Queen Essays

Description:

Total Possible Score: 6.00

Distinguished – Thoroughly describes one's personal worldview.

Proficient – Describes one's personal worldview. Minor details are missing.

Basic – Minimally describes one's personal worldview. Relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations – Attempts to describe one's personal worldview; however, significant details are missing.

Non-Performance – The description of one's personal worldview is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Distinguished – Comprehensively explains how elements of the personal worldview could positively influence one’s perception of the problem.

Proficient – Explains how elements of the personal worldview could positively influence one’s perception of the problem. The explanation is slightly underdeveloped.

Basic – Minimally explains how elements of the personal worldview could positively influence one’s perception of the problem. The explanation is underdeveloped.

Below Expectations – Attempts to explain how elements of the personal worldview could positively influence one’s perception of the problem; however, the explanation is significantly underdeveloped.

Non-Performance – The explanation of how elements of the personal worldview could positively influence one’s perception of the problem is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Distinguished – Thoroughly, clearly, and accurately examines the worldview for existing or potential biases that may negatively impact one’s perception of the problem or potential solutions.

Proficient – Examines the worldview for existing or potential biases that may negatively impact one’s perception of the problem or potential solutions. Minor details are missing, slightly unclear, or inaccurate.

Basic – Minimally examines the worldview for existing or potential biases that may negatively impact one’s perception of the problem or potential solutions. Relevant details are missing, unclear, and/or inaccurate.

Below Expectations – Attempts to examine the worldview for existing or potential biases that may negatively impact one’s perception of the problem or potential solutions; however, significant details are missing, unclear, and inaccurate.

Non-Performance – The examination of the worldview for existing or potential biases that may negatively impact one’s perception of the problem or potential solutions is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Distinguished – Thoroughly describes at least two ways in which biases can be prevented.

Proficient – Describes at least two ways in which biases can be prevented. Minor details are missing.

GEN499.W2A1.09.2023

Describes One's Personal Worldview Total: 1.00

Explains How Elements of the Personal Worldview Could Positively Influence One’s Perception of the Problem

Total: 1.00

Examines the Worldview for Existing or Potential Biases That May Negatively Impact One’s Perception of the Problem or Potential Solutions

Total: 1.00

Describes At Least Two Ways in Which Biases Can Be Prevented Total: 1.00

Basic – Minimally describes at least one way in which biases can be prevented. Relevant details are missing.

Below Expectations – Attempts to describe at least one way in which biases can be prevented; however, significant details are missing.

Non-Performance – The description of at least two ways in which biases can be prevented is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the assignment instructions.

Distinguished – Displays meticulous comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains no errors and is very easy to understand.

Proficient – Displays comprehension and organization of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains only a few minor errors and is mostly easy to understand.

Basic – Displays basic comprehension of syntax and mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains a few errors which may slightly distract the reader.

Below Expectations – Fails to display basic comprehension of syntax or mechanics, such as spelling and grammar. Written work contains major errors which distract the reader.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Distinguished – Demonstrates methodical application of organization and presentation of content. The purpose of the writing is evident and easy to understand. Summaries, quotes, and/or paraphrases fit naturally into the sentences and paragraphs. Paper flows smoothly.

Proficient – Demonstrates sufficient application of organization and presentation of content. The purpose of the writing is, for the most part, clear and easy to understand. There are some problems with the blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper flows somewhat smoothly.

Basic – Demonstrates a limited understanding of organization and presentation of content in written work. The purpose of the writing is somewhat evident but may not be integrated throughout the assignment. There are many problems with the blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper does not flow smoothly in all sections.

Below Expectations – Organization and presentation of content are extremely limited. The purpose of the writing is unclear. There is little or no blending of summaries, paraphrases, and quotes. Paper does not flow smoothly when read.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Distinguished – Accurately uses APA formatting consistently throughout the paper, title page, and reference page.

Proficient – Exhibits APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout contains a few minor errors.

Basic – Exhibits limited knowledge of APA formatting throughout the paper. However, layout does not meet all APA requirements.

Below Expectations – Fails to exhibit basic knowledge of APA formatting. There are frequent errors, making the layout difficult to distinguish as APA.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Distinguished – Uses more than the required number of scholarly sources, providing compelling evidence to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Proficient – Uses the required number of scholarly sources to support ideas. All sources on the reference page are used and cited correctly within the body of the assignment.

Basic – Uses less than the required number of sources to support ideas. Some sources may not be scholarly. Most sources on

Written Communication: Control of Syntax and Mechanics Total: 0.50

Written Communication: Context of and Purpose for Writing Total: 0.50

Written Communication: APA Formatting Total: 0.50

Written Communication: Resource Requirement Total: 0.50

the reference page are used within the body of the assignment. Citations may not be formatted correctly.

Below Expectations – Uses an inadequate number of sources that provide little or no support for ideas. Sources used may not be scholarly. Most sources on the reference page are not used within the body of the assignment. Citations are not formatted correctly.

Non-Performance – The assignment is either nonexistent or lacks the components described in the instructions.

Powered by

2Developing a Lens of Understanding

xijian/iStock/Getty Images Plus

Module 2 Learning Outcomes

In this module, you will consider how your personal experiences and knowledge gained through your postsecondary general education courses inform your analysis and understanding of problems. After reading this module, you should be able to

ሁ Compare the limitations and functional benefits of a lens as a means of interpreting truth. ሁ Reflect on your individual cultural lens and the ways in which it impacts your understanding of

phenomena. ሁ Articulate how using a theoretical lens can focus and enhance your problem-solving efforts. ሁ Evaluate theories to determine their relevancy to a problem of interest.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 4Module 2 Introduction

Module 2 Introduction In 1799, George Washington, the first president of the United States, died in his Mount Vernon bedroom after doctors had extracted nearly 40% of his blood volume while attempting to cure a throat infection. His wife, Martha, purportedly shared her concerns about this method of treatment, but Washington had requested it, believing it had cured him of past illness. While Washington’s exact diagnosis is unknown, he died within a day of his first complaints (Wallenborn, 1997). Modern physicians might infer that it was the bloodletting treatment that led to his rapid decline, but it would be inappropriate to criticize the doctors who admin- istered a method of care considered to be standard best practice for nearly 3,000 years (Greenstone, 2010).

The medical treatment of bloodletting was based on an understanding of disease theorized by Greek physician Hippocrates (approximately 460–370 BC) well prior to the discovery of molds and bacteria in the mid – to late-1600s (Nouri, 2011). Because germs were unknown in Hippocrates’ time, he believed disease to be the result of an imbalance of four bodily elements called humors: blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile. Bloodletting via small cuts and scraping was thought to restore that bal- ance and offer a cure. Leeches, a predatory worm, were added to the practice in the early 19th century (Greenstone, 2010).

As science has advanced, medical practice has also evolved. Hippocrates’ theory of bodily humors has been replaced by a modern understanding of anat- omy and medicine, and bloodletting is no longer a standard treatment. It is easy to reflect in hindsight on the errors of past thinking and practice (recall hindsight bias from Module 1), but imagine yourself as a mediaeval physician or as one of Washington’s doctors; you would have had to act on what you understood as truth.

Ask the ancient Greeks who first countered com- mon knowledge of a flat earth with a spherical hypothesis; truth, as it turns out, is a tricky thing. By definition, truth is based on proven fact or com- monly accepted reality. Ironically, this definition reveals truth’s flaws. First is the issue of “proven.” To offer proof, evidence must be produced accord- ing to an agreed upon method. Experts are often called upon to establish standard methods and to evaluate the accuracy of evidence. Therefore, proof is subject to expert opinion. Expert opinion is based on the wisdom and knowledge of the era—hence, bloodletting. Similarly, truth that is based on “commonly accepted reality” requires the shared subjective experience that something is true.

“A medical practitioner administers leeches” by Wellcome Trust is licensed under CC BY 4.0.

ሁ As our understanding of anatomy and medicine has evolved, so too has the way doctors treat patients. In the early 19th century, leeches were used for bloodletting, which was believed to cure various illnesses and restore balance to a sick patient’s body.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 1Establishing a Lens of Understanding

Although an objective reality may exist that is not subject to human experience and interpre- tation, when discussing truth, humans are limited to what we have experienced either col- lectively or individually. In other words, objective truth may exist, but it may be unknowable. This module introduces how you might view the circumstances of a problem through the subjective lens of truth, noting that this lens is both a limitation and a potential advantage in bringing focus to complex issues. As you read this module, you are encouraged to reflect on your own lens of understanding, how it is informed by your strengths and preferences, and how you might apply this lens as you set out to analyze and solve problems.

