Making sense of making sense of making sense delving beneath cognitive behaviour - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 16
About This Presentation
Title:

Making sense of making sense of making sense delving beneath cognitive behaviour

Description:

... learns may be more than a question of one's repertoire of learning strategies. ... Cognition (basic information processing) ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:96
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 17
Provided by: anthonyd7
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Making sense of making sense of making sense delving beneath cognitive behaviour


1
(No Transcript)
2
Making sense of making sense of making sense -
delving beneath cognitive behaviour
Work in progress byA D McKenzieFaculty of Rural
ManagementUniversity of Sydney
Mouse click anywhere to advance to the next
slide.
3
In education literature we often read that some
individuals show an aptitude for in deep
learning, while others engage in surface learning
(see, for example, Ramsden 1988 19). This slide
presentation attempts to consider how we might
make sense of the difference between deep thought
and shallow thought. This is part of an effort to
test the possibility that deep learners engage in
qualitatively different thinking from surface
learners - that the depth at which one learns may
be more than a question of ones repertoire of
learning strategies. The presentation explores
some ideas for designing educational programs
that foster individual development into deeper
and richer learning and thought. We are now
going to try some analysis of our own experience
as thinkers!
4
Look! Shapes! What are they?
5
Look! Shapes! What are they?
I can step outside myself, observe and interpret
my thinking behaviour.
6
I step outside myself, observe and interpret my
thinking behaviour.
I become critically aware of my mental gear
shifts through any number of context-reframing
adjustments.
7
I step outside myself, observe and interpret my
thinking behaviour.
I become critically aware of my mental gear
shifts through any number of context-reframing
adjustments.
1. I try to make sense of things. 2. I try to
make sense of making sense. 3. I try to make
sense of making sense of making sense.
8
I become critically aware of my mental gear
shifts through any number of context-reframing
adjustments Within an analysis of the relation
between systems thinking and critique, Fuenmayor
1990 offers a helpful way of viewing these gear
shifts. In the following three-tiered model,
critique is understood as the progressive
process of gaining awareness about our own state
of mind which is necessarily hidden in our
judging (p.530).
9
Critique is the attempt to perceive how we look
at something.
At the level of basic everyday discovery, our
view of something is unchallenged.
Everyday dogmatic discovery
10
Once doubt arises, we take a first step backward
from our naïve, dogmatic position.
We start to reflect on the matter (immanent
reflection), and maybe articulate that thought
(immanent critique).
Immanent reflection/critique
11
On a higher plane again we dont simply consider
the matter at hand we reflect on how the matter
is experienced. Fuenmayor calls this
transcendental reflection or transcendental
critique.
Levels oftranscendentalreflection/critique
Once I am reflecting on this plane, each step
backward is one of ever-more comprehensive
contextual-isation, not a substantive change in
the nature of my questioning.
12
Along similar lines, Kitchener (1983) proposed
three kinds of cognitive activity. They can be
explained this way...
Cognition (basic information processing) such
as perceiving, reading, speaking, computing,
memorising
Metacognition the ability to reflexively
conceive, evaluate and correct the way we
process information
Epistemic cognition being cognitively
reflexive from a vantage point beyond the
metacognitive frame of reference, as when I
reflect on the epistemic nature of a problem,
questioning the adequacy not only of my root
definitions but of the very purpose and
methodology of the analysis, acknowledging the
subjectivity of all knowing at the heart of the
construct
13
Shifting mental gears between different contexts
or worlds of thought can be compared to the
operations of a microscope, first focussing on
one plane of the subject of inquiry, then moving
to a different plane. This requires depth of
field sensitivity (McKenzie 1999a 15)
As individuals develop their capacity for
reflexive depth of field perception, so this more
abstract, critiquing style of thought becomes
habitual.
We wonder what will happen if we side with the
constructivists, for whom there is no final,
unchallengeable frame of reference.
We learn to live with the uncertainty that takes
hold as we entertain that possibility.
Is this what it takes to be cognitively
autonomous?
14
The road to epistemic knowing is by doing
reflection.
15
You may record a comment or participate in
discussion on these matters by visiting the forum
page. Go to Note the discussion site is not
yet available email the author for advice when
the forum will commence tmckenzi_at_orange.usyd.edu
.au.
16
ReferencesFuenmayor, R. (1990). Systems
thinking and critique. I. What is critique? In
Systems Practice 3 (6), pp. 525-544. Kitchener,
K. S. (1983). Cognition, metacognition and
epistemic cognition a three-level model of
cognitive processing. In Human Development, 26,
pp. 222-232. McKenzie, A. D. (1999a). A ferret
tail-chase the perpetual closed loop of open
system reflecting theorising. Paper presented at
the Issues of Rigour in Qualitative Research
Conference, Melbourne, July 1999. Ramsden, P.
(ed.) (1988). Improving Learning New
Perspectives. Kogan Page London
Click your mouse and close this window to return
to your previous presentation or document.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com