Search

Although using the five-paragraph formula to teach essay writing is a ubiquitous practice--and many K-12 teachers defend it--Campbell argues that having students write according to this formula does more harm than good. The formula's tight structure stops the very critical thinking students need to do to strengthen their cognition and their writing skills. Students focus on slotting sentences into a template rather than pondering what they really want to say about a topic. In addition, writing to the formula doesn't lead to the highest scores on standardized tests or prepare kids for college writing--and may reinforce a deficit model of education. Drawing on her experience teaching English language arts, Campbell suggest specific ways teachers can forgo the formula and guide students to read closely, gather evidence, think deeply about an argument they'd like to make, and make informed decisions about how to structure and compose their essay.

This author contends that the United States neglects creativity in its education system. To see this, he states, one may look at the Common Core State Standards. If one searches the English Language Arts and Literacy standards for the words "creative," "innovative," and "original"--and any associated terms, one will find scant mention of the words and the ideas they represent. Readers should find this troubling. Supporters of the new standards will likely note that creativity relates more to instructional methodology than to literacy and that the Common Core initiative leaves choices about methodology to teacher practitioners. Although this deference to teachers' judgment is appreciated, there are three problems with this reasoning. At this point in history, certain competencies and understandings should be outlined in the basic literacy standards. The author has four suggestions for what educators should add to the new standards, all tied to creativity and technology: (1) Adopt art as the 4th "R"; (2) Teach media grammar; (3) Adopt "creatical" thinking; and (4) Spur thinking about technology. (Contains 2 endnotes.)

The "elephant in the room" when we talk about preparing critical thinkers for the 21st century, Gallagher believes, is U.S. students' lack of reading proficiency and their general disinclination to read. Gallagher's provocative argument is that a significant factor behind the decline of reading in young people is a set of practices schools engage in (with the hope of raising test scores) that actually kill students' love of reading. He calls these practices readicide. He discusses four trends in instruction that encourage shallow thinking and reading and limit both the amount and quality of true reading students engage in: (1) Schools value the development of test-takers more than the development of readers; (2) Schools limit authentic reading experiences; (3) Teachers overteach books; and (4) Teachers underteach books. Gallagher suggests approaches and strategies, drawn from his work as a high school English teacher, that teachers should try to counteract these trends.

In this interview, creativity expert Sir Ken Robinson makes the case for creativity as the crucial 21st-century skill. Genuine creative processes involve critical thinking as well as imaginative insights and fresh ideas. Also, creativity is a process, not a single event, one that requires continual evaluation. It's about everyone, it's a function of everything we do, and it's structured and disciplined. Creativity and innovation can help us tackle our current challenges and reconnect us with our passions. Instead of "systematically alienating people from their own talents," schools need to teach creatively and teach for creativity.

Although teachers focus on style, fluency, tone, and correct grammar in writing, they rarely emphasize the importance of content. Both the National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges and the NAEP seem to favor emotional and personal writing, at least at the high school level. Judging from their guidelines, both the SAT and the WASL promote fictional nonfiction in their writing sections. This is a great disservice to students, who end up struggling with writing requirements in college. Assigned to remedial classes, they often drop out of college. Fitzhugh, the founder of The Concord Review, offers students a place to publish their academic essays.

How should a teacher respond when a student makes off-base guesses about meaning in a literary text because that learner is trying to genuinely understand the story rather than find the "right" meaning? Aukerman argues that when teachers jump in to correct students' interpretations, they short-circuit students' processes of reading and thinking. Aukerman describes a discussion among 5th graders in which a teacher refrained from correcting a boy's misinterpretation of the word beast. The teacher allowed the kids to mine the text for meaningful clues instead, as they argued about whether the donkey was a savage monster or just a large animal. With the authentic purpose of convincing one another, students looked to the text--not the teacher--for answers. The author calls this kind of textual discussion through which students come to their own interpretations as a group Shared Evaluation Pedagogy. She provides evidence that the practice increases students' comprehension and thinking skills. (Contains 1 figure.)

Standardized writing tests helps educators to learn how well their students' will be scored and how well they can apply assessment techniques in their own classrooms. Students can use assessment as an instruction tool in order to generate a scoring rubric of their own, which fosters critical thinking and formative self-assessment abilities that will serve them throughout their life.

Encouraging young children to think themselves as writers helps them to achieve more in their life than one have ever imagined. When young students are given an open-ended ongoing invitation to write books, they build identities as writers around their daily work of composing texts and they also gain a sense of ownership and control over literacy.