Part 1: Establishing a Lens of Understanding With so much uncertainty about the nature of truth, it may seem unlikely that humans agree on anything, especially as each person views phenomena through their own lens of under- standing that serves as a filter through which information is perceived and interpreted. A basis for common understanding is formed through education. In primary and secondary school, students are often taught highly evidenced, basic facts. Examples include math facts like multiplication tables, the varying energetic intensity of clouds in producing storms, and witnessed historical facts, such as the order of the presidents of the United States. Education also provides students with fundamental skills for differentiating fact from opinion. Facts are defined as something that can be supported by evidence, whereas opinion is based on

2 Developing

a lens of understanding

4 Finding

solutions and gaining support

f02.00_UN_GEN499.ai

1 Identifying

and defining problems

3 Collecting

and considering data

5 Taking

action and leading change

 Self-reflect on your cultural lens and personal beliefs.  Map concepts related to the problem.  Conduct research to find relevant theories or existing models.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 1Establishing a Lens of Understanding

subjective beliefs that may vary from person to person. For a fact to be a fact, it must be unaf- fected by what an individual thinks or feels about it. Students might list state capitals as fact, for example, but offer opinion as to whether each capital is a desirable vacation destination.

Discerning fact from opinion is key in analyzing the quality of a source. This is yet another skill that students hone throughout their education, but it can be a confusing effort. Students may find that different sources argue over the logical soundness of evidence used to support facts. Or some sources may offer evidence that directly conflicts with another’s statement of fact. As students develop information literacy, they learn specific strategies to evaluate such conflicts. Researching a source’s credentials, potential biases, and motivations can help in determining their credibility, or trustworthiness. However, it may still occur that equally cred- ible experts in a field disagree on the truth of a matter, each providing seemingly sound evi- dence to bolster their counterpoints. In these instances, a student might compare the experts’ varied worldviews, their individual experiences, and the theoretical lens through which they view phenomena. Often, an individual will be most inclined to believe or to agree with those whose “lens” is most aligned with their own.

Defining “Lens” In photography, the role of the camera lens is to adjust focus and depth of the field of view with the aim of drawing attention to specific subjects. There is more at play when compar- ing camera lens types and exploring creative pos- sibilities, but at a basic level the lens sheds light on what the photographer wants to see and influences the quality of that image. It is the tool used to deter- mine not only what is in the picture, but also what is excluded.

“Lens” in the figurative sense is much like the pho- tographic tool. It is a perceptual and cognitive tool through which information is filtered and inter- preted. Learned through both experience and edu- cation, your lens of understanding is the unique perspective through which you view the world. This perspective is informed by any number of demographic factors, including your gender, age, where you live, work, or go to school, who you inter- act with, and so on. Your lens helps you determine what you see as normal, right, or good. It is your truth-o-meter when truth is hard to measure. It is important to acknowledge that your lens is not the only way to see things, and that what you consider to be normal or right may seem strange or even wrong through someone else’s lens. You may also be completely unaware of your own lens, despite recognizing when your viewpoints differ from others’. Problem solvers, like trained researchers, make a conscious effort to examine their ingrained and adopted lenses. This awareness allows them to

“Pushing the Leaning Tower of Pisa – 3” by Barney Moss is marked with CC BY 2.0.

ሁ This tourist photo of the Leaning Tower of Pisa provides a further reminder that what is captured through a lens may be more a matter of perspective than reality.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 1Establishing a Lens of Understanding

check their own biases, assess the validity of other perspectives, and note when their lens has limited their focus to the wrong thing.

Lens as a Potential Limitation Your lens may also be described as your worldview. Worldview is a philosophical term refer- ring to your conception of the world and humanity’s role within it. It is “a collection of atti- tudes, values, stories and expectations” that informs your thoughts, behaviors, interactions, and judgments of others (Gray, 2011, p. 58). Certain fundamental beliefs form the core of your worldview, such as beliefs about the nature of reality, the origins of man and the universe, the meaning and purpose of life, and the nature of values. Unlike the practice of bloodlet- ting, the philosophical debates related to these beliefs often transcend time and elude sci- ence—despite humanity’s best efforts to resolve them. In the absence of definitive evidence, it is impossible to conclude that one belief is entirely accurate while the opposite is entirely wrong.

While a worldview isn’t necessarily limiting, it has the potential to limit how you see the world. The beliefs that stem from your worldview are so central to your understanding that they may be taken for granted. You may find yourself arguing with others about something that seems quite obvious to each of you, only to discover that your differences aren’t in the validity of your reasoning, but in your respective worldviews. The failure to recognize these funda- mental differences can limit your ability to understand and solve problems. This is especially the case when you’re unable to identify your own interpretative lens and instead assume that your beliefs are undeniable truth. In lacking this awareness, you may fail to understand oth- ers’ experiences and perspectives. Recalling the photography analogy in this instance, your lens may define more of what you do not see, rather than providing further clarity and focus.

This limitation is also self-perpetuating. Because we view new experiences through our pre- existing lens, our interpretations of these experiences tend to validate and justify what we already believe. Confirmation bias, the psychological tendency to actively seek information and evidence that supports existing beliefs, also contributes to unchallenged worldviews. Understanding these tendencies can help you to appreciate why others might deny certain facts of a situation, or why you may also struggle to see another’s point of view.

Just as all lenses can be limiting, all lenses can be useful, too. Your worldview offers an impor- tant foundation to identify and examine issues in your life and helps form the basis of your opin- ions and perspectives. It is only when you close yourself off from learning and considering new information, and hearing others’ views, that your worldview is purely limiting. To ensure that your lens is not limiting, spend time reflecting on your beliefs, but also ponder possible alterna- tives. Actively seek to learn about other perspectives. Be open to feedback from others. Be will- ing to listen, and humbly seek truth in what others have to say, even if you ultimately disagree.

Lens as a Tool While a narrowed view of the world can be a limitation, when acknowledged, a lens can actu- ally serve a functional purpose. Being open to limitless possibilities may sound like a noble social ideal. The pursuit of lifelong learning may even lead you down many different intellec- tual paths. In the interest of being politically correct, some people even fear committing to a certain viewpoint. But there is a difference between considering all perspectives and accept- ing all possibilities as truth. Some views will always be mutually exclusive, wherein two or

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 1Establishing a Lens of Understanding

more possibilities conflict to the extent that they cannot coexist or be simultaneously true. To move forward with purpose and action, you must be willing to commit to a particular way of viewing or examining a problem.

As noted in the opening of the section, education offers students a common understanding of basic phenomena. In college or university studies, students begin to unpack the differences in their perspectives on these phenomena. Such differences may be found in relation to their peers, their instructors, and the scholars whose work they read. Rather than simply evaluate the credibility of a source, college students are asked to evaluate the quality of the source’s ideas. Critical evaluation of others’ competing claims for truth is a necessary step in a college student’s journey toward asserting their own claims. Guided by their instructors in the evalu- ation of others’ arguments, students are also encouraged to reflect critically on their own viewpoints. These efforts lead students to the goal of establishing a framework to test their own ideas (Perry, 1999). In other words, college students are led to assess the worldview inherited from their childhood experiences and develop an intentional lens—one that is still anchored in their values but informed by a deeper understanding of self and the world.

To understand how a lens could be used as a tool, consider the function of another device that makes use of literal lenses: the telescope. Attributed to physicist Galileo Galilei (1564–1642), the telescope is a device that enables astronomers to see objects at great distances, such as the Messier 51 galaxy that is located 31 million light-years from Earth (Garner, 2021; Macha- mer & Miller, 2021).

Hubble Space Telescope, a satellite telescope residing outside of Earth’s atmosphere, captures images from as far as 13.4 billion light-years away (Vogel, 2022). Telescopes use perfectly engineered optics, often a combination of mirrors and lenses, to concentrate light on regions of the night sky that an astronomer wishes to explore in greater detail (NASA Science, 2021). If an observer were to view the night sky without a telescope, they may only identify the faint stars of the constellation, Canes Venatici, where the Messier 51 galaxy resides.

