| 1.1
Background
|
| |
|
In
2002, the researcher conducted a probe study concerning student performance
across the curriculum in items in the NEMP assessments which tested
the essential skills (Knight, 2002). In the section on problem-solving
skills (pp 21-22), an attempt was made to classify those items of
a problem solving nature according to the kind of thinking required
for their successful completion.
The classification of thinking used was that of the New Zealand Curriculum
Framework document (Ministry of Education, 1993, p17) which states,
among other attributes, that:
Students will: |
| |
•
think critically, creatively, reflectively and logically. |
| |
The
focus of the study was on student performance and, in particular,
on differences in performance between year 4 and year 8 students,
and on changes in performance between assessment cycles. Consequently
only those tasks which were attempted by both year groups and the
trend tasks which were used in two cycles of assessment were considered.
In this study the focus is changed from being purely on student performance
to the consideration of the nature of the tasks themselves and also
the nature of the marking criteria used to assess student performance
on these tasks.
All tasks in the 1996 – 2003 assessments are considered and
those which seem to have significant potential for assessing different
kinds of thinking are identified. The marking criteria for some of
these tasks are then examined to determine the extent to which this
potential was realised in the assessment.
It was also hoped that it would be possible to identify some particular
items, presented in a one-to-one interview task approach with video
tape, which might be used in subsequent studies to explore the nature
of the thinking which was actually used by a sample of students in
completing the tasks. |
| |
|
|
| 1.2
RESEARCH QUESTIONS |
| 1. |
What
is the nature of the tasks in the NEMP assessments which seem to have
significant potential to assess students': o critical thinking skills?
|
| |
•
creative thinking skills? |
| •
reflective thinking skills? |
| •
logical thinking skills? |
|
|
| 2. |
To what extent is the potential for assessing these skills realised
in the marking criteria for the tasks? |
| |
|
| 3. |
What
are the similarities and differences between curriculum areas in this
regard? |
| |
|
| 4.
|
Is
it possible to identify particular tasks, presented in a one-to-one
interview format, the video tapes from which would be likely to enable
a researcher, in a subsequent study, to explore the nature of the
thinking which was actually used by students? |
| |
|
|
| 1.3
THINKING |
Many
books have been written concerning thinking from philosophical,
psychological, and educational points of view and it is not necessary,
or appropriate, to consider the concept in too much depth in a report
such as this. However, it is important to establish in a broad sense
how the researcher is interpreting the concepts of critical thinking,
creative thinking, reflective thinking, and logical thinking in
this research.
Halpern (2003,
page 356) expresses this kind of approach as giving a 'working definition'.
She writes:
“When an
abstract concept, like critical thinking, is operationalized, the
researcher or evaluator provides a 'working definition' or, perhaps
more accurately, a 'definition that works' so that observers can
reliably identify the construct.”
It is clear
to the researcher that in an educational context we are interested
in thinking which is directed to a purpose. Ruggerio (2004, page
4) provides a useful working definition of such thinking:
“Thinking
is any mental activity that helps formulate or solve a problem,
make a decision, or fulfil a desire to understand.”
With such a
definition it is not difficult to see why thinking is at the very
core of education.
When it comes
to identifying different kinds of educational thinking, the literature
includes many different classifications, and the terms critical,
creative, reflective and logical are used in a number of ways. Halpern
(2003, Page 357), for example, writes:
“For the
purposes of this chapter, critical thinking skills (or strategies)
are those that increase the probability of a desirable outcome (e.g.
making a good decision, reaching a sound conclusion, successfully
solving a problem).”
This is, of
course, very similar to Ruggerio's definition of thinking in general
and would, it seems, include creative, reflective and logical thinking.
It is reasonable to assume that this was not the intention of the
New Zealand Curriculum Framework and that, for this research, we
need a working definition of each kind of thinking which will enable
us to distinguish between them.
Briefly, in
this research: |
| |
|
|
| |
Critical
thinking is thinking which involves evaluation and, perhaps,
challenge.
Creative
thinking is directed towards solving a problem in one's
own way. It often involves imagination and initiative.
Reflective
thinking involves looking back on one's previous thinking,
knowledge and understanding.
Logical
thinking is directed towards making deductions or presenting
arguments. |
| |
|
|
| These,
of course, are not entirely independent. A given task may well involve
more than one kind of thinking. In fact it seems likely that all thinking
tasks begin with reflective thinking. However, the researcher did
not find it difficult to identify tasks for which seemed to involve
each of the kinds of thinking in a relatively major way. All the tasks
which were classified are reported in later sections of this report.
|
| |
|
|
| 1.4
ASSESSING THINKING |
Assessing
thinking is obviously problematic since we do not have access to
the thinking itself but only to the result of that thinking and,
perhaps, to the student's report of the processes used. However,
it does seem that the NEMP assessments, particularly those which
involve video taped interviews, have the potential to assess thinking.
This view is
supported by Halpern (2003, page 361) who writes:
“My own
preference for test format, when the goal is to assess critical
thinking, is to use an ecologically valid example with an open-ended
response format, followed by specific questions that probe the reasoning
behind an answer.”
This format
is entirely possible in the NEMP assessments in those tasks which
use the one-to-one interview task format in which the student works
individually with a teacher, with the whole session recorded on
videotape. Halpern's criteria for test format are used later in
this report. |
| |
|
|
| 1.5
MARKING CRITERIA |
| The
nature of the presentation of the results of the assessments in the
NEMP content area reports means that the marking criteria can reasonably
be inferred from the published results. Consequently, it was not considered
necessary to examine the marking criteria of all tasks. A sample of
marking criteria was considered and, apart from a very few examples
where some of the information obtained through the marking criteria
was not published, the marking criteria categories closely matched
the reporting categories. |
|
