Content uploaded by Abdullah Bayat
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Abdullah Bayat on Jun 07, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
South African Journal of Higher Education https://dx.doi.org/10.20853/36-1-4517
Volume 36 | Number 1 | March 2022 | pages 207‒233 eISSN 1753-5913
207
EVALUATING THE DECODING THE DISCIPLINES PARADIGM THAT
IS USED FOR DEVELOPING DISCIPLINARY HABITS OF MIND: A
SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW
S. Mohamed*
Library Services: Learning and Teaching
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1886-1429
A. Bayat*
School of Business and Finance
https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1796-9526
*University of the Western Cape
Cape Town, South Africa
ABSTRACT
This article reports on a systematic review of the literature to evaluate the Decoding the Disciplines
paradigm (henceforth “DtD”) in the development of expert disciplinary habits of mind in student
learning. A search was conducted utilising various databases (EBSCOhost, DOAJ, JSTOR, SAGE
Journals Online, Scopus, Wiley Online and uKwazi) (Library Search Engine) for the period 2004
to 2020. More than 500 papers, retrieved from nine scholarly databases, were screened, based
on title and abstract, resulting in 33 shortlisted papers for analysis. The researcher and one
independent reviewer assessed the methodological quality of the shortlisted articles. Five
countries are represented in this study. The results of this review highlighted the impact that the
DtD has on the development of expert ways of thinking in learners. The case studies attest to the
fact that several insights, namely 1) Concretising abstract phenomena; 2) Overcoming emotional
bottlenecks; 3) Making expert habits of mind explicit to the learner; 4) Trans-disciplinary
approaches and the T-Shaped learner and 5) Synergies between threshold concepts and
information literacy habits of mind, are capabilities that the DtD process could cultivate in student
learning to overcome complex bottlenecks.
Keywords: bottlenecks, Decoding the Disciplines, disposition, efficacy, habits of mind, mind
theory, student learning, systematic review, troublesome knowledge, ways of thinking
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
It often occurs that investment of time and resources in teaching courses and modules yield
poor results (Pace 2017). This is, to a great extent, due to the fact that learners experience hidden
difficulties in many levels of their academic journeys. These bottlenecks or thresholds
occasionally derail student learning and academic progress which may end in high student
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
208
failure rates. As teachers, we tend to assume that our students have already attained the
necessary attributes or disciplinary ways of thinking that are needed for a successful academic
career. Hence, we do not integrate our own expert habits and practices into learning outcomes
when we prepare lesson plans, course content and learning assessments.
Typically, academic educators have course outlines and module descriptors with
chronological lists of due dates for completing topics and learning assessments for their
modules. Based on this customary practice, a pervasive discourse permeates the literature which
epitomises the student as a “consumer of services” (Land 2016, 11). Hence, scholars
recommend that course content should not be taught using prescriptive, linear methods as this
might be counter-productive in the learning and teaching process. (Land 2016). The contention
is that such pedagogic techniques do not foster habits of mind that are required for lifelong
learning. First designed by Costa and Kallick (2000), it has been postulated that these
disciplinary habits or ways of thinking are directly aligned with information literacy practices
that graduates should acquire throughout their academic careers (Baer 2015).
Although significant research has been conducted in the area of Habits of Mind (Alhamlan
et al. 2018), troublesome information literacy concepts (Gibson and Jacobson 2018) and
Gofman (2019), it is evident that questions remain about the best ways to identify these
challenges so that teachers may address the pertinent learning needs of struggling students.
Unearthing challenges and including appropriate teaching methods to enable students to
develop the desired expert proficiencies has been the main motivation behind the Decoding the
Disciplines paradigm (henceforth the DtD).
The DtD model (Figure 1) provides guidelines for designing instructional, motivational
and assessment strategies that support deep learning and for identifying and analysing
disciplinary challenges in student learning. The model suggests that teachers, operating as
experts in their disciplines, hold tacit knowledge and implicit ways of thinking that are not
necessarily accessible to novices in the discipline. Its founder, David Pace, suggests that this
seven-step cycle enables those implicit practices to be decoded so that learning bottlenecks or
roadblocks could be alleviated. Pace (2017) believes that, through discussion with expert
educators, disciplinary mental operations may be deconstructed to understand their tacit
knowledge. Whereas Derrida’s (1976) notion of deconstructing knowledge includes a more
complex interpretation of language that accentuates thought processes in a poststructuralist
manner, Pace (2017) associates the term or process of deconstruction with the conventional
structuralist principle that spoken language can be accepted as the closest representation of
thought (Higgs 2002). Derrida (1976), however, claims that all structures of meaning or
interpretations are inherently unstable (Balkin 1995) and that all texts and utterances have
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
209
multiple meanings that conflict with each other. This seems to be in stark contrast with Pace’s
general, simplistic description of the process of deconstructing ways of thinking, being and
becoming, which, he maintains, may easily be deciphered through an interview with an expert
educator. Despite the philosophical underpinnings of the term as advocated by Derrida (1976),
this study uses Pace’s (2017) interpretation of “deconstructing” to simplify and contain the
meaning of complex phenomena and thoughts.
Figure 1: Decoding the Disciplines Paradigm (Hlp.sitehost.iu.edu)
Furthermore, Roland Barthes (Bathes, Miller, and Howard 1974), who is a key participant in
the philosophy of deconstruction, argues that our role is active rather than passive in our
interpretation of texts. He, like Derrida (1976), challenges the “restrictive reading experience
under structuralism and says that meaning making is not limited to the author only who claims
to know the truth” (Jadoon, Naqi, and Imtiaz 2020, 244). All readers actively interpret the text
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
210
instead of looking at fixed, single or final meanings. This gives the reader more agency to derive
meaning from studies and to respond to its ideas. Taking into consideration Barthes et al.’s
(1974) perspective, we, as readers of the review articles, used Pace’s (2017) DtD model as a
guide to interpret the articles.
Thus far, there have been only positive responses to the DtD model which further
reinforces the purpose for this review which is to investigate the efficacy of the DtD process on
the development of expert disciplinary Habits of Mind or ways of thinking in student learning.
The findings of the review may be used to create a shift in the mindset of the disciplinary
academic teacher with regards to recognising the nature and extent of their own submerged
habits of mind. While many academics may be aware of disciplinary blind spots, few realise
that learners need to be taught new mental models which focus on understanding the core ideas
about information and scholarship within their disciplines.
A systematic review of the literature in this regard will enable the researcher1 to explore
whether the DtD Paradigm contributes to the development of expert habits of mind. Since its
inception in 2004, a body of literature has proliferated, but this is the first systematic review
conducted on the research pertaining to the DtD model.
METHODOLOGY
This study utilised a systematic review methodological approach. The process is defined as a
“systematic and explicit method to identify, select and critically appraise relevant research”
(Isaacs and Andipatin 2020, 2). Data is then subsequently extracted and analysed from
shortlisted studies. This protocol is claimed to be a “standardized method” (Boell and Cecez-
Kecmanovic 2015, 162) which renders it replicable and transparent for researchers who may
desire to conduct the same or similar review.
The aim of the review is to evaluate and summarise various local and international studies
on the efficacy of the DtD model for the development of expert habits of mind in student
learning. This methodology was considered to be the most appropriate method to interpret
findings in a rigorous, methodical and coherent manner as it may also be considered transparent
and free from bias.
Therefore, the review was guided by a valued and competent colleague who assisted with
verifying the validity and credibility of the process. Although the reviewer had not previously
been involved in the process of conducting a systematic review, he was briefed on the
methodology and all the steps required for this procedure. The reviewer2 spent considerable
time consulting the necessary literature to familiarise himself with the various steps of a
systematic review.
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
211
The review question
An appropriate and relevant research/review question was developed using the acronym SPICE
(Setting, Perspective, phenomenon of Interest/Intervention, Comparison, Evaluation). The
main research question was: How effective is the Decoding the Disciplines model in developing
expert disciplinary habits of mind in university students?