“Hubble image of M51, the ‘Whirlpool Galaxy’” by dsleeter_2000 is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

“CanesVenaticiCC.jpg” by Till Credner is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

ሁ Note the differences in these two images of the Messier 51 galaxy. The photo on the left was taken with the Hubble Space Telescope and the one on the right was taken without a telescope.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 2Examining Cultural Lenses

Without a telescope, an observer sees the broader picture of many stars and galaxies from Earth’s viewpoint. With the telescope, the observer gathers a much more detailed image and understanding of a galaxy of interest. Similarly, by applying the lens of your worldview to a specific phenomenon, you’re able to see and analyze that issue in more refined detail. When you then consider other perspectives, you may lose that refinement, but see more of the larger context of possibilities.

For your lens to serve as a tool, rather than a limitation, you must regularly reflect on it. It is necessary to become critically self-aware of both your assumptions and those things you might be excluding from sight in favor of the clarity of narrowed focus. This module provides more detail in this regard in the sections that follow.

Part 2: Examining Cultural Lenses The ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle were the first to explore—or at least the first to document—ideas of worldview and individual perspective (Marshall, 1995). Their findings formed the basis for considering how individuals experience and make sense of their world. Philosopher Immanuel Kant was the first to describe these organizing structures of the mind as schemas (Kant, 1781–1787/1929). He theorized that individuals rely on prior experiences to categorize new information. As they encounter new information, people draw intuitive relationships, assigning categories as a means of intellectual efficiency (Pendlebury, 1995). In other words, when an individual encounters something new, they make sense of it through the lens of what they already know.

In his 1932 publication Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology, psychol- ogist Frederic Bartlett adopted the term schema, introducing this theory to the field of psy- chology. Schemas, he reasoned, are the building blocks for learning, memory, and decision- making processes. They are the mental models that serve as the lens of individual experience. So to understand how an individual lens is formed, the influences that shape it, and to evalu- ate its malleability, it’s necessary to turn to the field of psychology where schemas have not only been theorized but demonstrated via empirical study and brain scans.

Schema Development As part of investigating the formation of schemas, cognitive psychologists have conducted experiments in which they presented research participants with a combination of previously familiar and previously unfamiliar sensory information in the form of video or pictures (Bal- dassano et al., 2018; Webb & Dennis, 2020). They then asked participants to view images

Part 1 Knowledge Check

Is the following statement true or false?

A telescope serves as a metaphor for a lens of understanding in that it allows you to see certain issues with more focus and clarity, but narrows the scope of what you might otherwise see.

Review “Knowledge Check Answers” at the end of this module to check your answer.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 2Examining Cultural Lenses

of related objects with the goal of identifying which appeared in the video or picture. For example, research participants may have been asked to examine a photo of a bathroom. The scene would include things you might expect to see in a bathroom, such as a toilet and a tub (see Figure 2.1). The scene would also include objects that might be in a bathroom, but are not expected, such as a vase of flowers.

After viewing the scene, participants were shown an image of just the toilet that was in the photo alongside a distractor image, or a “lure,” of a sink. They were then asked to identify which image appeared in the original photo. Similarly, participants were tasked with identify- ing which of the unexpected objects—a vase of flowers or a lure, such as a mirror—appeared in the original photo. Keep in mind that participants saw a series of photos before they were asked to identify which objects they recalled. Such studies revealed that participants remem- bered the unexpected items—like the vase of flowers or mirror—at a rate no better than chance. This finding implies that par- ticipants aren’t paying as much atten- tion to information that isn’t normally part of a bathroom scene. Surprisingly, participants erred at a similar rate when selecting between the expected objects—like the toilet or sink.

A conclusion you could draw from these studies is that memory is unre- liable, but there is more to consider. As participants examined and then reviewed presented images, the brain was creating and accessing men- tal models of—in this example— bathrooms to gauge what might be expected or unexpected in a scene (Gage & Baars, 2018, Chapter 10). The brain makes predictions and offers

Figure 2.1: Example schematic scene and test

From “Memory for the Usual: The Influence of Schemas on Memory for Non-Schematic Information in Younger and Older Adults,” by C. E. Webb and N. A. Dennis, 2020, Cognitive Neuropsychology, 37(1-2) (https://doi.org/10.1080/02643.294.2019.1674798). Copyright 2020 by Taylor & Francis, Ltd. Reprinted with permission.

“Box of balls” by Christina Vlinder is licensed under CC BY 2.0. ሁ Through schemas, babies learn that balls are round

and bouncy. Once their schemas are refined, they learn additional information such as not all round objects are balls and not all round objects bounce.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 2Examining Cultural Lenses

meaning to abstract information; sometimes it prompts assumptions unfitting to a situation, such as remembering a sink in the bathroom scene instead of a toilet.

Babies develop schemas as they integrate and make meaning of new experiences. For example, when their parent identifies an object as “ball” and bounces it, the baby learns that balls are round and that they bounce. They may see other round objects and refer to them as “balls.” When their par- ents correct them, they learn that not all round things are balls, and their “ball” schema is refined. They may try to bounce round objects to determine if they are, in fact, balls. As they experiment and further categorize, they are more able to distinguish balls from other objects. They learn what a ball is and what a ball is not. They also learn how to interact with balls. You’ll note that this activ- ity sounds a lot like play, and it can be! Experimentation and play are key in the development of early classification structures.

Over time, schemas mature and become more sophisticated. In addition to distinguishing objects, people, and places, schemas provide the foundation for understanding symbolic concepts like language, complex logical reasoning, the nuances of acceptable social behavior, and personal and cultural identity. Much like the baby with the ball, more complicated and abstract schemas are also informed by a combination of individual sensory experiences, prior knowledge, experimentation, and social influences or instruction.

Sociocultural Influences While schemas are mapped within an individual’s mind, the concepts and categories that they represent are not distinctly their own. A significant portion of schema development is social, occurring within the context of a culture. Culture is characterized by the shared values, atti- tudes, behaviors, symbols, and traditions of a social group. Culture is a way of life and a way of understanding the experience of life within particular groups of people. Culture may also distinguish groups of people. Different racial, ethnic, or religious groups often come to mind when providing examples of cultures, and you may even identify your own sense of culture with one or more of these groups. But culture is not limited to such divides. Consider, for example, the colliding seas of orange and crimson at a Tennessee versus Alabama college football game.

These notorious rivals ironically share the culture of Southeastern Confer- ence (SEC) college football. Marino Casem, a longtime coach in the region, summarized the game’s importance by region: “On the East Coast, football is a cultural experience. In the Midwest, it’s a form of cannibalism. On the West Coast, it’s a tourist attraction. And in the South, football is a religion, and Saturday is the holy day” (as quoted in Hall, 2013, para. 3). College football so permeates life in the South that it is considered in everything from Satur- day wedding plans to economic devel- opment in regions hosting games. But this shared regional culture is not

“Alabama vs Tennessee 2009-10-24.jpg” by Matthew Tosh is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0.

ሁ Alabama college football fans might greet each other with “Roll Tide,” while Tennessee college fans likely know every word to their fight song “Rocky Top.” Each is ingrained in the culture of their respective fanbase.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 2Examining Cultural Lenses

apparent in the tailgates, stands, or on the field. SEC teams have such distinct fan groups that country music artist Megan Moroney wrote a song detailing the fear of telling her father that she fell in love with a fan of a different college team (Dukes, 2022).

Workplaces also have distinct cultures. Online shoe company, Zappos, prides itself on fostering a fun corporate cul- ture that embraces diversity and cele- brates self-expression (Zappos, 2023). While any company could espouse such values, employees live this cul- ture by decorating their workspaces and by taking breaks for dance-offs in the lobby.

Technology giant Apple shares an organizational culture based on cre- ative innovation. The company has established an environment where employees can share ideas, problem solve collaboratively, and stay focused on maintaining the company’s com- petitive edge (“Company Culture,” 2022). Their workspaces and schedule of work throughout their day reflect this culture, as do the innovative products they design that continue to lead the marketplace. Similarly, Chick-fil-A, a fast-food chain, is driven by religious values and a family-oriented culture. They live these values in practice and demonstrate this priority over that of the bottom line by closing their restaurants on Sundays.

