Article:            Pratt, D.D. (1997). Indicators of Commitment (pp. 22-25). Malabar, Florida: Krieger Publishing.

  1. What are the defining characteristics of the two epistemological traditions?


bulletBased on discovery learning
bulletFacts on what world is like
bulletLearner and content are separate entities
bulletTo show learning, it must be accurately described or reproduced
bulletObjective knowledge is not distorted by interests and values


bulletBased on ones’ interpretation
bulletKnowledge is distorted by bias of values and personal interests
bulletWorld is knowable through people’s interpretations of it (depends on interests, prior knowledge, purposes, values)
bulletEmphasize meaning of action instead of the action itself
  1. What do you think some of the implications of each tradition would be for the design of instruction?

Even though I find that subjectivism plays a major role in learning and in instruction, I sometimes find there are instances where it helps to have a solely objective perspective when it comes to instruction of some topics.  Students themselves when they have a preconception of something can sometimes let notions hinder their learning.  On the other hand, prior knowledge usually helps in the attainment of new knowledge.  I can see pros and cons of each of the epistemologies.  When I think of an objective approach to instruction, I most often think of science concepts such as when conducting experiments, or when teaching a religion concept of another denomination than your own.  Subjective teaching makes me think of relating social studies outcomes to everyday examples for today’s generation, or when solving a math problem by putting it into the child’s perspective by relating the problem to something more familiar or meaningful to them.

Back Home Next