Digital literacy, the ability to understand, evaluate, and integrate information in multiple, computer-delivered formats, is a critical skill. A multimedia computer with an Internet connection allows people to construct information from around the world. Virtual instruction is best used to supplement, not replace classroom teachers. Educators should use filters and search engines to determine the best Web pages for instructional purposes. (MLH)

Media literacy is making a comeback, spurred by students' access to unlimited information on the Internet. Can schools provide the skills students need to become media literate in a digital world? Researchers find that reading for understanding online requires the same skills as offline reading, including using prior knowledge and making predictions, plus a set of additional critical-thinking skills that reflect the open-ended, continually changing online context. Choosing appropriate search engines, following relevant links, and judging the validity of information are difficult challenges, not only for students of all ages, but also for most adults, including many teachers. Educators face enormous challenges in preparing their students to be critical online readers. For the most part, the teaching of critical-thinking skills is not part of the regular curriculum, and printed text is still considered the mainstay of school reading. Moreover, many recent studies identify persistent barriers to integrating new technologies into instruction, including lack of training and help for teachers and insufficient access to functioning technology. Yet more and more students spend more and more time online. Rather than ignoring this fact of life, the author asserts educators and education policymakers should embrace it.

Research has revealed distinct differences in the problem-solving approaches of high- and low-aptitude students. As a consequence, content area teachers can focus on thinking skills by having students describe their mental processes and giving them feedback on erroneous or incomplete reasoning. (TE)

Argues that the Socratic method is inappropriate for children because it teaches them to question adult authority before they have the necessary experience and is therefore conducive to cynicism. A traditional liberal arts curriculum, combining transmission of culture with open inquiry, is preferable to attempts to teach critical thinking. (TE)

Argues that the best way to cultivate children's reasoning is to make philosophy an essential part of the elementary school curriculum. Philosophy alone provides the logical criteria for distinguishing better thinking from poorer. The author's "Philosophy for Children" program is described. (TE)

Short and long term strategies for implementing critical thinking skills into school programs are discussed. The short term strategy is to teach analytic skills within established subject areas, while the long term strategy involves recognizing and overcoming the unconscious obstacles to development of sound critical and dialectical thinking. (TE)

Change in the way social issues are addressed depends on our recognizing the value of using issues to improve thinking and decision-making skills and to develop historicalmindedness and a global perspective rather than learning the content of particular topics or the "right" answer about an issue. (Author/DCS)

Proposes an expanded definition of critical thinking and discusses its components. Includes an outline of goals and objectives for a critical thinking curriculum. (MCG)

Briefly analyzes and critiques "The Taxonomy of Educational Objectives" by Benjamin Bloom and others from the perspective of the values and epistemological presuppositions of the critical thinking movement. Suggests that the hierarchical organization of the taxonomy fosters mistaken assumptions about cognitive processes and may hamper successful curriculum design efforts. (Author/PGD)

This interview with David Perkins, codirector of Harvard's Project Zero and author of "The Mind's Best Work," focuses on the links between creative and critical thinking styles. Exercises in Venezuela's Project Intelligence are also discussed, along with possible curricular approaches to teaching skills. (11 references) (MLH)

In this interview, author Art Costa asserts that the teaching of either content or thinking skills in isolation is unproductive. To combine these approaches, he recommends selecting content for its relationship to thought processes. He also observes that administrators who model intelligent behavior thereby create a climate for thinking. (TE)

Approaches to teaching thinking such as direct teaching of thinking skills and metacognitive approaches, if applied thoughtlessly, can backfire and inhibit thinking, especially with students who are already able, but unconventional, thinkers. We do not know enough about the nature of thinking processes to warrant a mandated thinking skills program. (TE)

Programs to teach students critical thinking must empower them to be self-directed, but they must also stress respect and empathy for the viewpoints of others. (Author/TE)

Recommends the frame of reference method in helping students learn to recognize bias in the questions an author asks, the evidence gathered, and the conclusions drawn. Describes a high school writing-anthropology unit on the Kung San society. Discusses the potentials, problems, and school-linked constraints in using frame of reference models. (IW)

Discusses the three counterforces that work against teaching art in the schools: (1)students' naive concepts; (2) schooling's neglect of intelligent behavior; and (3) counterproductive disciplinary procedures. Presents the concept of "invisible art" used to teach an experimental course in art appreciation. Includes extensive references. (MD)

