GMIT EXAMINATIONS 2013/2014

Continuous Assessment No 1 (CA1) ACADEMIC ESSAY

Programme:

DTE

Year:

Module:

PRINCIPLES OF EDUCATION (PE)

CA Weighting:

(20% out of 100%)

Internal Examiner(s):

Dr. Pauline Logue Collins

External Examiner(s): Dr. Elaine McDonald

Mr. Tom Scott
Submission [Dates to be confirmed]
Submission Date 1 (required draft) 10%

Tuesday 21th Oct, 2013 (15%) 9

am

Submission Date 2 (final version) 10%:

am

Shane Brouder
G00287783

Tuesday 29th Oct, 2013 (15%) 9

HIGHER ORDER THINKING AND PROBLEM

SOLVING IN THE CLASSROOM: THEORETICAL AND
PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVES

Abstract
There are many relevant theoretical and practical perspectives on higher
order thinking and problem solving which intertwine with classroom
teaching and learning. This academic essay, which employs secondary
research, is a brief guide to aiding the teacher and the pupil in promoting
higher order thinking and problem solving techniques within the
classroom. It provides an understanding of the learning processes,
practices as well as assessment methods when teaching higher order
thinking and problem solving. It also examines how higher order thinking
and problem solving affects teachers and pupils both directly and
indirectly. Key findings include the interaction between the child and
cognitive, affective and psychomotor learning, teaching strategies that
will aid the teacher in promoting higher order thinking and problem
solving, and finally, how we can assess the childs progress of higher order
thinking and problem solving.

Acknowledgements
I would like to articulate my deepest thanks and appreciation to my
lecture; Dr. Pauline Logue-Collins, who supplied me with her infinite
experience and wise direction in the achievement of writing this academic
essay. Without Paulines guidance and advice I would have found it
impossible to complete this challenging essay. Her rewarding support has
enabled me to conclude my second academic essay. I also owe a great
deal of gratitude to the librarians at G.M.I.T Galway who dedicated
countless hours of their time aiding me in accomplishing my research. The
following people have sacrificed their time reviewing and monitoring the
progression and completion of my essay; Kevin Forrey, David Walsh and
Padraig Moore. They alerted me to mistakes and faults that needed
correction throughout this academic essay. Finally to my fellow peers, I
would like to thank you for your encouragement, advice and motivation.
You gave me the courage and inspiration required to complete such a
testing academic essay. Thank you.

Content

Abstract....................................................................................................................ii
Acknowledgements.................................................................................................iii
1. Introduction.........................................................................................................1
2. Blooms Taxonomy of Education.........................................................................1
2.1 Cognitive Domain..............................................................................................2
2.2 Affective Domain................................................................................................3
2.3 Psychomotor Domain.........................................................................................3
3. Teaching Strategies.............................................................................................4
4. Assessing Higher Order Thinking and Problem Solving..................................5
5. Conclusion............................................................................................................6
6. Bibliography.........................................................................................................8

1. Introduction
Higher order thinking and problem solving in the classroom can be defined
as the ability to analyse, manufacture, evaluate, and understand thoughts
at complex levels. It is the skill which enables you to process opinions at
deep levels, make critical verdicts, and detect shades of meaning. One
can make critical interpretations and demonstrate high levels of insight
and sophistication in their thinking and problem solving. Individuals are
able to make implications, create relevant and insightful conclusions, use
their knowledge in new situations, and relate their thinking to other
situations and to their own background knowledge. (Tankersley, 2005).
The aim of this short academic essay is to explore the theoretical and
practical perspectives on higher order thinking and problem solving from
which I hope to access their proposed relevance for classroom teaching
3

and learning. The following are topics that I will discuss throughout this
academic essay; Blooms Taxonomy of Education, Teaching Strategies, The
Assessment of Higher Order Thinking. Throughout this academic essay I
will address the key fundamentals associated with higher order thinking
and problem solving, I also hope to share my views, reflections and
experiences concerning its integration within the classroom.

