|
| Gravitas |
 |
|
Soliloquy
in pursuit of well-tempered thought
|
| Miscellaneous
articles relevant to critical thinking, and the commentary by Hunter
Finch
pertaining to those articles, are examples of aggregated news in the
blogosphere,
which in this case have mostly been posted to the "Critical Thinking in
the News" section of the Foundation for Critical Thinking website
(criticalthinking.org).
It is the FCT's mission to foster critical thinking throughout all
domains
and disciplines of inquiry, discourse and learning in our social
institutions. Leading
research
suggests, and many leading educators believe, critical thinking will
become
a dominant |
force in the world
only when,
and to the extent that, critical societies emerge. Critical societies
are
those for whom fair-minded critical thinking is a social value and thus
routinely cultivated in all citizens and respected in all social
practices.
One contributes to the emergence of critical thought as a social value
by making changes consistent with the integral concepts, standards and
best practices of critical thinking across all domains and disciplines
in one’s daily life. Intellectual integrity arrived at through open,
accurate,
clear, precise, fair and independent thought processes is at the very
core
of a well |
tempered
mind. It is also at the core of the values and character in a critical
society. As media are reflections of our collective values and
character,
they are also potentially significant in helping us shape and alter our
individual views. Thus, a running index to some of the news, discourse
and critique that contextualizes critical thinking in media as they
alter
and illuminate our times follows. Articles and commentary are of mixed
quality and significance and we leave it to the reader to assess them.
###
|
Secularists,
What Happened to the Open Mind?
USA
Today -- August
29, 2007
by
Tom Krattenmaker
"Many
of the leading voices among atheists and the 'unreligious' reveal a
disdain for
religion that can only damage today’s dialogue. Speaking with people of
faith,
instead of about them, would enrich both sides of this philosophical
divide ...
Critical thinking might be to secularism what faith is to devout
religious
believers. Thinking rationally, questioning assumptions, embracing
complexity
and eschewing the black-and-white — these habits of mind are, to the
champions
of non-belief, a keystone of the secular worldview and a crucial part
of what
separates them from religious people ... So why, when it comes to
matters of
religion, do secularists so frequently leave their critical thinking at
the
door?... As the atheist writer and religion scholar Jacques
Berlinerblau
recently put it, 'Can an atheist or agnostic commentator discuss any
aspect of
religion for more than 30 seconds without referring to religious people
as
imbeciles, extremists, mental deficients, fascists, enemies of the
common good
... conjure men (or) irrationalists?' ... The behavior is unbecoming a
school
of thought that emphasizes rational complex thinking — and that has so
much to
offer if its practitioners can only live up to their own ideas about
the value
of an open mind ... The worst tendencies of atheists (who, by
definition,
believe God does not exist) and secularists (who are best described as
'unreligious') were framed for me during a recent e-mail exchange I had
with a
staff member of a humanist organization ... Discussing the relationship
between
science and religion, I had expressed my view that religion should
leave
scientific research to the scientists and devote itself, along with the
fields
of ethics and philosophy, to the mighty issues of the human condition:
good and
evil, the meaning of life, the nature of love and so forth. To which my
correspondent replied: Why would something as inherently foolish as
religion
deserve a place at the table for discussions of that magnitude?... As
someone
who has studied religion and attended progressive churches, I was
aghast. I had
expected an articulate and intelligent advocate for the non-religious
worldview
to display a more nuanced understanding of that which she stood against
...
But, sadly, this is how the conversation often goes when secularists
take up
the issue of religion. The tendency has perhaps reached its crescendo —
or low
point — with the appearance and best-selling success of Christopher
Hitchens'
book God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything
... Like
earlier books by atheists Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris, Hitchens
holds up the
worst tendencies and misdeeds of religious people like an ugly
piñata, on which
he then performs the predictable act. But his demolition of religion
dishonors
the tradition of critical thinking and intellectual seriousness that
supposedly
define secularism. Berlinerblau suggests that Hitchens and other
in-your-face
atheist authors are becoming the 'soccer hooligans of reasoned public
discourse' ... Not that Hitchens and his like-minded fans don't have a
point.