Objectives of the review
In order to assess the efficacy of the model in question, the following specific objectives of the
review have been identified, which would be to ascertain:
1) the nature of the bottleneck(s) identified; 2) the habit(s) of mind envisaged to be developed
through the DtD intervention; 3) the nature of university settings in which DtD has been used;
4) the disciplines in which DtD has been applied; 5) the types of courses in which the DtD has
been applied; 6) the methods of application (steps followed) of the DtD intervention; 7) the
results and outcomes supporting or rejecting the DtD intervention.
The review process
This systematic review comprises four steps. The first step (identification) involved identifying
and retaining relevant studies that may be included in the review. To complete this process,
keywords were identified and searches were conducted across a number of the University of
the Western Cape (UWC) databases. The second step, called screening, consisted of assessing
the abstracts of all the included articles to ensure that they complied with the inclusion criteria.
The third step, eligibility, is executed when the selected articles are screened for methodological
rigour using a critical appraisal tool. The fourth step, called data extraction, involves selecting
relevant data from each article that relate to the study objectives. The entire process for this
review is discussed in detail below and illustrated in Figure 2.
Literature (electronic) search strategy
To retrieve records on the application of the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm, an electronic
search was conducted across 9 databases between September 2020 and November 2020.
Databases listed in Table 1 relate to the Education discipline. Each database displays unique
search techniques and coverage of the topic as well as controlled vocabulary.
Information sources
A search was conducted across UWC databases such as Ebscohost (Academic Search
Complete, ERIC and SocIndex); JSTOR, DOAJ, Scopus, Sage Journal Online, Wiley Online
and the University of the Western Cape Library search engine, uKwazi. To retrieve specific,
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
212
relevant results pertaining to the effectiveness of the Decoding the Disciplines model on
developing disciplinary habits of mind, a number of search strings were used: “Decoding the
Disciplines”; “Decoding the Disciplines” AND “Critical thinking”; “Habits of Mind” AND
“Decoding the Disciplines”; “Decoding the Disciplines” AND Disposition*; Habits of mind
OR “Mind theory” AND “Decoding the Disciplines”; “student learning” AND “Decoding the
disciplines”; “Decoding the Disciplines” AND “Ways of thinking”; “Student performance”
AND “Habits of Mind” AND “Decoding the Disciplines”. These keywords and related
synonyms were used as it responds to the research question and seeks to explore its relevant
issues.
Table 1 represents the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the literature search, the
databases used for the search, including the final version of the search strategies. The researcher
and the reviewer decided to exclude the databases Google Scholar and Library and Information
Science Source as all records should fall within the ambit of the relevant discipline which is
Teaching and Learning (Education).
Two conference papers and 1 PhD dissertation were located using alternative methods due
to the fact that these 3 documents are inaccessible. Their authors generously provided the full
texts via email.
Eligibility criteria (inclusion criteria)
Studies were included if they met the following criteria: a) Full-text qualitative; b) Journal
articles, book chapters, conference papers and book reviews. The latter was considered as it
may lead to relevant monographs on the Decoding the Disciplines model; c) The papers
should be published between 2004 and 2020. When the Decoding the Disciplines model was
first developed in the early 2000’s, the first publications on empirical studies in this regard
ensued in 2004.
Study selection
The researcher used eight search strings to search across the databases using All Fields, Title
and Abstract limiters. However, she noted that the All Fields option generated too many
searches.
Circumventing the risk of bias
Conducting searches across databases
The researcher’s interpretation and individuality in selecting and judging the studies and
findings are to be minimised during the systematic review process (Boell and Cecez-
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
213
Kecmanovic 2015). Therefore, a reviewer is required to help researchers become more critical
and reflective in evaluating the studies. The assigned reviewer verified the results obtained from
all title and abstract searches. The reviewer used each search string, limiters and inclusion
criteria to search for relevant documents in each database.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it was not possible for the researcher and the reviewer
to meet in a face to face environment. Therefore, they had collaborated in virtual Zoom
meetings where the searches were conducted and verified by the researcher. The reviewer
highlighted all discrepancies and appended it in an excel sheet that was uploaded to the Google
Drive. He occasionally emailed captured screenshots of his searches to the researcher to
emphasise and clarify any inconsistencies that he detected. This is in keeping with the scholarly
guidelines provided for conducting a systematic review.
Table 1: Inclusion and exclusion criteria, selected databases and final search strings
Inclusion Criteria
Full Text documents
Journal Articles; Book Chapters; Conference papers; book reviews
Publication Year 2004‒2020
English Language
Exclusion Criteria
Foreign Language documents
Commentaries
Editorials
Databases
• EBSCOhost
Includes: Academic Search Complete, ERIC
(Education Resource Information
Center), SocINDEX with Full Text (The world’s most comprehensive and highest
quality sociology research database. SocINDEX with Full Text offers coverage from all
subdisciplines of sociology)
• DOAJ (Directory for Open Access Journals (DOAJ is a community-curated list of open
access journals and aims to be the starting point for all information searches for quality,
peer reviewed open access material)
• JSTOR (An online journal archive providing access to back issues of core scholarly
journals in arts, humanities, business, social sciences, ecology, botany, language and
literature)
• SAGE Journals Online (prestigious and highly cite
d journals are available
electronically on the award-winning SAGE Journals Online platform. Search across
560 journals in Business, Humanities, Social Sciences, and Science, Technology and
Medicine)
• SCOPUS (a multidisciplinary navigational tool that contains records going back to the
mid-1960s, offering newly-linked citations across the widest body of scientific abstracts
available in one place. More coverage of scientific, technical, medical and social
science literature (14,000 titles) than any other database)
• Wiley Online (a leading international provider of scientific, technical, medical, and
scholarly journals. In 2008, Wiley InterScience incorporated the online content formerly
hosted on Blackwell Synergy to provide access to over 3 million articles)
• Library Search engine (uKwazi). (uKwazi (isiNguni word which means “to know”)
enables you to search across the library’s entire collections, both print and online
resources)
Search Strings
“Decoding the Disciplines”
“Decoding the Disciplines” AND “Critical thinking”
“Habits of Mind” AND “Decoding the Disciplines”
“Decoding the Disciplines” AND “Disposition”
“Habits of mind” OR “Mind theory” AND “Decoding the Disciplines”
“Student learning” AND “Decoding the disciplines”
“Decoding the Disciplines” AND “Ways of thinking”
“Student performance” AND “Habits of Mind” AND “Decoding the Disciplines”
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
214
Figure 2: Flow chart of study screening process
METHODOLOGICAL QUALITY APPRAISAL OF THE ARTICLES
In order to evaluate the 47 articles, we decided to use the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme
(CASP) tool, which is claimed to be the “most commonly used tool for quality appraisal in
health-related qualitative evidence syntheses, with endorsement from the Cochrane Qualitative
and Implementation Methods Group” (Long, French, and Brooks 2020, 31). The researcher and
reviewer chose this tool for this study’s critical appraisal since it comes “highly recommended
Identification
Screening
Eligibility
Included
Number of records identified
through a systematic search across
title and abstract (n= 517)
Number of additional records
identified through other sources
(n=3)
Number of records after duplicates removed
(n = 494)
Number of records screened
(n= 494)
Number of records
excluded (n=416)
Number of full text articles assessed
for eligibility (n=78)
Number of records
excluded on reading full
text (n = 31)
Number of records included
(n = 33)
Number of articles assessed for quality
(n=47)
Number of articles
excluded on critical
appraisal (n=14)
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
215
for novice qualitative researchers” (Long et al. 2020, 31).
