Dear Tony,

I have given this question (in various forms) a lot of thought and some attention (e.g., development of related cognitive models of learning). At the end of the day (i.e., after several decades of research and over 30 years of university teaching -- both undergraduate and graduate), I have concluded that while we can (relatively easily) test/assess for higher order thinking skills (e.g., use of problem solving questions), the actual development of these abilities is a significantly greater challenge. Although NOT politically correct the answer lies in the old adage "You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear." Similarly, if a student (i.e., learner) is not endowed with higher order cognitive abilities then it is highly unlikely (if not impossible) to develop these abilities in them (think, for example, about Piaget's development levels . . .).

Sincerely,

Lou

PS This does NOT mean that we give up on students, but merely that we recognize their abilities, help them to achieve their maximum potential, and do not set unrealistic expectations.

The strategy that worked in my institution is the task oriented approach to instructions. This is all about experiential learning. This approach juxtaposes all aspects of the Bloom's taxonomy and actualizes mastery and retention

Reflective learning activities has been shown to improve critical thinking and clinical reasoning skills, which are both considered higher order thinking skills.

I am currently developing reflective learning modules for pharmacy education at the University of Sydney in order bridge the gap between theory and practice.

Construct structured questions that begin with lower order thinking skills (LOTS) items and eventually move to higher order thinking skills (HOTS) items.Then use appropriate verbs for each item. The verbs used for HOTS items must be both mutually understood by the test setter and the examinees.

Dear Tony,

I have given this question (in various forms) a lot of thought and some attention (e.g., development of related cognitive models of learning). At the end of the day (i.e., after several decades of research and over 30 years of university teaching -- both undergraduate and graduate), I have concluded that while we can (relatively easily) test/assess for higher order thinking skills (e.g., use of problem solving questions), the actual development of these abilities is a significantly greater challenge. Although NOT politically correct the answer lies in the old adage "You cannot make a silk purse out of a sow's ear." Similarly, if a student (i.e., learner) is not endowed with higher order cognitive abilities then it is highly unlikely (if not impossible) to develop these abilities in them (think, for example, about Piaget's development levels . . .).

Sincerely,

Lou

PS This does NOT mean that we give up on students, but merely that we recognize their abilities, help them to achieve their maximum potential, and do not set unrealistic expectations.

Hi Tony,

From my perspective, the greatest tools for supporting the development of critical thinking all center around reflective writing. It takes a lot of scaffolding, of course. Students need active support to learn how to describe the relevant components of their experience, to reflect on it critically, to connect their reflection to subsequent action, etc. But it can be amazingly fruitful.

A similar track involves the use of oral dialogue and oral examination - where the instructor can support students to stretch their limits of their current reflection.

One great motivator, for a certain sector of our students, is the concept of reflexivity. How do experiences impact on their own sense of self? How did the activities of this unit help develop you as an engineer (or whatever)? Leading students to reflexive practice help make the critical and conceptual elements more immediately relevant to many students.

There are many approaches that suggest developing higher order thinking skills (PBL, TBL, TICs) depending on the skill, just be creative and assertive...the problem is to actually measure the effect after the intervention...

I tend to agree with Matt, careful scaffolding of reflective activities into curricula,such as reflective writing, engaging in reflective dialogue and utilizing reflective tools such as blogs, journals, portfolios has the potential to enhance higher order thinking skills.

I'm going to agree with Matt and Cherie as well, and add problem-based learning as well. If you give students real problems to solve - this includes case studies, hypotheticals, and simulations as well as real-time real problems, they must apply their knowledge. As soon as they have to apply, analyse, evaluate or create something new using the information they have remembered and undertood, you are training them in higher order thinking. Collaborative learning is also very useful in this respect, but it does take time to teach students how to work in teams; you can't rush it.

Interesting discussion and I agree with Louis, however I believe it begins in early childhood during play...cause and effect. Build a tower of blocks and watch them fall if not stacked properly, for example. I remember my father giving my brother and I a map, showing us the legend, and asking us to figure out how long it will take us to get to my grandmother's house if we're going a certain speed (we lived in NY, she lived in New Orleans). He was always challenging us to figure things out for ourselves by continuously asking us questions and pushing us to think.

There are a couple of things taking place during this learning...seeking/gaining knowledge, developing skills, and putting both together to help solve problems and apply them to a variety of situations starting at the moment of birth.

How do we get students to reach a higher level of thinking? For some it's easy because they grew up with it.

Enabling students to apply their learnings to solve real-world problems is the easy way to enable higher order thinking. Works all the time for me.

The critical thinking skills are an integral part of both higher order and lower as defined by Bloom. Critical thinking itself is defined as integrating two components: 1) ability to generate information ( lower order thinking ) and 2) use those skills to guide behavior ( higher order thinking ) . Think critically about a set of facts or other information to make an informed decision requires the thinker passes through six levels of cognitive thinking defined by Bloom : knowledge, comprehension , application, analysis , synthesis and evaluation . Important decisions or life changes that are made without going through this process may not be the best and most informed decisions and may show less than satisfactory results .

The most effective way to facilitate critical thinking in an individual way is to ask questions . Check cognitive levels of Bloom to ask any questions . The questions that ensure that a student is using the lower order thinking in solving problems , beginning with keywords such as " who," " what," " why" and "when." These questions have a student thinking on a basic level about a problem . Ascends the scale , asking questions such as " How would you do ____ ? " or "What evidence can you find ___ ? " other questions designed to make a student think critically at a higher level could be " Do you agree with ___ ? " Questions of this type will help a student learn how to analyze and evaluate information , so he or she can make informed decisions to submit satisfactory results for all involved.

