EDCO 725 critical thinking DB
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Liberty University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
725
Subject
Communications
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
3
Uploaded by MegaFire7312
As Merriam and Baumgartner (2020) point out, students do not learn in isolation, but rather from
others who possess different information, knowledge, or perspectives on an issue that is relevant to the learner. Brookfield (2013) asserts that critical thinking is a social learning process that must inevitably involve other individuals. Discussions and use of critical thinking in the classroom promote learning within this social environment, and set up students to learn not only the material, but also how to think about the content, meaning, and application of the information
they are receiving and digesting.
Critical thinking skills are difficult to learn because it is cyclically challenging to teach teachers how to teach the skills (Nilson, 2021). Students need to practice thinking, but also need thinking to be modeled to them, and labeled when it is used effectively to reinforce the positive practices (Svinicki & McKeachie, 2014). Brookfield (2013) identifies five themes or elements of learning how to think critically that are beneficial to students. These include teachers’ intentional modeling of the process, practice and development in small groups with peer feedback, connection to examples from hypothetical situations as well as prior experiences, being pushed out of the comfort zone into the zone of proximal development, and the development of the process in stages with steps broken into practical actions (Brookfield, 2013). Having to explain their thoughts to their peers in discussion makes the student translate abstract ideas or images into words. Students are exploring in practice situations or while reviewing cases to creatively be
open to new or innovative solutions (Nilson, 2021).
Students must also learn to differentiate facts from feelings or opinions, and have the information
to back up their assertions. This helps them to make connections from one thing to another, as well as differentiate forms of reasoning that include inductive, inferential, deductive, and analogical (Nilson, 2021). In preparing for discussions, students learn to organize their thoughts and notes after reading, so they are already synthesizing the information (Svinicki & McKeachie,
2014).
There are a number of components of critical thinking that can be utilized in a good discussion. As identified in the instructions for this assignment, discussion can explore concepts that don’t have obvious answers. Nilson (2021) points out that when used from a critical theory perspective, critical thinking helps students to challenge ideology that dominates over others in order to counter hegemony and sources of power. This can be effectively used in exploring the development of morals and values, as in Kohlberg’s work (Carmichael et al., 2018). Discussion can also help examine underlying beliefs. Students check the accuracy of assumptions through exploration of various sources, perspectives, viewpoints (Nilson, 2021). Discussion can help define how the information is applied to their own experiences and life and how they are impacted by the topic (Walker, 2003). Further through use of critical thinking, students can explore and uncover the assumptions that direct their actions, decisions, and choices (Nilson, 2021).
Another positive component of engaging in classroom discussions is the ability to focus on relationships, including between ideas, or cause and effect relationships (Svinicki & McKeachie, 2014). Students learn how their early personal experiences, including understanding of how emotions and behaviors impact and possibly stunt growth in adulthood because of assumptions or rules that are developed over the lifespan (Nilson, 2021). Within comparison of relationships, hierarchies of ideas can be created when discussion focuses on what is “best” or “better” in order
to identify the ideal solution to a problem. In Bloom’s taxonomy of skills, this engages evaluation, as well as has the potential to generate analysis and creativity to develop the solutions
(Svinicki & McKeachie, 2014). Comparing ideas also reduces misconceptions, promotes flexibility, and applies procedural knowledge (Rittle-Johnson et al., 2020). During discussions students work together to define what is the most important concept and provide priority status to
some ideas over others (Walker, 2003).
Phillipson and Wegerif (2020) write that dialogue between individuals in the classroom creates a social plane of engagement that facilitates the developing and understanding of concepts so that students can build and reconstruct knowledge through a mutual process of answering, exemplifying, explaining, comparing, applying, connecting, and more. Dialogue builds students’ sensitivity to variations between their interpretations and perceptions, and those of others’ in their environment (Phillipson & Wegerif, 2020). Discussions can stimulate inquisitiveness, and generate curiosity and more exploration of the idea (Walker, 2003).