As illustrated in Figure 2, forty-seven (n=47) studies formed part of the methodological
appraisal section of the review. The criteria used for assessing the methodological rigour and
quality of the selected studies included research design, data collection methods, steps in the
decoding process, data analysis, ethical considerations as well as the potential value of the
studies for future pedagogical practices. The researcher and reviewer applied a threshold of 65
per cent to appraise the studies. Of the 47 studies appraised, 22 studies were classified as
“strong” (80‒100%), while the 12 studies in the “moderate” (65‒79%) category were also
included in the review. Although these studies lack explicit discussions of research methods
and ethical procedures, they examined how various steps of the Decoding model are used in
student learning. Therefore, the reviewer and author decided not to exclude these case studies
from the final review. Fourteen (n=14) studies were evaluated as “weak” (>65%) and were
consequently excluded from the review. These studies failed to discuss specific learning
bottlenecks as well as how the DtD model was used to develop disciplinary habits of mind. The
remaining 33 studies were included in the final review process.
Table 2: Ranking according to critical appraisal tool
Zolan, Strome and Innes (2004)
70%
Schlegel and Pace (2004)
70%
Durisen and Pilachowski (2004)
70%
Burkholder (2011)
70%
Zhu, Rehrey, Treadwell and Johnson (2012)
70%
Ardizzone, Breithaupt and Gutjahr (2004)
70%
Kurz and Banta (2004)
70%
Pace, David.2004
70%
Sundt, Jody (2010)
70%
Pace, David. (2011)
70%
Grim, Pace, and Shopkow (2004)
70%
Rubin and Krishnan (2004)
80%
Yeo (2017)
80%
Riegler. (2019)
80%
Pinnow (2016)
80%
Lee-Post (2018)
80%
Yeo (2017). Hermeneutic
90%
Cameron (2019)
90%
Khomokhoana and Nel (2020)
90%
Verpoorten et al. (2017)
90%
Attas (2018)
90%
Miller-Young (2015)
90%
Diaz (2008)
90%
Fischer (2018)
90%
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
216
Sturts and Mowatt (2012)
90%
Currie (2017)
90%
Miller (2018)
90%
Miller-Young and Boman (2017)
90%
Middendorf, Mickutė, Saunders, Najar, Clark-
Huckstep and Pace. (2015)
90%
Pettit (2017)
90%
Mohamed (2020)
100%
Tingerthal (2013)
100%
Rousse, Mary, Julie Phillips, Rachel Mehaffey,
Susanna McGowan, and Peter Felten. (2017)
100%
The researcher and reviewer discussed each article to confirm its inclusion in the review. The
two parties deliberated about questions pertaining to ethics and research methods as these
matters were not always made explicit in every case study. An informed decision was made
that, where articles did not address ethical procedures and in instances where research methods
were not discussed, the study in question should not be excluded on the basis of those criteria.
This decision was especially reinforced where such articles comply with all other factors, for
instance where the study explains how the DtD model influenced student performance. This
would constitute a worthy item for review.
It is worth noting that any disagreements between the researcher and the reviewer were
resolved during telephonic discussions to reach consensus. The discrepancies and
disagreements in this regard, were considered as miniscule.
RESULTS
Data extraction and overview of reviewed studies
The final step of the review process is the synopsis whereby data was extracted from the 33
shortlisted studies. The researcher read through all the articles and identified significant and
relevant themes that addressed the research question.
Table 3 categorises the data into criteria that were used to compile the results for the
review. The 33 selected articles discussed the nature of the bottlenecks, habits of mind that
needed to be developed to overcome complex learning problems and at least one outcome of
the study. These headings were chosen because they are aligned with this review’s objectives
and main research question.
Table 3 provides a portion of the analysis to expound the process of the data extraction as
discussed below.
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
217
Table 3: Description of data extraction
Author
Study
design and
Population
Size
Setting Nature of
bottleneck
Habits of mind
that need to be
developed
Method of
application
of the DtD
model
(steps
used and
applied)
Results and outcomes of
intervention
Pinnow, E.
(2016).
Decoding
the
Disciplines:
An approach
to scientific
thinking
Case-control
study
Control
Group:
n=45, DtD
group: n=46.
Introductory
psychology
courses
University
of
Wisconsin,
USA
Students,
however,
often struggle
to reconcile
their ideas
about
psychology
with the
fundamental
role of the
scientific
method in
psychology.
A common
complaint
among nearly
all
psychology
instructors is
their
students’
inability to
differentiate
between
independent
and
dependent
variables.
Conceptualising;
Visualising
abstract
phenomena
Steps 1 – 6
Three independent samples t-
tests compared performance on
each of the assessment
measures (hypothesis
generation, identifying variables,
and creating operational
definitions).
Students who were taught using
the Decoding the Disciplines
technique were more likely to
generate complete hypotheses
that looked at relationships
between two variables. Similarly,
students in the Decoding the
Disciplines condition
outperformed students in the
Control condition in writing
operational definitions. It is clear
that the Decoding the Disciplines
methodology offers an effective
form of active learning. The
Decoding the Disciplines method
also offers potential for other
bottlenecks for students within
the field of psychology such as
the basis of neural
communication, the logic of p
values, or the Opponent-
Process Theory.
Study design
This review focused on publications which used a qualitative research method. The DtD model
was applied to gain insight into student difficulties and to explore the depth and complexity
inherent in this phenomenon.
The final sample of 33 studies which were included in the systematic review provides
detailed descriptions of how the model was applied in teaching and learning.
The studies comprised of 23 single case studies: (Zolan et al. 2004, 23 – 32; Mohamed,
S. 2020, 182‒209; Rubin and Krishnan 2004, 67‒73; Yeo et al. 2017, 49‒62; Cameron 2019,
675‒84; Khomokhoana and Nel 2020, 17‒32; Middendorf, Mickutė, Saunders, Najar, Clark-
Huckstep and Pace 2015, 166‒180; Pace 2011, 107‒119; Miller-Young and Boman 2017, 19‒
35; Sturt and Mowatt 2012, 39‒45; Fischer 2018, 149‒159; Diaz 2008, 1211‒1224; Pace 2004,
13‒21; Kurz 2004, 85‒94; Attas 2018, 1‒23; Ardizzone 2004, 45‒56; Chen Zhu et al. 2012,
54‒60; Verpoorten et al. 2017, 263‒267; Rousse et al. 2017, 1‒14; Pinnow 2016, 94‒101;
Durisen 2004, 33‒43; Schlegel 2004, 75‒83; Yeo 2017, 87‒96); 1 self-study: (Pettit 2017, 75‒
85); 6 auto-ethnographic studies (Tingerthal 2013 (Dissertation); Grim et al. 2004, 57 – 65;
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
218
Sundt 2010, 267‒284; Miller-Young 2015, 32‒57; Burkholder 2011, 93‒111; Riegler 2019,
685‒691); 1 pilot study: (Miller 2018, 412‒418); 1 phenomenological study: (Currie 2017, 37‒
48) and 1 research paper: (Lee-Post 2019, 398‒414).
Demographics
The articles which were screened portrayed the following geographical locations: 3 studies in
Canada: (Miller-Young and Boman 2017, 19‒35; Yeo 2017, 87‒96; Attas 2018, 1‒23); 2
studies in Germany: (Riegler 2019, 685‒691; Fischer 2018, 149‒159); 1 study in Belgium:
(Verpoorten et al. 2017, 263‒267); 2 studies in South Africa: (Mohamed, S. 2020, 182‒209;
Khomokhoana and Nel 2020, 17‒32) and 25 studies in the USA: (Zolan et al. 2004, 23–32;
Rubin and Krishnan (2004), 67‒73; Yeo et al. 2017, 49‒62; Cameron 2019, 675‒684;
Middendorf et al. 2015, 166‒180; Pace 2011, 107‒119; Sturts and Mowatt 2012, 39‒45; Diaz
2008, 1211‒1224; Pace 2004, 13‒21; Kurz 2004, 85‒94; Ardizzone 2004, 45‒56; Zhu et al.
2012, 54‒60; Rousse et al. 2017, 1‒14; Pinnow 2016, 94‒101; Durisen 2004, 33‒43; Schlegel
2004, 75‒83; Pettit 2017, 75‒85; Tingerthal 2013; Grim et al. 2004, 57–65; Sundt 2010, 267‒
284; Miller-Young 2015, 32‒57; Burkholder 2011, 93‒111; Miller 2018, 412‒418; Currie
2017, 37‒48; Lee-Post 2019, 398‒414). The body of literature under review ranges between
the periods 2004 and 2020.
