Teaching Strategies, Modes of Evaluation, and Field-Dependence Factor

Provost, Guy

doi:10.2466/pms.1981.52.1.163

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While the instructional treatment had no overall effect, and did not interact with cognitive style, field-independent students were found once again to perform more effectively. A similar result was found by Provost (1981). Two teaching strategies were used, one which allowed the learner to adopt a passive approach, the other required an active participant approach.…”

Section: How Teachers Teachmentioning

confidence: 49%

Learning implications of field dependence‐independence: Cognitive style versus cognitive ability

McKenna

1990

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The relationship between field dependence-independence and learning has been the subject of much research. In particular it has been suggested that matching teachers aKd students on cognitive style may produce beneficial results. Much research has also related cognitive style to the way students learn, the way teachers teach, and the way students make choices and perform in various academic areas. While cognitive style has provided the theoretical framework, it is found upon re-examination that a contrasting interpretation in terms of cognitive ability is readily applicable.The application of cognitive style research to a variety of learning and vocational situations has now received a good deal of attention (Witkin, 1976, Witkin, Moore, Goodenough andCox, 1977a). Given the considerable influence and widespread implications of this work it is important that the interpretations offered are examined thoroughly. One of the factors which has been considered to be important in field dependence-independence research, particularly in the educational field, has been the concept of cognitive style. Two major approaches to a definition of cognitive style have been offered (Kogan, 1973;Messick, 1976). The major feature in each of these is the contrast between cognitive style and ability. For example, values are attached to abilities but not to cognitive styles. Thus, when considering an ability one end of the dimension is valued while the other is not. This is not true of cognitive styles, for which neither end of the dimension is regarded as better or more adaptive. Witkin et al. (1977a) consider this factor makes cognitive style much less threatening than an ability such as intelligence. It is also argued that while ability is concerned with the effectiveness of performance, style is concerned with the manner of performance.While the concept of cognitive style has been considered central to field dependence-independence theory (Goodenough, 1978), the appropriateness of this position has been challenged by McKenna (1983McKenna ( , 1984 who argued that the measures defining field dependence-independence do not justify as measures of cognitive style and are more appropriately viewed as measures of cognitive ability. As Messick (1979) has noted, measures of ability have had a long and important history in educational practice since they are related to school achievement and are useful in diagnosing learning strengths and weaknesses and planning instructions 0888-4080/90/060425-13$06.50

show abstract

Section: How Teachers Teachmentioning

confidence: 49%

Learning implications of field dependence‐independence: Cognitive style versus cognitive ability

McKenna

1990

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Ferguson (1992) found that field-independent subjects studying fine arts at university achieved better grade point average or GPA and better appreciation of their own artistic ability than field-dependent subjects. Provost (1981) distributed self-learning material on FORTRAN programming to 115 university students. The material comprised of a) texts for passive reading and b) sets of questions involving application of rules presented in lectures.…”

Section: Fdi and Achievement In Other Curriculum Areasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This dimension is now conceived as distinct from (though clearly related to) that which is manifested in tests of perception of the upright. In these tests, confidence in internal references is translated into recurring to postural cues where confidence in external references leads to a preference of visual cues (Witkin & Goodenough, 1977, 1981Witkin, Goodenough, & Oltman, 1979).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Field dependence-independence cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory

Tinajero

Páramo

1998

Eur J Psychol Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Field dependence-independence was originally conceived as a neutral style dimension, in that field-dependent subjects were considered to be as well-adapted to their environment as field--independent subjects. Subsequent authors, however, questioned this assumption ofneutrality, on the grounds thatfield-independent subjects generally perform better in certain intellectual tasks. Such findings provoked interest in the possible repercussions offield dependenceindependencefor education. Here, we review research into the possible effects of FDI on achievement at school. In general, field-independent subjects perform better than field-dependent subjects, whether assessment is of specific disciplines or across the board. We discuss possible explanationsfor this difference in performance.The earliest research into cognitive styles was carried out by members of the "New Look" movement, a group of psychologists who were concerned that traditional models of perception placed insufficient emphasis on the individual. In the course of research into the contribution o:fvisual and postural cues to perception of the vertical, Asch (1948a, 1948b) found that some subjects consistently tended to use only one or another type of cue. Subjects who used visual cues were designated "field-dependent", while those who used postural (i.e., vestibular, tactile and kinesthetic) cues were designated "field-independent". In its earliest formulation, field dependence-independence (FDI) was conceived as a visual--postural dimension specifically relating to perception of the vertical.More general interpretations were soon to follow. The task developed by Witkin began to be viewed as a measure of the subject's ability to perceive individual elements within an organized perceptual field: according to this point of view, field-independent subjects are those with a greater capacity to break perceptual information down into its component parts and to focus attention on those parts which are relevant, without being distracted by the context. In contrast, field-dependent subjects are those with a greater difficulty to disembed parts from This review was supported by a grant from the Xunta de Galicia, XUGA 21106A91.

show abstract

“…As Provost (1981) suggests, one reason for this difference is that field independents employ more effective cognitive strategies in reading than field dependents. Field independents seem to be more able to use the full range of cues available in the text.…”

Section: Fd/i and Wordsmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…Wilcox, Richards, and Merrill (1977) looked at high school students while Provost (1981) and Smith and Standal (1981) considered the FD/I influence on college students. In all three studies the field independents consistently outperformed the field dependents on a variety of general reading tasks under various experimental conditions.…”

Section: Fd/i and Overall Reading Performancementioning

confidence: 98%

Field Dependent/Independent Cognitive Style Research Revisited: Do Field Dependent Readers Read Differently Than Field Independent Readers?

Rasinski¹

1984

Reading Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teaching Strategies, Modes of Evaluation, and Field-Dependence Factor

Cited by 8 publications

References 11 publications

Learning implications of field dependence‐independence: Cognitive style versus cognitive ability

Learning implications of field dependence‐independence: Cognitive style versus cognitive ability

Field dependence-independence cognitive style and academic achievement: A review of research and theory

Field Dependent/Independent Cognitive Style Research Revisited: Do Field Dependent Readers Read Differently Than Field Independent Readers?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About