The Age of Reasoning Prompting Reflective Judgment in

The Age of Reasoning: Prompting Reflective Judgment in a Time of Information Adam Peck, Ph. D. , Dean of Student Affairs M. E. Mc. Williams, Director, Academic Assistance Resource Center

The Digital Dilemma: New Frontiers in Student Learning for the Information Age.   Adam Peck, Ph. D. , Dean Student Affairs Stephen F. Austin State University

Session Learning Outcomes Participants will be able to: • Appreciate the value of reflective judgment as a learning outcome • Understand the role of educators in helping students to develop reflective judgment • Express improved confidence in their own critical thinking and reflective judgment. • Articulate strategies for creating/adapting programs which promote reflective judgment • Identify methods of measuring/assessing reflective judgment

Relevance • The top 10 jobs in 2010 will be jobs that did not even exist 5 years ago. • Today’s students will have an average of 10 -14 jobs by age 38. • There are 31 billion Google queries each month. • In a week of reading The New York Times, you can learn more than a person in the eighteenth century might have learned in a lifetime. • As Keeling (2004) articulated in Learning Reconsidered: A Campus-Wide Focus on the Student Experience, “…knowledge is no longer a scarce – or stable – commodity. (It) is changing so rapidly that specific information may become obsolete before a student graduates and has the opportunity to apply it” (p. 4).

Relevance 1. Higher education needs to shift from a knowledge acquisition model to information management models. 2. Students are losing their sense of wonder. 3. Students should be less certain of what they know and believe, but it seems to have the opposite effect. We need to teach students how to think.

RELEVANCE • We often say that students learning “critical thinking” through co-curricular programs, but few can articulate just what that means or how to quantify when it has occurred. • There is limited empirical research related to the development of reflective judgment in cocurricular programs.

What is Reflective Judgment?

How is Reflective Judgment Different from Critical Thinking? Reflective judgment is like critical thinking in that students have to critically evaluate information to understand if it is credible, but it is different in that it concerns students’ epistemic assumptions. • Students have to understand what they believe and why they believe it. • Students need to learn to ensure that their beliefs are consistent or at the very least know that they are inconsistent. • Students have to understand how these beliefs work together as a personal epistemology.

What Kind of Problems Does Reflective Judgment Study? King and Kitchener describe reflective judgment as considering “how people decide what they believe about vexing problems” (King and Kitchener, 1994, p. 2). . . . Especially when these problems are “illstructured” or have no simple solutions or for which conflicting evidence and opinions exist.

What Are the Two Most Important Assumptions Regarding Reflective Judgment? 1) That individuals' understanding of the nature, limits, and certainty of knowing (their epistemic assumptions) affects how they defend their judgments 2) That epistemic assumptions change over time in a developmentally related fashion.

The Reflective Judgment Model The conceptual framework for reflective judgment is that of a stage model characterized by seven distinct but developmentally related sets of assumptions about the process of knowing (view of knowledge) and how it is acquired (justification of beliefs). The seven developmental stages of the Reflective Judgment Model may be broadly summarized into three levels: • Pre-Reflective • Quasi-Reflective • Reflective Thinking

Pre-Reflective • Belief that "knowledge is gained through the word of an authority figure or through firsthand observation, rather than, for example, through the evaluation of evidence. [People who hold these assumptions] believe that what they know is absolutely correct, and that they know with complete certainty. People who hold these assumptions treat all problems as though they were well-structured" (King & Kitchener, 2002, p. 39).

Pre-Reflective Stages • Stage 1 - "I know what I have seen. “ • Stage 2 - "If it is on the news, it has to be true. " • Stage 3 -"When there is evidence that people can give to convince everybody one way or another, then it will be knowledge, until then, it's just a guess. “ – Most freshmen enter the university at this stage

Quasi-Reflective Recognition "that knowledge-or more accurately, knowledge claims-contain elements of uncertainty, which [people who hold these assumptions] attribute to missing information or to methods of obtaining the evidence. Although they use evidence, they do not understand how evidence entails a conclusion (especially in light of the acknowledged uncertainty), and thus tend to view judgments as highly idiosyncratic" (King and Kitchener, 2002, p. 40).