Culture is not limited to a surface-level distinction but is a more deeply shared understanding. Further, it is rarely stated explicitly or learned consciously as it is at Zappos or Apple. Rather, culture is most often integrated into individual schemas at an unconscious level. Individuals test ideas and behaviors, gauge responses, and make adjustments. Language and modeling of others provide further definition and guidance. Just as a parent labels the round object a “ball,” people with a shared culture use commonly understood labels to identify social groups and social interactions. Whereas children gain a full grasp of the concept of “ball” rather early, culture is continuously learned and internalized. These processes shape the cultural lens through which humans view themselves and others.

A cultural lens plays an important role in social cohesion and community. The social learn- ing focus of kindergarten curriculum provides an example of this tool in practice. A study examining kindergarteners’ emerging friendship schema found agreement among students that sharing, playing together, expressing concern, and physical proximity were strong factors in identifying friends and in forming friendships (Holmes, 1990). While teachers (and the researcher, in this case) helped students to navigate conflicts and offered students feedback on their emerging beliefs, collective understanding of these “rules” of friendship occurred through the students’ experience of trial and error. The foundation for friendships is thus formed via these early schemas.

While a cultural lens can serve as a useful tool, it can also be limiting. In particular, stereo- types illustrate how a cultural lens may become a limitation when examining problems. The

“The Casual department” by Robert Scoble is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

ሁ Every company has its own culture—some are a little more casual than others.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 2Examining Cultural Lenses

World Animal Foundation reports that approximately 40% of dogs eutha- nized in shelters are pit bulls and 23% of Americans surveyed support a ban on pit bull ownership due to a wide- spread fear of the breed (Laybourne, 2023; Palmer, 2013). This fear stems from several common misunderstand- ings about the breed, including that they are bred for fighting, have locking jaws, and aren’t safe around children and other pets. An error in logic also supports this negative stereotype: people assume that because wider- skulled dogs tend to have stronger bites, just having a wide skull makes a dog more likely to bite (Ellis et al., 2009). This assumption is untrue. Much of the mythos surrounding pit bulls emerged during the early 2000s when over 50 pit bulls were rescued from a dog fighting ring run by former football star Michael Vick. This story featured prominently in the national media and drew increased attention to the breed, despite the lack of statistical evidence that pit bulls are more danger- ous than other dogs and the fact that they do not have locking jaws. Yet, the stereotype per- sists, leading to increased insurance costs and residence restrictions for some pit bull owners, and poorer treatment of the breed overall.

The benefits and challenges presented (respectively) by these examples highlight the impor- tance of being critically aware of your own cultural lens, its influences, and the blind spots it may create.

Malleability of Cultural Lenses Through self-awareness, critical reflection, and new learning, cultural lenses are promisingly malleable. Returning to the use of schemas as the psychological basis of cultural lenses, child development psychologist Jean Piaget theorized the interaction of new information with existing schemas (Piaget & Inhelder, 1969). In his view, knowledge is constructed through stages of increasingly complex learning. In the first stage, children understand their world in terms of physical interactions. They build on this learning through age 2 to 7 as they develop logic for understanding symbols (such as imagery or language). From age 7 to 11, children can understand more abstract concepts and use their knowledge to mentally simulate sce- narios and predict outcomes. In the final developmental stage from age 11 to 15, mental mod- eling is increasingly abstract and includes the metacognitive capacity to evaluate their own thought processes.

Piaget’s observation of knowledge as constructed over time and through this series of stages implies the integration of new learning and thereby the malleability of schemas. According to Piaget, as individuals encounter new information that is inconsistent with their existing schema, they adapt in one of two ways. Either they assimilate the new knowledge into their existing schemas, or they accommodate the new knowledge by adjusting the structure of their schema.

“PITBULL (I)” by Hugo A. Quintero G. is licensed under CC BY 2.0. ሁ Negative stereotypes based on misinformation about

some dog breeds, such as pit bulls, have led to real-world consequences for these dogs and their owners.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 2Examining Cultural Lenses

A common example of assimilation is seen when children apply their existing knowledge and consequently mislabel all four-legged animals as the common household pets “cat” or “dog.” With guidance they may distinguish the spe- cific features of the animal they misla- beled and accommodate their schema for four-legged animals to include other animals like horses and goats.

Adult learning is similarly attentive to inconsistencies that don’t match an existing lens. Adults continue to assim- ilate new information into their exist- ing understanding or reframe their understanding to accommodate new information. In interacting with some- one who does not fit their stereotypes of another culture, for example, adults might assume that that person fits within their existing schema, but as an exception to the rule. Or, as a result of encountering novel information, the adult might revisit their overall under- standing of that culture and create a new schema.

Despite the process continuing into adulthood, schemas are easier to change in childhood (Kan et al., 2020). Recall the discussion of the research that asked participants to review images—such as one of a bathroom. Such studies revealed that adults in particular tend to over-rely on schemas in everyday memory to get “the gist” of things at the expense of certain details. Interestingly, when researchers in these studies directed a participant’s attention to unexpected objects in the images, the accuracy of their memories was dramatically improved (Webb & Dennis, 2020).

When applied to questioning the malleability of a cultural lens, this finding suggests that explicitly pointing out information that differs from an individual’s existing beliefs can potentially change that person’s belief system. It further emphasizes the need for social interaction and direct communication when evaluating problems. So while it is important that a problem solver asks good questions, it is also important that a problem solver is asked good questions that can challenge and refocus their cultural lens. As the adage indicates: two heads are better than one.

Yuri_Arcurs/E+/Getty Images ሁ Children may initially think all four-legged pets

are dogs if that’s the schema they started with. But eventually they learn that cats and dogs are two very different species.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 3Examining Theoretical Lenses

Part 3: Examining Theoretical Lenses In reviewing the preceding section of this text, you might note that the cultural lens was pre- sented within the historical context of a growing body of research. The concept stemmed from ancient Greek philosophers. Two thousand years later, Kant further refined the idea in the late 1700s, offering the label of schema. In the 1930s, Bartlett adopted Kant’s ideas about schemas, as well as the term. He applied Kant’s theoretical proposal to learning and memory, processes of specific interest to his field of psychology. In the 1960s, Piaget further extended this work by applying the concept of schemas as a means of explaining child development and early learning processes. Also discussed in this section are more recent studies that exam- ine schemas in adult learning. Beyond those mentioned in this text, there are many other researchers who have tested, confirmed, and critiqued the theory of schemas in their publi- cations as well. Even with brain scans providing further confirmation of these ideas, it may never be possible to definitively assert that schemas function exactly as research has defined them. Schemas offer a way of understanding what might be happening in the human mind. Because it is such a well-researched way of understanding, it is an accepted theory in the field of psychology. Experts agree that this is most likely what is occurring as humans learn.

Theories in other fields develop through time in a very similar fashion: researchers read about and build on each other’s work, thoroughly testing ideas until after a time there is some expert agreement on phenomena. Their efforts might contribute to proving a theory or they may contribute to disproving a theory by offering contrary evidence or explanation. Not all of Aristotle’s ideas have persisted as schemas have; he also suggested the theory of spontane- ous generation, claiming that with sufficient application of “vital heat” or life force, life could be generated from nonliving material. This theory remained credible for 2,000 years. In the mid-1700s, scientist John Needham believed his research confirmed it! He sterilized a solu- tion, mixed it with a “life force” broth, and later observed microbes in the mixture. Needham likely failed to boil the broth, so any living organisms it already contained most probably accounted for the microbes observed in the mixture. Nonetheless, his research favored the popular theory of the time. Spontaneous generation was later disproven decisively by chem- ist Louis Pasteur, who proved that airborne microorganisms created the phenomenon that Aristotle had viewed as spontaneous creation of life (Phillips, 2010).

Theories, as shown through these examples, offer systematic ways of examining phenomena. They may be suggested by one individual, but they are strengthened through a confirming body of research, the best-known evidence at the time, and consensus among experts in the field. An example of this type of confirmation through consensus is illustrated through the review process of textbooks and scholarly journals. You have likely been asked to incorporate such scholarly sources into your research papers for some college courses. Scholarly sources

Part 2 Knowledge Check

Is the following statement true or false?

A cultural lens is primarily influenced by an individual’s parents.

Review “Knowledge Check Answers” at the end of this module to check your answer.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 3Examining Theoretical Lenses

are considered “scholarly” because they are reviewed by a group of peers who share similar expertise to the article’s author(s). These reviewers consider the process that the author(s) undertook in conducting their research and evaluate the resulting evidence. In vetting this content before it is published, they are ensuring the quality of a body of research on a particu- lar topic, because this body of research represents a collective understanding of truth—not just the belief of a single person.

