RE: Remedies for Brain Workers wishing to avoid Brain Fag
I have always enjoyed Michael Scriven’s take on critical thinking. In my opinion it is a reliable and valid remedy for Brain Workers wishing to avoid Brain Fag
Critical thinking is
skilled and active
interpretation and evaluation
of
observations and communications, information and argumentation
as a guide to thought and action(Fisher and Scriven (1997) in What is critical thinking?)
Over the years the definition has been proven to be a useful remedy for making critical thinking visible to teachers and students alike.
On page 4 in section 0.1.2 “The Problems of Popularity” Scriven and Fisher clearly describe some of the barriers to a successful program in teaching when the idea/thing being taught becomes suddenly popular.
The fact that critical thinking is currently treated as A Good Thing represents a hazardous period for an important idea in education, because education is a domain that is strongly controlled by fashion’s swings. In the present case, this has meant that a mass of educational materials – and research has emerged which are centered on what is called critical thinking but is in fact crucially different from it.
Through the accurate definition and testing of critical thinking Scriven and Fisher hope that
… it will be possible to avoid the usual swing of the pendulum , which so often proceeds by taking a good idea, inflating its merits and conception, discovering that these inflated claims are not supportable, and rejecting the whole idea.
More recently I have used Scriven’s definition aligned with the the levels of cognitive complexity described in SOLO Taxononmy to help teachers make sense of some bewilderingly complex rubrics claiming to represent both critical thinking and deep learning. I offer this thinking about skilled and active “interpretation” and “evaluation” as an alternative framework for deep learning when thinking critically. For without a clear framework for identifying critical thinking we risk remedies that promise much but deliver little like Cerecibus described in the 1983 print advertisement below.
Functioning Knowledge Rubric
| Knowing how to …interpret and evaluate | Multistructural | Relational | Extended abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| (have a go but makes mistakes) | (on to it) | (teach others) | |
| Interpretation of: observations communications information argumentation [Interpretation - explain the meaning] | I can have a go at explaining the meaning of [X] … but I am unsure and make mistakes “because” and or “so that” Strategy – Use SOLO Relational maps e.g. Explain causes map and rubric | I can explain the meaning of [X] … and I can explain how and why the meaning is correct. | I can teach others how to explain the meaning of [X] |
| Evaluation of: observations communications information argumentation [Evaluation – making a decision, assessing, judging, analysing, sizing up, expressing an opinion, summarise, make a generalisation] | I can make a decision about [X] … but I am unsure if it is a good decision (reliable and valid). “make claim …because … because” Strategy – Use SOLO Extended abstract maps e.g. Evaluate, Predict or Generalise map and rubric | I can make a good decision about [X] … and I can explain how and why the decision is good (reliable and valid). | I can teach others how to make a good decision about [X] |
Declarative Knowledge Rubric
| Knowing about [X] by interpreting and evaluating [X] | Multistructural | Relational | Extended abstract |
|---|---|---|---|
| (loose ideas) | (linked ideas) | (extended ideas) | |
| Interpretation of: observations communications information argumentation [Interpretation - explain the meaning] | I can explain [X] with several relevant reasons “because” and or “so that” Strategy – Use SOLO Relational maps e.g. Explain causes map and rubric | … AND I explain why these are reasons for [X] "because" "so that" | …and I make a generalisation about the significance of the reasons for [X] “Overall I think … because … because …” |
| Evaluation of: observations communications information argumentation [Evaluation – making a decision, assessing, judging, analysing, sizing up, expressing an opinion, summarise, make a generalisation] | I can make a decision about [X] … but I am unsure if it is a good decision (reliable and valid). “make claim …because … because” Strategy – Use SOLO Extended abstract maps e.g. Evaluate, Predict or Generalise map and rubric | I can make a decision about [X] and back it up with several relevant reasons. [reliability] “this is a reason for the decision because” | …and I can justify my decision with evidence. [validity] |