2. Blooms Taxonomy of Education.

In order to understand higher order thinking and problem solving within
the classroom we must first get an insight into the learning behavior of
the student. Taxonomy is demarcated as the Classification, esp. of
animals and plants according to their natural relationships (Bloom, 1956).
This is a term used in the environmental science field for differentiation of
organisms into classes such as family, species, genus and phylum.
However the Taxonomy of Education fluctuates slightly from the biological
term. It is believed that students can too be collected, divided and
grouped into different educational units based on the classification of the
goals of our education system. (Bloom, 1956). When exploring higher
order thinking and problem solving we as fascinators must directly revisit
and relate to Blooms Taxonomy of education, thus ensuring that we
maximize the potential and development of the
students. In order to promote higher order thinking and problem solving
within the classroom we must follow the three domains of educational
activities or learning. The three domains include, cognitive, affective and
psychomotor. According to Richard Eason the Blooms Model (Eason,
2011) can be simplified into three dissimilar types which include, learning
that is transferring knowledge, learning that is developing attitudes and
learning that is generating a skill thus referring back to my previous
statement that there are three identifiable domains in educational
behaviors and learning. (Eason, 2011)

2.1 Cognitive Domain

We consider cognitive learning to be the knowledge and development of
intellectual skills. (Bloom, 1956). The student learns by monitoring,
listening, watching and experiencing stimuli, the brain then processes the
material stores the information and regurgitates it at a later stage when it
is required. According to Donal Clark there are numerous subdivisions of
learning within cognitive learning. (Clark, 1999)The six subdivisions in
specific order include knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis,
synthesis and evaluation. Clarke states that the categories can be
thought of as degrees of difficulties. That is, the first ones must normally
be mastered before the next ones can take its place. (Clark, 1999). In my
eyes, an individual must conquer each phase in order to reach their initial
goal of completing the cognitive learning process. An entity must input
the information, analyze and interpret the information, relate it to
information they already know, build on that information and when one
fully understands the information they should be able to calculate it
through reasoning. In my opinion cognitive learning must take place
within the classroom in order to optimize the students potential. Jean
Piaget believed that the cognitive development of a child begins even
before they enter the classroom. His theory on the cognitive domain
consisted of four stages which list in detailed order, Sensorimotor, {Birth
through ages 18-24 months}, Preoperational, {Toddlerhood (18-24
months) through early childhood (age 7)}, Concrete operational Ages 7 to
12}, Formal operational {Adolescence through adulthood} (Roy
Benaroch, 2012). Piaget states that different children may pass through
the various stages of cognitive development at different ages; each child
has a unique intellectual development. (Piaget, 1964). Although Piagets
theory differs slightly from that of Blooms and Clarks theories, they have
many similarities about imputing information, building on previous

information and developing the childs mind that will allow them to
practice higher order thinking and problem solving.

2.2 Affective Domain

The affective domain is most commonly known as the
learning objectives that emphasize a feeling tone, an emotion, or a
degree of acceptance or rejection. Affective objectives vary from
simple attention to selected phenomena to complex but internally
consistent qualities of character and conscience. (Karthwhol, et al.,
1964).
David R. Karthwhol believes that this type of learning is derived from
interests, attitudes, appreciations, values and emotional sets or basis.
(Karthwhol, et al., 1964) Just like Clark, Karthwhol states that there are
several divisions within affective learning, these include in explicit order,
receiving, responding, valuing, organization and characterization.
(Karthwhol, et al., 1964). As facilitators we must strive not to give into
temptation by inputting the information into the students heads and
expect them to recall it word for word after a period of time. Students are
entitled to learn through communication skills, motivation and
management skills so they can use these abilities later in life and not just
one exam. Therefore we would appreciate the student to respond to what
they have learned, value what they have learned, organize it and put it to
good use by characterizing it into something personal which they admire
and believe they can become.

2.3 Psychomotor Domain

The Psychomotor domain relates directly to technology and woodworking
teachers, the pupil is learning through physical and motor skills. We
believe that the psychomotor domain involves physical movement,
coordination, and use of the motor-skill areas. Development of these skills
requires practice and is measured in terms of speed, precision, distance,
3

procedures, or techniques in execution. (University, 2007). There are

many different theories on the psychomotor domain according to different
books but after studying numerous of key thinkers opinions I found that I
could relate most to Ms. Anita Harrows taxonomy.
Harrow's interpretation of the psychomotor domain is strongly
biased towards the development of physical fitness, dexterity and
agility, and control of the physical 'body', to a considerable level of
expertise... appropriate to the development of young children's
bodily movement, skills, and expressive movement... Harrow model
would be perhaps more useful for the development of adult public
speaking or artistic performance skills than Dave's or Simpson's,
because the Harrow model focuses on the translation of physical
and bodily activity into meaningful expression. (Chapman, 20062009).

