Using Popper’s Philosophy of Science to Build Pre-Service Teachers’ Knowledge

2017

IJEM

Self Cite

Purpose Through a series of critical discussions on Karl Popper’s evolutionary analysis of learning and the non-authoritarian values it promotes, the purpose of this paper is to advocate a Popperian approach for building medical student knowledge. Specifically, it challenges positivist assumptions that permeate the design and management of many educational institutions, including teaching hospitals, by considering what does and does not happen when learning takes place. Design/methodology/approach To illustrate how Popper’s approach differs from such a conception of learning, the paper examines the exchange between a preceptor (Sam) and a medical student (Lisa). The following exchange is based on the observations during a team meeting in a Canadian teaching hospital. The authors sent the transcript of the observation to Lisa for her comments. The statements in italics represent Lisa’s additions. Pseudonyms are used to protect the identity of participants in the exchange. Findings Popper’s evolutionary analysis of learning and the Objective Knowledge Growth Framework provide a means of managing specific aspects of one’s education through engaging in this learning process. Although this approach to teaching and decision making takes time to master, it does not require reconstituting existing institutional arrangements before it can be implemented in hospitals. Instead, it asks medical students, teachers and practitioners to be open to the theoretical underpinnings of the approach and to view knowledge growth as a process of systematic trial and error elimination. Originality/value This paper is original in its conceptualisation and may well become a classic in education circles. It draws on Popper’s philosophical arguments and enters into a much needed discourse for teaching and learning.

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Questioning clerkship: applying Popper’s evolutionary analysis of learning to medical student training

2017

IJEM

Self Cite

“…Each strategy, generated through joint interactions, which is then employed as a resolution becomes bolder and sharper in empirical content. Additionally, the OKGF is cost-effective and relatively easy to implement – as illustrated by the study conducted with a group of principals from an Eastern Ontario School Board, Canada, who demonstrated how they resolved organizational problems using the OKGF (Chitpin, 2015; Simon et al , 2010), as well as a Social Sciences Humanities Research Council of Canada-funded study with pre-service teachers on assessment issues (Chitpin, 2010, 2016; Chitpin and Evers, 2012).…”

Section: The Objective Knowledge Growth Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Decision making, distributed leadership and the objective knowledge growth framework

2019

IJEM

Self Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to know the extent to which a decision-making framework assists in providing holistic, comprehensive descriptions of strategies used by school leaders engaging with distributed leadership practices. The process by which principals and other education leaders interact various school-based actors to arrive at a distributed decision-making process is addressed through this paper. The position taken suggests that leadership does not reside solely with principals or other education leaders, but sustains the view that the actions of various actors within a school setting contribute to fuller and more comprehensive accounts of distributed leadership. Design/methodology/approach While the application of rational/analytical approaches to organizational problems or issues can lead to effective decisions, dilemmas faced by principals are often messy, complex, ill-defined and not easily resolved through algorithmic reason or by the application of rules, as evidenced by the two stories provided by Agnes, a third-year principal in a small countryside elementary school in a small northeastern community, and by John, a novice principal in a suburb of a large Southwestern metropolitan area. Findings The value of the objective knowledge growth framework (OKGF) process is found in its ability to focus Agnes’s attention on things that she may have overlooked, such as options she might have ignored or information that she might have resisted or accepted, as well as innumerable preparations she might have neglected had she not involved all the teachers in her school. Research limitations/implications The implementation of the OKGF may appear, occasionally, to introduce unnecessary points along this route and may not be laboriously applied to all decision-making situations. However, the instinctively pragmatic solutions provided by this framework will often produce effective results. Therefore, in order to reduce potentially irrational outcomes, the systematic approach employed by the OKGF is preferable. The OKGF must be managed, implemented and sustained locally if it is to provide maximum benefits to educational decision makers. Practical implications Given the principals’ changing roles, it is abundantly clear that leadership practice can no longer involve just one person, by necessity, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to imagine how things could have been accomplished otherwise. Expecting the principal to single-handedly lead efforts to improve instruction is impractical, particularly when leadership may be portrayed as what school principals do, especially when other potential sources of leadership have been ignored or treated as secondary or unimportant because that leadership has not emanated from the principal’s office (Spillane, 2006). In this paper, the authors have striven to reveal how a perspective of distributed leadership, when used in conjunction with the objective knowledge growth framework, can be effective in assisting principals in resolving problems of practice. Social implications Different school leaders of varying status within the educative organization benefit from obtaining different answers to similar issues, as evidenced by John’s and Agnes’s leadership tangles. Lumby and English (2009) differentiate between “routinization” and “ritualization.” They argue, “They are not the same. The former erases the need for human agency while the latter requires it” (p. 112). The OKGF process, therefore, cannot provide school leaders with the “right” answers to their educative quandaries, simply because any two school leaders, facing the same issues, may utilize differing theories, solutions, choices or options which may satisfy their issues in response to their own individual contextual factors. Similarly, in a busy day or week, school leaders may be inclined to take the shortest distance between two points in the decision-making process; problem identification to problem resolution. Originality/value Should the OKGF process empower decision makers to obtain sound resolutions to their educative issues by assisting them in distancing themselves from emotions or confirmation biases that may distract them from resolving school problems, its use will have been worthwhile.