They are correct in criticizing those who have used religion to create
suffering in the world. And those acting in the name of their faiths
have
indeed furnished far too many case studies. Unfortunately, the forms of
religion most often in the spotlight these days lend credence to the
idea that
religion is a dark-ages anachronism that must be eradicated if the
human race
is to advance ... Nevertheless, I find myself wanting to leap to
religion's
defense when I encounter broadsides against all religion. Yes, many
religious
people behave in foolish and obnoxious ways, and some do cause harm in
the name
of their belief system. Yet the same could be said of non-believers.
When a
Stalin, Pol Pot, or Hitler commits monstrous deeds in connection with
an
ideology opposed to religion, does that somehow prove the inherent
delusion and
danger of non-belief?... My point is not to demonize secularists or
atheists.
There is too much of that already. According to a USA TODAY/Gallup Poll
conducted in February, fewer people would vote for a well-qualified
atheist for
president (45%) than an African-American (94%), a Jew (92%), a woman
(88%), a
Hispanic (87%), a Mormon (72%), a thrice-married person (67%) or a
homosexual
(55%)." -- Read
the Full Article
Commentary
by
Hunter Finch
Aristotle is alleged to have said, "The
mark of an
educated person is their ability to entertain positions other than
their
own." An open mind is essential to critical thinking. Yet, most
religions and atheist positions are cut from the same cloth. Neither of
these
"metaphysical" positions is given to recognizing or admitting
what can't yet be substantiated. No conclusive proof of the
existence, or non existence, of our vaguely defined concepts of
god currently exists. However, both religious and secular camps
believe
what they believe, and the fact that they believe one way or the
other is, itself, held as "proof" of their
respective truths' validity. When people already know the
truth by
equating their beliefs with fact, they aren't thinking critically.
Their truths
get in the way of their and others' journeys to discovery and
learning.
Belief systems — religious as well as secular faiths — are
generally
held together by external third-party "arguments by authority" such
as gods, apostles, prophets, gurus, scriptures,
literature,
language, as well as by our social conditioning and other intellectual
masks
that create blind spots in our thinking. And, it isn't always that we
don't
know what we know and don't know, but that we hold the truth in
self-righteousness and want to impose our version of it on everyone
else. We
need to check our legacy beliefs and belief systems at the door
and adopt
a more agnostic, albeit tentative, working relationship with each
other in
the things we may believe but don't actually know. The difference
between
knowledge and belief is a fine one grounded in a non cynical yet
skeptical
process of objective reasoning. Critical thinking emphasizes the
transcendence of egocentricities and sociocentricities with a genuine
intellectual humility and rigorous independent exploration and
examination of
diverse points of view that are clear, accurate, precise, and relevant.
A
seminal pedagogical concept and cadre of best practices that accompany
all
forms of inquiry, discourse, and understanding in virtually every
domain and
discipline, it is the foundational competency behind all learning.
It’s
the key to learning how to learn and to taking ownership of knowledge
and
skills in all other domains and disciplines. Available to any and
all who
choose to understand and practice it, it's the purview of neither
religious nor
secular camps.
###
No
Fad Left Behind
The San Francisco
Chronicle -- August 23, 2007
by Debra
J Saunders
"'Many Americans do
not believe that the success of our students or of our
schools can be measured by one test administered on one day, and I
agree with
them. This is not fair,' Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, told the
National
Press Club last month ... As the House Education and Labor Committee he
chairs
is expected to roll out a draft for legislation to reauthorize the 2001
No
Child Left Behind bill, Miller and fellow Democrats want to change NCLB
testing
... Currently, the law requires that students be tested in math and
reading
every year between third-grade and eighth-grade, then once in high
school.
Miller explained he would add 'multiple measures of success. These
measures can
no longer reflect just basic skills and memorization, but rather
critical
thinking and the ability to apply knowledge to new and challenging
contexts'...
