I am knee deep in my critical thinking professional development, and I feel that I have learned a lot in a short period of time.   Over my twenty-four year career, critical thinking has appeared in a wide array of curricula, and professional development sessions.  This would lead one to suggest that critical thinking is a widely valued entity in education. We want students to be able to think critically. Yet, I can honestly say that  I have never attended a professional development session where the presenter actually broke down what critical thinking is and how to effectively facilitated it.  I do not think that my experience is a unique one, and I would venture to suggest that there is a need for clarity around the topic of critical thinking.

My present journey in critical thinking was spurred by the conversation that I had with a colleague.  I was asked to specifically pinpoint how to scaffold or coach critical thinking.  During this discussion, I recognized that we had a different picture in our minds of what constituted critical thinking.  I also realized that I wasn’t 100% sure what effective scaffolding should look like and nor did have a wide repertoire of successful experiences to draw from.

I have been extremely blessed to receive a bursary from a collaborative professional development fund that was developed by my teachers’ union and school division.  This bursary has allowed me to kick start my critical thinking journey.  So, my blog post today is going to focus on what I have learned to date, with great mentorship from Garfield Gini-Newman from Ontario Institute for Studies in Education-University of Toronto (OISE-U of Toronto), regarding what critical thinking is, and how to frame tasks that open greater opportunities for critical thinking to take place.   I believe my learning journey highlights key aspects outlined in Adult Learning theory.  Adults learn best when the learning is self-directed, relevant, practical, collaborative and utilizes prior knowledge experiences.

Below are two texts that I have been using in my professional development journey.  They have been extremely helpful and provide practical strategies that one can utilized in the classroom.

Are you ready?  Well, here goes with section one of my journey to date.

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is based on a Greek word meaning criteria. Please note: I will not be making any Big Fat Greek Wedding references in my discussion  Critical thinking is to make thoughtful decisions using criteria to guide one in decision-making.  Epiphany #1-  I had never considered that criteria were important elements embedded in the process of critical thinking.  Critical thinking engages the student in assessing or judging the merits of “possible options” in relation to criteria or relevant factors.  Thus, not only do I need to have criteria but kids need to be assessing or judging the merits of items in relation to the criteria.  Below are two summative task examples that I have developed in consultation with Garfield that demonstrate the use of criteria and assessing the merits of items in relation to the criteria.  I have felt very awkward and uncomfortable in trying to utilize these two components when designing summative tasks.  Although my implementing of these elements is far from perfect, I believe student thinking has been positively influenced. When I focused on developing questions using the UBD essential question method, I felt that students’ responses often reflected limited critical thinking.  Yet, when I developed questions tied to clear criteria, and students had to assess or judge the merits of items in relation to the criteria, they have shown deeper thinking.  They have a clear target compared to the often global nature of my essential questions.    The first example is a  Gr. 9 Science task that I just finished and the second is a Grade 11 Canadian History example that I hope to utilize next year.  

Task #1– As a Canadian astronaut candidate, you have been called upon by the Canadian Space Agency (CSA) to participate in a planetary analysis investigation    Upon your examination of the Mars, you will be required to report your findings and as well recommend whether the planet is a good choice for colonization.  Your recommendation must include three key reasons ( in ranked order)  why Mars should or should not be colonized.

Criteria for good choice:

• enables easy transport of materials (food, building, and medical supplies etc.) and humans between the two planets
• provides colonist with the ability to construct structures (buildings)
• possesses an effective energy source, (potential to grow food either on the planet or in a greenhouse structure) and has weather and seasonal patterns similar to Earth possesses the possibility to accommodate a growing population

Task #2- There is inequity between Aboriginal and non-aboriginal people in Canada, which has existed since colonization. In support of Truth and Reconciliation, our  School Division is asking for student input on ways to educate our community regarding the factors that have contributed these historical inequities; and requests student direction on what the next steps should be in moving our school communities forward in building stronger positive relationships between Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal community members.  Your team will be presenting your plan to our principal or superintendent.

To what degree did each of the following contribute to the historical inequities that Indigenous people face today?

• Racism/Prejudice
• Power- one group wants power over anther
• Greed-wants wealth or resources of another
• Cultural misunderstanding

Criteria for the degree of contribution:

• widespread impact
• powerful and lasting impact

Cascade Unit Design VS UBD Framework

I was introduced to the cascade planning template through my work with Garfield.  It has some similarities to the Understanding By Design (UBD)  framework that I have used for the past 15 years.  At first glance, I made an incorrect assumption that the overarching questions used in the cascade framework were almost identical to essential questions (EQ’s) utilized in UBD.  Overarching questions always are accompanied by criteria that a student must utilize to reference their thinking against, and EQ’s do not have criteria tied to them.

