⚡ Critical Thinking In English Language

Sunday, October 17, 2021 8:24:12 AM

Critical Thinking In English Language

Many teachers would argue Critical Thinking In English Language setting aside the Critical Thinking In English Language needed for feedback, and for the Critical Thinking In English Language of several drafts, is Dermatomyositis Case Study, particularly within the constraints of school systems; and particularly where Critical Thinking In English Language are large. Reflections Reflection Did the activities Critical Thinking In English Language this Critical Thinking In English Language motivate your students to draw inferences from their Critical Thinking In English Language lives? Facebook Twitter Critical Thinking In English Language Explaining to students the principles or Occupational Effectiveness: Personal Statement behind any practical activity that has just taken Critical Thinking In English Language during a workshop. It would also pave the way for introducing new trends Critical Thinking In English Language the teaching Critical Thinking In English Language process for promoting Critical Thinking In English Language learning of the English language Critical Thinking In English Language. You may question the information aggression in sport read in a textbook, or you may question Critical Thinking In English Language a Critical Thinking In English Language or Critical Thinking In English Language professor or a SWOT Analysis Of Food Processing In India says. Use evidence from the story, from Kate Chopin's life, and from your own life's experience and reading to explain First Boat In Australia Case Study interpretation.

CRITICAL THINKING - Fundamentals: Introduction to Critical Thinking [HD]

She also provides support in early literacy instruction and reading fluency. She provides professional development instruction within her school district in early literacy assessment and reading comprehension strategies. With generous support provided by the National Education Association. By Liz Fothergrill. On this page How can educators teach critical thinking skills?

Suggested Activities Hot links. How can educators teach critical thinking skills? Suggested Activities Lower Grade Activities In lower grades, the teacher should present this lesson as a whole group activity. Ensure ELLs receive a list of any challenging vocabulary words they might encounter. It's a good idea to provide an explanation and the meaning for each word before they begin to read the story. Begin to model higher thinking skills , by evaluating your student's different levels of knowledge. Upper Grade Activities Teachers may choose to first model the first paragraph and then let students work in small groups as they find the main idea. Have students read a story and write several questions for each level adapting Bloom's Taxonomy for use with literature.

Have students work in groups to answer the questions they have created. Hot links Bloom's Taxonomy: An Introduction This site offers an introduction to different stages of Bloom's Taxonomy theory, as well as methods for applying the theory in lesson plans. Howard Gardner, Multiple Intelligences and Education This article describes Howard Gardner, the creator of the Multiple Intelligences theory, and his "seven intelligences. References Paziotopoulos, A. Reprints For any reprint requests, please contact the author or publisher listed.

The teacher then puts the students in groups of two or three, where the groups or pair share their ideas. Students then share with the class the ideas acquired from other groups. Students then write down the ideas and turn their ideas into a short narrative conveying those ideas. Therefore, students take the think-pair-share notes turning them into a writing piece. Your email address will not be published. Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Facebook Twitter Submit a Comment Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Blog Idea Submissions Click Here. For example, scientific researchers always consider their studies to be best if their initial questions lead to other questions -- research is as much to generate questions as to uncover answers. However, the underlying purpose of the researcher's questions is to narrow the gap between what is known and what is not about a field of inquiry, to move toward some form of closure, although true closure rarely occurs; it generally is yet another question that will help move thinking along. Thus, although "full" knowledge may never be reached, and successive questions may sometimes seem to muddy rather than elucidate what is known, the far off goal is the explication of knowledge.

Here is the essential difference from literary orientation, where it is the musing itself is the goal. Although I have been discussing the two orientations toward meaning in extreme terms, as if they were dichotomous, neither orientation operates completely independent of the other. Instead, as suggested earlier, together they provide alternative ways of sense-making that can be called upon when needed.

Although both purposes, literary and informative, generally interplay in a variety of ways during any one experience, each situation seems to have a primary purpose, with the others being secondary. For example, when writing a paper providing important historical details on the Gulf War involving an informative orientation , a student might momentarily slip into a literary orientation, in describing the day to day life experiences of a member of an oil clean-up crew or of a woman soldier who had to leave her newborn when called up from the reserves -- although most of the paper presents details and commentary on the war itself.

Conversely, when writing from a literary orientation about a soldier or clean-up crew member by portraying the personal lived-through experiences of the people, their relationships -- their joys and tragedies the student may at times "step out" of the living text she or he is creating and momentarily assume an informative orientation in order to provide specific and accurate information about the details of the bombings, or the world's reaction to Saddam's dumping oil into the Gulf. In each case, it is the primary purpose that shapes the student's overall orientation to the shape of the piece, but it is the interplay of the two that can add richness to the understanding that results.

However, research indicates that literature is usually taught and tested in a nonliterary manner, as if there is one right answer arrived at through point of reference reading or writing. Arthur Applebee's Literature Center study of English classes across the United States indicates that literature is often taught as if there were a point or predetermined interpretation the reader must build toward, or as a literal reworking of the plot line from start to finish -- with no room for students' explorations to be sanctioned or to take form. For example, students are rarely given the opportunity to "live through" the polar expeditions of the arctic explorer or to "feel" the living conditions described by William Faulkner, Sinclair Lewis, Nadine Gordimer, Ann Frank, or Athol Fugard, and therefore to explore the possibilities involved in the worlds they create.