Sample populations were selected from undergraduate students at various tertiary
institutions. Samples sizes ranged between 45 heterogenous students and 250 students in a
particular control group. A huge proportion of the selected articles contained unspecified
numbers of students.
Case studies were undertaken across a range of disciplines such as Introductory
Psychology courses, Biology, Marketing and Statistics, History, Psychology, Computer
Science, Business Finance, Astronomy, Mathematics, Cognitive Psychology, Nursing,
Engineering, Journalism, Library and Information Science, Recreation, Park and Tourism
Studies, Political Science, Service Learning and Community Engagement, Music Analytics,
Geology, Creative Writing, Marketing and Business and Finance.
The nature of the bottleneck
Having been applied and tested across a number of disciplines, the DtD model was used to
identify several student learning challenges that are commonly referred to as “bottlenecks”. The
selected case studies depict these various difficulties which are described and reported on by
experts in their respective fields. According to Pace (2017), bottlenecks may be categorised as
epistemological, procedural and emotional.
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
219
a) Epistemological bottlenecks
Of the 33 selected studies, 25 studies (Tingerthal 2013; Riegler 2019, 685‒691; Cameron 2019,
675‒684; Khomokhoana and Nel 2020, 17‒32; Zolan et al. 2004, 23 – 32; Yeo et al. 2017, 49‒
62; Rubin and Krishnan 2004, 67‒73; Burkholder 2011, 93‒111; Mohamed 2020, 182‒209;
Lee-Post 2019, 398‒414; Zhu et al. 2012, 54‒60; Ardizzone 2004, 45‒56; Attas 2018, 1‒23;
Pettit 2017, 75‒85; Miller-Young 2015, 32‒57; Fischer 2018, 149‒159; Sundt 2010, 267‒284;
Currie 2017, 37‒48, Sturts and Mowatt 2012, 39‒45; Yeo 2017, 87‒96; Pace 2004, 13‒21; Pace
2011, 107‒119; Diaz 2008, 1211‒1224; Grim et al. 2004, 57–65; Schlegel 2004, 75‒83) discuss
epistemological bottlenecks which are characterised by an inability to understand how
knowledge is constructed within a discipline. An example of this type of challenge is prevalent
in courses where learners struggle to comprehend what “counts” as evidence to support an
argument (Brigham University, https://ctl.byu.edu/tip/identify-bottlenecks-student-learning-
develop-improved-learning-strategies). These challenges include specific instances where
learners may not understand how to generate knowledge within a specific field. This particular
epistemological bottleneck is prevalent in 16 case studies (Grim et al. 2004; Grim, Pace, and
Shopkow 2004, 57 – 65; Diaz 2008, 1211‒1224; Pace 2004, 13‒21; Pace 2011, 107‒119; Yeo
2017, 87‒96; Sundt 2010, 267‒284; Fischer 2018, 149‒159; Miller-Young 2015, 32‒57; Pettit
2017, 75‒85; Kurz 2004, 85‒94; Attas 2018, 1‒23; Ardizzone 2004, 45‒56; Zolan et al. 2004,
23–32; Riegler 2019, 685‒691; Durisen 2004, 33‒43; Tingerthal 2013). The remaining articles
expand on epistemological bottlenecks detailing students’ difficulty to align abstract ideas or
models to specific evidence in the discipline (Mohamed 2020; Cameron 2019); their inability
to connect facts to a coherent whole instead of committing it to memory (Khomokhoana and
Nel 2020; Schlegel 2004; Zolan et al. 2004); and the challenge experienced when learners are
asked to measure time and space (Zhu et al. 2012).
b) Procedural bottlenecks
Five articles of the 33 studies addressed learning challenges which may be classified as
procedural bottlenecks. This troublesome knowledge begins where learners have difficulty
completing tasks, or where successful completion thereof requires multiple steps. An example
is found in Pinnow (2016) where the steps involved in formulating a hypothesis, identifying
competing hypotheses, and writing a literature review (Rousse 2017) were evaluated using the
Decoding model.
c) Emotional bottlenecks
Aside from Pinnow (2016), one other study focused on emotional bottlenecks, which occur
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
220
when students respond with emotion to difficulties or to subject matter that derails their
learning. (Brigham University, https://ctl.byu.edu/tip/identify-bottlenecks-student-learning-
develop-improved-learning-strategies). Middendorf and Pace (2004) address this issue and
discuss the repercussions when students feel that their ancestral rights are questioned in History
or when they believe that their religious beliefs are threatened if they study or accept the concept
of evolution in Biology.
Identifying expert habits of mind
The ways of thinking, being and doing that were identified in the final selection of the 33 chosen
case studies, were categorised into 5 disciplinary habits of mind that students should internalise
when engaging with their respective disciplines: 1) Perceiving scholarship as dialogic and as a
symbolic conversation; 2) Solving problems through a process of iterative enquiry;
3) Recognising the authority of evidence as a contextual and constructed phenomenon;
4) Selecting and using information sources for particular purposes and audiences; and
5) Practicing mental flexibility and perseverance when searching for information. This review
found that some of these themes permeate the above-mentioned case studies.
Perceiving scholarship as dialogic
Thirteen shortlisted studies (Pace 2004; Schlegel 2004; Ardizonne 2004; Attas 2018; Diaz
2008; Fischer 2018; Sturts and Mowatt 2012; Sundt 2010; Currie 2017; Miller 2018; Miller-
Young 2015; Middendorf et al. 2015; Pettit 2017) discussed the development of this
disciplinary habit of mind which requires the understanding that scholarly research in various
disciplinary fields is a discursive practice where ideas are generated, debated and weighed
against each other.
Three studies identified expert practices that consider the contribution which information
sources make to History, Physiology and Phenomenology (Schlegel 2004; Pace 2004; Currie
2017). One study (Sundt 2010) discussed the importance of seeking out conflicting perspectives
in the area of Criminal Justice as well as being aware that one enters a scholarly conversation
which is incomplete and constant. Experts maintain that, in addition to perceiving scholarly
conversations as dialogic, learners should summarise the changes in perspective over time on a
particular topic within a discipline. Two studies (Ardizzone 2004; Pace 2004) found that it is
important to interpret poetry and fiction within its historical contexts and to become familiar
with various literary conventions that were applied over periods of time. This way of thinking
can also be applied when analysing historical artefacts.
The remaining 8 studies (Attas 2018; Diaz 2008; Fischer 2018; Sturts and Mowatt 2012;
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
221
Miller 2018; Miller-Young 2015; Middendorf and Pace 2004; Pettit 2017) identified tacit
mental operations that are often mistakenly assumed in student learning: The disciplinary
practitioner knows that prescribed scholarly material do not represent the only opinion on a
matter (Attas 2018; Schlegel 2004; Pace 2004; Pettit 2017) and that learners should seek other
conflicting perspectives. By voicing their own interpretations (Diaz 2008), learners would soon
realise that they are not passive consumers of knowledge but that they are able to become active
contributors to scholarship.
Similarly, the disciplinary unconscious mind of the expert recognises instances where it
becomes necessary to suspend judgement on the value of a particular argument until the larger
context of the scholarly conversation is holistically understood (Fischer 2018; Miller 2018;
Sturts and Mowatt 2012).
Solving problems through a process of iterative enquiry
Of the 33 studies, 17 articles (Zolan et al. 2004; Mohamed 2020; Rubin 2004; Yeo 2017;
Cameron 2019; Schlegel 2004; Khomokhoana 2020; Durisen 2004; Pinnow 2016; Lee-Post
2019; Verpoorten et al. 2017; Zhu et al. 2012; Pace 2004; Miller-Young 2015; Sundt 2010;
Miller 2018; Miller-Young and Boman 2017) examined the habit of mind that requires learners
to question and to “move beyond memorisation” in Genetics and Molecular Biology (Zolan et
al. 2004), to organise information in meaningful ways in Business and Finance, Criminal Justice
and Library and Information Science (Sundt 2010; Mohamed 2020; Miller 2018) including the
ability to recognise main complex ideas and filter these into manageable chunks (Sundt 2010;
Miller 2018). Moreover, the iterativeness of problem-solving was discussed, suggesting that a
hermeneutic approach (Yeo 2017) could lead to the development of a questioning attitude
towards research. Notwithstanding that problem-solving is a collaborative activity, this does
not exclude learners from engaging in independent thinking.
