Class Summary

Notes for EDUC 600 Class, March 25 Epistemology Day
Submitted by Cindy Nigro and Linda Dixon

Housekeeping:
1. Presentation grades are now available.
2. Schedule final activity will be at Dr. Pope’s house.
3. Today’s articles: Phillips/constructivism; Elgin/knowledge vs. understanding; Siegel/critical thinking.

The articles by Elgin, Siegel and Phillips all talk about words often used in education, but not analyzed. The Phillips article lays out the field in which constructivism is taught. They all define learning as constructivism, but the term has a spectrum of different meanings. In the Elgin article she discusses that we shouldn’t be teaching knowledge but rather understanding. Siegel writes about critical thinking, what that means and how teachers can promote it.
D.C. Phillips- "The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly: The Many Faces of Constructivism"
People can construct knowledge differently. He discusses these differences in relation to three different axes.

AXIS 1
Individual_________________________________Social/Public
AXIS 2
Human as Creator___________________________\_____Nature as Instructor

AXIS 3
Active____________________________________Passive

The individual constructivist emphasizes that the individual takes information and constructs his or her own individual reality. Vygotsky and Piaget fall into this area. The social constructivist believes that bodies of knowledge are gained from communities. Thomas S. Kuhn stressed the role of scientific communities in the role of knowledge construction. Some of the public emphasis on knowledge has more to do with politics of the day. How can this relate to science? Isn’t the result of scientific experiments and observation just fact? Kuhn says that the scientific community does affect knowledge. Dr. Pope explained it this way:

S1 (representing scientific norm) shifts to S2 (new scientific norm)
I1, I2, I3, I4- These symbols represent ideas. Some of these ideas may not be included in the scientific norm or standard. The closer the idea matches up to what is already in the standard, the more likely it will be accepted. Occasionally an idea does not fit the norm, I4 in this case. If the idea persists but doesn’t fit, it may force a change in the structure, scientific norm. When this happens it is called a paradigm shift.

Linda Alcoff and Elizabeth Potter are two constuctivists that fall into the social category. They believed that the political and social climate has a major impact on what is considered knowledge. Political forces decide what counts as truth. When you say something that doesn’t fit in with the body of knowledge, it will be assumed as false. Who is in power (politics) has a lot of power to influence values of knowledge. Human concerns influence as much as nature.

A radical contructivist claims that scientific knowledge is constructed entirely out of social relations. Whatever is driving political and social changes will count as knowledge.

Where does knowledge originate? The second axis suggests that human beings are the creator of knowledge. The other end of the axis suggests that nature dictates knowledge. In other words knowledge is discovered not made. At some point on this spectrum
knowledge is not being made, it is being discovered.

Karl Popper falls in the middle of the second axis. His believes that the development of knowledge can be described as "man proposes, nature disposes." Man comes up with a theory tests it, then eliminates error and moves to the next theory.

The shift from Newtonian physics to that of Einstein is an example of this paradigm shift. Darwin’s evolutionary theory is also an example of the paradigm shift. Eventually the results of scientific observations and experiments change the norm.

The third axis ranges from active to passive. Climate change is an example. Some say the climate is changing, and we can do something about it. Others say that the climate is not changing. Both sides say that the individuals with the other perspective are motivated by politics. As a result what passes for knowledge is changing. Dewey and Piaget stress the active end of the constructivist spectrum. The individual through interaction with his environment is constantly changing how he interprets reality. John Locke is passive, with his blank slate perspective. You can be at different points on the spectrum.

How is this relevant to the early childhood classroom? Von Glassferfield believed that individuals construct everything. It should be free from societal influences. In the early childhood classroom we should pay close attention to the individual student and how they learn. We should also incorporate the history of the disciplines as we study. Both these suggestions are good pedagogical ideas that rest on epistemological principles.

"Education and the Advancement Understanding"-Catherine Elgin

Elgin makes reference to Plato’s Meno where he is trying to teach a slave boy geometry. What he is doing is not teaching, but helping the boy pull knowledge out (analogy of a midwife) Teaching requires knowledge. The definition of knowledge has been set very high. Elgin bases the claim that knowledge is a hard thing to obtain. Plato taught that you couldn’t teach what you do not know.

Knowledge is a justified, true belief (JTB) Truth has to have a tether, something that holds it fast. Some tethers are stronger than other.

Example- UNC beat LSU in basketball. If you saw the score on the new, you have a strong tether to believe it. If you just saw half the game, and guessed that UNC won, you have an educated guess.

What makes a good tether? There has to be a strong tether to justify your belief as knowledge. Two things make it difficult:
1. We don’t help our students have a strong enough credit for knowledge, because we tell them. We preconceive that our students know because they have been told.
2. Teachers don’t know a whole lot.

Elgin wants to move away from knowledge to understanding. It more accurately describes what happens in schools. Understanding is an approximation of the truth. It admits to degrees. It is not restricted to facts, and it is holistic. Knowledge is expressed verbally, but understanding may be expressed in other ways. Example is the young child who cannot write down what he wrote in a story; therefore it is not considered knowledge. The child may be able to draw pictures, act out or tell another student the content of the story. The student has demonstrated understanding.

Bloom’s theory is that facts are at the bottom. The theory constructed is the top of the knowledge pyramid. For Elgin this is not knowledge, but understanding.

In her summary paragraph at the end of the article, Elgin proposes that if what we do advances understanding, we are teaching and the student is learning. If we are just on the same level as our students, we are struggling together with the material, so this process is collaborative investigation.

Harvey Siegel- "The Reasons Conception"

Critical thinker is one who is moved by reasons. Reasons are based on principles, which are consistent and backed up by principles or rules. They are not arbitrary. P is a reason for "q" if and only if principle "r" renders "p" as a new reason for "r". Principles are consistent, impartial and non-arbitrary.

Example- Students who cheat get zeros. Principles apply consistency. If it is not consistent, it is not a principle. For reasons to function there has to be principles.

For reasons to function we have to have principles. For Siegel critical thinking is an educational goal. We want our students to be motivated by reasons. "…a critical thinker must be able to assess reasons and their ability to warrant beliefs, claims and actions properly."

There are two general types of principles:
1. Domain specific-good reasons for a particular area such as science and math.
2. Subject neutral-general principles that apply across a variety of contexts and subjects.

Example: Hemmingway was a drunk. For Whom the Bell Tolls is a crappy novel. There is a fallacy in this logic. Hemmingway’s personal life and behavior do not affect the quality of the product. The fallacy is subject neutral. You cold say that the novel is about man’s struggle with himself.

We want our students to value good reasoning, and to believe and act on that basis. This is the heart of the critical attitude.

In schools we should teach:
- Subject specific rules
- Subject neutral rules
- We should try to teach a critical spirit and think these things are important
- A moral component exists here too ofgetting our students to be people that value critical thinking

How do we teach critical thinking? Content, Method and Manner
- Manner-Teacher needs to model it.
- Method-We asks our students to decide knowledge and defend/justify their position.
- Content-You can teach the subject-specific and the subject-neutral principles. Subject neutral skills and domain specific skills are taught when taking certain classes.

We'll reconvene April Fool's Day; have a good week.