In Search of Explanation and Conceptualization

“Hafizul’s Construct”Encompassing Epistemological Beliefs Framework

Promise me you’ll keep reading

2015

Problem of Nomenclature

• Terminology has caused much consternation resulting a chaotic conceptualization of scientific constructs

• Sometimes multiple terms are used interchangeably and sometimes they’re not. Sometimes the meanings of terms are explained, sometimes they’re assumed

– So, I need systematic classification and deep level of comprehension of other related constructs

– This study designed to give name/label my proposed construct based on theoretical considerations

How My Mind Works

Epistemological Beliefs

Epistemological Judgment

Justification of Assertions

Omniscient Authority

Judgment of

Assertions

Source Reputation

Model of Literature Study

Model of Content-Exploration from latest EFA

Epistemological Beliefs

• Hofer & Pintrich (1997) define it as “to beliefs about knowledge and knowing”

• Brownlee, Purdie, and Boulton-Lewis (2001) define it as “beliefs about knowing that reflect an individual’s views on what knowledge is, how it can be gained, its degree of certainty, the limits and criteria for determining knowledge”

– the abstract beliefs of lay folk that address questions relevant to professional epistemologists, typically about the nature of knowledge and knowing

Epistemological Beliefs

• Two critical aspects of this epistemological belief system are important to keep in mind:

“Whether or not these beliefs develop in synchrony and what is meant by more mature beliefs”

(1st), Synchronized!

• In 2004, Schommer-Aikins attempted to clarify that these beliefs may or may not develop in synchrony. If they do develop in synchrony, then stage-like patterns may be evident as has been hypothesized by others – (Baxter-Magolda, 2004; Kitchener & King, 1981)

• For example, young learners may come to believe that knowledge is highly complex, yet during their adolescent years they may not have wrestled with the notion that knowledge is changing– (Boyes & Chandler, 1992).

The important point, practically speaking, is that because a learner appears mature on one or two beliefs, it cannot be assumed that the learner is

consistently mature across all beliefs.

(2nd) Mature Beliefs!

• Mature beliefs do not mean that the learner is at the extreme end of a spectrum

– (Schommer-Aikins, 2004)

• Mature beliefs are NOT abbreviated

• As their beliefs began to support higher-order thinking, their belief about the stability of knowledge would be revised to conclude much of knowledge changes. The mature belief is encompassing variability in knowledge

Mature beliefs do not denigrate remembering facts, adhering to authority, or seeking definitive answers.

Rather, mature beliefs will tend to support higher order thinking the majority of time

(Kitchener, 2002)

Individuals appear to pass through something like an initial stage of absolutism or externalism, appealing to external authority for what is knowledge.

This is followed by a stage of individualism (subjectivism) in which knowledge is inside the individual

Finally, individuals reach something like astage of interactionism or relationalism,

in which internal and external factorshave to be integrated and coordinated in the right kind of way

• Prototypically, individuals initially believe that knowledge is certain and stable– either True or False

– and can be handed down by an Authority

• Overtime, they become convinced that knowledge is more complex and relativistic, accept the uncertainty and changeability of truth, and shift to the notion that knowledge is construed individually

Epistemological Beliefs Questionnaire

• Schommer (1990) paper-and-pencil self-report instrument (Epistemological Questionnaire, EQ) comprises five hypothesized dimensions of Epistemological Beliefs:– Beliefs in the source of knowledge (Omniscient Authority)

– The certainty of knowledge (Certain Knowledge)

– The structure of knowledge (Simple Knowledge),

– The speed of learning (Quick Learning)

– The ability to acquire knowledge (Innate Ability)

Epistemological Judgment

• Epistemological Judgments defined as :

– Judgments of knowledge claims in relation to their beliefs about the nature of knowledge and knowing

– Judgments of lay folk that mimic those of professional epistemologists, normally pertaining to the evaluation and justification of certain assertions

“The Analysis of Knowledge”(Steup, 2006)

This form of personal epistemological research is not merely concerned with

how individuals come to know, but with how an individual evaluates and

justifies certain assertions

How can we Judge other People Assertions?

(Steup, 2006)

1. Assessments of the validity of assertions of others

2. Explanations for why assertions compete

3. Evaluations of the certainty of one’s own beliefs about an issue

4. Decisions about the criteria that would justify an assertion.

The latter dimension, Steup (2006) concerns the criteria of making

Judgment of Assertions

Objective (Evidence, Plausibility, and Reputation of Fig)

Subjective (Intuition, Emotions, and Trust)

Don’t question my Authority or put me in the box, cause I’m not!-Radiohead

I notice that Lecturing from Lecturer is one of primary activity for students to gain insights and knowledge

I notice that lecturers had competence to teach, but we can’t assume they are always telling the truth

It’s really dangerous to construct our knowledge recklessly. We can’t took every information from our lecturer for granted.