Some studies (Miller 2018) complement the notion of iterative inquiry as emphasised in
the ACRL Framework (2016) where this process “extends beyond the academic world to the
community at large, and which may focus upon personal, professional, or societal needs”
(ACRL 2016, 7). This way of thinking is an area for development in courses such as Marketing,
Geology and Service Learning (Rubin 2004; Zhu et al. 2012; Miller-Young 2015). Remaining
aspects of problem-solving is evident in studies where learners are expected to turn concrete,
abstract questions into measurable ones as depicted in Introductory Psychology, Geology,
Computer Source Coding, Service Learning and Criminal Justice (Pinnow 2016; Zhu et al.
2012; Khomokhoana 2020; Miller-Young 2015; Sundt 2010).
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
222
Recognising the authority of evidence as a contextual and constructed
phenomenon
Five shortlisted studies (Grim, Pace, and Shopkow 2004; Pace 2004; Schlegel 2004; Sundt
2010; Miller 2018) focussed on the expert capacity to assign trust to evidence within particular
contexts and to understand that evidence is constructed in various ways by communities of
practice.
One study (Pace 2004) emphasised that to think like a historian, students must select and
assess evidence that supports interpretations of the meaning of the past. It found that students
need to develop an understanding of the social nature of the information ecosystem where
authorities actively connect with one another and that these sources develop over time. Eleven
shortlisted studies (Sundt 2010; Miller 2018) posit that students should be able to evaluate the
logical relationship between evidence and a study’s findings such as those in Research Methods
and Library and Information Science. Similarly, 1 study (Schlegel 2004) found that it is
imperative to develop an awareness of the importance of assessing evidence with a sceptical
stance. Using evidence to shape the historical imagination is also an expert disciplinary habit
of mind as maintained in Grim et al.’s (2004) study on learning how to use evidence in History.
Selecting and using information sources for particular purposes and audiences
Six shortlisted studies identified the tacit assumption that learners are aware of the reasons why
and how information is created. This theme advocates an understanding that experts look
beyond format when choosing resources to use in their research. This review found that
disciplines such as Business and Finance, Engineering, Language Comprehension, Cognitive
Psychology, Library and Information Science as well as Music History and Analysis require
learners to recognise the nature of information creation and the underlying processes thereof.
The expert understands that each final product is packaged with different capabilities and
constraints.
Learners often reach a bottleneck where they are unable to distinguish between various
formats of information (Mohamed 2020; Attas 2018; Riegler 2019; Cameron 2019; Miller 2018
and Tingerthal 2013). For instance, the failure to recognise that information may be perceived
differently based on the format in which it is packaged is discussed in detail in Tingerthal (2013)
and Mohamed (2020).
Practicing mental flexibility and perseverance when searching for information.
The researcher and the reviewer found that authors in the following 3 shortlisted studies (Sundt
2010; Schlegel 2004; Pace 2004) identified expert ways of thinking that are aligned with
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
223
information seeking behaviour. It is imperative to teach the notion that the searching for
information is not a linear step by step process but should be regarded as an exploration which
requires mental flexibility and perseverance. This process is often affected by cognitive,
affective and social dimensions (ACRL 2016).
These 3 studies (Schlegel 2004; Sundt 2010; Pace 2004) found that expert practitioners
do not have to search through all information resources to access relevant material in for
instance, Criminal Justice (Sundt 2010) – they are able to identify paradigms and schools of
thought that could answer their research questions. Similarly, these studies identified habits that
students should acquire such as realising that information vary in content and format. Historical
artefacts, for example, have different degrees of significance, depending on the needs of the
search.
Findings: The application of the Decoding the Disciplines model in developing
expert habits of mind
To alleviate and overcome the bottlenecks which were identified in these selected studies,
various steps in the decoding model were implemented. The total number of studies (n=33)
which forms the body of literature for this review, used the first step in the decoding process to
identify the bottleneck in student learning. However, each study selectively applied certain
steps of the Decoding model. Those which were preferred and deemed necessary to assist with
alleviation of a bottleneck constituted the main focus of a particular study. Thus, it was found
that analysis of the seven steps of this model were dispersed across all the case studies.
Twenty-five studies of the shortlisted cases (Mohamed 2020; Tingerthal 2013; Miller-Young
33
25
20
18
10
6
2
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
STEP 1: IDENTIFYING THE BOTTLENECK
STEP2: INTERVIEWING
STEP 3: MODELLING
STEP 4: PRACTICE AND FEEDBACK
STEP 5: MOTIVATION
STEP 6: ASSESSMENT
STEP 7: SHARING
Application of DtD model
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
224
2015; Currie 2017; Fischer 2018; Sundt 2010; Miller 2018; Diaz 2008; Sturts and Mowatt 2012;
Yeo 2017; Riegler 2019; Yeo 2017; Cameron 2019; Pinnow 2016; Burkholder 2011;
Middendorf 2015; Rousse 2017; Lee-Post 2019; Verpoorten et al. 2017; Pace 2004; Zhu et al.
2012; Attas 2018; Pace 2011; Pettit 2017; Miller-Young and Boman 2017) applied the
interview technique (Step 2) to unlock the disciplinary unconscious of the expert practitioner.
This is an attempt to unearth ingrained knowledge that has become submerged beneath the
lecturer’s teaching practices and needs to be made explicit in the classroom.
The review found that 20 selected studies applied Step 3 (Modelling) as a means of
reframing teaching practices to alleviate the bottlenecks which were identified in their modules.
In most instances, the lecturer employed various tasks (Step 4) such as collaborative learning
in class, questionnaires, observations, minute papers; video clips, index cards, discussions;
group work, pre – and – post assessment as well as the use of MCQ questionnaires to measure
understanding. A noticeable number of studies (10) analysed emotional blockages (Step 5) in
learning, while only 6 studies concentrated on summative assessments (Step 6) to monitor
progress and to test whether learners have managed to overcome the threshold. The final step
in the Decoding model (Step 7) involves sharing the outcomes of the studies with a larger
community of practice. Only 2 studies included this task (Tingerthal 2013; Pace 2011).
DISCUSSION
Significant insights achieved through decoding liminal areas in student
learning
Irrespective of whether these 33 studies were research-driven (observational, empirical) or self-
directed, it may be deduced that the majority of the reviewed studies illustrated a positive
predisposition towards the Decoding the Disciplines model. With the exception of one or two
instances, the general outcome is that the Decoding model aids student learning in substantial
ways. To assist with the investigation into the efficacy of the model on the development of
expert habits of mind, the researcher categorised the following observations and insights into 5
parts: 1) Concretising abstract phenomena; 2) Overcoming emotional bottlenecks; 3) Making
expert habits of mind more explicit for the novice learner; 4) Trans-disciplinary approaches and
the T-Shaped learner; 5) Synergies between threshold concepts and information literacy habits
of mind.
Concretising abstract phenomena
Five shortlisted studies (Zolan et al. 2004; Zhu et al. 2012; Ardizzone 2004; Cameron 2019;
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
225
Durisen 2004) found that modelling intricate processes in disciplines such as molecular biology,
geological time frames, eye movement during graph reading exercises and astronomical
concepts, serve to teach students to visualise abstract ideas. Researchers realised that the
modelling process, which is the third step in the Decoding model, may include the expert
practitioner’s mental operations. These are transformed and concretised as analogies or
metaphors in the classroom. The decoding process helped instructors to understand the reasons
why many learners fail to comprehend the meaning of abstract phenomena from schematic
diagrams or illustrations, “even when supported by explanatory texts” (Durisen 2004, 43).