A theoretical lens is a framework through which phenomena can be rationally and methodi- cally examined in accordance with an established or developing theory. It is the application of theory as a means of viewing problems. Whereas a cultural lens is unconsciously birthed through an individual’s experiences, a theoretical lens is consciously adopted as research- ers or problem solvers study existing theories and develop an affinity for specific published views. Like the cultural lens, a theoretical lens is learned, but learned through intentional study and often in formal educational settings.

General Education Informs Theoretical Lens The Enlightenment, or the “Age of Reason,” was a period of time from the late 1600s to the early 1800s when European society was greatly immersed in scientific, political, social, and philosophical study and discourse (White, 2018). Improvements in the speed and technology of printing at the time allowed increased access to pamphlets and books. As a result, literacy spread among members of varied social classes, scientists shared discoveries, and a thirst for knowledge grew. Within the context of this time period, some European universities—and the University of Oxford, specifically—adopted a “liberal education” model for higher education that embraced the study of literature, philosophy, rhetoric, logic, and classical languages like Latin and Greek. This model was intended to inspire students’ appreciation of human knowl- edge, while encouraging critical thinking and problem solving. Harvard University, founded in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in 1636, was the first university in America (Harvard Univer- sity, 2023). Following Oxford’s model, Harvard adopted a similar model of liberal education as the focus of students’ study and preparation to become contributing citizens.

As colleges and universities expanded across the United States in the mid- to late-1800s, lib- eral education became known as “general education” and students pursued programs that included both general education and work-oriented study. This balance of coursework was based on the competing values of the tradition of liberal education as a means of training thinkers, and the importance of vocational training. This is the model of higher education coursework that persists at most colleges and universities in the United States. Whereas stu- dents once studied the classical fields of liberal education in some depth, general education is focused more so on breadth, as students are now introduced to a broad range of courses that influence their thinking.

Though general education coursework may seem like a checklist of requirements to be met along the pathway to a career (Mintz, 2020), it is in fact an important opportunity. As students focus on their area of specialty, or their “major,” they often learn specific ways of thinking associated with that discipline or subject area. They are introduced to the body of knowledge on that subject, learning related theories, methods, and best practices applied in teaching, journalism, or engineering—whatever their major may be. Students begin to build an expertise in their field that offers them a theoretical lens or a range of theoretical lenses specific to that area of study. When viewing phenomena or attempting to understand problems, students and researchers alike often draw on theoretical lenses specific to their

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 3Examining Theoretical Lenses

discipline. They are most familiar with their area of expertise and related ways of viewing problems. But this comfort zone can become a blind spot. Familiarity with other disciplines offers important insights.

Imagine if, as a psychologist, Bartlett had no knowledge of philosophy. He may have never come across Kant’s work on schemas to apply the theory as a lens to his own work on learn- ing. As another example, the field of social work relies on an understanding of social prob- lems. While problems can be examined at the family level, applying theories borrowed from political science can allow social workers to better understand their work in the context of broader social policymaking and laws (Michailakis & Schirmer, 2014). Similarly, through gen- eral education, students become familiar with others’ work from outside of their specialty area. General education complements focused study in a “major” by introducing students to perspectives and theories held by other disciplines, providing students with opportunity to try on theoretical lenses, and to think more critically and creatively.

Advantage Offered by a Theoretical Lens While anyone can propose a theory, within academic disciplines esteemed theories are repeatedly tested, challenged, and refined. Whereas cultural lenses are formed through indi- vidual experiences, theories offer a common frame of reference among all those who study that discipline. Because a theory provides common terms and a common way of understand- ing, it also provides problem solvers a basis for debate.

Prior to August 2006, many elementary school students would have been heard reciting “My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Nine Pizzas” or “My Very Easy Method Just Shows Us Nine Planets.” These mnemonic sentences offered students a way of recalling the nine planets of the solar system in order from the Sun: Mercury – Venus – Earth – Mars – Jupiter – Saturn – Uranus – Neptune – Pluto. But as teachers prepared their lesson plans for the fall of 2006, they were forced to adopt a new memory tool.

The International Astronomical Union (IAU) had redefined the term “planet,” narrowing the defini- tion in such a way that Pluto was demoted to “dwarf planet” and the solar system was reduced to eight planets, rather than nine. But how would that even be possible? Isn’t a planet simply a planet? How can a group of people just change their minds and thereby change the international understanding of what constitutes the solar system? Simply put, sci- entists’ understanding of planets is based on plane- tary theory. The tenets of planetary theory are often naturally observed or tested through mathematical models, and include such factors as planetary for- mation, movement, and—unfortunately for Pluto— how a planet is defined. The IAU’s shift in definition occurred in response to a further understanding of the nature of planets. Knowledge of planetary theory allowed IAU scientists a common foundation for debate about the definition of a planet (Sykes, 2008). The updated definition of a full-sized planet

“New Horizons Flyby of Pluto” by NASA Goddard Photo and Video is licensed under CC BY 2.0.

ሁ Because they are grounded in research, theoretical lenses (like planetary theory) can offer researchers an objective view of a problem. So, it’s nothing personal, Pluto!

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 3Examining Theoretical Lenses

represents the finding of their planetary debate and includes three criteria: orbits around the Sun, sufficient mass to form a nearly round shape, and “clearing the neighborhood” of its orbit with its gravitational influence. Pluto does not meet the third criterion and therefore misses the cut (Science Reference Section, 2023).

When a student or researcher selects a theoretical lens through which to view a problem, that lens anchors their research of that problem to an existing body of research. For example, if they observed a new celestial object, they might seek to categorize and identify this object by using known criteria of planetary theory. When addressing the problem of “what is this thing I’ve observed?,” planetary theory may offer the answer of what it is, or at least what it is not.

To apply a theoretical lens in another example setting, imagine a teacher confronting the prob- lem of disruptive behavior in their classroom. The teacher might make certain assumptions about students’ misbehavior through their cultural lens. Perhaps they’ve observed other stu- dents whose misbehavior signaled lack of sleep or trouble at home. The teacher speaks with the students’ parents and learns that these reasons are not the cause. Something else is afoot. Recall complicated and complex problem types discussed in Module 1? The cause-and-effect relationship in these problem types is challenging to define, and this teacher believes they are dealing with a complex problem. So they turn to behavioral learning theory, a theory from the field of psychology, to examine possible causes. This theoretical lens offers the teacher a way of evaluating the system of rewards and determents used in the classroom that may be motivating students’ behavior. Or, if they were not already using such a system, the teacher might consider adopting a method that has been recommended by other teachers who have also favored the behavioral theory lens.

As you can see through these examples, the adoption of a theoretical lens helps a problem solver who is facing complicated or complex problems to focus on the possible explanations offered by an existing body of research. The theoretical lens offers a direction to pursue in finding a solution. It also provides problem solvers a common vocabulary and basis of understanding so that they can effectively collaborate with others, even if their individual experiences differ.

Part 3 Knowledge Check

Is the following statement true or false?

Cultural lens and theoretical lens are both learned ways of understanding phenomena.

Review “Knowledge Check Answers” at the end of this module to check your answer.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 4Choosing a Theoretical Lens

Part 4: Choosing a Theoretical Lens Through practiced self-awareness, an individual can examine other perspectives and consider the world as others may see it. But even with this ability and intention, it is impossible to view phenomena without the influence of a cultural lens. Even when trying on others’ viewpoints, people rely on prior experience to make judgments and decisions. While this does not bode well for releasing certain stereotypes, it is adaptive for survival: schemas also ensure that real dangers are recognized, and that the trial-and-error learning of past generations need not be entirely repeated in the next. While escaping the filter of a cultural lens may be both impos- sible and unwise, it is possible to improve the quality of decision making and insight based on this imperfect wisdom.

In their study of problem solving in business environments, Soyer and Hogarth (2015) observed how the lens of prior experience can lead to faulty decisions and can limit innova- tive thinking. Three of their findings specifically demonstrated the limitation of relying on a cultural lens alone when examining complicated and complex problems. Their research suggests a tendency to recall outcomes—successful outcomes in particular—rather than recounting the process taken to reach those outcomes. This tendency led problem solvers to overestimate the quality of their own insights while discounting the role of chance. Soyer and Hogarth’s research also alerts problem solvers to the tendency to focus on evidence that confirms existing beliefs, or confirmation bias, as discussed earlier in this module. Third, they suggest that people hold a misguided belief that the future will resemble the past, and therefore they fail to fully examine complex situations that resemble issues they’ve previously faced. In short, people overvalue their own experience and ability to reason.