Angkatan : Jenis Kelamin : Pria/Wanita IPK : Usia :

No Pernyataan STS TS S SS

1 Seringkali saya hanya belajar dengan PPT dosen sebelum menghadapi Ujian

2 Saya memiliki kadar kepercayaan yang tinggi dengan perkataan dosen

3 Dosen adalah pakar

4 Saya sering meninjau kembali klaim atau statement yang diberikan dosen melalui sumber lain

5 Saya patuh dengan dosen demi keberlangsungan perkuliahan saya

6 Saya percaya dosen-dosen fakultas psikologi UI memberikan pengetahuan yang akurat

7 Dosen adalah sumber kebenaran

8 Semakin tinggi pendidikan dosen, semakin saya yakin dengan informasi yang diberikan

9 Dalam berargumen, saya sering merujuk pada perkataan dosen saya

10 Dosen adalah fasilitas

11 Dosen adalah orangtua saya yang sebaiknya saya patuhi

12 Saya diajarkan untuk berargumentasi logis selama belajar di fakultas psikologi

13 Kebenaran itu relatif

14 Saya mengisi EDOM (Evaluasi Dosen Oleh Mahasiswa) dengan serius

15 Rata-rata dosen psikologi UI memiliki pemahaman penuh dengan materi yang diajarkannya

16 Mematuhi perkataan dosen dapat membuat saya mendapatkan nilai yang saya harapkan

17 Saya percaya dengan dosen yang yakin ketika menyampaikan informasi

18 Kontribusi dosen sangat besar terhadap pengetahuan yang saya miliki

19 Meski saya mendeteksi kesalahan pada informasi yang diberikan dosen, saya lebih baik tidak berdebat dengan dosen tersebut

20 Saya ragu dengan kebenaran informasi yang diberikan dosen jika dia menerangkannya dengan ragu-ragu/terkesan tidak yakin

How My Mind Works (2)

Epistemological Beliefs

Epistemological Judgment

Justification of Assertions

Omniscient Authority

Judgment of

Assertions

Source Reputation

Model of Literature Study

Model of Content-Exploration from latest EFA

Discussing..

This page is intentionally left blank due to inappropriate, seductive, and barbaric discussions of me and my sailor-mouthed colleagues

Hypothesized Factors of Hafizul’s Construct

– Student’s Perceived Credibility• Individual perception about credibility of an informant

(educator) whom perceived as authority figures in educational context

– Student ‘s Perceived Trust towards Authority’s Projected Confidence• Degree of individual trust towards authority’s projected

confidence when transferring knowledge in educational context

– Student’s Obedience• Degree of individual obedience towards authority figures in

educational context

(F1) Perceived

Credibility

– Dosen adalah sumber kebenaran (padadomain tertentu)

– Semakin tinggi pendidikan dosen, semakin saya yakin dengan informasiyang diberikan

– Dosen adalah pakar (pada domain tertentu)

– Rata-rata dosen psikologi UI memilikipemahaman penuh dengan materi yang diajarkannya

– Dalam berargumen, saya sering merujukpada perkataan dosen saya

– Saya memiliki kadar kepercayaan yang tinggi dengan perkataan dosen

– Saya percaya dosen-dosen fakultaspsikologi UI memberikan pengetahuanyang akurat

– Saya sering meninjau kembali klaim ataustatement yang diberikan dosen melaluisumber lain

Conceptually defined as :

Persepsi individu mengenaikredibilitas agen pemberiinformasi (penyelenggarapendidikan) yang dianggapmemiliki otoritas di institusipendidikan

(F2) Projected

Confidence

– Saya percaya dengan dosen yang yakin ketikamenyampaikan informasi

– Saya ragu dengan kebenaran informasi yang diberikan dosen jika diamenerangkannya dengan ragu-ragu/terkesan tidakyakin

– Kontribusi dosen sangatbesar terhadappengetahuan yang sayamiliki

Conceptually defined as :

Derajat kepercayaan individuterhadap pihak otoritasterkait keyakinan diri yang diproyeksikannya dalammenyampaikan informasi diinstitusi pendidikan.

(F3) Obedience

– Saya patuh dengan dosen demikeberlangsungan perkuliahansaya

– Dosen adalah orangtua saya yang sebaiknya saya patuhi

– Mematuhi perkataan dosendapat membuat sayamendapatkan nilai yang sayaharapkan

– Meski saya mendeteksi kesalahanpada informasi yang diberikandosen, saya lebih baik tidakberdebat dengan dosen tersebut

– Seringkali saya hanya belajardengan PPT dosen sebelummenghadapi ujian.

Conceptually defined as :

Kepatuhan individu padapihak yang dianggapmemiliki otoritas diinstitusi pendidikan

Anomaly!!!

• Item [Kebenaran itu relatif]– Item ini menggambarkan keseluruhan konstruk/tidak

merupakan kovariat item lainnya.