Common bottlenecks in this regard include the inability to visualise the size and scale of
astronomical concepts (Durisen 2004), geological scale and time (Zhu et al. 2012), biological
processes such as meiosis and mitosis (Zolan et al. 2004), and graph reading (Cameron 2019).
In each case, the value and formidability of abstract content is expounded through making this
step an integral part at programme and course level.
Overcoming emotional bottlenecks
The identification of emotional or affective blockages in student learning is addressed in 6
selected studies (Currie 2017; Sundt 2010; Fischer 2018; Pace 2004; Diaz 2008; Middendorf
2015). In one particular study, faculty came to realise that their own authentic experiences in
clinical settings or journalism enabled them to fully embody and understand disciplinary
concepts. The interviews that were conducted in this study elicited the conscious connections
between instructors and their own interpretations of difficult concepts. According to Currie
(2017) “touch, perceptions, feelings, actions and sensations” cannot be translated in course
content or lesson plans. These affective experiences should be given explicit attention and
integrated into pedagogical practices. The Decoding model makes provision for this procedure
in the fifth step of the learning cycle.
The remaining four studies reiterate the value of overcoming cognitive dissonance through
making hidden emotional operations transparent. Fischer (2018) and Sundt (2010) attest to the
fact that it is important to gain insight into some of the emotional causes of such dissonance
which could threaten to derail learning. It was found that insight into the sources of student
resistance has helped instructors to become “less defensive and more supportive” (Sundt 2010;
282). Middendorf’s (2015) finding reinforces the notion that emotional bottlenecks should not
be regarded as problems in the classroom, but rather as “useful flags” (Middendorf 2015, 177)
which indicate patterns of thought that may interfere with student learning.
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
226
Making expert habits of mind more explicit for the novice learner
The method of Decoding brings deeper levels of interpretation to the scholarship of teaching
and learning and may be linked to broader frameworks of philosophical, sociological and
psychological approaches. For instance, special attention has been brought to the interview
technique (Miller-Young and Boman 2017) where researchers have detected the presence of
themes such as the reconstruction and deconstruction of knowledge. As discussed and explained
in the introduction of this article, these terms are interpreted using Pace’s (2017) stance on
“deconstructing” to explain and simplify the meaning of complex phenomena and thoughts.
In this regard, interviewees have highlighted the importance of the extent to which
teachers help students understand, investigate and determine how implicit cultural assumptions,
references, perspectives, and philosophical biases within a discipline influence the ways in
which knowledge is constructed within it. It was found that the Decoding model serves to
develop the capability to deconstruct such disciplinary thinking through generating new ideas
or understandings. This method of deconstruction allows students to not only master a new set
of mental operations, but also enables them to adopt the required knowledge practices and
dispositions of professionals in the disciplines that they aspire to enter.
As mentioned earlier in this article, the habit of deconstructing knowledge allows complex
processes and phenomena to be transformed into manageable chunks of information (Miller-
Young and Boman 2017; Miller-Young 2015; Pettit 2017; Lee-Post 2019; Pace 2011; Schlegel
2004; Grim et al. 2004). Miller-Young and Boman’s (2017) study found that knowledge
construction involves the expert’s ability to recognise patterns and connections amongst various
pieces of information; examine problems from different points of view, and engage consciously
with their surroundings (Miller-Young and Boman 2017). These habits of mind should be
integrated into the classroom allowing students to “step back from the constructed narratives to
deeper questions of interpretations and meaning” (Pace 2017, 125).
Miller-Young’s (2015) self-study found that group dialogue during interviews generated
deeper understandings of the disciplinary concept of reciprocity and states that expert thinking
is “inclined towards an epistemology in which knowledge construction is never finished or
complete” (Miller-Young 2015, 40). Similarly, Pettit (2017), Lee-Post (2019), Pace (2011),
Schlegel (2004) and Grim et al. (2004) found that active participation amongst students
generates new forms of questioning that appear to be powerful tools for reflection. Without
precluding the importance of autonomous learning, such team effort facilitates disciplinary skill
development (Schlegel 2004) and allows tasks to be skilfully analysed, dissected (Grim et al.
2004) and deconstructed.
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
227
Trans-disciplinary approaches and the T-Shaped learner
According to the University of the Western Cape (UWC) Charter of Graduate Attributes for the
Twenty First Century (2018), one of the four holistic overarching and enabling attributes which
characterises the Twenty First Century graduate is the “T-shaped learner”. It is envisaged that
this graduate should be able to have in-depth knowledge of their own respective field of study
(vertical column of the “T”), yet should also have the proficiency to apply such knowledge
across all diverse disciplinary and professional boundaries (horizontal column of the “T”) to
solve problems beyond their home discipline. Students are therefore required to think critically
and apply their knowledge within unfamiliar contexts.
This review found that two shortlisted studies (Fischer 2018; Zhu et al. 2012) highlighted
these attributes which became apparent through the Decoding interviews. One study posits that
experts are able to apply a disciplinary concept such as “sustainability” [author’s own quotation
marks], across various subjects, depending on their level of interest. In addition, the study found
that the modelling process (step 3) also enables debate and discussion amongst learners which
enhances critical thought and that this could initiate a “feedback culture in the disciplines of
sustainability science and beyond disciplinary boundaries” (Fischer 2018, 157). The study also
concludes that DtD could be a valuable approach for transdisciplinary research. Similarly, Zhu
et al.’s (2012) study incorporated metaphor-building exercises in the decoding process to
facilitate the use of geologic time in various authentic world problems.
Synergies between threshold concepts and information literacy habits of mind
Three studies (Mohamed 2020; Miller 2018; Burkholder 2011) found that expert habits of mind
may be directly aligned with information literacy ways of thinking and practices. Mohamed’s
(2020) study suggests that by integrating an additional step into the decoding model, critical
literacies could be enhanced. The interview in Mohamed’s (2020) study revealed that a strong
synergy exists between expert habits of mind and the threshold concepts of the ACRL
Framework (2016). The case shows that information literacy dispositions could be embedded
within the disciplinary unconscious mind of the practitioner. Through modelling information
literacy ways of being and thinking, Mohamed (2020) was able to assist students in the Business
Finance module to overcome complex bottlenecks.
Similarly, this valuable insight was surfaced in Miller (2018) and Burkholder (2011).
Burkholder (2011) discovered that by focussing on one bottleneck at a time, other obstacles in
learning may surface in the process. Such places of liminality are: finding information for an
assignment, annotating a bibliography, differentiating between different sources of information
and refuting counter-arguments. These information literacy practices were elicited during
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
228
practice and feedback (step 4) where students were instructed to write a music history paper.
In addition, Miller’s (2018) entire study is devoted to bringing tacit information literacy
knowledge of the expert and disciplinary bottlenecks together. Her pilot project revealed
complex themes pertaining to the ACRL Framework (2016) and found that the DtD model
could be used to further develop critical literacies.
Additional insights
Moreover, all the included studies except for Verpoorten et al. (2017), attest to the fact that the
DtD model has valuable impact on eliciting hidden challenges and for assisting learners to
overcome thresholds in learning.
However, the researcher and reviewer noted that, although all the studies lauded the
Decoding model for its significant contribution to teaching and learning, they placed huge
emphasis on the importance of mental operations. Many studies lacked the holistic picture of
teaching practices, which encompasses more than just extrapolating the mental models of the
practitioner. Furthermore, the operations are not detailed enough to show how novice learners
should transition to become expert thinkers.
None of these studies mention the degree of expertise that is required to exhibit significant
mental operations. It may be inferred that the expert’s experience and ingrained knowledge
would determine the type and value of tacit knowledge that they hold and whether this is
adequate enough to embed into transformed pedagogical practices in the classroom.
LIMITATIONS OF THE REVIEW
Due to the COVID-pandemic, the researcher and reviewer were unable to meet in person.