Quasi-Reflective Stages • Stage 4 - "I'd be more inclined to believe evolution if they had proof. It's just like the pyramids: I don't think we'll ever know. Who are you going to ask? No one was there. “ – Most seniors graduate at this level • Stage 5 - "People think differently and so they attack the problem differently. Other theories could be as true as my own, but based on different evidence. "

Reflective Thinking People who hold these assumptions accept "that knowledge claims cannot be made with certainty, but [they] are not immobilized by it; rather, [they] make judgments that are "most reasonable" and about which they are "relatively certain, " based on their evaluation of available data. They believe they must actively construct their decisions, and that knowledge claims must be evaluated in relationship to the context in which they were generated to determine their validity. They also readily admit their willingness to reevaluate the adequacy of their judgments as new data or new methodologies become available" (King & Kitchener, 2002, p. 40).

Reflective Thinking Stages • Stage 6 - "It's very difficult in this life to be sure. There are degrees of sureness. You come to a point at which you are sure enough for a personal stance on the issue. " • Stage 7 - "One can judge an argument by how well thought-out the positions are, what kinds of reasoning and evidence are used to support it, and how consistent the way one argues on this topic is as compared with other topics. "

Developing Reflective Judgment in Ourselves “Good teaching cannot be reduced to technique; good teaching comes from the identity and integrity of the teacher. ” Parker Palmer “The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher’s Life”

How do you know what you believe? Think about a theory about student development that guides your practice. It does not need to be a formal theory. • When did you first come to believe this theory? • Why did you believe it to be true? • How often have you reexamined this belief? • What prompts you to reexamine this belief? • How certain are you of this belief • If you are certain, then, why are you certain? • Can you think of a time you learned something (either inside the classroom or outside of the classroom) that made you question this belief.

How do you know what you believe? Now Consider: * Looking at the reflective judgment levels, where would you place the level of reflective judgment that you demonstrated at the time that this theory became part of your belief system. I know what I’ve seen If it’s on the news, it must be true. Stage 1 Stage 2 We’ll know someday Stage 3 I need proof. Stage 4 Beliefs are based on perspective There are degrees of sureness Beliefs are based on wellreasoned judgments Stage 5 Stage 6 Stage 7

How do you know what you believe? Now Consider: • If you no longer held the belief that this theory was an accurate reflection of reality, what other beliefs would you need to change as a consequence?

Enemies of Reflective Judgment • Attribution Error • Confirmation Bias • Certainty • Source Reliability

What Your Use of Language: Catch Phrases Watch For Replace With In fact… In my opinion… The truth is… In my experience… Scientists say… According to some research I have read… In reality… From my perspective… I know… I have noticed… The right thing to do is… My instincts tell me…

Trust in Experts or Authority… Adam Peck, Ph. D. , Dean of Student Affairs M. E. Mc. Williams, Director, Academic Assistance Resource Center

Prompting Reflective Judgment in our Students Educators must decide, “Whether we permit chance environments to do the work, or whether we design environments for the purpose. ” (John Dewey, “Democracy and Education, ” 1916).

Prompting Reflective Judgment in our Students • Beyond Person-Environment Constructs • The Authority Trap/An Advantage for Student Affairs - Lecture/Presentation format encourages transmission learning, not transformational learning. - Don’t be the sage on the stage; be the guide on the side. • Must be Intentionally Constructed. But how?

Disequilibrium: An Essential Element • Creating Disequilibrium/Cognitive Dissonance is essential in prompting belief change. • This change depends upon four conditions that must be met, “ 1) a dissatisfaction with existing beliefs, 2) individuals must find new alternatives intelligible and useful, 3) individuals must find the new beliefs plausible, and 4) new conceptions must stand up to challenges and lead to new learning” (Hofer, B. K. & Pintrich, P. R. , 2004, p. 203).