Alan Purves' studies at the Literature Center e. His favorite multiple choice literature question, typical of those in many large scale assessment tests, is: "Huck Finn is a good boy. True or False. In contrast, my studies indicate that both horizon of possibilities and point of reference thinking have their place in history, social studies, biology and physics as well as in English classes, and that the two orientations toward understanding interact in productive ways, providing students with alternative vantage points from which to approach problems and build fuller understandings. However, although both kinds of thinking occurred in all the academic classes I have studied, they occurred in different amounts and served different purposes based both on the particular subject and on how it was taught.

For example, as would be expected, exploring a horizon of possibilities occurred most often in English classes, particularly when students stepped into the literature they were reading and when discussion was treated as time to go beyond initial understandings and consider multiple perspectives as part of the process of developing interpretations. However, point of reference thinking also occurred in English classes; it occurred most often either when students dipped down to explore a particular issue from a particular point of view, to clarify confusion, or to learn particular information from what they were reading. It also occurred in English classes when one particular interpretation was considered acceptable and the students held this as the endpoint of meaning this was particularly so in traditionally taught English classes.

English classes often began with a horizon of possibility, inviting students to share their initial impressions by describing their current understandings, concerns, and questions. Such classes often ended with horizons of possibility thinking as well, leaving the students with the notion that multiple interpretations are to be expected and that ambiguity and reconsideration are at the heart of literary thinking. Although horizon of possibilities thinking is evident in social studies and science classes, this orientation seems to be used by teachers primarily as motivation, before the students are to get down to work. For example, in the classrooms I studied, before laboratory experiments were begun, students were sometimes asked to explore possibilities such as "What would you think if?

Horizon of possibility thinking was also often used during lessons to "pull" students back into thinking about the topic at hand, particularly when their attention wandered. Alternative interpretations were rarely sought in science, while in social studies a debate model was sometimes used, requiring the students to look at an issue from two often dichotomous and predetermined perspectives. However, students in these classes used horizon of possibility thinking more often than their teachers invited -- in seemingly productive ways.

When they worked in groups with other students, when they read and thought alone, and also when they discussed certain issues, we saw them exploring possibilities as they considered alternative explanations and interpretations, when they went about trying to solve a problem at hand, or when they were simply stuck and spun imaginary scenarios in an attempt to move on. However, because this kind of thinking was not considered productive, when it did come to the teacher's attention e. Thus, although both orientations toward understanding seem to be called upon in various ways either by students or teachers, the field of education has yet to consider how these differing orientations can be used as tools of instruction to help students think more richly and deeply about their coursework and to help them become stronger thinkers and problem solvers in general.

For the past four years I have also been studying what the process of understanding literature means for rethinking our notions of literature instruction, identifying ways in which English language arts classrooms can become environments that encourage students to arrive at their own understandings, explore possibilities, and move beyond their initial understandings toward more thoughtful interpretations. Over time, I and ten Research Assistants from the Center who are all experienced teachers , with more than forty teachers from a diverse group of suburban and city schools have been working collaboratively to find ways to help students engage in the critical and creative thinking that literature can provoke -- to arrive at their own responses, explore possibilities, and move beyond initial understandings toward more thoughtful interpretations.

We have been studying the classrooms carefully, analyzing the lessons that work, noting how the classrooms change over time, and coming to understand what underlies contexts where rich thinking occurs. We have learned that there are characteristic ways in which students make sense of literary pieces, and that the role of the teacher is central to the ways in which students think, talk about, and formulate their understandings and interpretations of the pieces they read. This work has permitted me to identify several principles of instruction that permeate the social fabric of classrooms that encourage students to explore possibilities see Langer, b, a, in press-b, in press-c, and in progress for further discussion.

Students are treated as thinkers. Students are treated as if they can and will have interesting and cogent thoughts about the pieces they read, and also have questions they would like to discuss. Teachers give students ownership for the topics of discussion or writing, making students' growing understandings the central focus of each class meeting. In such environments, students think about how to get the right answer, not how to think through their own ideas. The following are examples of the types of questions teachers used to stimulate thinking for discussion or writing: T. What did you think about when you finished reading the story? What does the piece mean to you? Is there any part you think will be interesting to discuss?

Requiring students to present their initial impressions is an important aspect of reader response or response-based instruction. Prompted in this way, students are invited to begin with their initial impressions, to raise questions, to introduce possibilities, to hear others, and to think beyond as they develop and enrich their interpretations. Written assignments such as logs, brief writing activities, informal letters, and written conversations in addition to more formal reviews, essays and analytic papers were also used to encourage students to reflect on, state, defend, and rethink their initial impressions.

Particular assignments varied from teacher to teacher; the following examples will give a sense of the underlying emphases. In some classrooms, students were encouraged to keep literature journals, and also to use them on a regular basis during class discussions, small group meetings and when they wrote. These were often used as the basis for small group discussions, written conversations or whole class discussions. The students were also encouraged to use their journals to check on their own understanding. For example, one teacher said: "Make a prediction in your journal when you put the book down.