To temper this failing, the researchers recommend deliberately studying decision-making processes, especially past examples that have led to failure. They also suggest intentionally seeking disconfirming evidence and imagining multiple possible outcomes of a scenario. A theoretical lens provides a basis for this analysis and investigation. It offers problem solvers a strategic way of questioning, researching, and drawing conclusions about a problem.

Researching Theories Module 1 concluded with a discussion of problem statements, using the example of decreas- ing voter turnout to model informative and persuasive statement formats. In the informative statement example, the problem of voter turnout was described as follows:

Voter turnout in this county has been significantly decreasing over the past decade, but other areas of the state have seen increasing numbers. The low- est turnout is among people from low-income households, which is consistent with trends seen elsewhere in the country. This area might be more dramati- cally impacted because of the demographics of the county. Lower voter turn- out is related to less civic engagement. Data also show a relationship between lack of political representation and lack of trust in democracy and authority. This study will use surveys and interviews to develop proactive plans to increase voter turnout in the county.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 4Choosing a Theoretical Lens

This problem statement effectively communicates the purpose of pursu- ing the issue further and appropriately indicates objectives that are fitting next steps. Also implicit in this prob- lem statement is some indication of its author’s cultural lens: at the very least, it implies they value voting. Their pre- liminary research, as noted in the problem statement, further supports the value of voting and its impact on communities.

In order to increase voter turnout, this problem solver will need to under- stand voter and nonvoter motivation. When reading about others’ related efforts, the problem solver is likely to uncover demographic trends in voting behavior. They noted in their problem statement that low-income individuals are less likely to vote. Their reading may further indicate that younger, elderly, and less edu- cated individuals are also less likely to vote. They may note these parallels in their commu- nity of concern as well. But does this information help them understand and influence voter behavior? Surveying and interviewing members of the community will help to better define motivation, but using a theoretical lens will provide further guidance on the questions that might be asked and how their answers might be interpreted.

If a prospective problem solver uncovered a problem while conducting a literature review (as discussed in Module 1), it’s likely that through this effort the problem solver also became familiar with the theories discussed in the research they reviewed. If the problem was uncov- ered through experience or observation, a problem solver may need to conduct some back- ground research in order to recognize related theories. Theories are primarily discussed in scholarly literature, such as peer-reviewed journal articles, that is written for an audience of other experts in the field. Theories may also appear in literature of practice that is not formally peer reviewed, but is written by experts in their fields. Literature of practice often includes “early findings”—examples include government reports, conference proceedings, doctoral dissertations, and publications from policy institutes (DeBellis, 2022). In either case, a library database or careful internet search can provide relevant information.

Brainstorming key concepts that relate to the problem is a helpful first step to identifying potential search terms. A concept map, providing a visual representation of ideas and rela- tionships between ideas, is a tool that can aid in the brainstorming process. Figure 2.2 illus- trates an initial concept map for the example problem of low voter turnout.

“Vote!” by kgroovy is licensed under CC BY-SA 2.0. ሁ Because low voter turnout can be a multifaceted

problem, it may require a problem solver to consider several theoretical lenses before finding the one best suited to the issues.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 4Choosing a Theoretical Lens

To draft this concept map, the problem solver returned to the original problem statement or their 5W1H notes that they used to construct that statement. As a next step, the problem solver might draw from the background provided by their education, as well as information that they might find through an internet search, to add fields of study related to the concepts on their map (see Figure 2.3).

Figure 2.2: Initial concept map: Low voter turnout

f02.02_GEN499.ai

Politics

Nonvoter demographics Elections

Motivation

Civic engagement

Lack of trust

Problem: Nonvoting

The problem solver might brainstorm further to note other concepts such as power, as related to politics, or historical events that provide context for lack of trust. As they conduct research, they might add specific names of theories or theorists, further expanding on those areas of the map that have been well-researched. A concept map may include related ideas and con- cerns such as the example in Figure 2.3, or it may begin with the effect of the problem at the center of the map and branch into possible causes for further exploration (see Figure 2.4 in Workplace Case Study: Amari Shah at the end of this module).

A note of caution regarding the brainstorming process: the internet offers unprecedented access to vast quantities of information, and it is easy to get lost in the brainstorming and researching processes. While the possibilities of what might be added to a concept map are endless, the purpose of this map is to structure thinking that might lead to a better under- standing of the problem such that a viable solution can be found. Don’t get so caught up in the background research and theory that it paralyzes your ability to make a difference in practice.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 4Choosing a Theoretical Lens

Figure 2.3: Concept map with related disciplines

f02.03_GEN499.ai

Politics

Political science

Nonvoter demographics

Sociology Data

science

Political science

Elections

Political science

Economics Data

science

Motivation

Psychology

Civic engagement

PsychologySociology

Lack of trust

Psychology

Problem: Nonvoting

Political science

Comparing Theories Noting that the field of political science provides the most context for the issue of low voter turnout, the problem solver studying this concern digs more deeply into political science research on the issue. In doing so, the problem solver will uncover a number of theories that provide further insight. One theoretical lens, the instrumental view of rationality, examines voters’ and nonvoters’ perceptions of the usefulness of voting. Through this lens, the problem solver might ask what purpose voting serves and if the benefits outweigh the costs of voting. The instrumental lens may lead the problem solver to consider ways to reduce the costs of voting—for example, advocating paid time off to vote and securing free transportation to poll- ing places.

Another theoretical lens is the ethical voting lens, which predicts whether people vote to sat- isfy self-interest or as an altruistic exercise. This lens suggests that people tend to act in their own self-interest when they believe that the stakes are high, and their actions are especially consequential. If voters do not believe that their individual vote is especially consequential,

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 4Choosing a Theoretical Lens

they may be more motivated to vote as an altruistic act, noting that personal satisfaction can also be gained from helping others. A problem solver applying this ethical voting lens may focus their efforts on developing a communications campaign that promotes the community impact of voting, rather than focusing on individual interests.

A third option would be to apply the lens of an information model that assumes people have a natural interest in voting, but that the probability of voting grows with increased information (Geys, 2006). This lens suggests that people believe their vote can impact election outcomes, and so they want to feel confident about the candidates for whom they might vote. Those who are uninformed tend to leave the decision to those who are more informed. Through this lens, the problem solver may ask interviewees about their sources for election information, the quality of those sources, and the time they spend trying to understand candidates’ differ- ences. The problem solver may then develop strategies for improving information sharing during election periods, based on the research and their view of this problem through the information lens.

While the instrumental, ethical, and information lenses are derived from the field of political science, the problem solver could also apply a lens borrowed from another field of study— perhaps something they became aware of through their general education coursework. An example might be minority discourse theory, which is applied in several different fields. As applied to the issue of nonvoting, a minority discourse lens may prompt questions about how marginalized communities are represented in the political decision-making process and the impact this has on policy outcomes and trust in state institutions (Cianetti, 2014). This lens may inform efforts to discuss systemic inclusion in political discourse beyond the issue of voting itself.

You might be thinking that since each of these theories provides a valid lens through which to view the example problem, why not look at the problem through every possible lens? While you have a point in asking this question, you’d also lack a starting place for taking action. Recall that complex problems may have more than one cause and it may not be feasible to uncover and address each cause. Choosing a theoretical lens will help you to narrow your focus, ask specific questions, and offer direction for solutions and interventions.

As demonstrated through the nonvoter problem example, the process of selecting a theoreti- cal lens begins by researching what is already known about the problem or related problems. This research will also ensure that your cultural lens is not simply predisposing you to certain assumptions. Perhaps, for example, you assumed that nonvoters didn’t have access to rides to polling places. Maybe you saw a report about this as a child and the idea stuck with you. While this assumption is consistent with an instrumental lens, it does not attend to some of the other lenses presented in this example. Exposure to these other possibilities can expand your thinking, even if you ultimately select the instrumental view as your theoretical lens.

As you conduct your research, you may want to compile a list of citations, including a brief summary of the contents of each source, in an annotated bibliography, add additional detail to your concept map, or construct a comparison table (like Table 2.1).

