chapter continues with a discussion of what it means “to think” and to delineate between lower order thinking skills, basic thinking skills, or surface structure understanding and HOTS, also referred to as critical thinking or deep structure understanding.
The characteristic traits and dispositions must be part of the discourse in determining what it means to be a higher order thinker. General categories of the traits and dispositions of someone who exhibits HOTS are identified and discussed.
The chapter further outlines the necessary skills, abilities or dispositions one needs to develop to become a higher order thinker. In addition, a discussion ensues about the aspects which influence the development of higher order thinking in human beings.
The chapter further discusses approaches and methods for embedding higher order thinking into the educational curriculum and concludes with an analysis of four studies which infuse higher order thinking skills into their specific programmes.
2.2 HIGHER ORDER THINKING: HISTORICAL, PHILOSOPHICAL, PSYCHOLOGICAL, PEDAGOGICAL AND SOCIETAL ORIGINS
The historical origins of higher order thinking can be traced back to Socrates and the Socratic method (Corich, Kinshuk & Jeffrey 2007:164) This method encourages people to rectify inconsistencies and irrational thought processes
37
through questioning. This includes clarifying meaning, recognising inadequate evidence and beliefs that are contradictory, as well as empty rhetoric. Roman preparation of lawyers, the medieval focus on logical argumentation, the Renaissance and the Enlightenment all had the goal of teaching their citizens to reason well and willingly (Facione, Giancarlo, Facione & Gainen 1995:2). Endres (1996:172) argues that higher order thinking is the most fundamental structure of human communication. Human beings’ ability to clarify what they experience and impart it to others enables purposeful communication with one another.
Higher order thinking emerged from the philosophical study of logic which formed part of the curriculum of the 20th century. The philosopher, John Locke (1690: I, IV, 2), in his essay, “Concerning Human Understanding”, wrote about reflection and operative knowledge as the mind’s ability to observe its own operations. This is not associative retrieval of a particular answer but knowledge of what to do in order to produce answers.
Operative knowledge is constructive and is best demonstrated in situations where something new is generated. It is not the response that matters as much as the way in which it was arrived at. Von Glasersfeld (1987:44) concurred with Locke and stated that higher order thinking refers to the process of interpreting which requires the person to be aware of more than one possibility or choice and this act requires reflection.
Hanscomb, Title and Issn (2011:137) argue that in reference to psychology, higher order thinking reveals a wide range and deep understanding about human thought and behaviour. Wundt (Rieber & Robinson 2001:200) developed a theory of “Voluntaristic Psychology” in which he argues that acts of will or decisions and choice, at a complicated level, is the act of logical thinking. Although volitional acts can range from automatic impulses to complex decisions, they are what Wundt (Rieber & Robinson 2001:202) refers to as motivated behaviour which means that people want to have the opportunity to achieve the loftiest level of thought or higher order thinking.
38
Wundt (Boring 1968:13) postulates that in order to understand human thought psychologists must adapt the scientific method to measure what he termed “introspection”. Introspection is the immediate observation of one’s subjective experience. It is a metacognitive process which involves thinking about what one is currently experiencing.
Sternberg (2009:26) views higher order thinking as a component of intelligence which he argues increases with age as the components of acquisition, retention and transfer steadily lead to a growing knowledge base. This coincides with the conclusions of Holton and Clarke (2006:128), Magno (2010:140), Ku and Ho (2010: 251), Angelo (1995:6), Zohar and Ben David (2009:75), Willingham (2007:9), Paul (1992:20), Pogrow (2004:10) and Cotton (1991:11), as well as other scholars who discuss the importance of the process of metacognition in higher order thinking.
Bloom (Bloom, Englehart, Furst, Hill & Krathwohl 1956:5) postulates that pedagogically a person’s thinking skills begin at a lower level (knowledge e.g. recognition and recall) and then once those basic thinking skills are mastered one is able to move to higher order thinking (application, analysis, evaluation and synthesis). In conjunction with this theory he developed a list of higher order thinking skills which he argues are hierarchical, from simple to more difficult and abstract.
Vygotsky’s (1932:110) view is that the development of thinking and language doesn’t move from the individual to the socialised but from the social to the individual. Higher order thinking is a product as well as a process practiced and utilised by the individual as a result of his interaction with his culture, language and society.
Dasen, Dasen and Mishra (2010:316) confirm Vygotsky’s theory that in the case of children developing geocentric spatial language and understanding, learning occurs within the context of the society and family. The children learn through involuntary immersion, observation, enculturation and imitation of spatial references used by people around them.
39
Hanscomb, Title and Issn (2011:137) state that the history of the development of how we define and what we consider higher order thinking, moved from a singular emphasis on the individual cognitive aspect of higher order thinking to one that is more inclusive of emotions, society and ethics. It is essential to any discussion of higher order thinking that one takes into account the individual as an emotional and social character, as well as a cognitive being. The challenge is to organise experiences and interpret them through a personal as well as a cultural lens.
In order to foster higher order thinking one must attempt to define the difference between lower order thinking, basic or surface understanding and higher order thinking or deep structure understanding. Scriven and Paul (1987:2) juxtaposes these two types of thinking in that he states that the lower order thinking skills are about acquisition and retention of information alone. Lower order thinking is about the mere possession of a set of skills because it involves the continual use of them as an exercise, whereas, higher order thinking involves reasoning leading to conclusions with implication and consequences. The following sections discuss those differences as analysed by several scholars.
2.3 LOWER ORDER THINKING OR SURFACE STRUCTURE