According to Harrows Model there are six categories or levels in the

development of the childs psychomotor learning domain. These list in
ascending order, reflex movement, basic
fundamental movements, perceptual abilities, physical abilities, skilled
movements and non-discursive communication. In my eyes this is the
most logical version of the psychomotor domain. It demonstrates the
growth of the child from the reflex movement, which can be seen inside
the mothers womb, right up to the non-discursive communication level
where the child has grown and can express meaningful interpretations.
The Harrow model is the only one of the three Psychomotor Domain
versions which specifically implies emotional influence on others within
the most expert level of bodily control, (Chapman, 2006-2009).

3. Teaching Strategies
In order to promote higher order thinking and problem solving within the
classroom one must have interesting lesson plans with set teaching
strategies. It is integral that the teacher puts himself/herself in the shoes
of the student and imagines What is your experience? What kind of
thinking you are doing? What are you learning? (Crawford, 2005). By
using Blooms Taxonomy of Education as a guide one can build lesson
plans and key teaching strategies around the childs learning abilities,
therefore giving the child the best possible chance of participating in
higher order thinking.
When starting any lesson the teacher must give the students a
quick overview of the lesson. The overview kick-starts the childs thinking
process which evidently begins the production of higher order thinking. I
believe that putting up a frame or scaffolding before a lesson commences
will allow the students to think about the topic and to raise their
curiosity. (Crawford, 2005). If you deliver this teaching strategy in a clear,
concise and exciting manner you can be assured that you have captured
the thoughts of the pupil and they are already thinking and questioning
the topic within their minds.
Opening a controlled conversation within the class can be one of the
most effective higher order thinking exercises. Small group activities
such as student discussions, peer tutoring, and cooperative learning can
be effective in the development of thinking skills. Activities should involve
challenging tasks, teacher encouragement to stay on task, and ongoing
feedback about group progress. (King, et al., 2008). Although this is a key
learning method for enhancing higher order thinking and problem solving
skills it may be difficult to execute with large class numbers, therefore
splitting the class into manageable groups can be largely constructive. I
believe that in order for this teaching strategy to be fully beneficial
to the class it is advised that each member of the group gives his/her
input and at the end of the session a speaker from each group shares their
ideas with the rest of the class.
3

Creating bridges is also another very superior method of

encouraging higher order thinking within the classroom. By building these
bridges it allows the student to compare, contrast and link previous
knowledge to new learnings. These connecting networks and operations
help provide the bridge to higher levels of thinking. (King, et al., 2008).
Students must be allowed to broaden their knowledge of the world by
building relationships among different concepts (Crowel, et al., 1997). For
example, if a teacher has a six legged table, the students must make the
link that although it has six legs it is still a table and not a couch. When
students link prior learning to new contexts, tap into their own schemata,
and have the proper scaffolding for new information, they move toward
higher order thinking. (Crowel, et al., 1997).
There are numerous strategies that teachers use to promote higher
order thinking in the classroom. Many teachers like to use their own or
stick to a set number of teaching strategies. It is extremely important to
keep your options open as different classes and different students respond
to different teaching strategies, higher order thinking and problem solving
exercises.

4. Assessing Higher Order Thinking and Problem

Solving.
Assessment is defined as the process and product of determining
whether students have learned what they were expected to learn from
instruction. From the teachers point of view, anything that reveals what
students are learning, or how well they have learned, can be considered
an assessment. When students ask or answer questions, they are showing
something about their knowledge of the subject. (Reeves, 2011). When
constructing an assessment there are three basic principles:

Specify clearly and exactly what it is you want to assess.

Design tasks or test items that require students to
demonstrate this knowledge or skill.
Decide what you will take as evidence of the degree to which
students have shown this knowledge or skill. (Brookhart, 2010).
3