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 4Choosing a Theoretical Lens

Table 2.1: Theoretical lens comparison table: Nonvoter problem example

Theory Instrumental Ethical Information Minority discourse

Brief summary The decision to vote is influenced by the perceived benefits of voting in relation to the costs of voting.

Voting is based on a balance of self-interest and altruistic concern.

The probability of voting grows with increased information.

Voting may be impacted by rep- resentative pres- ence in decision- making processes and trust in institutions.

Example questions

How can the “costs” of voting be decreased and the benefits increased? What are the barriers to vot- ing that might be weighed as “costs”?

To what extent do community members believe that their vote matters? Which community issues motivate voters to act on behalf of their community by voting?

How is policy or platform informa- tion made avail- able to the public? Is information accessible (for example, is audio format available for the visually impaired)? Does it use plain lan- guage or technical terms?

Are marginalized communities currently repre- sented and visible in government? Do community members believe that their con- cerns have been heard in the past?

Possible actions

Advocating paid time off to vote and securing free transportation to polling places.

Communica- tions campaign that promotes the community impact of voting.

Strategies for improving infor- mation sharing during election periods.

Efforts to discuss systematic inclu- sion in political discourse.

These tools can help organize your research, structure your thinking, and complement your problem statement as another means of keeping you focused in your solution-finding efforts if you find you’re getting distracted or veering off track.

Selecting a Theory Recall that a theory proposes relationships between variables: for example, when you apply x to y, it leads to z. So when applying a theoretical lens to a problem, you’re intentionally adopt- ing a certain set of assumptions about cause-and-effect relationships according to that theory. These established assumptions, or tenets of a theory, offer a specific viewpoint that focuses data collection, analysis, and interpretation. A theoretical lens also provides some direction for resolution, as noted by the comparison in Table 2.1. Multiple theories will offer varying perspectives and action strategies for the same issue. While each explored theory may seem applicable, pursuing them all defeats their purpose in focusing your efforts.

Theory Quality When selecting a theory from among those you’ve researched, you’ll first want to evaluate the quality of the theory itself. Some theories rise to prominence in their fields and come to be accepted as general knowledge until an alternative theory offers new insight. Recall that

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Part 4Choosing a Theoretical Lens

the practice of bloodletting, discussed in the beginning of this module, was based on a com- monly accepted theory of bodily humors until that theory was disproved. Not all theories are disproved—even those that are imperfect in their explanation of phenomena. They simply represent the best-known understanding at the time.

Theories are evaluated as superior when they

• solve difficult problems that other theories have been unable to explain; • are applicable to a wider scope of concerns than alternative theories; • are logically sound; and • are parsimonious, or offer the simplest possible explanation for a phenomenon

(Capaldi & Proctor, 2008).

Researchers and scholars spend significant time evaluating the quality of one another’s theo- ries, imagining and testing alternatives, and exploring new applications for popular theories. It is therefore possible to find sometimes unwieldy quantities of academic discussion debat- ing the quality of different theories. When solving a problem (outside of the realm of profes- sional research or graduate studies), it may not be necessary to wade through this level of detail in selecting a theory. Textbooks used in introductory general education courses may serve as a useful resource for easing comparisons. These textbooks often include the most widely accepted theories in the field. While less reliable than a peer-reviewed text or article, some online resources can be found that also compare theories and offer general insight.

Theory Fit In addition to considering the overall quality of a theory, it is especially important to select a theory that is most fitting to the problem you’re trying to understand and solve. Your world- view and purpose as a problem solver will drive this selection. When considering the applica- bility of particular theoretical lenses, you might ask the following questions.

• Which theory is most consistent with your current understanding of the problem, whether that understanding is based on preliminary data or viewed through your cultural lens?

• Which theory offers you the best understanding of the problem in context?

Again, the purpose of applying a theoretical lens is to focus problem-solving efforts and to offer a perspective that is generally accepted among experts in the field. A theory that natu- rally fits with your own understanding may not challenge your cultural lens but can ensure that you’re not guided solely by your personal assumptions. A theory that offers you the best understanding of the problem in context may challenge your cultural lens, especially if the theory provides new insight into the environment and variables that impact the problem.

In the nonvoting example, the solution finder may be most attuned to the minority discourse theoretical lens, as their original problem statement indicates the concern for lack of trust in the government and the value of civic engagement consistent with this lens. In adopting this theoretical lens, they may then seek more information or develop a line of questioning that delves deeper into the specific issues of representation and trust in motivating voting behavior.

A third question you might ask when thinking about a theory’s fit is: who is your audience? Because a theoretical lens guides not only your understanding of a problem, but the actions

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Module 2 Summary and Resources

that you might take in addressing it, consider who else might be involved in applying a solu- tion. Will you need to ask others for assistance or resources? Will you need to make a case for change to an organization or legislative group? Modules 4 and 5 will address the con- cern of audience in greater detail; however, if you have an early sense about who else might need to be involved in solving a problem, it is relevant to consider a theoretical lens through their viewpoints. Will they recognize the theory as valid or as consistent with their existing views about the problem? Is the theory so strongly supported through research that it might convince a nonbelieving audience to take further note of the problem you’re presenting? All things being equal, choose a theory that will best help you make a case for support in your problem-solving efforts, should you need it.

What If No Theory Fits? As researchers examine theories, they may also encounter new information about phenom- ena that doesn’t fit with current understanding. They may then conduct studies using specific methods designed to devise their own theories. You may similarly encounter problems that are not readily explained through existing theories. Do not choose a theory, just to choose a theory. A theoretical lens is ultimately intended to help simplify the process of researching and understanding a problem, not to overcomplicate that process by attempting to force a problem to fit known parameters. Without a theoretical lens to structure your thinking, you may need to ask more questions or collect more data; but don’t panic, the story of the problem will evolve as you analyze this information. Every theory had a starting point; perhaps your problem is a starting point, too.

Module 2 Summary and Resources 1. This module introduced the concept of a lens of understanding as a cognitive filter

through which information is interpreted. While a lens may be a limitation in terms of narrowing your views and preventing you from seeing other perspectives, as you develop awareness of your individual—or cultural—lens, you are better equipped to use that lens as a tool.

2. Self-awareness begins with understanding how a cultural lens is formed. To this end, the module borrowed from the field of psychology, discussing the development of schemas as a cognitive tool shaping individual understanding of phenomena, con- cepts, and symbols. Schemas are developed within a sociocultural context and are thereby influenced by the communities you engage with from early childhood and on. As you become more aware of these patterns of thought and the assumptions associated with them, and as you encounter new information that may challenge your existing schemas, your cultural lens may shift.

Part 4 Knowledge Check

Is the following statement true or false?

When adopting a theory as a theoretical lens, both the quality of theory and its fit to the problem of interest should be evaluated.

Review “Knowledge Check Answers” at the end of this module to check your answer.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Module 2 Summary and Resources

3. Another lens, the theoretical lens, may help you better contextualize your cultural lens within the accepted thought of a community of scholars in a particular field. Con- versely, it may challenge your existing understanding and patterns of thought about an issue. In either case, the application of a theoretical lens to a complicated or com- plex problem can offer additional insight into the cause-and-effect nature of the prob- lem. Theories offer structure for thinking about a problem, provide focus on a range of potential solutions, and give problem solvers a common vocabulary and basis of understanding so that they can more effectively collaborate with others. While not all problems might be solved through the lens of established theory, the research efforts undertaken when considering relevant theories are still valuable as they reveal view- points that might vary from the individual cultural lens of the problem solver.

Critical Thinking and Discussion Questions 1. Critical Thinking: Think of a time when you encountered new information about a

person, group of people, or circumstance that challenged your existing assumptions. How did you handle that new information? Did you decide that the new information was the exception to your assumptions, or did you change the overall way in which you viewed the subject?

2. Discussion: Imagine that you’re working with a group to solve a difficult problem. Each member of the group disagrees about the root cause and therefore has a differ- ent understanding of what should be done to address the situation. How is it possible that each group member could examine the same situation but identify different causes? How could the adoption of a shared theoretical lens help this group to move forward collaboratively?

Workplace Case Study: Amari Shah Catch up on Amari’s problem-solving journey by referring back to Module 1.

[Self-reflection: Cultural lens] A cultural lens is comprised of an individual’s overall world- view and their ways of understanding phenomena shaped through their individual experi- ences. Aware of his cultural lens, Amari takes a moment to reflect on his current understand- ing of the problem, as well as some of the assumptions that he’s needed to “check” to date. His own strong work ethic, a product of his parents’ modeling of the value of hard work, has led to a personal distaste for the Samples manager, who he views as lazy and disorganized.

