chapter  17
Interacting Epistemic Systems within and Beyond the Classroom
Pages 14

My first exposure to Perry’s (1968) work hit me like a lightning bolt. At the time, while I was not so naïve as to think that students’ personal epistemology was the sole determinant of their success in education, the model did align with my experience that some students just seemed more critical, with more sophisticated understandings of concepts, than others. I thought that if educators made personal epistemology development an explicit goal, then students would be more likely to display the kinds of argumentation (Iordanou, Kendeou, & Beker, 2016/this volume) and logical reasoning (Moshman & Tarricone, 2016/this volume) needed for high-level comprehension and critical-analytic thinking (Murphy & Alexander, 2016/this volume) across contexts. With time, the literature on epistemic cognition became more and more complex, with the introduction of multiple dimensions on which students could vary (Hofer & Pintrich, 1997; Schommer, 1990), domain-differences in epistemological understanding (Buehl, Alexander, & Murphy, 2002; Kuhn, Cheney, & Weinstock, 2000; Muis, Bendixen, & Haerle, 2006), useful but challenging insights from philosophical epistemology (Chinn, Buckland, & Samarapungavan; Murphy, Alexander, Greene, & Edwards, 2007), and empirical evidence of connections with other psychological phenomena (Hofer, 2016/this volume; Sinatra, Kienhues, & Hofer, 2014).