Epistemology Quiz

[Bravus]

I made this: http://quizfarm.com/test.php?q_id=12663&first=yes

[Planey]

personal constructivist ..67%

social constructionist... 67%

social constructivist ....53%

objectivist ..............50%

I have no idea what these results mean (no knowledge lol) but it seems that perhaps I am Laodicean.

Graeme

[Gregory Matthews]

So, this is how I scored:

personal constructivist 77%

objectivist 70%

social constructivist 63%

social constructionist 60%

I do not know what this means.

I do suspect that it does not have a hight degree of reliability. I made major changes in my answers as I was taking the test.

I would be interested to learn how validity was determined.

[cricket]

personal constructivist

73%

social constructivist

67%

objectivist

50%

social constructionist

33%

[Bravus]

Heh, validity is an objectivist construct, Gregory - as a personal constructivist you should be beyond it! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Frankly, this was just me goofing around while I waited for my daughter to phone to be picked up. There are definitely gaps and overlaps in the questions: making up 10 discrete items for each of 4 scales taxed the old brain.

I do think it'll be interesting to find out where people's beliefs about knowledge lie: I might have expected more objectivists in a faith community, so I hope a few more people will be willing to complete it.

If it helps, think about it as a continuum:

objectivist <---> personal constructivist <---> social constructivist <---> social constructionist

(It would actually be better thought of as a Cartesian plain with a personal/social axis and an objectivist/constructionist axis, but that's a bit more complex.)

So at the left of that continuum, knowledge is seen as being extremely independent of the human mind, and at the right as being totally dependent on the human mind (well, *some* kind of conscious mind) and incapable of existing without it. From left to right also the degree to which you see knowledge as shared and communal, versus individual, increases.

Personal constructivists (everyone so far) see knowledge as personal - what I know is mine, and I made it - and as an individual construction: two people might construct different knowledge from the same experience.

[Neil D]

You scored as personal constructivist. Personal constructivists believe that knowledge is constructed by learners, rather than transmitted by teachers. They believe that learning is an individual process of coming to understand the world.

Well, now I know.....and now YOU know about what I know....

[Bravus]

You scored as social constructionist. Social constructionists believe knowledge is constructed in learning communities. They believe the knowledge resides, not in the individual, but in the collective - groups, not individuals, know and learn.

social constructionist 84%

personal constructivist 73%

social constructivist 70%

objectivist 10%

[_david]

You scored as social constructivist.

Social constructivists share the belief with personal constructivists that knowledge is constructed rather than directly transmitted from one person to another. They believe, though, that we learn in collaboration and discussion with one another, rather than in isolation.

social constructivist 77%

personal constructivist 67%

objectivist 63%

social constructionist 33%

i still don't understand nothing. my heads hurts now. besides my brain shut down around 9:15a on Friday (explains my quizzes for the rest of the days classes)

[NormF]

OK, Bravus, here's you a new one. I scored:

objectivist - 70%

personal constructivist - 67%

social constructionist - 50%

social constructivist - 30%

To me, the construction of the quiz didn't seem to match your description of the continuum. Your parenthetical description as a Cartesian plane does seem closer to what I understood epistemology to be about. Your questions, on the other hand, seemed to be of two types - what's the stuff of knowledge, and how is that stuff acquired?

As an independent, lone-wolf type (or so I consider myself), those questions about, "did I acquire my knowledge socially?" were an impertinence at best, mostly forms of distraction. I guess I was expecting the questions to inherently suggest some answers to, "what is knowledge?" in the process of being asked; which, for me, they didn't.

But then, let me ask you, as my professor, a social question. That's the way it felt to me; give me some feedback on your reaction to my response vis-à-vis my score.

Regards,

Norm

[NormF]

Forgot something ...

In essense, you made the tree-falling-in-the-forest distinction in the quiz's summary of objective knowledge when it evaluated my answers. For me, it falls/I hear it, but if it falls, with or without me, it falls - the crash is there. Objectiveness is the tree and its fall; that's an absolute, it's out there. Then along comes me and figures out: that is a tree, and it is falling, and I hear it. Perception of its objectiveness and of me, my presence, and my perceptiveness in the here-and-now constitute my connection to reality. Perception may not be knowledge, but it's only a hair's breadth away.

That take probably skewed my answers to the questions some, too, nicht wahr?

Norm

[Nicodema]

Mine (not that anyone cares):

You scored as personal constructivist.

Personal constructivists believe that knowledge is constructed by learners, rather than transmitted by teachers. They believe that learning is an individual process of coming to understand the world.

personal constructivist 70%

social constructivist 67%

social constructionist 53%

objectivist 50%

No surprises there -- just confirms that I live in my head, which everyone already knows.

[Amelia]

You scored as personal constructivist.

