Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years William G. Perry, Jr. Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years

The Life of William G. Perry, Jr. Born in Paris, France in 1913. Died January 12th, 1988. B.A. in English and Greek from Harvard in 1935 M.A. in English in 1940, also from Harvard 1947- Founded the Bureau of Study Counsel at Harvard: a student center for counseling and tutoring. Published Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years in 1970. Received lifetime achievement award from the Massachusetts Psychological Association “Perhaps development is all transition and stages are only resting points along the way.” Did his research for the book in the 1950’s and 60’s- a 15 year study.

Perry’s Study Studied the intellectual development of college students Longitudinal Study Interview-style questioning: wanted students to give their own accounts of college in their own terms Then a panel of judges would rate the unedited transcripts of the interviews using Perry’s scheme of 9 positions Longitudinal study- over time, over the course of 15 years. He gathered evidence from the same group of students for four years- as they complete college. Interviewing them once a year until they complete college. Harvard during the 1950s- especially after WWII and the GI bill- lots more students and kinds of students going to college, was a diverse and pluralistic society- take this with a grain a salt- this was also published in 1970. The study came about because he saw that some students thought the notion of multiple frames of reference as wholly unintelligible, while others would eventually form a personal style of commitment in their thinking and care. Diversity in the student body became a priority and a selection tool for universities, so no matter where you went, students will have to face a pluralism of ideas and ways of thinking. Questions started out like- “Would you like to say what has stood out for you during the year?”, what particularly stuck out?, Then moved on to questions like what was the most important thing you learned? Or what has been the most valuable? Something to note about the judging process- at first they were concerned because even though they did not include names, the professors/judges were sometimes able to figure out what year the students attended or were possibly able to figure who the student was or might be- might have taken some of those judges’ classes- etc. Then they had to go back into the transcripts and take out some of the more obvious cues.

His Scheme of Intellectual Development 9 positions Polar terms- we-right-good vs. others-wrong-bad Diversity of opinion and uncertainty are seen as confusion in poorly-qualified authorities Diversity and uncertainty are legitimate but also due to not finding the answer yet. “Anyone has a right to their own opinion.” Knowledge and values are contextual and relativistic. Orientation of self in a relativistic world through personal commitment of some sort. Student makes an initial commitment in some area. Student experiences implications of that commitment. Affirmation of identity. Right answers exist for everything in the absolute, known to Authority- mediate/teach them. Knowledge and goodness are quantitative, can be collected by hard work and obedience Or are exercises set by authority to make us find the answer ourselves. If authorities don’t know or are uncertain, this is just due to the teacher not finding out the answer yet. There is still a concept of right and wrong answers here to every problem, question etc. This replaces black v, white worldview- or is actually placed against it- so this is kinda a rebellious phase. Relativistic thought subordinates dualistic, right-wrong functions- but those are still present in a special case kind of way- this kind of thought is still okay for certain topics. In order to live in a relativistic world- you have to orient yourself through a personal commitment of thought, style, etc.- more of a realization- less of actual commitment 8.- explores the subjective and stylistic issues of responsibility- 9. Student also sees commitment as an ongoing activity through which he expresses his life style.

His Scheme Cont. While going through the positions students will also: Temporize- delay in some position, hesitant to move on Escape- Exploits opportunity for detachment around Positions 4 & 5. Retreat- Entrenched in Dualism- around positions 2 & 3. 4 Generalized Levels Dualism (1-2) Multiplicity or Complex Dualism (3-4) Relativism (5-6) Commitment to Relativism (7-9) Temporizing- hesitant to move on to the next step – can happen anywhere as students begin to explore the implications of new ideas/thoughts- usually for about a year Escape- deny responsibility through passive or opportunistic alienation. Retreat- around positions 2 & 3- doesn’t want to move past dualism- moves into the unknown- where unknown things will happen. Movement through the stages- reorganization of major personal investments. Freshman started at one- at 3-5 end of year. Seniors operate around 6-8. 9 is beyond seniors 1. Dualism – knowledge is received, not questioned; students feel there is a correct answer to be learned. 2. Multiplicity – there may be more than one solution to a problem, or there may be no solution; students recognize that their opinions matter. 3. Relativism – knowledge is seen as contextual; students evaluate viewpoints based on source and evidence, and even experts are subject to scrutiny. 4. Commitment within relativism – integration of knowledge from other sources with personal experience and reflection; students make commitment to values that matter to them and learn to take responsibility for committed beliefs. There is recognition that the acquisition of knowledge is ongoing activity.  