Further, although he’s aware that others might assume that it is the organic nature of the par- ticular product line in question that is an issue, Amari has personally advocated for organic dyes and flavorings in the past. His preference for organic additives is influenced by the death of a relative from colon cancer early in Amari’s teenage years. His family believes that the can- cer could have been prevented through healthier eating and he has since sought more organic options for himself as well.

Noting that these issues might be ancillary to the problem at hand, Amari also reflects on his understanding of business processes. He believes in authoritative leadership with a clear management structure and order of business. When departments are interconnected and the actions of one impact the other, then processes need to be clear and followed to the letter.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Module 2 Summary and Resources

[Concept mapping] Starting with his own understanding and the information he’s gathered in composing his problem statement, Amari develops a concept map (see Figure 2.4).

Amari’s concept map centers on the effect he’s observed (the problem of missing and expired samples) and brainstorms possible causes, noted in the branched boxes. It also includes ques- tions that Amari considers relative to each of the causes he has brainstormed thus far. Exam- ining this concept map, he further recognizes overlap between these questions and the fields of business, leadership, food science, and chemistry.

[Research and theory] Conducting some initial research relative to organic additives in the food science and chemistry fields, Amari concludes that the samples do have a shorter shelf life and must, in some cases, be packaged and stored differently from the nonorganic addi- tives that they shelve. He examines the current sample supplies and determines that they do appear to be labeled and stored properly.

Amari further examines available business theories to see if anything might offer any insight. While there are many theories applicable to the field of business, he notes that Systems

Figure 2.4: Amari’s concept map

f02.04_GEN499.ai

Lack of communication

Problem: Missing and

expired samples

Which communications systems or tools are

used between departments?

How are communication tools used within the

Samples Department?

How does the Samples

manager train employees responsible for shipping samples?

Samples manager’s leadership

Operations issue

Is there an inventory tracking

system in place?

Problem with the organic line

Are the materials missing or arriving expired to

Samples?

Do organic additives have a shorter shelf life and, if so, how is that indicated?

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Module 2 Summary and Resources

Theory in particular may be a good fit to add context to the problem he’s considering. Systems Theory addresses the interaction, communication, and business flow between multiple inter- connected departments. After reading the article “Communication and the systems theory of organization” (Almaney, 1974), he summarizes the theory as a way of capturing his own understanding:

Systems Theory of organizations supposes that it is not the characteristics of any one group or individual within an organization that determines its suc- cess, but rather that success is dependent upon the interdependence among those individuals or parts of an organization. In turn, this interaction is facili- tated through communication. Leaders play a key role in ensuring communi- cation effectiveness.

The lens of this theory leads Amari to focus on interdepartmental interactions and communi- cations as a main area of concern related to this problem.

To see how Amari applies this theory to his information gathering and data collection efforts, follow his problem-solving journey further in Module 3.

Community Action Case Study: Dayanara Reyes Catch up on Daya’s problem-solving journey by referring back to Module 1.

[Self-reflection: Cultural lens] Daya recognizes that her value and definition of community may differ from others’. She reflects on her childhood experiences in the neighborhood with a great deal of nostalgia. In her view, a community is cohesive when interactions are visible and inclusive. She doesn’t want to just make friends but reengage the street in activities that fos- ter a sense of belonging and lead coordinated action to make the community better. She also recognizes that she’s feeling some loneliness and disconnect in the wake of the pandemic, but she suspects that others likely feel the same. She also acknowledges the possibility that in a digital era, others may not view community as tied to their geographic location as she does.

[Concept mapping] Drawing from her personal thoughts and observations thus far, Daya drafts an initial concept map to explore her ideas further (see Figure 2.5). She considers some of the possible reasons for the declining sense of community, but also begins to brainstorm more detailed impacts or effects.

[Researching theory] While Daya recognizes that the most impactful insights will be gained from speaking directly with her neighbors, she wants to better grasp how “community” is defined and understood beyond her own values and understanding. Her initial research reveals potential insights from related fields of urban planning, psychology, sociology, and anthropology, among others.

Seeking specifically to understand the meaning and function of community, Daya comes across the work of a psychologist, Seymour Sarason, who first described the Theory of Sense of Community as a feeling experienced when people perceive their interdependent connec- tion with a broader group outside of themselves. Through her research she further learns that community psychologists measure sense of community across four domains: membership, influence, integration and fulfillment of needs, and shared emotional connection. Her source described these factors as follows:

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Module 2 Summary and Resources

Membership involves clear boundaries regarding who is in and who is out of the specific community. Influence refers to the ability one feels one has to impact the broader community-level and individual-level norms that guide the practices of the community. Integration and fulfillment of needs refer to feeling connected to a network that holds shared values, that exchanges resources, and meets needs. Shared emotional connection refers to participa- tion in the celebrations of others, and participation in specified rituals or cer- emonies. (Jimenez et al., 2019, Sense of Community Theory section, para. 1)

Figure 2.5: Daya’s concept map

f02.05_GEN499.ai

Problem: Declining sense of community

in my neighborhood

Cause? Disconnect

following the pandemic

Effect? Individuals in need may be

neglected

Cause? Changing de�nition of community in a

digital era

Effect? Concern for

declining safety and security without a solid community

Cause? Disinterested

neighbors

Daya believes that this theory will help her to better structure her thinking relative to her own community. For example, she might develop questions related to these four domains to use when interviewing or surveying her neighbors. She can also use these domains as the lens through which she interprets data collected through the problem-solving process. Further, she might develop an action plan to address these four domains, or the specific domain(s) that she determines to be a concern for her particular community.

To see how Daya applies this theory to her information gathering and data collection efforts, follow her problem-solving journey further in Module 3.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Module 2 Summary and Resources

Knowledge Check Answers

Correct answer(s) Explanation

Part 1 Knowledge Check

True This statement is true. The telescope offers a metaphor for a lens of under- standing, both in terms of its limitations and benefits as a tool to focus understanding.

Part 2 Knowledge Check

False This statement is false. A cultural lens is primarily influenced by an individ- ual’s own interpretations of their individual experiences. These experiences may be in relation to their parents, or in response to many other available stimuli. Parents often aid children in forming interpretations.

Part 3 Knowledge Check

True This statement is true. Even though it’s learned unconsciously, a cultural lens is learned through experience. A theoretical lens is learned and applied more purposefully, as one might approach any academic pursuit.

Part 4 Knowledge Check

True This statement is true. Both the quality of a theory relative to its alterna- tives and its fit to the problem of interest should be considered. If there is no quality or fitting theory, then it is appropriate to proceed without a specific theoretical lens.

Key Terms annotated bibliography A list of citations, including a brief summary of the contents of each source.

concept map A visual representation of ideas and relationships between ideas.

confirmation bias A psychological ten- dency to actively seek information and evi- dence that supports one’s existing beliefs.

culture The shared values, attitudes, behaviors, symbols, and traditions of a social group.

discipline A subject area characterized by a related body of knowledge.

lens of understanding A cognitive filter that influences the information that you take in about phenomena and how you interpret that information.

literature of practice Reports, proceed- ings, and findings that are not peer-reviewed and are published outside of commercial and academic publishing by experts in the field (e.g., government reports, conference proceedings, doctoral dissertations, and publications from policy institutes).

mutually exclusive A description of a situation wherein two or more possibilities conflict to the extent that they cannot coexist or be simultaneously true.

parsimonious Offering the simplest pos- sible explanation for a phenomenon.

schemas Organizing structures of the mind that explain how individuals interpret and make meaning of experiences and that form the basis for learning, memory, and decision making.

scholarly literature Academic literature that is peer-reviewed and written for an audience of other experts in the field (e.g., peer-reviewed journal articles).

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.

Module 2 Summary and Resources

tenets of a theory The main principles and established assumptions upon which a theory is based.

theoretical lens A selected framework through which researchers and problem solvers can rationally and methodically examine phenomena.

theories Ideas that offer systematic ways of examining phenomena.

worldview A philosophical term referring to the attitudes, values, stories and expecta- tions that inform one’s conception of the world and humanity’s role within it.

© 2024 The University of Arizona Global Campus. All rights reserved. Not for resale or redistribution.