“…Life is complex and, often times, multiple forces exert their influences upon us and, hence, it becomes difficult to figure out exactly how each of these forces shapes our behaviour. In order to understand how these forces exert influence on our behaviour, this paper proposes a Popperian framework, which I have previously used with educators as both a professional development and a decision-making model (Chitpin, 2015; Chitpin and Evers, 2012). It examines how educators solve their problems of practice using the Popper’s critical approach in new or uncertain situations with available information at hand.…”

Section: How a Fire Led To A Study Of Irrationalitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Overcoming irrationality: the Popperian approach

2017

IJEM

Self Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how associationism mistakenly assumes that direct experience is possible; that is, there is expectation-free observation and association without prior expectation. Thus, associationism assumes that learning involves the absorption of information from the environment itself. However, contrary arguments take the position that, for an individual to make a connection between his/her behaviour and its consequence(s), he/she must first have an expectation in order for a connection to be made. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses a personal experience to illustrate how implicit assumptions and unstated expectations can be found in the corporate world. It offers to answer questions that will lead to an examination of overcoming irrationality through utilization of the Popperian philosophy of associationism. Findings When evaluating a practice, it is easier to find evidence of some sort to support the practice, especially if we are either disposed to do so or if our colleagues and organizations have recommended that we adopt these practices. However, if we are committed to genuinely improving our practice, Swann (2009) suggests that we become critical and ask, “What are the unintended and undesirable consequences of doing things this way?” (p. 8). Research limitations/implications Popper’s approach needs to be developed or learned through stages and with time. We need to be aware that it takes time to master the use of this approach. Merely introducing or having organizations learn the different methods or short cuts have only a limited effect in improving their ability to deal with issues in different contexts. Practical implications The examples used throughout this paper illustrate that the adoption of Popper’s approach does not necessarily require large-scale experiments. In fact, a well-conducted case study can be effective in casting doubt on existing assumptions. Regardless of the nature of the research strategy and the scale of the experiment devised to test a hypothesis, the task of testing can and will be problematic. Social implications Expectations can make us look foolish from time to time, but they can also be very powerful or useful because they are more than mere anticipation. If we are unable to strip away our preconceptions or prior knowledge, we can at least acknowledge our biases and, in doing so, we may not continue to be trapped within our own perspectives, which can blind us to the truth. Originality/value The examples used in this paper illustrate that Popper’s approach is robust and applicable in a variety of contexts and is not limited to educational organizations. Furthermore, it showcases our irrationality, and helps us understand when and where we may make erroneous decisions.