– 100 dari 103 N menjawab pada kategori setuju

• Item [Dosen adalah fasilitas]– Item ini merangkum konten ketiga faktor sekaligus

– Item ini ambigu, memiliki dua makna, dosen sebagaiobjek? atau jabatan?

– Item ini punya pemaknaan moral, diduga karena isudehumanisasi

Next Step?

Epistemological Beliefs

Epistemological Judgment

Justification of Assertions

Omniscient Authority

Judgment of

Assertions

Source Reputation

Model of Literature Study

Model of Content-Exploration from latest EFA

Endless NamelessNirvana

?

Obedience

Perceived Credibility

Projected Confidence

Composites? Or Dimensional?

Perceived

Credibility

Projected Confidence

Obedience

“TRUNCATED BELIEF”Encompassing Epistemological Beliefs on

Students in Higher-Education

Hafizul

2015

TRUNCATED BELIEF

Perceived Credibility

Projected Confidence

Obedience

Individual perception about credibility of an informant (educator) whom perceived as authority figures

Degree of individual trust towards authority’s projected confidence when transferring knowledge

Degree of individual obedience towards authority figures in educational context

Individual’s fixated believe that knowledge

is certain and stable

(gF)TRUNCATED BELIEF

(Schommer-Aikins, 2004)

• It has been hypothesized with this particular belief, an extreme truncated belief in the stability of knowledge, would lead to either

• Rigid/non-adaptive thinking

– (Knowledge never changes, hence, I cannot learn anything that is inconsistent with what I already know) or

• Noncommittal/Indecisive thinking

– (Knowledge is in constant flux with no end in sight)

• The truncated rigid thinking would limit learning to that which fits into prior knowledge acquired earlier in life at the least, or failure to transition to cognitive maturity at the worst

• Noncommittal thinking could lead to an inability to make decisions (or gullibility to follow everyone else’s decisions) at the least, or to a mental breakdown at the worst

Truncated (Adj) : similar to abbreviate, “cut-off”, mutilated, curtail. etc.

Perry suggested in 1968, the epistemological belief system theory asserts that as learners’ beliefs mature, their beliefs become more encompassing with a strong tendency toward one side of a continuum

Defined as :

Degree of Individual’s fixated believe that knowledge is certain and stable.

Capturing individual degree of subjective trust on assertions, reputation, and adherence towards authorities.

Dimensions of

Truncated Belief– Student’s Perceived Credibility

• Individual perception about credibility of an informant (educator) whom perceived as authority figures in educational context

– Student ‘s Perceived Trust towards Authority’s Projected Confidence• Degree of individual trust towards authority’s projected

confidence when transferring knowledge in educational context

– Student’s Obedience• Degree of individual obedience towards authority figures in

educational context

To be continue..

• Study 5 :

5a : Truncated Belief Model CFA

5b : In search of Validity, Truncated Belief : Link with Cognitive Style, Power-Distance, Source Miscalibration, Epistemic Curiosity, Critical Thinking Ability & Cognitive Flexibility

• Study 6 :

Emergence of Intervention. Blinded by Trust?

“There's always a siren singing you to shipwreck”Radiohead

References

• Barchfeld, P., & Sodian, B. (2009). Differentiating theories from evidence: The development of• argument evaluation abilities in adolescence and early adulthood. Informal Logic, 29, 396–416.• Brownlee, J., Purdie, N., & Boulton-Lewis, G. (2001). Changing epistemological beliefs in pre-service

teacher education students. Teaching in Higher Education, 6(2), 248–268.• Baxter Magolda, M. B. (2004). Evolution of a constructivist conceptualization of epistemological

reflection. Educational Psychologist, 39(1), 31–42.• Boyes, M. C., & Chandler, M. (1992). Cognitive development, epistemic doubt, and identity formation

in adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 21, 277–304. doi:10.1007/ BF01537019.• Brownlee, J. (2004). Teacher education students’ epistemological beliefs: Developing a relational

model of teaching. Research in Education, 72, 1–17.• Hofer, B. K., & Pintrich, P. R. (1997). The development of epistemological theories: Beliefs about

knowledge and knowing and their relation to learning. Review of Educational Research, 67, 88–140.• Kitchener, R. (2002). Folk epistemology: An introduction. New Ideas in Psychology, 20, 89–105.• Schommer, M. (1990). Effects of beliefs about the nature of knowledge on comprehension. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 82(3), 498–504.• Schommer-Aikins, M. (2004). Explaining the epistemological belief system: Introducing the

embedded systemic model and coordinated research approach. Educational Psychologist, 39, 19–29.• Schommer-Aikins, M., & Easter, M. (2009). Ways of knowing and willingness to argue. The Journal of

Psychology, 143(2), 117–132.• Steup, M. (2006, January 16). The analysis of knowledge. Retrieved December 13, 2008 from

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-analysis/