Examples:

• Can the design of a slide enhance the experience for the riders?
  • Criteria for an exhilarating ride:
    • • High velocity
      • Variations in velocity
      • Safe
      • Dramatic finish
• Did First Nations benefit from early interactions with European?
  • Criteria for benefit:
    • Increased their safety
    • Increase their wealth
    • Improved life in their families and community

I have come to understand that inquiry can be framed basically four different ways:

1. Inquiry as Factual Recall– Teacher poses a question that requires students to find factual information about.  Manitoba’s  Gr. 11 Canadian History Essential Questions reflect this form of inquiry.
2. Inquiry as Personal Preference-Students explore a question that they are interested in.
3. Inquiry as Discovery– Students investigate something and see what they find out.

All of the above do not require any thoughtful response and nor do they require any critical thinking.

The fourth type of inquiry-Inquiry as Critical Lens– involves students exploring questions, in relation to criteria, which they reference their thinking around.  This process forces students to interact and dissect their new knowledge rather than simply and passively gathering new facts or information. The criteria force students to look at this new knowledge through different lenses.

Can students engage in critical thinking throughout Blooms Taxonomy?

In the past, I had always supported the notion that critical thinking could only occur in the upper levels of Blooms Taxonomy, but I have recently changed my thinking.  The following table is found on page 69, of Garfield Gini-Newman and Roland Case’s book -Creating Thinking Classrooms.  They outline how critical thinking tasks can be developed at any level of Blooms, and they suggest that critical thinking should be a priority of classroom instruction on a daily basis.

	Sample questions using Bloom’s taxonomy	Critically thoughtful versions of the tasks
Remember	Describe where Goldilocks lived	Describe where Goldilocks lived in a way that makes me see and feel what the place was like
Understand	Summarize what the Goldilocks story was about.	Select the five most important details that tell what
Apply	Construct a theory as to why Goldilocks went into the house.	Construct a believable theory based on clues in the story as to why Goldilocks went into the house
Analyze	Differentiated between how Goldilocks reacted and how you would react in each story event.	Differentiate between how Goldilocks reacted and a sensible (street-safe) response to each story event
Evaluate	Assess whether or not you think this really happened to Goldilocks	Assess which of the story events could really happen and which are fantasy.
Create	Compose a song, skit, poem, or rap to convey the Goldilocks story in a new form	Compose and perform a well-crafted song, skit, poem, or rap that conveys the core message to students your age of the Goldilocks story.

I believe that I will need to do a better job of “strategically” planning for critical thinking. I need a better understanding of  how to coach students on two platforms: how to engage in thinking critically and as well how to effectively communicate their thinking.    I find that quite a few students can provide their critical analysis, in relation to the criteria, orally with a few prompts from me, the teacher.  What I have observed and experienced first hand is that a much larger percentage of students struggle with placing this oral discussion into a written form.  Now experts, provincial consultants etc.,  might suggest that I should not necessarily worry about having students communicating their ideas in a written manner, but I disagree.  I believe in balance, but I also strongly believe that students need to get better at expressing their ideas in a written manner.  I believe that the general dissemination of  Gardner’s Multiple Intelligence work, like it or hate it, has caused some/many teachers to move away from developing strong written communication skills.  I thinking that Gardner’s work is very interesting, but there has not been much empirical research conducted to test his theory.  In the work that I have done over the past two decades, I have seen a growing student trend where they place boundaries around how they can learn new skills or content.   Students will tell me that I only learn “this way” so I can’t do this type of assignment.  Thus, I feel this is a contributor NOT the contributor to some students’ written communication struggles.

Skill or Competence?

Garfield tossed out the following idea to me, a couple of weeks ago, that critical thinking should be considered as a competency rather than being viewed as a skill.  There are many different skill sets that one draws upon when thinking in a critical manner.  I had never considered this perspective before, and after some reflection, I would agree.

Here is a critical thinking video series that might be helpful in your professional development.

• Critical Thinking Videos

 

Although I have learned much more than what I have reflected upon today, I need to focus on some family responsibilities that I have been neglecting.  I look forward to any comments and feedback that you are willing to provide. Wishing everyone a wonderful weekend, although it is a very frosty weekend in my neck of the woods, and only 14 days until Spring Break!!

 

All the best,

Ingrid