Stages of Reflective Judgement

Reflective judgment is “one's ability to analyze critically multiple facets of a problem, reach an informed conclusion, and justify one's response as systematically as possible.” (Bruning, 148) Man, that quotes packs quite a punch when combined with the assertion by researchers Kitchener and King that this ability is measurable! If I were qualified to assess this ability, could I go up to my friend and say, “Yea, sorry dude, but you're level of reflective judgment is only a 1.1, and listening to you lowers my own reflective judgment score!” (But then again, do I lower my own score by saying such a thing!? This meta thinking can really bake your noodle!)

Ok, what the heck am I talking about? According the Kitchener and King, reflective judgment is a measurable attribute based on three criterion: certainty, process by which we acquire knowledge, and type of evidence. A person who thinks that knowledge is absolute, unchangeable, and doesn't scrutinize new information would score lower (this is referred to as “stage 1”) whereas some who thinks that knowledge is relative, constructed, and scrutinizes evidence would score higher (a level 6 or 7). In th middle, you would have someone who thinks knowledge is “uncertain” and “idiosyncratic:” someone in the middle is a bit wishy-washy about knowledge. Here, why don't I just list them from page 149.

1. Knowledge is unchanging, absolute, and accessible

2. Knowledge is certain but may not be accessible to everyone

3. Knowledge is certain, though it may be accessible to anyone

4. Knowledge is uncertain and idiosyncratic

5. Knowledge is uncertain, though contextually interpretable

6. Knowledge is relative yet justifiable on the basis of rational arguments

7. Knowledge is relative, though some interpretations have greater truth.

As I read this section of the chapter, I found myself saying, “Ooo, I think Person X is a stage 2 person!” or “I think Person Y is a stage 5!” I base this from my observations and reflection on past conversations with them. Of course, I turned it on myself, and I would say that I'm around a 5.5 to 6.5. Why? Is my ego that big? It might be..but it's all relative! (See! I do think knowledge is relative! Ha!) I can tell you that I have progressed through some of the earlier stages, but then again, are these stages contextual in of themselves?

Let me give an example of the former: I used to be very religious! Although I feel it was an important part of my development, I no longer am. My outlook on life was very stage 1-3 (I would say on the 2-3 side) because I believed the only relevant information for making choices in my life stemmed from the writings in the Bible. By the way, I don't equate all religious people as being “stuck” in stages 1-3, as I've known religious people to be in the latter stages. But I was stuck. When I was an upperclassman and came into contact with more diverse crowds, and exposed myself to new ideas, that I started to come out of my shell. It was not until my second year of grad school that I really embraced a stage 4 through 6 outlook: I guess all of those discussions about how an author supported their arguments by considering his or her sources really raised my consciousness.

However, are there certain things in my reflective judgment ability that are contextual (i.e. Lower?). For example, I really do have a habit of believing people in authority in certain situations/contexts that I'm unfamiliar with. When I listen to classroom teachers in class, I soak it up because I do not have their experiences! I'm wondering if I take what they say and not processing it enough to evaluate/read between the lines of what they're trying to convey. It's a thought that's worth pondering....