How can we encourage RJ in Co-Curricular Programs? • Dialoguing on Ill-structured Problems • Integrate Socratic Dialogue • Use Modeling of Reflective Judgment • Designing Guided Reflections • Including Meta-cognitive Reflection

Creating Disequilibrium/Cognitive Dissonance • Face the Millennial Generation Challenge • Make the River Run Backwards • Example Program: Tunnel of Oppression

Dialoguing on Ill-structured Problems • We have a need for programs which prompt contemplation and discussion of ill-structured problems or important issues which have no easy solutions. • We need to expose students to examine points of view other than their own. • Example Program: Switch Sides/Movie Discussions

Movies that Prompt Dialogue on Ill-Structured Problems • The House of Sand Fog • Crash • Doubt • Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price vs. Why Wal -Mart Works & Why That Makes Some People Crazy • Fahrenheit 9/11 vs. Fahren. HYPE 9/11 • 30 Days with Morgan Spurlock • Frontline

Movies that Prompt Dialogue on Ill-Structured Teach Students to Recognize Logical Fallacies Problems Ad Hominem (Personal Attack) -An attempt to discredit the argument by discrediting the character of the person advancing it. • The House of Sand Fog Bandwagon Fallacy -Arguments that appeal to the growing popularity of an idea as a reason for accepting it as true. • Crash Appeal to Antiquity / Tradition -Assume that older ideas are better, that the fact that an idea has been around for a while implies that it is true. • Doubt • Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price vs. Why Wal -Mart Works & Why That Makes Some People Straw Man Argument Crazy - An argument that misrepresents a position in order to make it appear weaker than it Appeal to Popularity - Suggests that an idea must be true simply because it is widely held. actually is, refutes this misrepresentation of the position, and then concludes that the real position has been refuted. • Fahrenheit 9/11 vs. Fahren. HYPE 9/11 Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc - This fallacy is committed when it is assumed that because one thing occurred after another, it must have occurred as a result of it. • 30 Days with Morgan Spurlock • Frontline

Movies that Prompt Dialogue on Ill-Structured Problems • The House of Sand Fog • Crash • Doubt • Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price vs. Why Wal -Mart Works & Why That Makes Some People Crazy • Fahrenheit 9/11 vs. Fahren. HYPE 9/11 • 30 Days with Morgan Spurlock • Frontline

Designing Guided Reflections • Structured reflection is foundational to learning from experience (Boud et al, 1985). • Tap into the collective intelligence of a group to design structured reflections. Use your reasoning skills to prompt theirs.

Reflective Activities: • Personal Journaling/Blogging • Presentations to Community Organizations • Case Studies Papers • Small-Group Work • Ethnographies • Group Problem Solving • Reflective Essays • Artistic Projects • Case Studies • Histories • Class/Workshop Discussions • Electronic Discussion Groups • Products Created for Organizations • Portfolios/E-Portfolios • Multimedia Class Presentations • Problem-Solving Papers Source: Janet Eyler, Dwight E. Giles, Jr. (1996). Practitioner's guide to reflection in service-learning: Student voices and reflections. Vanderbilt University Press.

Meta-Cognitive Reflection • In much the same way that a child posing for yearly school pictures will show changes that may be unnoticeable day to day, meta-cognitive reflection encourages students to reevaluate their beliefs and to periodically think about the ways that these beliefs have changed overtime. • Example Program: The Week of Reflection

Assessing Reflective Judgement

Assessment • Track Reflective Judgment as a Learning Outcome • Construct a Rubric to Evaluate Reflective Judgment • Use the RCI as a Pre/Post

Outcome Median High Score 15 What do you want to measure? Low 20 25 ? What behavior indicates a lack indicates of success moderate success What behavior indicates a high level of success

The Age of Reasoning: Prompting Reflective Judgment in a Time of Information Adam Peck, Ph. D. , Dean of Student Affairs M. E. Mc. Williams, Director, Academic Assistance Resource Center

The Charge to Student Affairs In the final analysis, the challenge of college, for students and faculty members alike, is far more complex than it first appears, and that they must make interpretive arguments and decisions— judgments that entail real consequences for which they must take responsibility and from which they may not flee by disclaiming expertise. The Challenge of Connecting Learning (Association of American Colleges, 1991, pp. 16 -17).