On the one hand, Miller is right to push to improve NCLB. He wants to
allow
states to apply graduation rates toward their yearly NCLB progress
scores and
also would have states include history and science test scores ... On
the other
hand, when the education establishment touts testing for "critical
thinking," that can be code for: Maybe the kid can't read, but look at
the
bright side, he's smart." -- Read
the Full Article
Commentary
by
Hunter Finch
This article reflects the current political tension between
those who want to put critical thinking at the front of the learning
process
versus those who think it can be added on as simply another subject
after we have taught students memorization as the fundamental
skill
for learning. The tension is exacerbated by different levels of
understanding on just what "critical thinking" is. And, this is as
true within academia as it is within government, business, our
media and
society at large. In fact, critical thinking is the antithesis of rote
memorization in that it emphasizes intellectual standards and
traits in
process over memorization of desired
outcomes as its means
to the end. In its specific definition, it is
a seminal
pedagogical concept and cadre of best practices that is necessary to
understand
anything and everything. It accompanies all forms of inquiry,
discourse, and
understanding in virtually every domain and discipline. It's the
foundational
competency behind all learning; the key to learning how to learn and to
taking
ownership of knowledge and skills in all other domains and disciplines.
You
can't understand, much less change or correct, what you
haven't
thought about. So, how critical thinking is taught, tracked, tested,
and
assessed within the context of other subjects and disciplines gets
right to the
heart of the fundamental question, “What is education and how do we
measure it?” A
concept of critical thinking that organizes instruction in every
subject at
every educational level across the curriculum -- around it, on it,
and
through it -- needs to be studied, understood and made the
fundamental
standard for all teaching, testing and accountability. Tracking,
testing
and assessing critical thinking contextually across the curriculum
within each
and every domain and discipline is at the core of its specific
definition.
There are a number of controversies taking place within education and
government aimed at improving the way we teach, learn and
assess. Unfortunately, the more general understanding of what
critical
thinking is, and the prevailing assumption that critical
thought adds
to the pedagogical complexity and workload as opposed to expediting the
entire
teaching/learning process, carries many misconceptions that government,
teachers, parents and journalists need to revisit through a
specific,
not a general, understanding of critical concepts. In
other
words, critical thinking needs to be taught and learned in
its
specific sense -- by teachers, curriculum designers, politicians,
parents,
journalists as well as students -- so that we're at least all on
the same
page with the concept. Everybody should be looking
at fostering
the critical competencies that incentivize the creative
questioning
and discovery process within us. These are the
intellectual concepts and
practices necessary to build well-tempered minds. The
alternative, of
memorizing answers in limbo and out of context in order to ace tests,
is like
stealing from ourselves where, only after the test do we discover how
little
we've retained and how little we ever understood to begin
with. Further, teaching and testing for end outcomes without
teaching and
testing for the means by which students independently arrive at their
own end
outcomes dumbs down the discovery process between us. This tactic of
averaging
down results to bring the less intellectually engaged up only
creates an illusion that masks the glaring truth: That,
each of
us questions, discovers, understands, and learns best through
our own
initiatives, at our own pace, and on our own
clock. Our upgraded NCLB needs to reflect this
fundamental truth
by reworking its foundational premise rather than by
attaching political add-ons to pedagogical infrastructure that is
inherently flawed.
###
Too
Many Exams, Too Little Creativity
Trinicenter.Com -- August
21, 2007
by Zophia Edwards
"Comment: Kids say the darnest
things! ... Answer: Not in my classroom!
