The web quests are used to encourage progress at an individual pace as well as give considerable student choice and encourage higher order thinking skills. The Taylor site (see Bibliography) contains activities that are interdisciplinary.
Designing a thinking curriculum
In each of the main areas there are opportunities for students to use learning technologies to gather, analyse and present information in authentic ways. These include PowerPoint, Microsoft Publisher selected Web quests, Images, Graphics and Inspiration.
Bibliography
Atkin, J A 1993, ‘How Students Learn: A Framework for Effective Teaching Part 1. Thinking—Critical for Learning’, Seminar Series No. 22, IARTV, Melbourne.
Bagley & Hunter 1996, Technology in Constructivist Learning Environments, South West Educational Development Laboratory , http://www.sedl.org/pubs/tec27/9.html
Braggett, E 1997, The Middle Years of Schooling: An Australian Perspective, Hawker Brownlow Education, Melbourne.
Brooks, J G & Brooks, M G 1993, In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms, Association for the Supervision and Curriculum Development, USA online book review (online), http://129.7.160.115/INST5931/Constructivist.html [23 September 2001]
Bruner, J 1973, ‘Readiness for Learning in Beyond the Information Given, Anglin, J (ed). Norton, New York.
Education Queensland, 2000, New Basics Project Technical Paper, http://education.qld.gov.au/corporate/newbasics/
Gardner, H 1993, Multiple Intelligences: The Theory in Practice, Harper Collins, New York.
Gardner, H & Pace, J 1997, Building a Bridge of Knowledge for Every Child,http://glef.org/
Goleman, D 1996, Emotional Intelligence, Bloomsbury, London UK.
Hannaford, M 1995, The Case for Grounded Learning Systems Design: What the Literature Suggests About Effective Teaching, Learning, and Technology,
www.ctserc.org/library/bibfiles/brain-based.pdf Harvard University, The Thinking Classroom2001, http://learnweb.harvard.edu/alps/thinking/
Haynes, F & Haynes, B 2000, ‘The Development of a Conceptual Framework for Critical Thinking and Problem Solving K-10’, Critical and Creative Thinking, 8:2, pp. 15–22.
Hill, P & Russell, J 1999, ‘Systematic Whole-school Reform of the Middle Years of Schooling’, Paper presented at the National Middle Years of Schooling Conference, Melbourne.
http://rubistar.4teachers.org/view_rubric.php3?id=52519
http://www.curtin.edu.au/conference/ascilite97/papers/Hannafink/Hannafink.html
Jensen, E 1998, Teaching with the Brain in Mind, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (online) http://www.ascd.org/frametutorials.html link to ‘The Brain and Learning’.
Muir, M 2000, Motivating Learning: The Underachieving Learner’s Perspective, http://www.mcmel.org/motiv8/motiv8.intro3.html
Newmann, F and Wehlage, G 1996, Authentic pedagogy boosts student achievement,
http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/Publications/WCER_Highlights/Vol.8_No.3_Fall_1996/Authentic_Pedago gy.html
Sandholtz, J A 1997, Student Engagement: Views from Technology Rich Classrooms, http://www.apple.com/nl/images/pdf/acotlibrary/rpt21.pdf
Sousa, D A 1998, Is the fuss about brain research justified?
http://www.edweek.org/ew/1998/16sousa.h18 (30/5/01)
Taylor, R A Teacher’s guide to the Holocaust. Yes, Virginia there was a Holocaust: Is Anyone Out There? An Interdisciplinary Examination of Persecution During World War II for Eighth Grade, http://rogertaylor.com/samples/918.htm
Tishman, S & Andrade, A (1993, 1995), Thinking Dispositions: A review of current theories, practices and issues. Project Zero, Harvard,
http://learnweb.harvard.edu/alps/thinking/docs/Dispositions.htm The Costs of War(online),
http://powayusd.sdcoe.k12.ca.us/pusdphs/dmoore/index2.html
Untitled
Kim Capistrano
Year 7 The Brookside School, Caroline Springs
Designing a thinking curriculum
10
Valuing and assessing higher order thinking skills in
mathematics
Julie Hoskins
Ruyton Girls School
Abstract
The continuing perception of the mathematics classroom tends to be narrow. It is perceived as a subject where there is one correct answer and, at its worst, rigid and monotonous. Yet the reality of what is happening in mathematics class- rooms need not be limited to such closed work practices. In this chapter Hoskins describes a number of stimulating activities that improved her students’
thinking. They undertook practical explorations of trigonometric relationships, played fraction and decimal games with chocolates, explored the mathematics in cake recipes, and played games of chance to explore the fundamentals of proba- bility. Herrmann’s four modes of processing information and Ely and Caygill’s categories for assessment caused Hoskins to consider her students’ thinking styles. She also reconsidered assessment tasks to reflect these new classroom approaches and understandings.
Introduction
When I first began teaching twelve years ago, my students learned to add and subtract positive and negative numbers by ballroom dancing while counting floorboards. Last year, in a Year 11 class, I dressed up in a tutu and demonstrated to my students the magic inherent in calculus. Hardly rigid or monotonous!
For many years, teachers of mathematics have recognised the importance of varying the learning experiences of students. Mathematics teachers have adopted teaching techniques that provide authentic contexts in which students can apply problem-solving skills rather than simply practise algorithms and apply formulae. They have learned the importance of asking open-ended ques- tions and giving students time to reflect on processes and appropriate answers.
There is no escaping the necessity of teaching algorithms, skills and formu- lae, but mathematics teachers have become very creative in their delivery of information and skills. Many teachers have acknowledged the importance of developing higher order thinking skills, and are developing classroom activities that assist students to attain these skills: they are attempting to design a thinking curriculum. I believe the problem now lies in how teachers recognise, value and assess these problem solving, reflective, higher order thinking skills.
Much of the discussion by educationalists at present is on cognitive processes, preferred learning styles and how to ensure students are given oppor- tunities to develop higher order thinking skills. As a result, theorists’ tools and classroom learning activities are being evaluated for their ability to provide students with the opportunity to develop higher order thinking.