{"id":2472,"date":"2007-05-22T10:02:00","date_gmt":"2007-05-22T10:02:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/learnhub.aucegypt.edu\/cltnewsletter\/?p=2472"},"modified":"2026-10-20T10:02:32","modified_gmt":"2026-10-20T10:02:32","slug":"better-thinkers-better-futures-2-the-perry-model-dualism-1","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/learnhub.aucegypt.edu\/cltnewsletter\/?p=2472","title":{"rendered":"\u201cBetter Thinkers, Better Futures\u201d (2) The Perry Model: Dualism [1]"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Originally published on:<\/strong> May 22, 2007<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The very first time I walked in class to teach \u201cScientific Thinking\u201d, I asked my students what they had heard about the course. One of the students responded that he heard that everything we learn in science turns out to be eventually false. His body language indicated that this was certainly not a good thing, and that \u201cScientific Thinking\u201d may be a waste of time. Two semesters later in another class, after we had we discussed Popper\u2019s falsification theory, (i.e.  that a scientific hypothesis has to be falsifiable and that no amount of experimentation can prove a scientific theory to be \u201ctrue\u201d) another student made the remark that since science is always \u201cchanging\u201d and that what we know today will be proven wrong tomorrow, then we have to rely on our religion to find the answers we look for (it was said, if I remember correctly, in the context of a situation where one is faced with conflicting arguments).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These are representative of the kind of thinking that Perry has classified as the \u201cdualistic\u201d stage.  Dualistic thinking is characterized by the certainty that there are right or wrong answers\/solutions to every problem and that these answers\/solutions are known to \u201cauthorities\u201d.<\/strong> The \u201cgood\u201d instructor is seen as one of these authorities who helps them find, or provides them with, the \u201cright\u201d answers, even to open ended problems that do not have absolutely correct answers. He\/she is the source of knowledge and is therefore expected to convey the facts.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In addition, W. Pierce (1998) recognizes in all of us hidden psychological barriers to clear thinking such as ego defenses and\/or \u201cenculturation\u201d (i.e. \u201cthe process of acquiring the basic beliefs and values of one\u2019s culture\u201d).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We should therefore not be surprised when students entering college feel uncomfortable when confronted with ideas or perspectives that challenge their cherished beliefs and\/or their sense of identity. The student whose religious upbringing prepares him\/her to think that science and religion are incompatible may be uncomfortable with the notion that \u201cabsolute\u201d truth does not have a place in science. When push comes to shove, he\/she will retreat to the security of belief be it cultural, religious, or political. When prodded to search for different perspectives, the realization that several \u201cauthorities\u201d are in conflict adds to the uneasiness.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

So how do we help students move away from dualistic thinking to Perry\u2019s \u201cmultiplicity\u201d stage?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Kloss (1994), who has found Perry\u2019s scheme very helpful, has devised pedagogical strategies to help university students become critical thinkers.  For students who think in dualistic ways his recommendations include the following: <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n