by Susan M. Brookhart
I believe that most teachers, in fact, do understand this reality. But we often don't carry it through into our assessment practices. Studies analyzing classroom tests, over many decades, have found that most teacher-made tests require only recall of information (Marso & Pigge, 1993). However, when teachers are surveyed about how often they think they assess application, reasoning, and higher-order thinking, both elementary (McMillan, Myron, & Workman, 2002) and secondary (McMillan, 2001) teachers claim they assess these cognitive levels quite a bit. Although some of this discrepancy may come from recent advances in classroom practices that emphasize higher-order thinking, it is also clear that many teachers believe they are assessing higher-order thinking when, in fact, they are not.
The reason that recall-level test questions are so prevalent is that they are the easiest kind to write. They are also the easiest kind of question to ask off the top of your head in class. Teachers who do not specifically plan classroom discussion questions ahead of time to tap particular higher-order thinking skills, but rather ask extemporaneous questions "on their feet," are likely to ask recall questions.
This situation is true for even the best teachers. After participating in professional development about questioning, one high school social studies teacher wrote the following:
Upon reflection, it became obvious that many of the questions I have asked were at a lower-order thinking, or simply recall or factual response, level. [I am now …] more aware of the necessity for higher-order or open-ended questions in class. Many of the students also now understand the importance of the many different types of questions that can be asked.
The same thing happens on classroom tests. Teachers who put together tests quickly, or who use published tests without reviewing them to see what thinking skills are required, are likely to end up asking fewer higher-order-thinking questions than they intended. Contrary to some teachers' beliefs, the same thing also happens with performance assessments. Students can make posters or prepare presentation slides listing facts about elements, planets, or stars without using higher-order thinking, for example. Of course, what amount and what kind of higher-order thinking should be required on a classroom assessment depend on the particular learning goals to be assessed.
Most state standards and district curriculum documents list goals for learning that include both knowledge of facts and concepts and the ability to use them in thinking, reasoning, and problem solving. The purpose of this book is to clarify what is involved in several different aspects of higher-order thinking, and, for each, to show how to write good-quality, well-planned assessments.
What Is Knowledge?
The nature of human thought and reason is the subject of a field of philosophy called epistemology. Epistemologists still debate the definition of knowledge. A classic definition, based on ideas in Plato's dialogue Theaetetus, is that for something to count as knowledge it must be justified, true, and believed. Branches of philosophy have developed to describe what count as reasonable and plausible justifications, what counts as truth, and the nature of belief.
I use this tidbit about Plato to make what I consider an important point. Even seemingly simple knowledge rests on some historical higher-order thinking. Facts and concepts did not just fall out of the sky—or out of a textbook. They were discovered and debated until they came to be widely held as true, and widely believed. When we teach students to do higher-order thinking, we are not just teaching them some fancy skills useful for the flexibility and adaptability required for life in our 21st century "information age." We are teaching them to be human.
What Is Higher-Order Thinking?
If we agree to stay grounded in this important purpose, our definitions of higher-order thinking for the purposes of this book can be much more modest and practical. In this Introduction, we consider the kinds of higher-order thinking that are (or should be) stated or implied in state content standards and classroom learning objectives. Definitions that I find helpful fall into three categories: (1) those that define higher-order thinking in terms of transfer, (2) those that define it in terms of critical thinking, and (3) those that define it in terms of problem solving.
Here is a definition in the transfer category:
Two of the most important educational goals are to promote retention and to promote transfer (which, when it occurs, indicates meaningful learning) … retention requires that students remember what they have learned, whereas transfer requires students not only to remember but also to make sense of and be able to use what they have learned. (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001, p. 63)
The critical thinking category includes this definition:
Critical thinking is reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do. (Norris & Ennis, 1989, p. 3)
Another example in this category comes from Barahal (2008), who defines critical thinking as "artful thinking" (p. 299), which includes reasoning, questioning and investigating, observing and describing, comparing and connecting, finding complexity, and exploring viewpoints.
In the problem solving category are these two definitions:
A student incurs a problem when the student wants to reach a specific outcome or goal but does not automatically recognize the proper path or solution to use to reach it. The problem to solve is how to reach the desired goal. Because a student cannot automatically recognize the proper way to reach the desired goal, she must use one or more higher-order thinking processes. These thinking processes are called problem solving. (Nitko & Brookhart, 2007, p. 215)
As you explore new domains you will need to remember information, learn with understanding, critically evaluate ideas, formulate creative alternatives, and communicate effectively. [A problem-solving] model can be applied to each of these problems … to help you to continue to learn on your own. (Bransford & Stein, 1984, p. 122)
Of course, the first thing that may strike you as you read these definitions is that there is a lot of overlap. In the discussion here, and in the chapters that follow, this overlap will be apparent as well. I discuss the definitions separately in the following sections and give practical advice for assessment of these different aspects of higher-order thinking in Chapters 2 through 6, for analytical reasons. As any taxonomy of higher-order thinking skills shows, pulling a concept apart and discussing its various aspects is one way of understanding it. Think of this book as an analysis of classroom assessment of higher-order thinking.
Higher-Order Thinking as Transfer
The most general of the approaches to higher-order thinking is the Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) division of learning into learning for recall and learning for transfer. Learning for recall certainly requires a type of thinking, but it is learning for transfer that Anderson, Krathwohl, and their colleagues consider "meaningful learning." This approach has informed their construction of the Cognitive dimension of the revised Bloom's taxonomy.
For many teachers, operating with their state standards and curriculum documents, higher-order thinking is approached as the "top end" of Bloom's (or any other) taxonomy: Analyze, Evaluate, and Create, or, in the older language, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Chapter 2 discusses assessing higher-order thinking conceived of as the top end of a cognitive taxonomy.
The teaching goal behind any of the cognitive taxonomies is equipping students to be able to do transfer. "Being able to think" means students can apply the knowledge and skills they developed during their learning to new contexts. "New" here means applications that the student has not thought of before, not necessarily something universally new. Higher-order thinking is conceived as students being able to relate their learning to other elements beyond those they were taught to associate with it.
There is a sense in which teaching for transfer is a general goal of education. Many teachers use the phrase "What are you going to do when I'm not here?" Most of the time, this reflects teachers' appreciation of the fact that their job is to prepare students to go into the world ready to do their own thinking, in various contexts, without depending on the teacher to give them a task to do. Life outside of school is better characterized as a series of transfer opportunities than as a series of recall assignments to be done.
Higher-Order Thinking as Critical Thinking
Critical thinking, in the sense of reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do (Norris & Ennis, 1989) is another general ability that is sometimes described as the goal of teaching. In this case, "being able to think" means students can apply wise judgment or produce a reasoned critique. An educated citizen is someone who can be counted on to understand civic, personal, and professional issues and exercise wisdom in deciding what to do about them. As we all learned in American history class, Thomas Jefferson argued this point explicitly. He believed that education was necessary for freedom, that having a citizenry that could think and reason was necessary for a democratic government.
The goal of teaching here is seen as equipping students to be able to reason, reflect, and make sound decisions. Higher-order thinking means students can do this. One of the characteristics of "educated" people is that they reason, reflect, and make sound decisions on their own without prompting from teachers or assignments.
Wisdom and judgment are particularly important in higher-order thinking tasks like judging the credibility of a source, always an important skill but newly emphasized in the era of ever-expanding, electronically available information. Identifying assumptions, a classic skill, also is very relevant today. As school and society become increasingly diverse, it is less likely that everyone's assumptions will be similar. Identifying the assumptions behind points of view—what students might call "seeing where you're coming from"—is a true life skill.
Examples of the importance of critical judgment occur in all disciplines. Literary criticism involves both analyzing works of literature and evaluating to what degree the piece of writing succeeds in accomplishing the author's purpose. Advertisers estimate the effect of various advertising strategies on different audiences. Closer to home, students estimate the effects various arguments might have in persuading their parents of their point of view. All of these involve critical judgment about purposes and assumptions and about the relative effectiveness of various strategies used to meet these purposes.
To help students learn to think by looking at works of art, Project Zero at Harvard University developed the "Artful Thinking Palette" (Barahal, 2008). Six thinking dispositions are listed around the image of a paint palette: exploring viewpoints, reasoning, questioning and investigating, observing and describing, comparing and connecting, and finding complexity. Although these dispositions were developed in the context of learning from visual art, they are good ways to approach other critical-thinking tasks as well. For example, try thinking about how these six approaches apply in the study of literature, history, or science.
Higher-Order Thinking as Problem Solving
A problem is a goal that cannot be met with a memorized solution. The broad definition of problem solving as the nonautomatic strategizing required for reaching a goal (Nitko & Brookhart, 2007) can also be seen as a broad goal of education. Every academic discipline has problems. Some are closed problems, like a set of math problems designed to elicit repeated practice with a particular algorithm. But many problems are open-ended, could have many correct solutions or multiple paths to the same solution, or are genuine questions for which answers are not known. Economists, mathematicians, scientists, historians, engineers—all are looking for effective or efficient solutions to both practical and theoretical problems. Educators are, too. Teachers propose a solution strategy for a complex problem—how to effectively teach a particular learning target to particular students in a given amount of time and with the materials available—every time they write a lesson plan. Many life problems are open-ended. For example, planning for and living within a budget is an open-ended problem most households deal with. People solve problems in many different ways, depending on the values and assumptions they bring to the task.
Bransford and Stein (1984) noted that problem solving broadly conceived—in a model they call the IDEAL problem solver, which I'll describe in Chapter 5—is the mechanism behind learning for understanding. This is a similar position to Anderson and Krathwohl's (2001) discussion of "meaningful learning." Bransford and Stein also point out that problem solving is the general mechanism behind all thinking, even recall. This may seem ironic, but think of it this way. To recall something, students have to identify it as a problem ("I need to memorize the capitals of all 50 states. How can I do that?") and devise a solution that works for them.
In fact, Bransford and Stein say that in addition to driving both recall and learning, problem solving is necessary for critical thinking, creative thinking, and effective communication. The role of problem solving in critical thinking (for example, "How well did this movie director accomplish his purpose with this film?") and communication (for example, "How can I write this review so that readers will be interested in seeing the movie?") seems pretty obvious. But does problem solving have a role in creativity? Isn't creativity the free-spirit, whatever-you-want kind of thinking? Actually, no. Most human creations, both inventions of things and inventions of social customs, were conceived to solve some sort of problem. The proverbial invention of the wheel, for example, solves a problem that can be expressed as "How do I get this heavy stuff from here to there?"
If you think of higher-order thinking as problem solving, the goal of teaching is equipping students to be able to identify and solve problems in their academic work and in life. This includes solving problems that are set for them (the kind of problem solving we usually think of in school) and solving new problems that they define themselves, creating something new as the solution. In this case, "being able to think" means students can solve problems and work creatively.
This article will be continued next week...
