Pages

Saturday, July 2, 2022

Theories of Critical Thinking

 

Theories of Critical Thinking

There are always new educational methods introduced to change the teaching and learning in education. Deep learning allows students to acquire skills to make room for creative thought and gain problem solving skills. When comparing new ideas to the ones of the past, there is accuracy, transparency, and learning potential. Newer forms of teaching strategies are emerging. In the past an assessment of a teacher was based on their ability to deliver the content of a lesson. Now technology and teacher delivery strengthen and encourages student success.

Library Media Specialists and classroom educators are collaborating to bridge the gap of literacy. New and improving types of literacies are constantly developing. The world is ever-changing, and it is vital to change with it. In order to keep up with times, it is important to acquire as much knowledge and skill as possible. It is not optional anymore; it is necessary to stay up to date with technology. When using digital and media literacy, it is vital to include the following: the use of texts and technologies to access information; the skills of critical thinking and evaluation; creativity; and the ability reflect ethically and individual and collaboration.

In 1948 a group of educators classified goals and objectives into three domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. The general idea of the taxonomy is that what educators want students to know can be arranged in an order of less difficult to more difficult. The levels are designed so that one level must be mastered to reach the next level. The original taxonomy levels by Bloom presented verbs and behavior statements for each level. In 2001 Anderson and Krathwohl modified Bloom's taxonomy to switch the names of the levels from nouns to active verbs and reversing the order of the highest two levels. Students learn about topics at various levels. Bloom’s Taxonomy verbs is used in classrooms worldwide. It is used to help progress learning objectives that describe the learning process. Before you can comprehend a concept, you must memorize it. In order to apply an idea, you must understand it. In order to assess a process, you must have analyzed it. In order to produce an accurate decision, you must have completed a detailed assessment.

Progression in education and technology had provided numerous ways to meet the individual needs of students. When learning about taxonomies, several important classifications have been used to plan, organize, and evaluate programs.  The helpful are those that have gone through long and careful research goes into these classification systems. Educators are most comfortable with the simple version of the cognitive levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. When collaborating to develop a lesson plan, teachers can use a format that include learning taxonomies and multiple intelligences. With the limited time that teachers have, technology provides teachers with more ways to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of each student’s learning style.

Social status differences exist between the two individuals act to impede effective communication. It is a difficult task to educate a student that is not mentally ready to receive information that is provided. It may be difficult for a teacher to comprehend or have empathy for a student who has other things to think about than schoolwork. There needs to be a way to bridge the two worlds.

 

References

Fullan, M. & Langworthy, M. (2014). A rich seam: How new pedagogies find deep learning. London: Pearson. https://www.pearson.com/content/dam/one-dot-com/one-dot-com/global/Files/about-pearson/innovation/open-ideas/ARichSeamEnglish.pdf  

 

Hobbs, R. (2011). Empowering learners with digital and media literacy. Knowledge Quest, 39(5), 12-17.

 

Huitt, W. (2011). Bloom et al.'s taxonomy of the cognitive domain. Educational Psychology Interactive. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/cognition/bloom.pdf  

 

 

Kuhn, M. S. (2008). Connecting depth and balance in class. Learning & Leading with Technology36(1), 18-21.  

 

Rogers, E. M. (1963). The adoption process II. Journal of Cooperative Extension, 1(2), 69-75. https://archives.joe.org/joe/1963summer/1963-2-a2.pdf  

 

1 comment: