Areas of Growth
This Unit aims to give students the understanding of dynamics of cognitive development and
to get them to participate in programmes and activities that foster logical, analytical and
sequential thought processes. Development of IQ (Intelligent Quotient) is at the core of the
Unit; cognizant of the fact that intellectual reflection and abstraction form the bedrock of
rationality and lucid thought patterns, thought forms and thought processes. This unit serves
to expose students to situations, programs and activities which stimulate:
development of knowledge (theoretical and practical knowledge),
Analytic thinking,
Interpretation of situations,
Problem solving capacities,
Informed decision making,
Confidence, and
Self-esteem.
Objectives
By the end of this Unit students should be able to:
Demonstrate knowledge of content learnt and experiences encountered beyond their face
value,
Explain and interpret situations in ways which show critical analysis and evaluation of
assumptions,
Provide intellectually sound solutions to problems/challenges in different social spheres,
and
Assist in providing informed and evidence-based decisions.
Learning Outcomes
Ability to use theories of cognitive development to facilitate personal growth and personal
effectiveness,
Improved comprehension of both academic and social situations,
Improved capacity for abstract and practical thinking and problem-solving,
Personal confidence and self-efficacy in different academic and social situations,
Improved love for both academic and social learning, and
Convergence of diverse views for common good within and beyond the campus
environment
Theoretical Framework
According to Richardson (2017), ideas of three groups of researchers have predominantly
determined the nature of thinking about student learning in higher education. The first line of
research is based on Perry (1970) Theory of Cognitive Development. According to Perry’s
theory and research, as students go through their university years, they progress along a
predictable path which is made up of four positions of development. The second line is based
on the work of Pask (1975) who postulates there being essentially two types of learners:
“serialists” and “holists”. The third line of research is based on the theoretical framework of
Marton and Saljor (1976) who, after having examined how students went about their learning
by using a qualitative method, concluded that students use two approaches; “deep” and
“surface” approaches.
However, there is a lack of cross-cultural validation of Perry’s theory. There are a number of
other limitations on Perry’ original work, most notably, a gender bias and difficulties in
measuring cognitive change. Hofer (1997) said Perry’s original research involved conducting
interviews on mostly males. Belenk, et al. (1986) found the process of cognitive development
different for females than the process reported by Perry (1970) for males.
Zhang (1999) also tried to examine the validity of Perry‘s theory among university students
in China using a self-report inventory, i.e. the “Zhang Cognitive Development Inventory”.
Repeated studies indicated that Chinese students ‘cognitive development progressed in a
direction opposite to that indicated by Perry. Piaget (1936) did a research on cognitive
development focusing mainly on early childhood cognitive development.
Piaget‘s theory is concerned with children, rather than all learners and it focuses on
development, rather than learning, so it does not 10 address learning of information or
specific behaviors at levels beyond early childhood learning.
Despite its noted weaknesses when subjected to gender and cultural validity tests, Perry’s
Cognitive Development theory is found applicable in explaining cognitive development at
tertiary level.
Perry's Stages of Cognitive Development
1. Dualism/Received Knowledge:
The stage is characterised as follows:
Basic Duality
o Knowledge is seen as simple facts and authorities have all the knowledge
o All problems are solvable
o Therefore, the student's task is to learn the “right solutions”
Full Dualism: Recognition of other perspectives
o Students’ task is to learn the right solutions and ignore other perspectives o Knowledge is
quantitative.
Multiplicity/Subjective Knowledge
The stage is characterised as follows:
Early Multiplicity
o Students see peers as sources of knowledge and can now think analytically
o Student's task is to learn how to find the right solutions
Late Multiplicity
o Students are now perceiving, analysing and evaluating their identity and their decision, All
opinions can be valid,
o Realization that they may not be able to rely on authorities for solutions/answers,
Acknowledgment of the need to support positions with data.
2. Relativism/Procedural Knowledge:
The stage is characterised as follows:
Contextual Relativism:
- Commitments and choices are foreseen as necessary to a responsible life and suggest an
individual needs to make their own decisions,
- Multiple solutions,
-Authorities are seen as experienced and knowledgeable,
-All proposed solutions are supported by reasons, and
-Student's task is to learn to evaluate solutions.
3. Pre-Commitment:
First experience of commitment or affirmation which evolves to a more intimate realization,
o Integration of knowledge/learning with own experiences,
o Students make commitments, and
o Begin to establish one's identity
4. Commitment/Constructed Knowledge
The stage is characterized as follows:
Commitments to life direction and values begin to be made
Commitments and affirmations which evolve to more intimate realization of the nature of
life
Integration of knowledge learned from personal experience and reflection.
Realisation and exploration of the implications of commitments made
Commitments consists of developing maturity, accepting change and involves choices,
decisions and affirmations
Student explores issues of responsibility
Lifestyle consists of one’s beliefs, values and identity
Students realizes commitment is an ongoing unfolding evolving activity
References
Belenk, M. R., Clinch, 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.
Hofer, B. K., 2000. Dimentionality and Disciplinary Differences in Personal Epistemology.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, Volume 25, pp. 278-405.
Pask, G., 1975. Conversation, Cognition and Learning. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Perry, W. G., 1970. Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A
Scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Piaget, J., 1932. The Moral Judgement of the Child. London: Routledge and Kegan.
Richardson, J., 2017. Student Learning in Higher Education. London: Emerald Publishing.
Zhang, L. F., 2000. Relationship Between Thinking Styles Inventory and Study Process.
Hong Kong: University of Hong Kong.