Higher order thinking and problem solving assessments differ slightly from
the majority or assessments. Higher order thinking and problem solving
assessments involve presenting something for students to think about,
usually in the form of introductory text, visuals, scenarios, resource
material, or problems of some sort. (Brookhart, 2010). One should use
material that is new to the student, not covered in class and thus subject
to recall. (Brookhart, 2010). When planning for the assessment
distinguish between level of difficulty (easy versus hard) and level of
thinking (lower-order thinking or recall versus higher-order thinking), and
control for each separately. (Brookhart, 2010).
A decent test for assessing higher order thinking and problem solving is
that of multiple choice examinations. In many countries multiple choice
questions have become the national assessment for higher level thinking
and problem solving. The multiple choice pieces can be used for testing
micro-dimensional critical thinking skills, like identifying the most
plausible assumption, recognizing an author's purpose, selecting the most
defensible inferences, and such like. (King, et al., 2008).
Other methods such as performance testing which include hands-on
errands (e.g. chiselling, sawing and drilling), essay writing, oral short
questioning and answering and journaling are all recommended tasks for
calculating higher order thinking and problem solving skills. Performance
testing can deal with complex, real-life problems that require students to
employ several higher order skills in their solution. They can generate
student interest and motivation. (King, et al., 2008). It must be noted
that students that practise higher order thinking fare well on
standardized tests and are considered to be advanced. They will indeed
be prepared to function as outstanding workers and contributors in a fastpaced workplace where the emphasis is on using information rather than
just knowing facts. (Tankersley, 2005).

5. Conclusion

Higher order thinking and problem solving is a hugely significant aspect of

classroom teaching and learning. I believe that in order to help the
individual child to grow, mature and express himself/herself they have to
be given the opportunity to learn through higher order thinking and
problem solving activities. In my eyes without higher order thinking and
problem solving in the classroom there would be no creativity or life. We
as training teachers have the opportunity to steer away from wrote
learning and start a new trend of originality, inspiration and individuality.
From studying Blooms Taxonomy I agree that it is vital to know the
different stages of learning through higher order thinking and problem
solving. I discovered that different children within your class will have
different learning styles weather it is connected to the cognitive domain,
affective domain or the psychomotor domain and it is our responsibility as
facilitators to teach the student through these particular styles. I find that
my studies are but just a pin prick on the skin of my exploration of the
theoretical and practical perspectives of higher order thinking and
problem solving within the classroom. I thoroughly enjoyed researching
this topic and as I become a teacher I hope to build on my existing
knowledge of higher order thinking and problem solving.

6. Bibliography
Bloom, B. S., 1956. Taxonomy of Education. 1st ed. London: Longman INC.
Brookhart, S. M., 2010. How To Assess Higher-Order Thinking Skills In Your
Classroom. 1st ed. s.l.:Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Chapman, A., 2006-2009. blooms taxonomy-learning domains. [Online]
Available at: www.businessballs.com
Clark, D., 1999. Big Dog and Little Dog's Performance Juxtaposition. [Online]
Available at: www.nwlink.com
[Accessed 5th June 1999].
Crawford, A. S. W. M. S. R., 2005. Teaching and Learning Strategies for the
Thinking Classroom. 2nd ed. New York: International Debate Education
Association.
Crowel, T., Kaminsky, S. & Podell, D., 1997. Educational Psychology: Windows on
teaching. 1st ed. Madison: Brown and Benchmark.
Eason, R., 2011. Blooms Taxonomy of Learning Domains: explained in simple
words!. [Online]
Available at: http://evaluationfocus.com
[Accessed April 2011].
Karthwhol, D. R., Bloom, B. S. & Masia, B. B., 1964. Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives. The Classification of Educational Goals, Handbook II: Affective
Domain.. 2nd ed. New York: David Mckay Company.
King, F., Goodson, L. & Rohani., F., 2008. Center for Advancdement of Learning
and Assessment: Florida State University. [Online]
3

Available at: www.cala.fsu.edu

[Accessed April 2008].
Piaget, J., 1964. The child's conception of the world. 1st ed. London:
ROUTLEDGE & KEGAN PAUL LTD.
Reeves, A. R., 2011. Where great teaching begins: Planning for student Thinking
and Learning.. 1st ed. Alexandria, VA, USA: Association for Supervision &
Curriculum Development(ASCD).
Roy Benaroch, M., 2012. Piaget Stages of Development. [Online]
Available at: children.webmd.com
[Accessed 6 November 2012].
Tankersley, K., 2005. Literacy Strategies for Grades 4-12: Reinforcing the
Threads of Reading. 2nd ed. Michigan: Association for supervision and
curriculum Developement.
University, T. P. S., 2007. Starting Point-Teaching Entry Level Geoscience.
[Online]
Available at: serc.carleton.edu
[Accessed Monday 17th December 2007].