Hence, all deliberations surrounding the verification of literature were restricted to virtual
platforms such as Google Docs, Google Sheets, Zoom meetings and Whatsapp communication.
This mode of collaboration may have limited the intensity and rigour of cross-checking during
each phase of the review process.
Furthermore, the current study has been restricted to reviewing material published
between January 2004 and December 2020. The researcher found a limited number of articles
pertaining to research on the DtD model, which implies that this body of literature may not be
saturated enough for an in-depth systematic review. This finding also implies that there is much
scope for further research and development in this area of teaching and learning.
The majority of studies on the Decoding model were conducted in the USA where it was
initially developed and tested. Only 2 studies were performed in a developing country (South
Africa), but no research exists to corroborate that the model does have any impact on student
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
229
learning across other developing nations where education systems are vastly different. This may
have skewed the current study’s findings pertaining to the efficacy of the Decoding model on
developing expert habits of mind.
IMPLICATIONS OF THE STUDY FOR HIGHER EDUCATION IN AFRICA
This nuanced approach to teaching and learning may have a profound impact on higher
education as it aims to assist learners with disciplinary challenges by empowering them to think
and behave as experts in their fields. It incorporates the theories that are advocated by Paulo
Freire on critical pedagogy and is disruptive in the sense that it has the potential to decolonise
the traditional ways of teaching and empower the student to develop expert ways of thinking.
Underpinned by Threshold Concept Theory and transformative learning, the DtD model offers
a framework which integrates all these theories that are student-centred, participatory and
evidence–based.
As was discussed in the review, students are able to think flexibly and creatively,
transferring and applying their learning from one context to new situations. This infers that their
transformed perceptions show that such pedagogical approaches should be foregrounded in
transformative teaching in South African classrooms. We argue that cognitive transformative
pedagogy interventions such as the Decoding model have a reflective dimension which may be
used for decoloniality. Within an African educational setting, this method could encourage
students to reflect on inequalities and socio-political contexts, as many young scholars would
want to speak about racialised, classroom-based forms of historical oppression. The model
disempowers colonial teaching and assumptions that are indicative of unjust regimes by
empowering the student to develop expert habits and new ways of thinking.
CONCLUSIONS
In conclusion, we can say that several fundamental aspects were highlighted through this
systematic review. First, the study shows that the DtD model was used to prioritise the
unlocking of expert mental operations. Although it was found that students do experience
various and differentiated stages of liminality in learning, the interpretations of their own
perceptions of the decoding process were omitted. The studies examined how the expert’s ways
of thinking could transform teaching practices and alleviate bottlenecks in the process, yet
almost no surveys or focus groups were held with students to explore their own thinking and
what exactly constitutes their individual blockages in learning. This is a huge gap in the
literature and needs to be highlighted in future research.
Second, the reviewed articles showed that the researchers were able to extract some ways
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
230
of thinking that are relevant for future pedagogical practices. However, the 7-step process was
not holistically applied in all case studies. As discussed earlier, only certain steps were used to
extract expert dispositions and for their subsequent use in classroom settings. This infers that
more research is needed to explore whether the steps are interconnected and explicable only in
reference to the entire model, or whether it suffices to conclude that disciplinary thinking could
also be successfully developed by the application of randomly selected steps. Nonetheless, for
a complete and thorough implementation and evaluation of the model to occur, its different
phases should best be explored over an extended period of time.
Third, although the DtD model is found to be promising, the linkages between it and
Teaching and Learning theories have not been sufficiently explored. This paves the way for a
much deeper investigation into the Decoding model in future research.
Moreover, one of the many ways in which the identified habits of mind were made explicit
in student learning was to concretise abstract phenomena. It was found that teaching learners to
visualise, specifically by using metaphors or analogies, would assist with grasping the meaning
of complex terms and processes.
Furthermore, students may enter a state of liminality in their learning due to emotional
blockages. As mentioned above, emotions cannot be translated in course content or lesson
plans. These affective experiences should be given explicit attention and integrated into
pedagogical practices.
It was also shown that the Decoding model serves to develop the capability to deconstruct
disciplinary thinking through the generation of new ideas or understandings. The ability to
recognise patterns and connections in texts and in different points of view allow students to
“step back from the constructed narratives to deeper questions of interpretations and meaning”
(Pace 2017, 125).
Certain studies also concluded that Decoding the Disciplines could be a valuable approach
for transdisciplinary research where, in some instances, learners were encouraged to think
beyond their home disciplines to solve complex problems.
It was found that, to a certain degree, a synergy does exist between the decoding model
and information literacy. Three studies explored this intervention, concluding that some expert
mental models are related to critical literacy practices. The Decoding model makes provision
for this finding in the second step of the cycle.
This study was done using a systematic review process with clear, prescribed guidelines.
The steps which were implemented served to find the most suitable body of articles which were
selected and appraised. A thorough data extraction was conducted from each study. Only
relevant and significant studies were included in the review. We conclude that our findings may
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
231
be valuable for researchers who may want to use our study as a springboard for future
investigation into the application of the decoding paradigm in student learning.
NOTES
1. The researcher is in reference to Shehaamah Mohamed, Senior Librarian: Teaching and Learning,
Library Services, UWC.
2. The reviewer is in reference to Professor Bayat, School of Business and Finance, EMS Faculty,
UWC.
REFERENCES
ACRL see Association of Colleges and Research Libraries.
Alhamlan, Suad, Haya Aljasser, Asma Almajed, Haila Almansour, and Nidhal Alahmad. 2018. “A
Systematic Review: Using Habits of Mind to Improve Student’s Thinking in Class.” Higher
Education Studies 8(1): 25–35.
Ardizzone, Tony, Fritz Breithaupt, and Paul C Gutjahr. 2004. “Decoding the Humanities.” New
Directions for Teaching and Learning 98(2004): 45–56.
Association of Colleges and Research Libraries. 2016. “Framework for information literacy for higher
education.” http://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/ilframework.
Attas, Robin. 2018. “Uncovering and Teaching the Process of Analysis to Undergraduate Music Theory
Students.” College Music Symposium 58(2): 1–23.
Baer, Andrea. 2015. “Decoding the ACRL framework for information literacy: Applying the ‘Decoding
the Discipline’ model for instructional planning.” October 29. ALA Publishing eLearning
Workshop. https://www.slideshare.net/ALATechSource/decoding-the-acrl-framework-for-
information-literacy-applying-the-decoding-the-discipline-model-for-instructional-planning-
workshop.
Balkin, J. 1995‒1996. Deconstruction. https://jackbalkin.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/
deconessay.pdf.
Barthes, Roland, Richard Miller, and Richard Howard. 1974. S/Z an essay. New York: Hill and Wang.
Boell, Sebastian K. and Dubravka Cecez-Kecmanovic. 2015. “On Being ‘Systematic’ in Literature
Reviews in IS.” Journal of Information Technology 30(2): 161–173.
Burkholder, J. 2011. “Decoding the Discipline of Music History for Our Students.” Journal of Music
History Pedagogy 1(2): 93–111.
Cameron, E. L. 2019. “Using Methods from Cognitive Psychology to Elucidate Mental Processes.” In
3rd Actas EuroSoTL Conference: Exploring new fields through the scholarship of teaching and
learning, Bilbao, Basque Country, June 13‒14, 2019. Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País
Vasco.
Costa, Arthur L. and Bena Kallick. 2000. Integrating and sustaining habits of mind. Alexandria, Va:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Currie, Genevieve. 2017. “Conscious Connections: Phenomenology and Decoding the Disciplines.”
New Directions for Teaching and Learning 150(2017): 37–48.
Derrida, J. 1976. Of grammatology. Translated by G. C. Spivak. Baltimore, MD: The John Hopkins
University Press. (Original work published 1967).
Díaz, Middendorf. 2008. “The History Learning Project: A Department ‘Decodes’ Its Students.” The
Journal of American History 94(4): 1211–1224. Bloomington, Ind.
