Personal, ethical and intellectual development of students
David Grantham, Coventry University
The arrival of personal development portfolios has renewed interest in student development and how learning experiences can encourage students to increase their intellectual and personal capabilities. The most extensive work in the field is that of William Perry, who conducted far reaching fieldwork in the United States. Perry's scheme of intellectual and ethical development has attracted new advocates, not least because it provides tools for practitioners to reflect upon their practice.
The session began with an outline of earlier work by Heath (1964) and then proceeded to an overview of the Perry scheme (1970). An important point to note here is that Perry did not begin with any hypothesis about the way in which students developed. On the contrary, the scheme emerged from the data as 'grounded theory'. Work by the workshop facilitator, based on that of Carolyn Miller (1974), was then introduced to look at Perry from the perspective of the law student. This focused on 'shift points', where the student was able to move forward by looking in a new way at learning and knowledge.
The workshop participants were then divided into groups to play the 'Perry role', first by going to the movies! There is evidence that, whether by design or default, certain movie-makers were aware of the Perry model. Excerpts from two films (Educating Rita (1983) and Good Will Hunting (1997)) were shown and colleagues were asked to consider where in the model of development they would put certain of the characters. Of course, this is by no means an exact science. Perry himself admits that all that can safely be said is that there was a 'tendency' from the evidence for a particular student to be at some developmental point.
Perry's work has been recently reviewed and given new life, particularly by Entwistle and Walker (1999), by linking the scheme to research on what is known about the conceptions of knowledge and learning of both students and tutors. This clearly powerfully demonstrates how naive and polar views of knowledge and learning are mirrored in the way in which students are taught. If knowledge is presented as a given, without real opportunities for students to question it, then the more likely it is that they will remain stuck in their current frame of reference. On the other hand, if knowledge is presented as 'provisional' only, and students are equipped with the necessary critical skills to test that knowledge, then there is more likelihood that students will develop their thinking and develop as people. Entwistle and Walker argue that student centred approaches to learning and teaching are much better suited to encourage this kind of development.
An early study: Heath
- a small study but involved regular interviews with students throughout their four years in college
- focused on both differences in personality and ways of thinking
- found that there were three distinctive personality 'types' - 'non-committers', 'hustlers' and 'plungers'
- non-committers were cautious and anxious, both in establishing personal relationships and in the ways they tackled their academic work
- hustlers were self-confident but also insensitively competitive
- plungers tended to be impulsive in their actions and followed individual pathways in their thinking which others found difficult to follow.
Over time, and to varying degrees, a number of the students gradually began to integrate the other characteristics into those of their own initial type and moved towards an 'ideal type' - Heath called the 'reasonable adventurer'. Characteristics of this stage of development were that the student:
- behaved more thoughtfully and sensitively towards others
- alternated their thinking between the free ranging thought processes of the plunger and the cautious approach of the non-committer, while maintaining the drive towards success of the hustler
A brief overview of Perry's scheme
Perry (1970) found evidence of trends in intellectual and ethical development through a series of nine 'positions' or stages. These began with dualism, or polar views, implying a belief in the existence of right or wrong answers. From this position students see tutors as both an authority and in authority, who have the 'right' answers which students must learn and then regurgitate in assessments. However, students soon realise that they are actually being presented with a multiplicity of views, all of which are given some weight by their teachers. At this point students tend to the view that any opinion is just as good as any other, but particularly their own point of view. (Such students have reached the fourth position in Perry's scheme).
The crucial fifth position involves a change in how students' perceive the world. 'Relativism' is not fully comprehended but there is a realisation that knowledge may be provisional only. A tension arises between the student wanting to move towards this view of knowledge, with all the uncertainty it brings, and the pull of the safe position of dualism. Perry's own words describe this well:
“(The fifth position) has taken us over a watershed, a critical traverse in our Pilgrim's Progress...In crossing the ridge of the divide...[students] see before [them] a perspective in which the relation of learner to knowledge is radically transformed. In this new context, Authority, formerly a source and dispenser of all knowing, is suddenly authority, ideally a resource, a mentor, a model, and potentially a colleague in consensual estimation of interpretations of reality...[Students] are no longer receptacles but the primary agents responsible for their own learning...As students speak from this new perspective they speak more reflectively. And yet the underlying theme continues: the learner's evolution of what it means to know.”