... This sentiment is largely responsible for the repression of ideas
in our
education system and has largely remained unchanged since our
independence in
1962. Our primary schools, secondary schools and tertiary institutions
have
maintained a rigid fixation on examinations. Standardized tests are
beneficial
in that they are useful for comparing students nationwide since they
are all
required to study the same curriculum for the same exam. What are our
standardized tests comparing? Memory. The downside is that the
education system
is organized in such a way that if you have problems memorizing and
regurgitating, you are branded as a person who is "not bright" and
your path is set from as early as the S.E.A. examinations. If you have
trouble
memorizing hard facts, crapaud smoke yuh pipe. Forget prestige schools
and
forget university. Those doors are not open to you who have problems
reciting
information, because even if you somehow make it pass the first stage
of
S.E.A., you end up in the same situation at higher levels in a system
that has
the same learn-by-heart demands of its students. This culture of
education has
limited the capacity of our citizens to produce at an optimum level in
our
society because it has limited creativity of the teacher, of the
student and of
the resulting workforce ... Standardized testing limits the
creativity of the teachers. Our nation's overuse of exams to assess
student
performance is having serious negative effects on teaching and
learning. The
tests have defined curriculum and fashioned instruction. The
standardized
testing of SEA, CXC, CAPE, A-levels, and even UWI final exams which
simply
assess memorization - a student's ability to store and reproduce names,
dates
and facts. What is important is that students memorize the formula and
not that
they understand it. This leads to a total lack of capacity for
comprehending
fundamental concepts and thinking in abstract terms. Basically, this
means that
students are not learning! Teachers instruct students in the alphabet
with
"A for apple and B for bat." God forbid if a child says A for Anchar!
In addition, how the subject is tested has become how the subject is
taught and
what is not tested is not taught ... The amount of emphasis
placed
on learning through past papers and sample tests speaks to the
unfortunate
importance of the understanding the test format over the importance of
understanding the actual material ... At the university
level, more
than ever, students should be encouraged to generate a large pool of
ideas, a
wide range of ideas and think outside of the box. They should not be
asked to
reproduce a semester's work in a two hour exam because this does not
develop
their critical thinking skills and analytical techniques. T&T's
education
system, by enhancing creativity in the classroom, will cultivate
originality in
thinking which will enable citizens to see things differently and
employ new
strategies and approaches to solving our problems ... The
real
achievers are always those who think outside of the box and who have
put their
knowledge and talents to creative use in the arts, business, sciences,
humanities, sports and across disciplines. This cannot be achieved if
the
system is stifling the creativity of the people. Memorizing a textbook
is no
replacement for innovative thinking. The creativity for progress that
should
have been cultivated in the classroom is lacking. T&T has not
adequately
tapped into the creative resources of the people." -- Read
the Full Article
Commentary
by
Hunter Finch
This
author fully understands and accurately reflects the dilemma facing all
education. If one accepts the suggestion that "creativity" -- a
critical
intellectual discipline initiated by engaged students working within
given
content-dense contexts to formulate their own essential
independently-created questions and strategies for purposeful
discovery,
understanding, enlightenment, and validation -- one wonders if the
only
measure of accountability within education that makes any sense to test
students and teachers on is the one that ignites the process; i.e., the
intellectual rigor and quality of the thinking itself.
###
Socialist
Bent Taints Higher Education
The
Arizona Republic -- August 12, 2007
by Doug MacEachern
"Ed schools, by and large (but
mostly large), fill up the education of
future teachers with unnecessary, often highly politicized, excelsior
... But,
overall, future teachers would do much better to get a well-rounded
liberal-arts education, salted with student teaching and a few classes
in
practical classroom management. Courses in American history,
Renaissance art
and economics would be a lot more valuable in the long run than, say, a
lot of
education-psych courses that attempt to turn elementary-school teachers
into
amateur Freuds ... Although wasting class time is a shame, turning
future
teachers into political activists is a far higher order of shameful
behavior.
And ed schools are nothing if not committed to inculcating their
students (and,
with luck, the students of those students) with a burning sense of
race, class
and gender grievance ... One popular tool has been the use of
'dispositions
assessments.' Before certifying their students as teachers, many ed
schools
require students to submit themselves to an evaluation of their
'critical
thinking' skills - an assessment that many schools have used to judge
their
students' commitment to 'social justice,' among other leftie causes ...
A few
years ago, Washington State University's College of Education refused
to
graduate a student whose responses to questions regarding his
commitment to
social justice failed to meet the school's standards. They tried to
flunk him
... The student sued. And what do you know? The WSU ed school
administration
suddenly had an epiphany regarding explicitly rejecting students with
conservative political viewpoints ... The concept of 'social justice,'
a phrase
loaded in socialist value judgments, shows up in the mission statements
of
countless schools of education. But the obsession with turning teachers
into
activists isn't restricted to individual schools ... In 2006, a huge
debate
erupted during the reauthorization hearings for the National Council
for
Accreditation of Teacher Education, a group that certifies college
ed-school
programs, over its recommendation that schools require a 'social
justice'
mind-set of their students ... You would think that the nation's
schools of
education might exhibit a smidgeon of humility about such a
hyperpolitical
agenda. Most of them, after all, like to think of themselves as being
academically meaningful, not just as factories for foot soldiers of the
revolution." -- Read
the Full Article
Commentary
by
Hunter Finch
We all have biases. It is not easy
or comfortable to be
intellectually honest with ourselves or independent in our thinking
separate
and apart from our surroundings. The author profiles a familiar
tendency of all
people and institutions to politicize their integral beliefs that,
in the
case for educators, would logically include various aspects
of academic curricula. It is too easy to seek associations
with
others who "think like we do," even when critical thought is the
least of what we may have in common. Our "metaphysical" longing for
acceptance compels us to seek out relationships with others on
common
grounds. We gravitate towards authoritative leadership on ideas and
issues
seeking our own acceptance in the notoriety of others. Acculturation
within and
across societies constantly pulls us into intellectual assumptions and
positions of acceptance in our associations with others that need
reconciliation continually. That said, critical thinking, in
its specific
definition, as opposed to its weaker use in the vernacular, is the
antithesis of all arguments by authority, indoctrination, brainwashing,
and
social manipulation. While "fair-mindedness" is a trait of thinking
critically, questions such as, "What constitutes social
justice?" are
left to independent thinking people and their institutions.
###
Competition
is King with Kids
Detroit Free Press -- August 12, 2007
by Kim North Shine
"The banquet room at the
Hampton Inn in Sterling Heights seemed oddly
quiet at first, considering some 60 kindergartners through high school
seniors
had taken over the place ... But then on second thought, it made sense:
These
kids were there to play chess. So, far more thought than talk was going
on at
the 2007 Universal Summer Scholastic Championship held July 29 at the
hotel ...
Offenders of the silent majority were promptly shushed ... Take
7-year-olds
Victor Ip of Madison Heights and Jacob Pochmara of Waterford ... When
they
decided to break the silence by discussing their game and their
previous
tournaments, and argue who was the better player of the two, players
around
them were not shy about issuing their shushes ... Patricia Mandell,
co-owner of
All the King's Men, the business that sponsored this and other chess
contests,
said this daylong event of quiet concentration was actually not so
quiet ...
'This is a lot noisier than most,' she said ... On July 19, the
U.S.
Department of Education announced an award of twenty-four $10,000
grants to the
State of Maryland to start chess programs for school students ... Dr.
Nancy S.
Grasmick, state superintendent of Maryland Schools, said in a
statement,
'Participation in an extended learning chess program can assist
students with
developing critical thinking, self-esteem, social skills, and other
necessary
skills to be successful in school and in other aspects of life.'"--
Read
the Full Article
Commentary
by
Hunter Finch
Does Chess assist students with developing critical thinking, or does
critical thinking assist students in learning Chess? The paradox, and
message,
is: You can't understand anything well without thinking
critically
about it well; you improve critical thinking with practice in
the
skills you have a critical understanding in. You can't do one
without
the other.
