Critical thinking instruction for most educators today is synonymous with Bloom's Taxonomy, which classifies six learning behaviors that range from Knowledge, a recitation of fact, to Evaluation, which requires the student to focus on values and making judgments. Many educators today do not go beyond the knowledge level in their instruction. Therefore, the primary challenge of this type of instruction is incorporating the various levels daily across the curriculum. Oftentimes, teachers find it difficult to integrate these levels into planning, and ultimately use strategies to implement critical thinking incorrectly. Learning of facts is often confused with acquisition of knowledge. Another error that is commonly made in application of Bloom's Taxonomy is that many educators do not include various materials and situations calling for the particular level of thinking. For effective instruction to occur, there must be well-built lessons targeting an objective or behavior, which must be introduced and practiced through activity, ultimately ending with the learner's exhibition of the behavior through assessment. Educators also often use only convergent questions to determine student knowledge and understanding, aligning instruction with the first three Bloom levels rather than including divergent questioning which would relate to the later three levels of the Taxonomy and require students to process information creatively (Wakefield 1998).

Another factor that should be considered in teaching critical thinking in the classroom is actively transitioning students from knowledge to evaluation-based instruction. Robert Gagne (1967) outlines eight distinct phases or events of learning that illustrate a students pilgrimage from knowledge to critical thinking, beginning with motivation and ending at the feedback stage. Also, teachers need to consider the use of cooperative grouping in the classroom to facilitate critical thinking. Cooperative grouping allows students continual engagement and feedback from their peers. Also, the "yes" and "no" questions often encouraged by individual questioning are virtually extinguished in such a setting (Wakefield 1998).

Infusion design is another approach focused on improving critical thinking in the classroom. This approach integrates direct instruction in specific thinking skills into content area lessons. These lessons are intended to both improve student thinking and enhance content learning. The infusion design approach advocates that thinking should be a valid educational goal and that all students are capable of attaining growth in this area. It is also a teaching of thinking rather than a teaching of thinking methodology. The teacher introduces students to thinking skills by demonstrating the importance of doing such thinking well. Additionally, the teacher uses explicit prompts to guide instruction in thinking skills and processes. The questioning skills employed with this strategy are more content oriented, with the question of "Why? substituted for "What," such that the product rather than the process takes precedence in the instruction. Teachers using this methodology typically include five components in their lessons. Firstly, they help students develop and learn explicit strategies that inform and organize the way they do specific types of thinking. Then, they build into their instruction significant opportunities for students to reflect on, monitor, evaluate, and plan their thinking (metacognition). They also plan specific engagements on the part of students in applying the type of skillful thinking being taught to the student in the process of thinking about the content (i.e.: they are learning active thinking). Furthermore, they also follow up specific lessons with opportunities for students to gain more practice guiding them to do the same sort of thinking in new situations, known as teaching for transfer. Finally, the activities are conducted in an open classroom environment where good thinking attitudes are modeled and where students are given opportunities to manifest those attitudes and reflect on their value, which ultimately builds the disposition to engage in skillful thinking (Swartz 1998).

Unfortunately, many educators still seem to believe that critical thinking instruction cannot coexist with content-based instruction. However, some evidence is emerging which indicates that critical thinking skills and content instruction not only can coexist, but that the use of critical thinking skills in the classroom can improve student achievement and even accelerate the learning gains of students. An interesting survey taken from 257 teachers in Massachusetts to determine changes in teachers' instruction as a result of high stakes testing generated data which demonstrated a notable increase in the use of open-response questions, creative/critical thinking questions, and inquiry investigations by educators. The teachers reported that the reason for implementing these instructional practices were most influenced by an interest in helping the students attain MCAS assessment scores that would allow them to graduate high school. The most interesting observation was that the changes in teachers' instructional practices included increases in the use of those practices deemed by educational research as the best practices (Vogler 2002).

Home
Purpose
Definitions of Critical Thinking
Teachers' Utilization of Critical Thinking in the Classroom
Correlation of Teaching Critical Thinking Skills to Standardized Test Improvement
Methodology
Analysis of Results - Questionnaire Analysis
Analysis of Results - Cartoon Analysis
Analysis of Results - Analysis of Chapter Quiz
Analysis of the Individual Assignment
Analysis of Group Assignment
Teacher Analysis of Daily Lessons