Durisen, Richard H. and Catherine A. Pilachowski. 2004. “Decoding Astronomical Concepts.” New
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
232
Directions for Teaching and Learning 98: 33–43.
Fischer, Matthias. 2018. “Decoding sustainability in the healthcare system. Teaching students how to
problematize complex concepts.” Journal on Innovation and Sustainability RISUS 9(3): 149‒159.
https://doi.org/10.24212/2179-3565.2018v9i3p149-159.
Gibson, Craig and Trudi E Jacobson. 2018. “Habits of Mind in an Uncertain Information World.”
Reference and user services quarterly 57(3): 183–192.
Gofman, Ari. 2019. “A Carpentries Approach to ACRL Framework Instruction.” Journal Of Escience
Librarianship 8(2): 1–14.
Grim, Valerie, David Pace, and Leah Shopkow. 2004. “Learning to Use Evidence in the Study of
History.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning 98: 57–65.
Higgs, Philip. 2002. “Deconstruction and Re-Thinking Education.” South African Journal of Education
22(3): 170–176.
Isaacs, Nazeema Zainura and Michelle Glenda Andipatin. 2020. “A Systematic Review Regarding
Women’s Emotional and Psychological Experiences of High-Risk Pregnancies.” BMC
Psychology 8(1): 45–45.
Jadoon, Aisha, Ali Naqi, and Uzma Imtiaz. 2020. “Five Codes of Barthes: A Post-Structuralist Analysis
of the Novel The Colour of Our Sky by Amita Trasi.” sjesr 3(1): 243–250.
Khomokhoana, Pakiso J. and Liezel Nel. 2020. “Decoding the Underlying Cognitive Processes and
Related Support Strategies Utilised by Expert Instructors During Source Code Comprehension.”
South African Computer Journal / Suid-Afrikaanse Rekenaartydskrif 32(2): 232–257.
Kurz, Lisa and Trudy W. Banta. 2004. “Decoding the Assessment of Student Learning.” New Directions
for Teaching and Learning 98(2004): 85–94.
Land, Ray. 2016. “Toil and trouble: Threshold concepts as a pedagogy of uncertainty.” In Threshold
concepts in practice, ed. Ray Land, Jan H. F. Meyer and Michael T. Flanagan, 11‒13. Educational
futures: Rethinking theory and practice, Michael A. Peters (Series Editor). Rotterdam/Boston:
Sense Publishers.
Lee-Post, Anita. 2019. “Developing numeracy and problem-solving skills by overcoming learning
bottlenecks.” Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education 11(3): 398‒414. https://doi.org/
10.1108/JARHE-03-2018-0049.
Long, Hannah A., David P. French, and Joanna M. Brooks. 2020. “Optimising the Value of the Critical
Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) Tool for Quality Appraisal in Qualitative Evidence
Synthesis.” Research Methods in Medicine & Health Sciences 1(1): 31–42.
Middendorf, Joan and David Pace. 2004. “Decoding the disciplines: A model for helping students learn
disciplinary ways of thinking.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning 98: 1‒12.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.142.
Middendorf, Joan, Jolanta Mickutė, Tara Saunders, José Najar, Andrew E. Clark-Huckstep, and David
Pace. 2015. “What’s Feeling Got to Do with It? Decoding Emotional Bottlenecks in the History
Classroom.” Arts and Humanities in Higher Education 14(2): 166–180.
Miller, Sara. 2018. “Diving Deep: Reflective Questions for Identifying Tacit Disciplinary Information
Literacy Knowledge Practices, Dispositions, and Values through the ACRL Framework for
Information Literacy.” The Journal of Academic Librarianship 44(3): 412–418.
Miller-Young, Dean. 2015. “Decoding Ourselves: An Inquiry into Faculty Learning About Reciprocity
in Service-Learning.” Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning 22(1): 32–47.
Miller-Young, Janice and Jennifer Boman. 2017. “Uncovering ways of thinking, practicing, and being
through decoding across disciplines.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning 150: 19‒35.
https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.20235.
Mohamed, Shehaamah. 2020. “Decoding information literacy ways of thinking in student learning:
Influencing pedagogic methods.” South African Journal of Higher Education 34(3): 182‒209.
Pace, David. 2011. “Assessment in History: The Case for ‘Decoding’ the Discipline.” The Journal of
Mohamed and Bayat Evaluating the Decoding the Disciplines paradigm that is used for developing disciplinary habits ...
233
Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 11(3): 107–119.
Pace, David. 2004. “Decoding the Reading of History: An Example of the Process.” New Directions for
Teaching and Learning 98(2004): 13–21.
Pace, David. 2017. The Decoding the Disciplines Paradigm Seven Steps to Increased Student Learning.
Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Pettit, Rathburn. 2017. “Building Bridges from the Decoding Interview to Teaching Practice.” New
Directions for Teaching and Learning 150(2017): 75–85.
Pinnow, Eleni. 2016. “Decoding the disciplines: An approach to scientific thinking.” Psychology
Learning and Teaching 15(1): 94‒101. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725716637484.
Riegler, P. 2019. “Lost in Language Comprehension: Decoding putatively extra-disciplinary expertise.”
In 3rd Actas EuroSoTL Conference: Exploring new fields through the scholarship of teaching and
learning, Bilbao, Basque Country, June 13‒14, 2019. Servicio Editorial de la Universidad del País
Vasco.
Rousse, Mary, Julie Phillips, Rachel Mehaffey, Susanna McGowan, and Peter Felten. 2017. “Decoding
and disclosure in students-as-partners research: A case study of the political science literature
review.” International Journal for Students as Partners 1(1): 1‒14. https://doi.org/10.
15173/ijsap.v1i1.3061.
Rubin, Barry M. and Shanker Krishnan 2004. “Decoding Applied Data in Professional Schools.” New
Directions for Teaching and Learning 98(2004): 67–73.
Schlegel, Whitney M. and David Pace. 2004. “Using Collaborative Learning Teams to Decode
Disciplines: Physiology and History.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning 98: 75–83.
Sturts, Jill R. and Rasul A. Mowatt. 2012. “Understanding and overcoming bottlenecks in student
learning.” SCHOLE: A Journal of Leisure Studies and Recreation Education 27(1): 39–45.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1937156X.2012.11949364.
Sundt, Jody. 2010. “Overcoming Student Resistance to Learning Research Methods: An Approach
Based on Decoding Disciplinary Thinking.” Journal of Criminal Justice Education 21(3): 266–
284.
Tingerthal, John Steven. 2013. “Applying the Decoding the Disciplines process to teaching structural
mechanics: An autoethnographic case study.” Dissertation. Northern Arizona University.
Verpoorten, D., J. Devyver, D. Duchâteau, B. Mihaylov, A. Agnello, P. Ebrahimbabaye, J.-F. Focant,
et al. 2017. “Decoding the disciplines – A pilot study at the University of Liège (Belgium).” In
Proceedings of the 2nd European Conference for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, ed.
R. Andersson, K. Martensson, and T. Roxa, 263‒267. University of Lund, Sweden: Jubileum
Series.
Yeo, Michelle, Mark R. Lafave, Khatija Westbrook, Jenelle R. McAllister, Dennis Valdez, and Breda
H. F. Eubank. 2017. “Impact of decoding work within a professional program.” New Directions
for Teaching and Learning 150: 87‒96. https://doi.org/10.1002/tl.
Yeo, Michelle. 2017. “Decoding the Disciplines as a Hermeneutic Practice.” New Directions for
Teaching and Learning 150: 49–62.
Zhu, Chen, George Rehrey, Brooke Treadwell, and Claudia C. Johnson. 2012. “Looking Back to Move
Ahead: How Students Learn Geologic Time by Predicting Future Environmental Impacts.”
Journal of College Science Teaching 41(3): 54‒60. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43748327.
(Accessed 1 February 2021).
Zolan, Miriam, Susan Strome, and Roger Innes. 2004. “Decoding Genetics and Molecular Biology:
Sharing the Movies in Our Heads.” New Directions for Teaching and Learning 98: 23–32.