There is rarely an immediate acceptance of relativism, often in faltering steps the student comes to accept how conclusions have to rest on subjective interpretations of objective evidence.
A few students only in Perry's study made the final move towards the final pivotal development and begin to make and explore personal commitment to their perspective. Here, the student tries to make their own personal evidence-based interpretations, often clustered around some concept or concepts that have come to have real meaning for them. Tutors are now seen as an authority, as distinct from in authority. Throughout, the student is tolerant of alternative viewpoints.
| learner's conception of knowledge | learner's conception of learning | teacher's conception of teaching |
|---|---|---|
| dualistic and absolute 'right' or 'wrong' ('polar views') | getting 'the facts' - write it all down and try to remember it then regurgitate it | giving information - content oriented |
| different views - all opinions of same value | build up more facts and views - in assessment let authority have their preferred view (if known) | giving structured knowledge (more 'building blocks') and varying interpretations (content-based) |
| becomes aware of knowledge being provisional only, but uneasy with this | in applying knowledge and skills there are matters that are not easily resolved | learning becomes more 'active' but is teacher-directed (more process-based) |
| knowledge is contextualised and relative - aware that evidence needed to test interpretations | aware of need to make more sense of the world and ideas in it - are interpretations valid, always valid? | facilitating more and better understanding and is more student-focused |
| commits to a reasoned and personal interpretation | developing both intellectually and as a person | encouraging change in perception of what learning is and how it is to be developed |
| Expanded awareness of learning and teaching [Hoyle's extended professional who researches the profession and reflects on practice] | ||
| cognitive features | ||
| Conceptualises the topic and the discipline [also 'contextualises' it] | Strategically links teaching with learning [processes for learning considered as important as the content] | Understands how students learn |
| affective features | ||
| Expresses positive feelings for the discipline [enthusiasm] | Fosters conceptual development [of discipline and of the nature of learning] | Shows empathy with the students [able to take a student view of own practice] |
| teaching approach | ||
| Shows strategic awareness of classroom events [alert to where students are intellectually, ability to help students re-conceptualise, situating the learning, mobilising student experience etc] | ||
Personal and intellectual development: design exercise
Stage 1 (10 minutes)
In groups of four concentrate on the module/unit/subject of one of the group and design part of an interactive lecture, workshop or seminar that would open up an opportunity for students to consider different perspectives of an issue in a particular context. Particularly have in mind Perry's scheme and the stages of intellectual and personal development.
If you are used to doing this in seminars or tutorials (and I don't want to be teaching granny to suck eggs) then consider the design in a situation where you wouldn't normally use it, for example in a lecture. Particularly, you might want to discuss the following:
- Why does the topic chosen lend itself to this kind of design?
- At what point would you introduce it (start of the session, middle, end)?
- How would you introduce it (as an exercise, brainstorming, debate, coursework etc.)?
- What would you want the students to do?
- At best, what would you want students to learn from the experience?
- If you had strong views on the matter would you a) keep them to yourself, b) express them, or c) express them with a clear message that it is a personal view and there are other views?
Swap designs with another group and put yourself in the place of the students involved in the process. Ask the following questions:
- What would be positive about the experience?
- Are there any features that would concern you?
Ask one of the group to give the positive student view and one to air the concerns in reporting to a focus group.
- Grantham D (1985) Beyond the letter of the law: an evaluation of full time A level law courses (unpublished: University of Sussex Master's project)
- Heath R (1964) The reasonable adventurer Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press
- Miller C and Parlett M (1974) Up to the mark (monograph 23) London: Society for Research into Higher Education
- Perry W (1970) Forms of intellectual and ethical development in the college years: a scheme New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston
