Critical And Creative Thinking Bloom'S Taxonomy
Learning outcomes in this area are the highest in the cognitive hierarchy because they incorporate or contain elements of knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, and synthesis.In addition, they contain conscious value judgments based on clearly defined criteria. It concluded that recognition in a respected field requires 10 years of dedication and learning at a minimum, regardless of IQ, innate abilities or talents. In teaching, Paul and Elder (2007) give at least two fundamental purposes to Socratic questioning: Please see the detailed excerpts from Paul and Elder (2007) on how to use unplanned Socratic questioning (link), and on how to conduct a planned Socratic discussion (link).
The Socratic style of questioning also encourages critical thinking.This does not have to be a linear process, but can move back and forth, and skip steps. The most obvious space to embed critical thinking in a Syllabus is in the Student-Learning Outcomes section.Learning objectives contain an action (verb) and an object (noun), and often start with, “Student’s will be able to…” Bloom’s taxonomy (link) can help you to choose appropriate verbs to clearly state what you want students to exit the course doing, and at what level.Next is synthesis, which refers to the ability to put parts together to form a new whole.Learning outcomes at this level stress creative behaviors with a major emphasis on the formulation of new patterns or structures.The last level of the taxonomy is evaluation, which concerns the ability to judge the value of material for a given purpose.The judgments are to be based on definite criteria.Overview: Critical thinking is a higher-order thinking skill.Higher-order thinking skills go beyond basic observation of facts and memorization.They are what we are talking about when we want our students to be evaluative, creative and innovative.When most people think of critical thinking, they think that their words (or the words of others) are supposed to get “criticized” and torn apart in argument, when in fact all it means is that they are criteria-based.