The techniques described by Svinicki and McKeachie (2014) can easily direct students into the higher order thinking skills that are sought by teachers. When starting discussion with a common
experience, Svinicki and McKeachie (2014) suggest using media as the shared stimulus. The conversation that follows turns the student from a passive recipient to an active thinker through their application of the new information to solve or evaluate the problem presented in the common experience, use of analysis to compare and contrast this new information to prior knowledge, and includes the possibility of evaluating the source of the common experience.
By starting with a case, or a problem, the teacher has the opportunity to build curiosity in the mystery of how the case is resolved or managed. This encourages hypothesis development and testing (Svinicki & McKeachie, 2014). A similar method is described by Rittle-Johnson et al. (2020) as the compare and discuss method. In this, two examples are compared, with students reflecting on important aspects of the issue, and comparing their insights to those of others in the class (Rittle-Johnson et al., 2020).
When a teacher starts a discussion with questions, there can be various levels of thought depending on the type of question utilized. Teachers can evaluate students’ understanding, and promote deeper thinking skills (Oyama & Yagihashi, 2020). Sometimes questions lead to more questions and these lingering questions can promote independent research. Oyama and Yagihashi
(2020) assert that if learners create questions, they will look for answers, creating a continuous cycle of inquiry-based learning. There are three hypotheses of what drives students' questions, including a deficit of knowledge, a clash with existing knowledge, and the connection between an obstacle and a goal (Oyama & Yagihashi, 2020). There is a challenge in this, as a certain base amount of knowledge is required to recognize the deficit and generate the questions in the first place (Oyama & Yagihashi, 2020). Sharing knowledge within the discussion can help to fill in the deficits or use a different perspective to generate the creative solutions that demonstrate the critical thinking skills that are being sought.
For my own teaching demonstration, I proposed to teach about the differential diagnosis process for posttraumatic stress disorder. I intend to use cases to generate discussion about what the various possible diagnoses could be for each vignette presented. This will help me to evaluate members understanding of the concept, they will apply the procedure of comparison of diagnoses, and analyze the differences between the symptoms presented, evaluate and come to a
conclusion about what the most appropriate diagnosis would be, and finally create a preliminary goal to work on with the individual in the vignette, addressing multiple levels of Bloom’s taxonomy as revised by Krathwohl and colleagues (Svinicki & McKeachie, 2014).
References
Brookfield, S. D. (2013).
Techniques for Teaching Adults
. John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Carmichael, C. L., Schwartz, A., M., Coyle, M. A., & Goldberg, M. H. (2018, December 2018). A classroom activity for teaching Kohlberg’s theory of moral development.
Teaching of Psychology, 46
(1), 80-
86.
https://doi-org.ezproxy.liberty.edu/10.1177/0098628318816180
Merriam, S. B., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2020).
Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide (4th ed.).
John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Nilson, L. B. (2021).
Infusing Critical Thinking into Your Course: A Concrete, Practical Approach
. Stylus Publishing, LLC.
Phillipson, N., & Wegerif, R. (2020). The thinking together approach to dialogic teaching. In E. Manalo (Ed.),
Deeper learning, dialogic learning, and critical thinking: Research-based strategies for the classroom
(pp. 32-47). Routledge.
Oyama, Y., & Yagishashi, T. (2020). Question based instruction (QBI) promotes learners’ abilities to ask more questions and express opinions during group discussions. In E. Manalo (Ed.),
Deeper learning, dialogic learning, and critical thinking: Research-based strategies for the classroom
(pp. 32-47). Routledge.
Rittle-Johnson, B., Star, J. R., Durkin, K., & Loehr, A. (2020). Compare and discuss to promote deeper learning. In E. Manalo (Ed.),
Deeper learning, dialogic learning, and critical thinking: Research-based strategies for the classroom
(pp. 32-47). Routledge.
Svinicki, M. D., & Mckeachie, W. J. (2014).
McKeachie’s Teaching Tips: Strategies, Research and Theory for College and University Teachers, (14th ed.).
Wadsworth, Cenage Learning.
Read Less
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help