Skip to main content

Instructors hold varying degrees of beliefs about their learning and their teaching prowess (Palmer 2009). This variation in instructor beliefs has also been noticed by researchers who have tried to understand how instructors use strategies to motivate students (Brothy, 2013; Palmer, 2007; Windschitl et al, 2020). The Office of the Chief Scientist (2014) suggests that one of the ways in which the issue of students’ declining motivation for learning can be addressed is via an increased focus on instructors’ thought processes/beliefs. Instructors within the ADF face a similar challenge of motivating students to learn due to the prior assumptions that they possess in a given context. As such, it is vital to understand how and where instructors’ beliefs originate from so that we can better motivate students to learn.

Instructors’ beliefs concerning facilitating subjects have been among the most researched educational subjects since the 1980s (Samuel & Ogunkola, 2015; Voet et al, 2019). Many education researchers have attributed the rise in the focus on instructors’ beliefs and cognition to the expansion of research paradigms that occurred in the late 20th century (Alexander & Dochy, 1995; Fang, 1996). By the 1980s, Ravich (1990) claimed that the US education system had a series of adverse reports that pushed educators and researchers to investigate the possible influences of instructors’ beliefs on learning and pedagogical strategies used in the classroom. Education researchers continued to attribute that the focus on instructors’ beliefs and shift in social psychology in the late 20th century was due to a change from what educationists call an affective, or emotionally engaging, orientation to a cognitive orientation (Richardson, 1996). This shift to the cognitive orientation brought to light the importance of instructors’ cognition in the teaching process.

Researchers such as Schon (1983) and Clark and Peterson (1986) suggested that not only should instructors’ cognition be investigated, but instructors’ beliefs about the nature of learning and teaching should be converted into action. Clark and Peterson classified the teaching process into two major domains: (1) Instructors’ thought processes; and (2) Instructors’ actions and their observable effects. This classification clarified that instructors’ beliefs should be an integral part of the teaching-learning process to inform pedagogical practices and learning in the classroom.

An individual’s belief system is defined as a set of psychologically based understandings, premises and propositions that the individual has about the world that he/she feels to be true (Richardson, 1996). Humans are born with their senses to assimilate and accommodate data from the environment about phenomena. People can adapt information received from the natural and social world into their cognitive schema to develop their belief systems. This definition illustrates that one’s belief about phenomena is of paramount importance to one’s social-cognitive development. However, the aforementioned definition of belief suggests the term connotes that those beliefs involve more than just developing one’s understanding or perceptions about phenomena. The definition of belief means that it is a human trait and consists of a person’s beliefs and trying to differentiate themself from the world by finding and developing systems of meanings about events occurring in the environment, natural or human-made (Samuel & Ogunkola, 2013).

The question now arises as to how beliefs compare with other cognitive processes of individuals. Over the years, many researchers have investigated the nature of beliefs and knowledge (Alexandra & Sinatra, 2007; Boldrin & Mason, 2009; Nespor, 1987; Nisbett & Ross, 1980; Pajeres, 1992). Some of these researchers, for example, Boldrin and Mason, conceptualised knowledge as being composed of an evaluative component, whereas other researchers purported that beliefs are formed due to an affective process (Nespor, 1987; Pajeres, 1992). Some other researchers believed that knowledge was a cognitive outcome of thought, and a person’s belief was the affective outcome of his/her thought processes (Halpern, 2013). Samuel and Ogunkola (2013) support this idea by Halpern (2013) by claiming that beliefs are uncertain and unproven personal truths that objective evidence may not support. Samuel and Ogunkola also claim that there is a line of thought in which beliefs and knowledge are regarded as being indistinguishable because both concepts are justified ‘According to objective, rational criteria [and] may also have subjective, affective and evaluative components’ (p. 45). Moreover, Boldrin and Mason (2009) proposed that knowledge may involve the affective domain and that beliefs may also involve some level of cognition.

Within the ADF, contextual understanding of instructors’ belief origins plays a major role in how members receive education/training. This understanding informs the method by which instructional content is written, delivered and reviewed. To the extent that beliefs are a contributing foundational aspect to one’s proficiency, and thus a limiting factor, training outcome analysis can determine the type of fundamental inputs to capability (FIC) resources that training schools have access to if the compounding effect of contributory factors is to enhance the cornerstone of military employment.

From this discourse on the conceptions of beliefs, the concept of belief is difficult to conceptualise. It can be noted that although the concepts, beliefs and knowledge may be difficult to operationalise, researchers have agreed that both concepts are dependent on each other. Furthermore, they are dependent on the wider natural and social world (Tondeur et al, 2017). As such, Richardson’s (1996) definition of beliefs as a set of psychologically based understandings, premises and propositions that an individual has about the world was adopted as the primary definition throughout this article. Additionally, as it pertains to this article, the definition of beliefs provided by Fang (1996)—being a person’s construction of reality they think as being accurate enough to guide their thoughts and behaviours—was considered. Kagan (1992) argues the study of beliefs is critical to education by asserting that ‘… the more one reads studies of Instructors’ beliefs, the more strongly one suspects that this piebald of personal knowledge lies at the very heart of teaching’ (p 329).

