you? Why?
• Have you written papers or taken essay exams that required you to state an opinion on a controversial subject or argue pro or con with respect to a topic? If yes, explain what you liked or disliked about this assignment.
• What do you think teachers look for in essays or term papers? Can teachers disagree with you on such assignments and still give you good grades? Explain why or why not.
  

Source: Hodes, C. L. (1988). Perry's scheme of development (Report No. HE 022846). The Pennsylvania State University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 311 796.)

Table 1. Summary of Three Cognitive Development Models

Top

WebCT 3 Comes to UGA!

New features of WebCT 3 make designing online courses and course components faster than ever before. The new look and feel of WebCT is clean and easy to navigate. The Menu Bar at the top of the screen and the Navigation Bar on the left provide quick access to all of the main areas of the course.

• Menu Bar: The Menu Bar contains links to myWebCT, Resume Course, Course Map, and Help. It also shows your current location and indicates whether you're in View or Designer Options.
• Navigation Bar: The Navigation Bar contains a Show/ Hide Navigation toggle, a Control Panel, and a Course Menu section.
• Breadcrumbs: The breadcrumbs list the path of screens that a user has visited. Each item in the list is also a link to provide easy access back to previous screens.
• Content Area: The Content Area is where the actual course material is displayed, including icons, text, quizzes, etc.

Top

more about WebCT 3 at UGA

Designer Map: Quickly Find the Commands You Need

One of the challenges of previous versions of WebCT has been finding the right command from the many available menus. WebCT 3 offers a solution that may end random searching for the right menu with a new feature called the Designer Map.

Designer Map is always available to the course designer from the Navigation Bar Control Panel. Just one click reveals an array of commands to choose from. Nearly every feature of WebCT can be found in the Designer Map. Upon locating the desired feature, the course designer may then click on the link. WebCT shows the appropriate screen, ready for designer input!

Get UGA MyID!

Another new feature of WebCT version 3 is the global database. This feature allows all users to log into each course with a single User ID. To accommodate the global database, UCNS is implementing the UGA MyID. The UGA MyID will give you access to WebCT, ARCHES, i-drive, and eventually other electronic services. With UGA MyID, you may use any or all of the services that are of interest to you. If you already have an ARCHES e-mail address there is nothing you need to do. Your ARCHES ID is now MyID --use it the same as you always have for e-mail and personal Web space. If you do not have an ARCHES ID, you can create your UGA MyID by going to: http:// www. uga. edu/ myid

Training Opportunities

Need some hands-on training in WebCT? There are many workshops available to help you gain familiarity with the features of WebCT 3. Topics include:

• Introduction to WebCT 3
• WebCT 3 Fundamentals for Course Designers
• WebCT 3 Student Management
• WebCT 3 Content Management
• Images in WebCT 3
• WebCT 3 Quiz Management
• Creating Web Pages with Netscape Composer

For more information and online registration, visit http:// webct. uga. edu. Click on "WebCT Training Sessions" for current dates and times.

Meet the UGA WebCT Support Team

The members of the UGA WebCT support team are more than happy to consult with faculty, staff members, and teaching assistants who are using WebCT. UCNS and OISD work together to provide a wide range of experience and technical expertise. Contact any one of the team members with your questions and requests regarding WebCT.

From UCNS (706) 542-3106

• Beth Hamilton: bhamil@ uga. edu
• Kevin Hoth: khoth@ uga. edu
• Mike Landers: mlanders@ uga. edu
• Jason Lunsford: lunsford@ uga. edu
• George Matthews: gmatthew@ uga. edu

From OISD (706) 542-1355

• Margaret Anderson: manderso@ uga. edu
• Sherry Clark: sclark@ uga. edu
• Shannon Wilder: swilder@ uga. edu
  

Top

Instructional Technology Leadership Program

The Instructional Technology Leadership Program (ITLP), administered by the Office of Instructional Support & Development, provides an opportunity for faculty members to develop applications of instructional technologies (IT) for their courses and programs and to become catalysts for change in their departments. Funded by the University System of Georgia Connecting Teachers and Technology initiative, this program provides equipment funds, technical support, and instructional design assistance to faculty members who are relatively inexperienced in using instructional technologies, but who are interested in developing their skills in this area.

Each participant receives an equipment grant and participates in a one-week Maymester workshop held at the Office of Instructional Support & Development. The ITLP participants then meet as a group regularly throughout the academic year and become familiar with The University's best practices in IT. Each participant is expected to develop a significant application of IT with the assistance of a support team of technology and instructional design specialists.

For 2000-2001, the first year of this program, the ITLP par-ticipants are Bruce Beck, School of Forest Resources; Linda DeGroff, School of Teacher Education; Carole Henry, School of Art; Keith Langston, Department of Germanic & Slavic Languages; Michele Simpson, Division of Academic Assis-tance; Cheryl Stratton, Division of Academic Assistance; and David Williams, Department of Religion.

Information about the Instructional Technology Leadership Program, as well as an application form for 2001-2002 participation, are available from the OISD-ITLP homepag at http://www.isd.uga.edu/faculty/itlp.html or by calling OISD at (706) 542-1355.

Top

Teaching at UGA is published two times a year by the Office of Instruc-tional Support & Development (OISD). OISD is a unit within Academic Affairs devoted to the advancement of instruc-tion at the University of Georgia. The office is advised by the University's Instructional Advisory Committee and reports directly to the Vice President for Instruction.

The central mission of OISD is to pro-vide campus-wide leadership on mat-ters relating to instruction. By coordi-nating a wide variety of programs and activities, OISD serves faculty, admin-istrators, and graduate assistants in each of the University's fifteen schools and colleges.

Dr. William K. Jackson is the Director of OISD. Dr. Tricia Kalivoda, Assistant Vice President for Academic Affairs, served as editor of Teaching at UGA. For this issue, Samuel Chung, Communications Coordinator at OISD, was responsible for the production of TUGA.

OISD is committed to providing access to its programs for all people with dis-abilities and will provide accommoda-tions if notified. Please call OISD at (706) 542-1355 for more information about architectural access and to arrange for a sign language interpreter, an assistive listening device, large print, audio, or braille.