How To Approach Higher Order Thinking

A basic definition of higher order thinking is that it is a name for a way of approaching learning. It states that there are different components to learning and that these are present in a hierarchy, such as remembering, understanding, applying, and then analyzing, evaluating, and creating.

The concept came to the attention of mainstream academia in 1956. This is when a publication edited by Benjamin Bloom included the section 'Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives'. It prompted discussion amongst those involved in setting standards of education and those responsible for carrying these standards out.

It is used to categorize, debate, and enhance the different strands that make up skills and knowledge. It recognizes that to learn a variety of subjects or to achieve a certain level of academic or practical application, there will be different ways of giving and acquiring knowledge to make this a successful occurrence.

This method is used in schools and colleges with the expectation that the skills learnt by being taught to think critically rather than memorizing facts will be transferable. This means that if someone is able to develop an understanding of why they are being asked a question, or what the context of the fact is, they will be able to apply this rationale to all areas of education. This assists with the individual's development as they are equipped to make sense of academia rather than flourishing in one or a handful of subjects because they have remembered by rote rather than engaged with the knowledge being presented.

There have been some criticisms of this teaching theory. The main concern is that it distinguishes those who struggle academically to an even greater extent. It has been suggested that for students who work hard to remember the core facts of a subject to prove that they have listened and applied their time and effort, this system is unfair. This is because it would seem that some people have a more natural ability to communicate creatively and fluently. However, it would be unfair to presume that a natural ability did not come from discrepancies in previous education, the support of family, and the confidence of the pupil.

The counter argument to this is that working to a lowest common denominator means that everyone learns the basics and no one is given the opportunity to improve, or to display higher abilities, or to attempt to learn how to be more creative in academic work thus surprising themselves and giving them more opportunities in the future.

One of the most frustrating things about the arguments in favor of and against higher order thinking is that it is extremely difficult to objectively apply and judge. We do not live in a world where schools and pupils can be made to behave like laboratory experiments.

There are issues to consider such as teacher shortages, excessive class numbers, and outside factors such as the self esteem or time for study that each individual does or does not have. While it would be ideal to assess each person's subjective and objective approaches to learning and give them a purpose built lesson plan and educational route, there are simply not the resources to provide this.