Bibliography

Alexander, PA & Dochy, FJ. (1995). Conceptions of knowledge and beliefs: A comparison across varying cultural and educational communities. American Educational Research Journal, 32(2), 413-442.

Alexander, PA & Sinatra, GM. (2007). First steps: Scholars’ promising movements into a nascent field of inquiry. In S Vosniadou, A Baltas & X Vamvakoussi (Eds), Reframing the problem of conceptual change in learning and Instruction (pp. 221–236). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Press.

Boldrin, A & Mason, L. (2009). Distinguishing between knowledge and beliefs: Students’ epistemic criteria for differentiating. Instructional Science, 37(2), 107.

Brophy, JE. (2013). Motivating students to learn. Routledge.

Clark, CM & Peterson, P. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. Handbook of Research on Teaching, 255-296.

Fang, Z. (1996). A review of research on teacher beliefs and practices. Educational research, 38(1), 47-65.

Kagan, DM. (1992). Implication of research on teacher belief. Educational psychologist, 27(1), 65-90.

Nespor, J. (1987). The role of beliefs in the practice of teaching. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 19(4), 317-328. doi:10.1080/0022027870190403.

Nisbett, RE & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings of social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Office of the Chief Scientist (2014). Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics: Australia’s Future. Australian Government, Canberra.

Pajares, MF. (1992). Teachers’ beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy construct. Review of Educational Research, 62(3), 307-332.

Palmer, DH. (2009). Student interest generated during an inquiry skills lesson. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 46(2), 147-165.

Palmer, D. (2007). What is the best way to motivate students in science? Teaching Science, 53(1), 38-42.

Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. Handbook of research on teacher education, 2, 102-119.

Samuel, DF & Ogunkola, BJ. (2013). St Lucian Elementary School Teachers’ Applicability Beliefs and Beliefs about Science Teaching and Learning: Relevance to Their Level of Inquiry-Based Instructional Practices in Science. International Education Studies, 6(7), 48-65.

Samuel, DF & Ogunkola, BJ. (2015). Elementary School Teachers’ Epistemological Beliefs as Predictors of Their Inquiry-Based Practices in Science Instruction. International Journal of Elementary Education, 4, 101-112.

Schon, DA. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York.

Tondeur, J; Van Braak, J; Ertmer, A & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. (2017). Understanding the relationship between teachers’ pedagogical beliefs and technology use in education: a systematic review of qualitative evidence. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65(3), 555-575.

Voet, M & De Wever, B (2019). Teachers’ adoption of inquiry-based learning activities: The importance of beliefs about education, the self, and the context. Journal of Teacher Education, 70(5), 423-440.

Windschitl, M; Thompson, J & Braaten, M. (2020). Ambitious science teaching. Harvard Education Press.

20
Cite Article
Harvard
APA
Footnote
RIS
(Dahl and Jean-Baptiste, 2024)
Dahl, L.J. and Jean-Baptiste, D.. 2024. 'How Instructors’ Beliefs Originate and Its Implications for Training in the ADF'. Available at: https://theforge.defence.gov.au/article/how-instructors-beliefs-originate-and-its-implications-training-adf (Accessed: 11 December 2024).
(Dahl & Jean-Baptiste, 2024)
Dahl, L.J. & Jean-Baptiste, D.. 2024. 'How Instructors’ Beliefs Originate and Its Implications for Training in the ADF'. Available at: https://theforge.defence.gov.au/article/how-instructors-beliefs-originate-and-its-implications-training-adf (Accessed: 11 December 2024).
Laura Jean Dahl and Davis Jean-Baptiste, "How Instructors’ Beliefs Originate and Its Implications for Training in the ADF", The Forge, Published: November 26, 2024, https://theforge.defence.gov.au/article/how-instructors-beliefs-originate-and-its-implications-training-adf. (accessed December 11, 2024).
Download a RIS file to use in your citation management tools.
Defence Technical Social

Technical Mastery

Advanced Specialisation tech-ecat-level2

Social Mastery

Character Role Model social-character-level3
Character Role Model social-character-level3

Comments

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Department of Defence or the Australian Government.

This web site is presented by the Department of Defence for the purpose of disseminating information for the benefit of the public.

The Department of Defence reviews the information available on this web site and updates the information as required.

However, the Department of Defence does not guarantee, and accepts no legal liability whatsoever arising from or connected to, the accuracy, reliability, currency or completeness of any material contained on this web site or on any linked site.

The Department of Defence recommends that users exercise their own skill and care with respect to their use of this web site and that users carefully evaluate the accuracy, currency, completeness and relevance of the material on the web site for their purposes.

 

Related Articles

1 /4