Check it later to see if that happened. Literature reading is treated as question generating. Teachers who support the development of students' literary understandings assume that after reading a piece, readers come away with questions as well as understandings, and that responding to literature involves the raising of "exploring horizons" questions. Thus, teachers continually invite students' questions -- in writing and in discussion. These questions focus on motives, relationships, feelings -- on the human experiences that are "read into" texts but never stated. They are the "gaps" that readers need to fill in for themselves. Writers often purposely leave these gaps to "invite" readers into the piece, and critical thinking in literature involves exploring possible ways to fill these gaps and how such possibilities might affect other parts of the readers' growing text worlds.

Stepping in and exploring possibilities is part of the joy of the literary experience. It is also at the root of the ambiguity that makes the literature lesson distinct from information-getting lessons. For example, in "real life" after seeing a movie or reading a book, we might say, "I really liked it, but how did those two ever get together? Anything you didn't understand?

Class meetings are treated as a time to develop understandings. In traditional classes, class meeting is a time for the teacher to check on what the students have understood and as a time for repair -- to help them fill in what they didn't "get. In contrast, when classes involve literary understanding, teachers treat the reading that students have done as the starting place for exploring further possibilities. Class meetings become times when students are expected to share their provisional understandings and then to individually and collectively participate in reworking their interpretations, raising questions, making connections and gaining deeper understandings.

For example, during a discussion of "The Story of an Hour" by Kate Chopin, the teacher began the lesson by asking, "What did you think about at the end - when you finished reading? To help the students consider multiple perspectives and let their understanding of the complexity of the piece build, some of the questions the teacher asked over two days were: "Did you always think of it this way? When did you realize it would be this way? Could others interpret this piece another way? Did anything in the piece remind you of something you've read or experienced in your own life? How did it affect your understanding of the piece? How might this piece be interpreted by a Freudian psychologist? A feminist spokesperson? Some people consider this an important feminist literary work.

Can you imagine why? Now, read about the author's life. What does that contribute to a feminist interpretation of the piece? Based on our discussions, you may have had a chance to rethink your initial understandings. Write your ideas about the piece now, and tell why. Use evidence from the story, from Kate Chopin's life, and from your own life's experience and reading to explain your interpretation.

Then we will discuss not only your views, but how well they stand up to argument. It was also clear that although there was no single appropriate way to interpret the piece, close analysis would separate the several acceptable interpretations from those that were less defensible. Further, the students came to realize that becoming aware of differing interpretations enriched their understanding of the piece -- an understanding that might well continue to grow and develop even after their study of the piece had ended.

This is far different from traditional classrooms that treat class meetings as a time to check on what the students didn't understand, and spend the rest of the time "filling in" what they "didn't get. They begin with their own initial impressions, and use writing and discussion as well as further reading to ponder and refine their developing interpretations. The social structure of the class calls for and expects the thoughtful participation of all students, the teacher assumes that there will be multiple interpretations to be discussed and argued, and the students learn that horizons of possibilities that are pondered and defended characterize the ways of thinking that are sought.

Toward Meaningful Reform In the classrooms I have described, students are given room to work through their ideas in a variety of contexts: in whole class discussion, alone, and in groups -- in reading, writing, and speaking. Developing envisionments, exploring them, talking about them, and refining understandings underlay the very fabric of how the class works. Although codified interpretations and particular points of view are discussed and considered, they are usually introduced and analyzed only after the students have had an opportunity to explore their own interpretations. Such analysis involves confronting, reexploring and possibly interweaving, refining, or changing their own interpretations. Thus, students are able to react to others' ideas including established interpretations through the lens of their own considered understandings as well as the understandings of others -- reaching interpretations which continue to be treated conditionally, always subject to further development.

In instructional settings like this, that treat all students like thinkers and provide the environment as well as the help to do this, even "at risk" students can engage in thoughtful discussions about literature, develop rich and deep understandings, and enjoy it too. What does all this suggest for educational reform? Clearly there are implications not only for literature classes, but other coursework as well. First, it means that literary understanding will need to be granted its place next to informative understanding as a necessary component of critical thought and intelligent literate behavior -- an essential goal of schooling.

What counts as knowing and reasoning will therefore need to change, to focus on students' growing abilities to engage in the act of literary understanding as well as their knowledge of the content. This will bring about the expanded view of critical thought I argued for in the introduction to this chapter -- validating the essential role that both literary and logical thought play in human consciousness, and ensuring that together they are placed at the center of pedagogical and curriculum concerns.

It also means that the conception of English language arts coursework across the grades will need to change. The English language arts need to be seen as having a critical role in the intellectual development of school children, as being the primary though not exclusive part of schooling where the processes of literary understanding are taught and developed.

How would Critical Thinking In English Language have told the story differently, if given the opportunity? Ask How Did The American Dream Affect Society student group Critical Thinking In English Language discuss their list with another group. Alan Tait alanmtait 10 October Critical Thinking In English Language.