###
Critical
Thinking and the Roll of the Parent
MomsOnEdge.Com --
August
5, 2007
"Recently some mothers of young children
engaged in a discussion about
passing judgment. It was unanimous; they would all teach their children
that
being judgmental of other people is wrong. They would be sure not to
model
judgmental behavior and they would correct their children if they
caught them
being judgmental. Sounds good in theory… but, shouldn’t children be
taught and
encouraged to be judgmental? This article is not advocating teaching
children
to be judgmental of people based on skin color, physical ability,
religion,
intellectual, or economic differences, of course. It is about teaching
children
about values and behavior and assessing situations ... Critical
thinking consists
of mentally evaluating information, analyzing that information and
forming a
judgment which leads to smart action ... Critical thinking and making
judgments
allow children to self-regulate their social, emotional, and physical
responses
to outside stimuli and stay in control. If a child is put into a
situation in
which he must choose between good and bad, he can make an assessment of
the
situation, and using the skills he has been taught by his parents, make
a good
choice. Children can be taught to think a few steps ahead, envision the
consequences of their actions, and make appropriate choices based on
the values
and morals taught by their parents. Parents can take a proactive role
in
teaching critical thinking by discussing topics that children will most
likely
encounter as they develop; such as peer pressure, failure in sports,
stress due
to grades, managing spending and handling relationships. Role playing
can be a
great tool in preparing kids in advance for likely situations. Parents
can use
their wisdom to coach their children about how to respond in certain
instances
... Parents should not assume that their children understand how to
think
critically and judge situations." -- Read
the Article
Commentary
by
Hunter Finch
A commonly held misunderstanding is that critical thinking is what
everyone instinctively knows how to do; that the only needed emphasis
is to
just do it. Quite to the contrary, critical thinking is a
relatively
complex concept and integral cadre of disciplines and best practices
which need
to be contextually taught, learned, understood and practiced
throughout
one's lifetime. The author is correct in admonishing parents not to
assume that
their children understand how to think critically and judge
situations. Yet, the assumption in this approach is that parental
wisdom,
and wisdom alone, will provide everything needed to get the job done.
###
Teaching
to the Test: News From the Education Front
Britannica
Blog (Where Ideas Matter) -- August 1, 2007
by Joanne Jacobs
"What does it mean to 'teach
to the test'? Linda Perlstein’s new
book, Tested: One American
School Struggles to Make the Grade, goes
inside the classroom at Tyler Heights, an Annapolis, Maryland,
elementary
school that’s working relentlessly to boost the test scores of its
low-income
black and Hispanic students ... Children practice endlessly writing
one-paragraph answers, known as BCR’s ('basic constructed responses'),
that they’ll use to show reading comprehension on the Maryland
School
Assessment (MSA). A third-grade teacher models a BCR: ... 'Damon and
Pythias is a play because it has the elements
of a play. Some
elements of a play are that plays have stage
directions. Also, there
is a narrator.
This play also has a lot of characters. So I
know this play has all
the features it needs' ... The words and
phrases in bold above are transitions and MSA vocabulary likely to earn
a higher
score: Students are taught these are 'million-dollar words,' and they
enjoy
adding up their earnings per paragraph ... Students have little time to
write
anything but BCRs: They may write about plays but they don’t act them
out, much
less try to write their own. They don’t read chapter books and rarely
go beyond
the literal interpretation of what they’ve read ... Furthermore (a
million-dollar word!), what’s not on the test isn’t taught: The minimum
of four
hours a day devoted to reading and math squeezes social studies and
science out
of the curriculum. (To make more time for reading and math, 44 percent
of
elementary schools spend less time on science, social studies and other
untested subjects, reports The Center on Education Policy.) Only in the
last few
months of the school year, after the MSA is given in March, do students
work on
social studies projects, do science experiments, go on field trips or
perform
in talent shows ... But in pre-NCLB (No Child Left Behind) days, Tyler
Heights
students weren’t critical thinkers and creative writers: Only 17
percent passed
the MSA in 2000. Many went on to fail in middle school and drop out of
high
school." -- Read
the Full Article
Commentary
by Hunter Finch
This article provides
good examples of what schools, teachers
and students are going through to satisfy the ends of No Child
Left
Behind. Raising grades on standardized tests whatever the means,
as a
premise to delivering student acquired ownership of ideas and
knowledge,
is a faulty premise. Incenting rote responses with scripted million
dollar
words and sugarcoated rewards, albeit
in BCRs formats, is
not an adequate intellectual foundation for well-tempered
minds. Bringing in outside specialists to help students prep for
tests and
then associating anything like this with critical thinking's
insights and
cadre of best practices mocks any suggestion that a mind actually needs
to
think and integrate substantively in order to understand.
###
|