Personal constructivists believe that knowledge is constructed by learners, rather than transmitted by teachers. They believe that learning is an individual process of coming to understand the world.

personal constructivist - 70%

social constructivist - 60%

social constructionist - 60%

objectivist - 47%

[:"blue"] Bravus, I hate to admit this, but even after taking the test and reading the results, I still have no idea what you are talking about.(waving my hand way over my head) [/]

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

For me, it falls/I hear it, but if it falls, with or without me, it falls - the crash is there. Objectiveness is the tree and its fall; that's an absolute, it's out there. Then along comes me and figures out: that is a tree, and it is falling, and I hear it. Perception of its objectiveness and of me, my presence, and my perceptiveness in the here-and-now constitute my connection to reality. Perception may not be knowledge, but it's only a hair's breadth away.

---

Well then this was not properly represented in the test or at least not accessibly so to me to answer because this is exactly how I think and I scored lowest in the "objectivist" category. Hmph.

[NormF]

How curious, Nico. We both think we think the same way. Yet when it came to the quiz, by the numbers, we jumped in opposite directions.

Hmph, indeed.

Frankly, my gut agrees with yours: our two heads work alike, yours and mine. Within my inner self, I believe we really do tend to think the same way. That is, if posts mean anything ...

Bravus, you started this; come back here and weigh in on it! Enlighten our confusion.

Regards,

Norm

[Bravus]

Sorry I didn't get back to respond to your questions a bit sooner, Norm and Nico - been running workshops for South African educators here yesterday, today and tomorrow that are keeping me pretty busy.

I think the quiz scored you correctly as an objectivist (or majority objectivist: one of the things I like about this quiz is that it acknowledges that we all have mixed perspectives on this stuff and shows the proportions). Basically the problem you identify is that there are ontological questions about the nature of reality intimately mixed in with the epistemological questions about knowledge. Whether the tree makes a sound in the forest is an ontological question, and the assumption you describe - that it does - is a realist assumption about ontology. That has implications for your epistemology but is slightly different.

You're probably close to being a personal constructivist like Nico, in that you firmly believe your knowledge construction is individual (impertinence, though, to even ask the question otherwise?), but what puts you further into the objectivist camp is that you believe that, given the same information, others will construct the same knowledge. In other words, it's possible to create an objective (or at least interobjective) description of reality by comparing and combining all our personal constructions of reality.

Personal constructivists don't hold that belief - they see the individual constructed knowledge as more idiosyncratic and owing more to the individual doing the constructing, so that it's impossible to arrive at a true account of the world by comparing constructions of it.

As I said, the quiz is not perfect, but as far as I can tell it does actually do a pretty reasonable job of distinguishing between the different perspectives.

Oh, and Amelia, absolutely definitely no intention to make anyone feel gone-over-the-head-of: it's all just for fun, and if it's not fun, please feel free to ignore rather than regret!

[Nicodema]

Quote:

---

Personal constructivists don't hold that belief - they see the individual constructed knowledge as more idiosyncratic and owing more to the individual doing the constructing, so that it's impossible to arrive at a true account of the world by comparing constructions of it.

---

I clearly did not understand the questions then, because this does not represent my thinking at all. I definitely think it comes closer to an objective take on the world to compare individual constructions of it than to remain isolated within one's own. This is what I call "reality checking" and it is indispensible to sanity as well as to getting along with other people to any degree (not that I'm any expert in that field!) @_@

[Gail]

personal constructivist 70%

objectivist 64%

social constructivist 63%

social constructionist 57%

Hmm... not very social, comparatively speaking. In other words, does this mean that if anyone gives me any information that I must pass it through my own mental process and make it my own before I use it? Because that is exactly what I tend to do

[Gail]

It was the name of the quiz which threw me. I immediately thought about one of those unpleasant childbirth things...

[Bravus]

lol - crossing my legs already...

[Amelia]

ROFL Gail, I actually had to read it a few times to make sure I wasnt really seeing episiotomy.

[Nicodema]

Eeesh.

[Bravus]

Epistemology is painless, it brings on many changes... <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

[NormF]

!!! /gasping/ /gasping/

!!! !!! ... oofff! ...

Please, let me catch my breath! Help, oh help! It's not safe to laugh this long without breathing!!

What a place is CA! Free college level instruction, and the greatest humor this side of the sun ... and all this in a single thread! Thank you, Bravus, et al.

Oh, mercy, mercy me! My poor aching [fl]abs. I may never recover ...

Bless you all,

Norm

P.S. No offense, ladies. My male-blindered eyes had never even recognized the possibility such a [mis]connection existed till now. (Yet another piece of freshly garnered knowledge.) My apologies. Bear with me.

[NormF]

Sorry, I just had a laugh attack. (... but it was all so priceless.)

[Guest]

personal constructivist - 77%

social constructionist - 73%

social constructivist - 70%

objectivist - 60%