«Teaching critical thinking nevertheless remains somewhat an unsolved field that headed towards perfection but as of today still in need of deeper and prospective investigation»

Pablo Agustín Artero Abellán
«Promoting Critical Thinking through the Modification of Questioning Verbs in Writing Assignments: A Study»
Tejuelo, vol. 31 (2020)
Número monográfico “Interfaces in language teaching”

Tejuelo. Didáctica de la Lengua y la Literatura. Educación | Universidad de Extremadura (@infouex) | Facultad de Educación | Departamento de Didáctica de las Ciencias Sociales, Lengua y Literatura | Badajoz | ESPAÑA

Se incluye a continuación un extracto seleccionado de las páginas 14 y 39 a 42 de la publicación en PDF [enlace de descarga directa]. Las referencias pueden consultarse en la ubicación original.

Enlace HTML.

Allie Smith @creativegangsters, Unsplash.

«Abstract

»The aim of the present study is twofold. First off, an analysis regarding 3rd ESO students' critical thinking application was procured from their performance from a piece of writing. To promote critical thinking, modification of the language of questions in the course book was purposely executed. This was then followed by an implementation of a whole Didactic Unit designed to enhance the role of reflective questions in the creation of more complex writings. This language modification was erected through the use of verbs contained in Bloom’s taxonomy higher orders. The changes that led students to write longer texts or express more elaborate ideas are also addressed. The data was collected via observation, pre and post questionnaires, and writing assignments.

»Conclusions, limitations of the study and lines for further investigation

»Regarding the answers provided first-hand by students through questioners as well as the previously exposed quantitative analysis can be both pointed at as the confirmation for the initial hypotheses and research questions. The mission was, except for the limitations to take into account, fully accomplished.

»At first, the conducted study was addressed to analyze whether critical thinking could be promoted or not within the framework of high school education, particularly through the modification of questioning verbs in writing assignments provided in the course book –Interface 3 by Macmillan editorial.

»The initial premise of a students’ potential production of longer texts, filled with more complex or richer ideas uniquely from a verbs’ replacement policy led to a search of professionalization when it comes to marking. Certainly, the difficultness to assess and give a faithful mark as far as ideas were concerned led to use a rubric to make it as accurate as possible. In this sense, a limitation of the study might be, arguably, that the grades were to some extent subjectively given. It is worth highlighting however that grading objectively continues to be a controversial area with much room for improvement. There is no official way or procedure to give an idea, a thought, one mark or another. What’s more, it is often the case that teachers grade same pieces of writing differently.

»Even admitting that the percentages of improvement were moderate, they still appear sufficient to claim that in the hypothetical case that students were provided with high-order-verbs questions, they would definitely be swayed to think deeper and write longer.

»Qualitatively speaking, all through the research period, students improved their grades an average by means of one point. By virtue of the quantitative analysis though, students also managed to ameliorate the three aspects assessed: the amount of words per writing, (increase of 42%), the inclusion of higher order verbs (rising about 12%) and lastly, a higher amount of compound sentences too (an additional 14%).

»Judging by the numbers and percentages laid out, it is our point of view that Interface 3 and maybe other course books as well should consider a restructuration in regards to the questions’ language and specifically, verbs.

»On account of this, the hypothesis referring to Interface 3 by MacMillan particularly on their failure to sufficiently promote the skill of critical thinking proved right too since the questionnaire showed students perception that the questions in such book were hardly to be answered in more than 3 lines.

»In this fashion, the definite re-counting that included both questions showed a positive imbalance of 30 words in favor of question 2, where the original verbs had been replaced for other higher in Bloom’s Taxonomy: question 1 revealed an average of 38 words per writing; question 2 accounted for 68 words on average. This difference may as well evince a much worrying feature: at present, Interface 3 and probably course books in general may be formulating their writing questions poorly from a ‘critical thinking’ point of view.

»To such a degree, it may be reasonable to affirm that if as a general rule, students wrote longer compositions for question two, reflective verbs such as hypothesize or imagine indeed influenced them as the key for such change.

»Another limitation to consider may be the pairing ‘prompt-teacher’. Whether the teacher remained silent during the completion of both questions 1 and 2, and in fact no further explanation, interpretation or detail were not given for the sake of impartiality, solidity and reliability as it was the specific purpose of the study, close attention should be put into the matter, meaning that this may well be laid out here as a possible limitation of the study equally.

»Taking all this into account, the outcome is irrefutably positive and edifying and was not only a success from an academic point of view. Instead, students expressed their most honest gratitude for having had the opportunity to work innovatively, through different approaches and technique. They claimed to have been inspired to think ‘out of the box’.

»Going further, this study was able to prove that through motivation and innovation yet applied to the same materials, students performed better in general lines. As a matter of fact, their writings could be also linked to other variables such as: a higher grade average, much more confidence, a more positive atmosphere, greater participation or a stronger will and mindset towards facing challenges or demanding subjects that additionally seek to avoid boredom as much as possible and enhance creativity.

»Teaching critical thinking nevertheless remains somewhat an unsolved field that headed towards perfection but as of today still in need of deeper and prospective investigation (Tsui, 2002). Authors such as Paul et al. (1995) also share such view and offer further reflection upon other future possibilities to help teachers designing original instructive ways for a better student command of thinking. This studio has laid out the relation between critical thinking and students’ performance in exams as a potentially interesting and perhaps productive field to explore.

»In relation with this another proposal that may be worth addressing consists of re-casting this same analysis including, even, the same questions and materials. The variation would come with regards to the groups with which the hypothesis would be tested. This means that two groups would be needed. Hypothetically, group A, would complete the first question, that of the book, including no modification whatsoever. This would be the control group. Group B would be the group subject to the same question except for verbs which would undergo change in terms of a higher level within Bloom’s Taxonomy. This way, an afterwards comparison may announce objectively as well possible changes.

»Assuming this other way may as well be worth of carrying out and so reading, I personally doubt that it should necessarily be regarded as a more reliable experiment since each student has their abilities and strengths. What this means is that comparing two different questions from two different students that, bear in mind, would undoubtedly have their unalike strengths and weaknesses or even excel at complete opposite subjects would seem, to my mind, unjust and biased.

»It is my personal stance that comparing two writings from a same subject will always appear more objective since they will continue to have their same skills and ‘defects’. Yet, as previously said, such study may as well shed light upon other fields or areas or even within the same. That, for now, remains to be seen.

»Working with a view to discovering new ‘powerful thinkers’ has also been suggested by William, Oliver and Stockdale (2004) who have in the past upheld the yet to discover potential behind critical thinking.

»Teaching or fostering critical thinking in the classroom should be neither stopped nor given scarce prominence come this point. This being so, “critical thinking is at the heart of our future because we live in a world of flagrant dogmatism and relativism, radically lacking in intellectual discipline” (Elder et al., 1999: 34).»