This is a great topic, Tony!

This has been such a problem for such a very long time; in fact, the literature shows that organizations are not satisfied with the level of critical thinking exhibited by graduates.

Socrates believed that debates stimulated higher order thinking, more recently Axley and McMahon (2006) suggested that the mechanistic system in thinking is deeply entrenched in education and what is needed is “chaos” and complexity in the classroom for, after all, isn’t the real work characterized by flux, change and complexity? Ways to achieve this are discussed in two case studies that are presented in the Axley article, attached. Hope this helps!

Also, I wrote a paper on this subject and you can find it at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260159757_Running_head_LITERATURE_REVIEW_Literature_Review_on_Critical_Thinking_Management_Education_and_Business_Needs_Alignment

Reference:

Axley, S. R., & McMahon, T. R. (2006). Complexity: A frontier for management education. Journal of Management Education, 30(2), 295-315.

Article Running head: LITERATURE REVIEW… Literature Review on Critic...

I always get a bad feeling if people try to nail down a complex issue to one or two concepts which - if only properly understood and applied - would solve the identified problems and dissolve the complexity.

"Critical Thinking" is such a concept. It undoubtedly has a ring of "important requirement", but I don't see how you would ever be able to define it sharply and concretely enough to be of much help (for practioners). Not only does it have multiple meanings for different people (like the important concept of "validity" which has more than 120 operationalizations in the literature, cf. Newton 2013), it is certainly also a typical instance of a "moving target".

Moreover, I take the attempt to develop some yardstick in the form of a test for higher order thinking to be wishful thinking and a psychologism which is doomed to fail and provoke enduring debates because of its inherent reductionism.

Maybe the newly born managerial complexity theory (not to be confused with mathematical complexity theory with its applications in computer science) can lead to a better approach of the topic, but up to now I haven't seen really new promissing proposals beyond what we already know from General Systems Theory which had its boom in the 70es and 80es. What, I wonder, did Systems Science learn in the meanwhile?

On validity and its many meanings and operationalizations ...

An very interesting and impeccably argued point Paul, but in the educational context we often have to negotiate meaning. I'm not convinced that the case to find shared meaning is entirely hopeless!

I fully agree with you, Tony, education is not research, and (most) educators are not researchers, so there is plenty room for negotiation and shared spaces of action which work allright in the given context.

Cleaning up my desk I found an article which appeared on May 21st 2013 in Philosophy about a recently published book of controversial philosopher Daniel Dennett about CTT (critical thinking tools). Looking up the phrase in google will give you several links to interviews, columns, etc. (here's just one).

I bought the book, and started reading, it's not bad, but - alas - there are plenty of other books I'm reading at the same time, so progress is slow, don't expect a longer review of mine. How about you? ;-)

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2013/may/19/daniel-dennett-intuition-pumps-thinking-extract

http://www.amazon.com/Intuition-Pumps-Other-Tools-Thinking/dp/0393348784

You may be interested in these links related to critical thinking.

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/09/16/endowed-chair-promotes-critical-thinking-rit

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-destler/critical-thinking-skills-_b_6161480.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eugene-fram/wanted-more-us-college-gr_b_4242062.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eugene-fram/avoiding-curriculum-myopi_b_4381165.html

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eugene-fram/avoiding-curriculum-myopi_b_4381165.html

Science practice: Students are allowed to comment on scientific manuscripts/publications either as a reader (simulating a referee task) or as a (co-)author (co-analyzer/co-writer).

My method is to use questions to entice students to go beyond the habit of regurgitating information. Questions, not statements is what makes students think, However, questions are often answered by students who are already interested in learning by themselves. Therefore, it would be necessary to ask directly those students who do not intervene often in class.

My two cents: One hard (it may take more than one session and it requires to be practised along more than one single module or course to yield clear symptoms of improvement) but productive-on-the-long-run learning activity is to ask learners to read academic material (some excerpt from a position paper or an essay) on a topic they have studied/are studying and set them to write a relevant question at the end of the excerpt which could be the topic of the following paragraph/s in the paper or essay. The idea is to engage them in a sort of critical collaborative writing of the paper in question. From what somebody else has written (a scholar), in this way we try to make them engage actively in the construction of the argument or the claims of the paper/essay. The previous activity of reading will show the problems they may have both with 'the language' as well as with the ideas or arguments behind so, in this way, it will prepare the kind of questions they may produce or are expected to produce... I hope this may help.

It has been my experience after years in secondary education and a college lecturer that in order to promote higher order thinking we must ask questions that demand higher order thinking. By this I mean questions on the issues relevant to our students everyday experiences and issues important to them.  For example in some form or another the use of a cell phone during a conversation. I have asked, "defend the use of answering a cell phone during a dinner conversation" or "defend when you are in a conversation taking a text".

Other topics I have used include same sex marriage, abortion, the difference between equity and equality, and take a position and defend it questions. Using this approach I have found I do not have to worry about student engagement, motivation, or time because it is there choice.

I read and promt counter positions and hand back, let them answer and resubmit, repeat this one more time. It is the students themselves who begin to refine and practice, utilize, and refine the skills labeled as higher order thinking.

Douglas

I stumbled across this video a few years back and thought it was quite brilliant and I watched the whole thing even though it is almost an hour and a half long. I would most succinctly summarize the method Eric Mazur describes in it as: "Decide for yourself the answer to this question. Now turn to the person next to you and attempt to convince them that your answer is correct."

Mazur rightly understands that it is often a classmate who knows best how to explain to a student why they are wrong as the lecturer has long discarded and forgotten all the incorrect concepts that people will bring to a subject when they are new to it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwslBPj8GgI