Higher Order Thinking - Essay Example

Running Head Higher Order Thinking Higher Order Thinking High order thinking is a core of modern education. The main contribution to this theory was made by Benjamin Bloom in 1956. Bloom's taxonomy can be explained as a classification system of different learning processes. The three lowest levels of taxonomy are knowledge, understanding and application. Three highest levels are analysis, synthesis and evaluation. Analysis has to do with figuring out something on your own, i.e., an individual cannot be just repeating what he reads or hears. It is seeing how something works. An individual discerns what is connected to what. A student gets at why something is happening. During synthesis process, iIf analysis is taking things apart to see what makes them tick, synthesis is putting things together. Synthesis is solving a problem, making something whole out of a bunch of pieces nobody told you how to put together, or creating or devising something (Bloom, 1956). Evaluation is deciding on your own, and in an informed way, whether something is preferable; whether it has merit or worth; or whether it is morally right, just, or fair. Personal Meaning is reflection on the personal significance, consequence, or implication of some object of concern. It is important to help students recognize that all concepts are in some way related to one another. This is one reason concept mapping can be a very powerful evaluation tool. The main limitation of Bloom's taxonomy is that it is not a strategy but a model which explains main thinking skills. It does not help to solve problems and develop effective critical thinking skills. Bloom explains some ideas and the concept of thinking but he does not explain how this model can be and should be applied to real world situations. His main works on taxonomy are Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Cognitive Dimension (1956). Another model of high order thinking was developed by Robert Marzano. Marzano adopted Bloom's taxonomy but added new characteristics to the model. This model consists of 8 characteristics: focusing, information gathering, remembering, organizing, analyzing, generating, integrating, evaluating. The ideology of Marzano is based on the idea that: "When content is new, students must be guided in relating the new knowledge to what they already know, organizing and then using that new knowledge. Knowledge can be of two types: Declarative (i.e., attributes, rules) or procedural (skills and processes). Items of this type are factual and content-specific" (Marzano 1995, p. 87). The main works by Marzano are Dimensions of thinking : a framework for curriculum and instruction (1988), Cultivating thinking in English and the language arts (1991), The systematic identification and articulation of content standards and benchmarks (1995). The most recent model based on Bloom's taxonomy is Anderson/Krathwohl mode (2000). According to this model, the following levels of thinking exist: (1) remembering: Retrieving, recalling, or recognizing, (2) understanding, (3) applying, (4) analyzing, (5) evaluating, (6) creating. The advantage of this model is that there isare student choice, exploration, or creative challenge. There is opportunity for students to collaborate, develop facility with language, and work with ideas. There is chance for students to write or say what they deeply care about. In sum, classrooms are all too teacher dominated, mechanical, and pedestrian for my blood. Whatever gains may result from mastery learning--and, remember the last section, they are significant--too often they are purchased at the expense of pointing us away from what really matters in education, that students learn how to take charge of their own learning and growth and empower themselves to live freely. The main problem describes the main stages of thinking but tells little about real life application and connections between these stages (Dettmer, 2006). In spite of limitations and weaknesses these models become a core of modern education helping teachers to construct tests and learning materials based on thinking concepts and models. Exploration and the development of processes of learning focusing on data gathering are taking place, but meaning-making through data analysis and reasoning via scientific argumentation have been lagging behind. The models mentioned above provide learners with the opportunities to develop the requisite reasoning skills to move from scientific data to scientific conclusions (Pintrich, 2004). In classroom, these models help a teacher to construct a learning process and create tests and questions in accordance with cognitive skills of the students. Individuals hold certain theoretical positions and use their theoretical understanding to incorporate and assimilate new information. Much of learning is thought of as a process of transfer, implying that one can only learn by making sense of new information through the use of already learned concepts. New concepts can build on old concepts, or there can be such inconsistency between old and new concepts that cognitive restructuring is required. Student conceptual development demands an understanding of the justification for methods and their relationship to a set of aims. Taken together, models are a direct outcome of teacher assessment decisions that begin to alter the dynamics of the classroom learning environment. The public expression of what matters and what is valued begins to change. As students learn the criteria, they not only learn the rules of the game in the classroom, they also learn what is valued in the scientific discipline (Pintrich, 2004). 2. In general, high order thinking can be described as a gradual process of cognitive development, from the lowest to the highest levels, which helps students to master knowledge and skills. The models mentioned above suggest that a major responsibility for a teacher within the mastery learning model is to be very clear on the learning objectives for students. The teacher needs to resolve the question of what exactly students are to learn so that everyone concerned knows what is expected, and also to give direction to instructional and evaluative activities. The question that drives this emphasis on specificity of purpose is how, if a teacher does not know where he wants students to go, he cannot decide what to do to get them there or know whether or not they have arrived. There is a tendency within this model to break down large, inclusive aims and goals into small, discrete objectives that are stated behaviorally. Learning tasks are made small and manageable to the greatest degree possible; for one reason, in order to maximize the chance that students will be successful with them. What results, usually, is a long series of discrete learning tasks. Each is circumscribed and manageable, so there is a high probability of achievement by students as they proceed objective-by-objective through the list. What this comes down to is being very clear on what is to be learned and staying with each objective until the student learns it. Since the objectives and the sequence of learning activities are predetermined, and there is the faith that all children can and will learn, the key variable is time (Bloom, 1956). High order thinking includes the need for people to gain a critical understanding of themselves and their circumstances and to begin to forge an integrated personal identity. They need to learn to relate to one another and to begin to take membership in the human community. They need to resolve issues related to physical maturity and sexuality. They need to find something to believe in, and to express themselves through their art and their work. They need to develop cognitively so that they can think in sophisticated ways about themselves and their world. It could be that these are the issues that they should study directly rather than the academic disciplines (Pintrich, 2004). Thinking learning occurs when learners actively create their own knowledge by trying to make sense out of material that is presented to them. For example, in reading a textbook lesson on the formation of lightning, a constructivist learner attempts to build a mental model of the cause-and-effect system for lightning formation. The purpose of high order thinking is to examine design principles for fostering constructivist learning, such as the learning of scientific explanations in textbooks, lectures, and multimedia environments. References 1. Bloom, B.S. (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Cognitive Dimension New York, McKay. 2. Dettmer, P. (2006). New Blooms in Established Fields: Four Domains of Learning and Doing. Roeper Review 28 (1), pp. 70-72. 3. Marzano, R. J. (1995). A New Paradigm for Educational Change. Education, 116 (1), pp. 87-89. 4. Pintrich, P. R. (2004). Learning to Think: Disciplinary Perspectives. Journal of Higher Education, 75 (1), pp. 476-478. Read More