Dianne Bateman & Janet Donald “Measuring the Intellectual Development of College Students: Testing a Theoretical Framework” Testing the ability of Perry’s Scheme to measure the intellectual development of college students. Two possible levels or general positions that students take towards knowledge The first is that knowledge consists of facts and data, and that professors should supply them. The second is that knowledge is a quest in which students have responsibility for their own learning, and are expected to be able to judge the validity of arguments and to identify and defend their own point of view. They are also testing the validity of Perry’s scheme, testing if one could make any valid conclusions about students’ intellectual development using his scheme. Two general positions about knowledge: The first is that knowledge consists of facts and data, and that professors should supply them. The second is that knowledge is a quest in which students have responsibility for their own learning, and are expected to be able to judge the validity of arguments and to identify and defend their own point of view. So instead of looking at this from a developmental point of view, they decided to see this as how students view the collection or gathering of knowledge…?????

My Study: Hypotheses Hypothesis 1: The majority of freshman students surveyed will be in the dualistic level of intellectual development. Hypothesis 2: There will be a significant difference between the intellectual levels of students and faculty members. Though the study started out as one that would investigate whether there is a significant difference between professors’ expectation of freshman students’ intellectual levels and their assessed levels of Intellectual Development as determined by an assessment based on William Perry’s Stages of Intellectual Development. Then I tried to compare faculty members’ levels to students’ levels- didn’t pan out so now I’m… Because I only received one faculty member response- I cannot accurately say if there is any difference, whether it is significant or not, between faculty members and students. However, I can compare this professor’s results with his/her students. Because all the student participants were this teacher’s students.

The How: Online Survey Sent students and faculty members an online survey through the website Survey Monkey. Participants had to consent to participating, indicate whether they were a student or faculty member, then they could complete the quiz. EX:

My Results: Percentages of Agreement and Disagreement Levels of Development Agreement % Avg. Disagreement % Avg. Dualism 46.5% 53.5% Multiplicity 53.2% 46.8% Relativism 76.4% 23.6% Commitment to Relativism 78.2% 21.8% Dualism: 73%, 53%, 33%, 26.7%, Multiplicity: 66.7%, 73%, 53%, 20%, Relativism: 73%, 73%, 86.7%, 73% Commitment: 73%, 80%, 73%, 86.7%

# 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 D1 A N D2 D SA SD M3 C4 R5 C6 C7 NO D8 R9 R10 M12 R14 C16 D17 M19 M20

Percentages of Students in each level % of Participants Dualism 13.3% Multiplicity 46.7% Relativism 40% Commitment to Relativism 0% Based on my own observations!!!! Not Perry’s or Bateman’s & Donald’s

I was wrong; I’ll admit it. I was wrong about my first hypothesis. Most students were actually at the level of multiplicity. However, the majority of students surveyed were in the lowest two levels of intellectual development. So… I cannot accurately test my second hypothesis, however, the professor has reached the level of Commitment to Relativism based on my assessment. He/she is two levels higher than 60% of his students.

Implications of Study Assuming that we could come up with valid test based on Perry’s Scheme… Should we test students on their intellectual development before they enter college? Could there be a correlation between schooling and stage when entering college? Should we expect the majority of incoming freshman to be generally dualistic in their thought processes? Should we change curriculum at the college and high school levels? Should we be trying to combat dualism or is it necessary for proper development? Should we change curriculum to combat dualism? Or is this just a fact of life that we should take into consideration? Do we all have to start out as dualistic