Higher-order thinking

About: Higher-order thinking is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 3025 publications have been published within this topic receiving 42951 citations.

Education and learning to think.

Abstract: The economic and social challenges confronting the nation today demand that all citizens acquire and learn to use complex reasoning and thinking skills. Education and Learning to Think confronts the issues facing our schools as they take on this mission. This volume reviews previous research, highlights successful learning strategies, and makes specific recommendations about problems and directions requiring further study. Among the topics covered are the nature of thinking and learning, the possibilities of teaching general reasoning, the attempts to improve intelligence, thinking skills in academic disciplines, methods of cultivating the disposition toward higher order thinking and learning, and the integral role motivation plays in these activities.

Critical thinking assessment

Abstract: (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory Into Practice: Vol. 32, Teaching for Higher Order Thinking, pp. 179-186.

Methodological Issues in the Content Analysis of Computer Conference Transcripts

Abstract: This paper discusses the potential and the methodological challenges of analyzing computer conference transcripts using quantitative content analysis. The paper is divided into six sections, which discuss: criteria for content analysis, research designs, types of content, units of analysis, ethical issues, and software to aid analysis. The discussion is supported with a survey of 19 commonly referenced studies published during the last decade. The paper is designed to assist researchers in using content analysis to further the understanding of teaching and learning using computer conferencing. SCENARIO Professor Jones has just completed her first university course delivered entirely on- line. The 13-week semester class has left Jones in a state of mild exhaustion. However, the course is finished, the marks have been assigned, and now, thinks Jones, time for some reflection, analysis and perhaps a publishable paper. Jones smiles, confident in the knowledge that the complete transcript of messages exchanged during the course has been captured in machine-readable format. She feels that this accessible data will confirm her hypothesis that students in the on-line course had engaged in much higher levels of discourse and discussion than any she had experienced in ten years of face-to-face instruction. Further, she is interested in investigating the impact of the collaborative learning activity that she instituted in the middle of the course. Jones is quickly disappointed. The 13-week discussion generated 950 messages. Merely reading them takes her four days. Attempts at cutting and pasting illustrations of higher level thinking into a word processor, have resulted in a hodge-podge of decontextualized quotations, each disparate enough to have Professor Jones questioning her own definitions of higher order thinking. Realizing that the analysis is going nowhere, Professor Jones goes back to the literature and finds a set of criteria laid down by an expert in the field that define the broad areas of thinking skills she sees being developed in the transcripts. Heartened, but now running out of time Professor Jones hires two graduate students to review the messages and identify the incidents of higher order thinking as defined by the expert. Two weeks later, the students report their results: not only have they failed to agree on 70% of the categorizations, but one student has identified 2032 incidents in the transcript, while the other has found only 635 incidents. To add to her misery, Professor Jones also learns that her University's ethics committee, concerned with the large increase in use of computer conferencing for credit courses, has ruled that without informed consent from students, her analysis does not conform with the guidelines of the university's ethical research policy. Feeling overwhelmed and depressed, Professor Jones returns to the educational literature once again, only to find that most of the methodological issues she has been dealing with have not been addressed by major researchers in the field. She also finds that

What Factors Facilitate Teacher Skill, Teacher Morale, and Perceived Student Learning in Technology-Using Classrooms?

Abstract: Based on a comprehensive study of 94 classrooms from four states in different geographic regions of the country, this quantitative study investigated the impact of seven factors related to school technology (planning, leadership, curriculum alignment, professional development, technology use, teacher openness to change, and teacher non-school computer use) on five dependent measures in the areas of teacher skill (technology competency and technology integration), teacher morale, and perceived student learning (impact on student content acquisition and higher order thinking skills acquisition). Stepwise regression resulted in models to explain each of the five dependent measures. Teacher technology competency was predicted by teacher openness to change. Technology integration was predicted by teacher openness to change and the percentage of technology use with others. Teacher morale was predicted by professional development and constructivist use of technology. Technology impact on content acquisition was predicted by the strength of leadership, teacher openness to change, and negatively influenced by teacher non-school computer use. Technology impact on higher-order thinking skills was predicted by teacher openness to change, the constructivist use of technology, and negatively influenced by percentage of technology use where students work alone. Implications for the adoption and use of school technologies are discussed.

Face-to-face versus threaded discussions: the role of time and higher-order thinking

Abstract: This study compares the experiences of students in face-to-face (in class) discussions with threaded discussions and also evaluates the threaded discussions for evidence of higher-order thinking. Students were enrolled in graduate-level classes that used both modes (face-to-face and online) for course-related discussions; their end-of-course evaluations of both experiences were grouped for analysis and themes constructed based on their comments. Themes included the “expansion of time,” “experience of time,” “quality of the discussion,” “needs of the student,” and “faculty expertise.” While there are advantages to holding discussions in either setting, students most frequently noted that using threaded discussions increased the amount of time they spent on class objectives and that they appreciated the extra time for reflection on course issues. The face-to-face format also had value as a result of its immediacy and energy, and some students found one mode a better “fit” with their preferred learning mode. The analysis of higher-order thinking was based on a content analysis of the threaded discussions only. Each posting was coded as one of the four cognitive-processing categories described by Garrison and colleagues [1]: 18% were triggering questions, 51% were exploration, 22% were integration, and 7% resolution. A fifth category – social – was appropriate for 3% of the responses and only 12% of the postings included a writing error. This framework provides some support for the assertion that higher-order thinking can and does occur in online discussions; strategies for increasing the number of responses in the integration and resolution categories are discussed.