Perry’s Stages of Cognitive Development

I could write about this in my own words, but I found several websites that explained it so well that I decided to present them in their entirety. What follows are their words, not mine, including any in-text citations.

  1. Dualism/Received Knowledge:
    There are right/wrong answers, engraved on Golden Tablets in the sky, known to Authorities.
    1. Basic Duality:
      All problems are solvable;
      Therefore, the student’s task is to learn the Right Solutions
    2. Full Dualism:
      Some Authorities (literature, philosophy) disagree;
      others (science, math) agree.
      Therefore, there are Right Solutions, but some teachers’ views of the Tablets are obscured.
      Therefore, student’s task is to learn the Right Solutions and ignore the others!
      • Rapaport’s speculation, part 1: Perhaps we begin as Dualists because we begin by accepting information from the world and reacting to it.
    2. Multiplicity/Subjective Knowledge:
      There are conflicting answers;
      therefore, students must trust their “inner voices”, not external Authority.
      1. Early Multiplicity:
        There are 2 kinds of problems:
        • those whose solutions we know
        • those whose solutions we don’t know yet
        1. Late Multiplicity:
          Most problems are of the second kind;
          therefore, everyone has a right to their own opinion;
          • Rapaport’s speculation, part 2: Perhaps we evolve into Multiplists after we learn things tacitly and have internal or implicit “feelings” or intuitions about things, but not conscious or explicit beliefs that can be explained or justified.
        1. Relativism/Procedural Knowledge:
          There are disciplinary reasoning methods:
          Connected knowledge: empathetic (why do you believe X?; what does this poem say to me?)
          vs. Separated knowledge: “objective analysis” (what techniques can I use to analyze this poem?)
          1. Contextual Relativism:
            All proposed solutions are supported by reasons;
            i.e., must be viewed in context & relative to support.
            Some solutions are better than others, depending on context.
            Student’s task is to learn to evaluate solutions.
            • Rapaport’s speculation, part 3: Perhaps we then evolve into Contextual Relativists when we can express our intuitions in language and seek justifications for them and relationships among them.
          2. “Pre-Commitment”:
            Student sees the necessity of:
            • making choices
            • committing to a solution
          1. Commitment/Constructed Knowledge:
            Integration of knowledge learned from others with personal experience and reflection.
            1. Commitment:
              Student makes a commitment.
            2. Challenges to Commitment:
              Student experiences implications of commitment.
              Student explores issues of responsibility.
            3. “Post-Commitment”:
              Student realizes commitment is an ongoing, unfolding, evolving activity
            • 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; Evaluations should be clear-cut
            • Support: Need high degree of structure. Dualistic students like lectures, hate seminars
            • 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, therefore OK
            • On evaluation: Of central concern; Fairness is important; Quantity of work counts
            • Support: From peers, some structure
            • Instructor: Seen as source of the thinking process; Or else (cynical form) seen as irrelevant – everyone’s entitled to their own opinion
            • Themselves: Seen as learning to think for themselves; Seen as expressing opinions (whether believed/supported or not)
            • Other students: Seen as legitimate
            • 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
            • 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 does not equal evaluation of self; Evaluation is part of learning
            • Get support from: Instructor, Diversity
            • To challenge students, so that they will move from dualism to multiplism to contextual relativism (& beyond)
            • To support students, as they move from the “comfort” of one approach to the strangeness of another

            Cited web sites for “Perry’s Stages of Cognitive Development”

            reference name in text
            link
            access date