Belief Systems in the Open

Posted on by

This is a reading response for Week 5 of the Research Colloquium course. My response was completed after reading the following dissertation: 

Rideout, G. (2005). An examination of the predictive power of demographic, experiential and philosophical orientation variable clusters in relation to change and stability of pre-service teachers’ pupil control ideology (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario.

Despite the overly lengthy title, I was drawn to Rideout’s dissertation in light of my current teaching role with preservice teachers and my previous work as a school principal and teacher mentor, supporting new teachers as they enter into the profession. I had not heard of pupil control ideologies, so found the literature review illuminating. It wasn’t until I had read through the literature review and the research question that I understood the title of the dissertation. There were several threads that connected to my research focus and the lit review provided some references that I will track back to find. 

I couldn’t help but think and compare this research to the issues within higher education, particularly in the belief systems and philosophical orientations held by instructors and teachers who come into teaching roles without any understanding, awareness, study, or experience within the field of education. Rideout explores the positive relationship between beliefs and philosophical foundations with their ideology about pupil control.  Rideout notes in the literature the extent a teacher holds a traditionalist, romanticism and progressive philosophies will impact their orientation and actions with students. He mentions the Rokeach Dogmatism Scale (1960) as a measure of an individuals’ openness or closed-ness. He references the Teacher Attitude Inventory to measure how teachers think about the nature of knowledge and how pupils learn. Both caught my attention since these measures were unknown and may have some application to my own research, so may be worth a critical examination.

When Rideout references Hoy and Jalovick (1979) when discussing open education, I noted the following points that are relevant to my research on open educational practices (OEPr)

  • A belief that knowledge is constructed as a result of interaction between learner and their context in the world (p. 39)
  • the role of the teacher is facilitating the learner’s active exploration (p. 39)
  • learning process is joint responsibility – teacher and student responding to materials
  • classrooms are places of discovery and inquiry (p. 39)
  • dependent on the openness of the teacher’s belief system (p. 39)
  • are doomed to failure unless teachers’ have and can maintain a humanistic PCI (p. 50)
  • is consistent with a romanticist / progressivist orientation rather than traditionalist (p. 50) 
  • classrooms are set up for exploration not transmission of knowledge (p. 50)
  • references Hoy (2001) to note that belief systems are resistant to change (p. 85)

Rideout draws on many researchers and philosophers for his literature review touching on manifestations of open (Hoy & Jalkovich, 1979), cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957), social impact theory (Latanté, 1981), philosophical orientations (Galbraith, 2000; Hiemstra, 1988; Kuhn, 1962; Mortimer, 1992; Sergivanni, 2000; Silvernail, 1992), and humanistic vs custodial PCI (Willower et al., 1967). 

What was truly surprising was that it took until page 98 to state his research question. Despite having established a purpose and significance early in the dissertation, it wasn’t until after the extensive literature review that the research question is established. If written earlier into the document, this question could have framed the literature review thus making it more relevant to the topics being explored. 

This dissertation left me with several questions:

  • How does philosophy of education impact openness in educational practice?
  • Is mastery and competency based teaching and learning just another form of traditionalist orientation in teaching?
  • How does the current two-year teaching program impact the PCI levels examined by Rideout?
  • How might Rokeach’s (1960) dogmatism scale inform or be an indicator of an educator’s likelihood to enact open educational practices?

I’m not sure if there are clear directions from any of these questions, but I’m curating them for future consideration.

Reference

Rideout, G. (2005). An examination of the predictive power of demographic, experiential and philosophical orientation variable clusters in relation to change and stability of pre-service teachers’ pupil control ideology (Doctoral Dissertation). University of Windsor, Windsor, Ontario.