Conceptual Matching Models and Interactional Research in Education

Abstract

In recent years, considerable attention has focused on student-environment interactions in classroom settings. Numerous attempts have been made to depict the processes involved, often in terms of attribute-treatment interactions (ATΓs). Opinions differ about the net resull of these efforts. On the one hand, there are those who note that few A TΓs have been reliably demonstrated, and point to inadequacies in both the theory and method being used. In contrast, there is a body of opinion which asserts that adequate theory and method already exist, within the framework of Conceptual Systems Theory (CST), and that there is sufficient empirical evidence to support this view. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the latter contention by undertaking a critical evaluation of both the theory and the educational research carried out within its framework A number of theoretical problems are raised which, however, do not appear to detract from the overall framework but merely point to areas that need development and to pitfalls that can be avoided by the prospective researcher. An evaluation of experimental design issues leads to the develop ment of an index of design adequacy which is used to rank studies. The majority of studies reviewed exhibit numerous design problems with a reason able degree of adequacy being apparent only in a small group of "superior" studies. Thus, the consistent support afforded theoretical expectations by the majority of studies needs to be viewed with caution, although greater confidence can be placed in the substantial support for the matching model provided by the better studies. It is noteί that the Conceptual System matchi/g model has yet tobeadequately tested under genuinely pedagogic conditions and that this is especially true of the developmental match. The paper ends with a discussion of the theoretical and practical issues that face the researcher who may wish Íoundertake such a test, and it is concluded that the theory offers a promising framework for interaction^l research in education.This is a paper about interactionist approaches to the teaching-learning process and, in particular, about the potential usefulness of Conceptual Systems Theory (CST), a cognitive personality theory, in dealing with the question of studentenvironment interactions.In recent years, considerable attention has been focused on student-environment interactions in classroom settings. Numerous attempts have been made to depict the processes involved, often in terms of attribute-treatment interactions (ATI's). Opin ions differ about the net result of these efforts. On the one hand are those who note Preparation of this article was supported by the Canadian Heart Foundation. 33at UNIV OF MICHIGAN on March 15, 2015 http://rer.aera.net Downloaded from at UNIV OF MICHIGAN on March 15, 2015 http://rer.aera.net Downloaded from CONCEPTUAL MATCHING MODELS StructureThe number of concepts developed by an individual (degree of differentiation) and their interrelations (degree of integration) jointly define the level of "...

The Matter of Style: Manifestations of Personality in Cognition, Learning, and Teaching

“…Significant interactions were also obtained when students were matched to instructional environments in terms of cognitive complexity (Miller, 1981). Furthermore, recent evidence suggests that matching students and teachers in cognitive style can influence achievement, sometimes positively for field-dependent students but negatively for field-independent students and sometimes the reverse.…”

Matching Teachers' and Students' Cognitive Styles

“…Theoretical and experimental studies confirm the advantages and/ or disadvantages of using matching strategies. Miller (1981) discusses in detail the complexities of the match/mismatch propositions. Nevertheless, until more research evidence challenges these propositions, the data from the studies discussed must be treated as a caveat before any generalisations are made.…”

A Family Counselor Practicum Based on a Deliberate Psychological Education Model

“…These counselor behaviors include greater empathic communication (Benack, 1988), more complex hypothesis formation (Holloway & Wolleat, 1980), the ability to be more thoughtful and deliberative and autonomous with increased valuing of dialogue (McAuliffe, 2000), and higher tolerance of ambiguity, thus displaying more openness to considering alternative perspectives of clients' problems (Neukrug & McAuliffe, 1993). Miller (1981) performed an analysis of more than 60 studies on cognitive complexity and concluded that higher levels of conceptual development were related both to enhanced abilities to process information and to a greater internal locus of control. Pratt (1998) found that therapists at higher developmental levels had a more differentiated rather than a projective empathy (based on understanding of the client's experiences as opposed to the therapist's assumptions) with clients and could more effectively set limits, confront clients in a therapeutic manner, take responsibility for their own feelings, and articulate a theory of termination.…”