Allan Glatthorn, author of "Curriculum Renewal," makes specific recommendations for the content of the English "mastery curriculum," grades 5 to 12. These include guidelines for the six strands of the English curriculum: literature, language, composition, speaking and listening, critical thinking, and vocabulary development. (TE)

If schools are to succeed in teaching critical thinking, educators must have a clear idea of what it is. Critical thinking is skillful, responsible thinking that relies upon criteria, is self-correcting, and is sensitive to context. (TE)

According to Matthew Lipman, director of the Institute for the Advancement of Philosophy for Children, philosophy is the best answer to the call for critical thinking because it provides experience in reasoning that will prepare children much better than the limited knowledge of the disciplines. (TE)

Describes travel experiences in foreign cities to illustrate the authors' contention that cities provide an ideal context for developing critical thinking in students. Argues that schools should exploit urban resources to relate students' learning experiences to their everyday lives. (Author/JM)

Instruction, like life, cannot always be planned, especially when teaching students the skills for interacting with real life situations and problems. (Author)

We can revive the spirit of inventiveness by allowing students the freedom to consider the unconventional and probe the possibilities of the "impossible." (Author)

For uncritical users, the Web can be a tangle of misinformation. A teacher offers tips to help educators and student evaluate the validity of Web sites. The four Ws of site validation involve determining who wrote the site, what the site is saying, when the site was created, and where it originated. Learners should not rely solely on Web resources and ignore information available elsewhere. (MLH)

Condensing the teaching of cognitive strategies into a discrete instructional unit is self-defeating. Success in teaching thinking skills results when content objectives are contingent upon activities that also promote thinking and when thinking skills permeate the entire curriculum. (TE)

Responding to criticism that teaching thinking places a misguided emphasis on process at the expense of curricular content, this article contends that teachers should focus on how to relate both content and process for meaningful learning, because the value of any knowledge or skill depends on its context. (TE)

The notion that thinking can be taught as a separate skill is a philosophical mistake. Teachers who are knowledgeable about their subject, who understand how it differs from other disciplines, and who can convey this to their students are already teaching thinking skills. (TE)

Responding to Goldman's critique of the Socratic method, the author redefines the "Socratic spirit" as rational dialog focused on questions of significance in an atmosphere of mutual support and cooperation. Exemplified in Lipman's "Philosophy for Children," this approach nourishes the reflective spirit in children and develops their confidence. (TE)

Answering Richard Paul's critique, the author restates his preference for open dialog in the school about beliefs and issues, rather than excessive concern with techniques of critical thinking. Children learn worthwhile things without being directly taught, while an unintended consequence of teaching critical thinking may be a weakening of creativity. (TE)

While schools cannot--should not--attempt to provide answers to controversial questions, they do need to teach children to pose those questions themselves and to examine them objectively. Regular forums in public schools in which various social issues are analyzed and discussed from a variety of viewpoints are one possibility. (Author/DCS)

Critiques the terminological, historical, prescriptive, and descriptive difficulties in the "great tradition" article (EA 519 521, this issue). It is important that schools teach the application of critical thinking to moral problems. (MD)

Criticizes the "great tradition" article (EA 519 521, this issue), asserting that traditional methods of moral instruction failed because they indoctrinated conduct and did not teach individuals moral understanding. Suggests that indoctrination is incompatible with education. (MD)

Criticizes the ideas of the "great tradition" article (EA 519 521, this issue), pointing out that there is little historical agreement on the nature of morality, and that advocating mindless conformity to externally imposed standards of conduct is to caricature the moral life. (MD)

A response to the opinion by John Baer that teaching thinking puts able thinkers at risk. The chances are greater that educators may retreat from teaching thinking if they are uncertain about the importance and possibility thereof than that able students will be harmed by efforts to help them. (Author/TE)

Argues that the preceding article in this periodical, written by Stephen Norris, about research related to critical thinking and the teaching of critical thinking, fails to demonstrate the scope of the research that has been done and overemphasizes a kind of specialized, compartmentalized thinking at the expense of dialectical thinking. (PGD)

Evidence from the Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) program suggests that at-risk students show little understanding of content without first receiving concentrated instruction in understanding itself. Teaching thinking skills to at-risk students requires a thinking environment, consisting of exploratory conversations, stimulation of curiosity, and challenging instruction. (TE)

Educators have shown great interest in teaching thinking in the last five years. This overview introduces thinking skills instruction as the theme of this issue of "Educational Leadership" and distinguishes three different approaches: teaching for thinking, teaching about thinking, and teaching of thinking. (TE)