Cognitive style and educational performance. The case of public schools in Bogotá, Colombia

Author(s):

Christian Hederich(presenting / submitting)Angela Camargo

Conference:

ECER 2017

Network:

09. Assessment, Evaluation, Testing and Measurement

Format:

Paper

Session Information

09 SES 07 B, Creativity Development, Cognitive Styles and Financial Literacy

Paper Session

Time:

2017-08-23

17:15-18:45

Room:

W5.18

Chair:

Marjeta Doupona

Contribution

Educational performance assessment, done by means of large scale standardized performance tests (PISA type of evaluation), and everyday pedagogical evaluations, made by teachers in classrooms, coexist in the educational system with similar contents, but with different goals and dynamics. The similarities and differences between these two sources of information about students’ learning achievements have not been completely understood.

We think that the explanation for the discrepancies in levels of educational performance between these two assessment modalities may have to do with a well-developed psychological construct: the concept of ‘cognitive style’ (Riding, 2000). Some authors have found that the use of this theoretical lens has important advantages for the study of educational performance (Tinajero, Lemos, Araujo, Ferraces, &Páramo, 2012; Tinajero & Páramo, 1997, 1998).

Understood as ‘a distinct and consistent way for an individual to encode, store and perform’ (Atkinson, 2004, p. 663), cognitive style has clear connections with educational performance, via school learning. This study is focused on one cognitive style dimension that has been the most frequently used in educational research: the field dependence-independence (FDI) dimension, developed by Herman Witkin and his colleagues. Recent formulations of FDI define it as a construct that entails individual differences in the preference for internal or external referents; preference that manifests itself in a wide range of behavioural domains including perception, cognition, social behaviour and affection (Witkin & Goodenough, 1981).

Witkin’s formulations of the FDI dimension emphasised its neutral value; which means that both, field-independent (FI) and field-dependent (FD) individuals, are equally well adapted to the demands of the environment; even though the modes of adaptation are clearly different. In general, most of the studies have found better educational achievement indicators for FI students in almost all areas, including Language (Paramo & Tinajero, 1990), Mathematics (Van Blerkom, 1988), Natural Sciences (Arthur & Day, 1991), Social Sciences (Bowlin, 1988), Foreign Language (Chapelle & Roberts, 1986), Music (Schmidt & Lewis, 1987), Arts (Fergusson, 1992) and Computer Programming (Coventry, 1989). In some cases, the associations stop being significant when intelligence is controlled (Roberge & Flexer, 1981); even though in other studies differences remain, always in favour of FI students, after intelligence is controlled (Tinajero & Páramo, 1997)

Method

Information was gathered about 3003 students from grades 8 (50.1%) and 10 (49.9%), ages 14 to 17 years old, who, by the time of the study, were attending public schools in Bogotá, Colombia. For each student information was collected about his/her educational performance scores in three standardized tests, administered by the City Office of Education, for the areas of Mathematics, Language and Natural Science, and four evaluations made by his/her teachers of the areas of Mathematics, Language, Natural Sciences and Social Studies (seven scores). In addition, information was gathered about each student’s demographic characteristics (age, sex, family size, socioeconomic level, etc.), his/her school profile (school history and behaviour), his/her attitudes towards certain school subjects and his/her cognitive style (in the FDI dimension).

Expected Outcomes

The examination of the relationships among the different educational performance indicators was done by means of an analysis of multiple correspondences. The results show strong and clear associations, linked to the type of assessment (standardized tests or teachers’ evaluations). All three standardized tests are clearly related to each other, and so it happens with all four teachers’ evaluations. Additionally, a classification analysis, using the individuals’ factorial scores from the multiple correspondences analysis, was done. The results of the classification analysis show the appropriateness of considering four different groups of students that express the similarities and differences between the two types of evaluations: in two of these groups the evaluations agree in identifying students with high achievements and students with low achievements and in two of the other groups the evaluations contradicted themselves: the students that exhibited high achievements in one of them are the ones that showed low achievements in the other, and vice versa. In general, the analysis of the educational performance groups points to different types of successes and different types of failures for most students. While, for many students, achievement becomes visible by means of the standardized tests, in another dimension, these same students are nor well adapted to the school institution. On the other hand, while another group of students show success in their school trajectory and according to their students, standardized tests indicate that their learning is limited. In this relationships net, cognitive style appears to play an important role as an indicator of cultural and cognitive differences associated to educational performance.

References

Atkinson, S. (2004). A comparison of pupil learning and achievement in computer aided learning and traditionally taught situations with special reference to cognitive style and gender issues. Educational Psychology, 24, 659–679. Páramo, M. F., & Tinajero, C. (1992). Influencia de la estructura normative familiar sobre el estilo cognitivo dependencia-independencia de campo: un estudio prospective [A prospective study on the influence of family environment structure on field dependenceindependence cognitive style]. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 15, 89–98. Riding, R. (2000). Cognitive style: A review. In R. Riding & S. Rayner (Eds.), International perspectives in individual differences. Volume 1: Cognitive styles (pp. 315–344). Stamford, CT: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Roberge, J. J., & Flexer, B. K. (1981). Re-examination of the covariation of field independence, intelligence and achievement. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 235–236. Tinajero, C., & Páramo, M. F. (1997). Field dependence-independence and academic achievement: A re-examination of their relationship. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 67, 199–212. Tinajero, C., & Páramo, M. F. (1998). Field dependence-independence and strategic learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 29, 251–262. Tinajero, C., Lemos, S., Araujo, M., Ferraces, M., & Páramo, M. (2012). Estilo cognitivo e estrategias de aprendizagem em estudantes universitarios brasileiros: repercussoes no rendimento academico [Cognitive style and learning strategies as factors which affect academic achievement of brazilian university students]. Psicologia: Reflexao & Critica, 25, 105–113. Witkin, H., & Goodenough, D. (1981). Estilos Cognitivos. Naturaleza y orígenes [Cognitive styles. Essence and origins]. Madrid: Ediciones Pirámide.

Author Information

Christian Hederich (presenting / submitting)

Universidad Pedagógica Nacional

Psicopedagogía

Bogotá

Angela Camargo