Thinking and Processing - Responder

I have spent the better part of my life educating and studying education. Terms, theories, and "paradigms" come and go, but one eternal rejoinder to the assertion that schools are failing is that we "are not teaching critical thinking skills". As Patricia and Karen clearly delineate in their posts, critical thinking has applications both for the workplace and the classroom. As I have considered approaches to building this skill in the adult learners that I teach, as well as improving my own capacity for it, I have come to believe that it is less important (and more threatening) to our present society than another skill that is heavily emphasized in our jobs and in our schools - information processing.

Thinking vs. Processing

Particularly in academia, wrangling over definitions causes us to pause and lose the name of action, as Shakespeare warns. I have no intention of falling into that trap here, but I do maintain that definitions are a useful tool for framing and focusing. In this particular case, when determining the fundamental difference between thinking and processing, a social, underlying, and somewhat sinister purpose in favoring one or the other comes to the surface. "Processing", as I see it being played out in our social, political, and educational institutions, denotes taking in information, breaking it into its component parts, and shoveling it into predetermined bins. While one could argue that breaking information down requires some degree of critical thinking and even creativity, I see even this part of the processing procedure as being predetermined. We are given "chunks" of information and told how we should go about breaking it up (often called "interpreting") and where it should be placed. Whether operating in our personal or working environments, it is not the intent of those providing the information that we should reflect upon, evaluate, or connect the information (i.e. critical thinking), because doing so would turn it into "knowledge" - a potentially dangerous bit of anti-matter for those in power. Rather, we are encouraged - if not outright commanded - to accept what we are given, put it in its appropriate file, and move on.

The Brazilian philosopher and educator, Paulo Freire, called the state of existence in which discernment is limited "intransitive consciousness" (Freire, 1973, p. 17). When in this state, we are not open to other possibilities and interpretations, and we approach "a near disengagement between men and their existence" (Freire, 1973, p. 17). However, as people "amplify their power to perceive and respond to suggestions and questions arising in their context, and increase their capacity to enter into dialogue not only with (others) but with their world, they become 'transitive'. Their interests and concerns now extend beyond the simple vital sphere" (Freire, 1973, p.17). Keeping those without power (the "oppressed", as Freire termed them) in this simple vital sphere, is in the best interests of those having the power. Liberating us from it, is the work of critical thinking.

Source: quotesgram.com

Though employers decry the lack of critical thinking ability among their employees, I submit that the desired depth of that skill, if it is truly wanted at all, varies. If workers begin to question the status quo, call for new policies and procedures that would cost money and time, or seriously engage in Freire's search for "possibilities and interpretations", you can quickly find out how sincere they are in their pleadings.

Implications for the Classroom

In the high-stakes testing classroom, students are taught to confine their "interests" and "concerns" to what must be regurgitated on some assessment. By doing so in the prescribed way, they can confirm their allegiance as "successful participants in the global economy" or some other similar capitalistic mantra. As Karen pointed out in her post, the best way to encourage critical thinking among our students is by example. Unfortunately, in the systems-based American educational philosophy, teachers are no more encouraged or allowed to think critically than are their students. Tie their ability to pay their bills to their students' performance on quantitative tests that they had no part in creating, overload them with non-academic duties and form-filing, and you have the breeding ground of Freire's "in-transitivity". The emotion-based thinking that Karen quoted in her post takes over and the possibility of arriving at logical decisions is further diminished. "Decision-making, in today's world, is many times a disorganized, impulsive process without the necessary information and analysis," writes Kyle Moore. "Many times this results in negative consequences for the decision maker and those affected by the decision" (Moore, 2010, p. 6).

The ramifications for adult learners are even more salient. Adult learners are even less able to accept this kind of mindless pedagogy because they have a level of maturity and experience that produces a fully functional instrument called (by my daughter) a "bull ***t meter". In higher education in particular, they are sacrificing time and money for their education and have less patience with participating in a kind of academic assembly line.

Source: logoscr,blogspot.com

Improving critical thinking skills involves engaging the student in a mosaic of interlocking activities, as represented in the illustration above. It is far from the one-way, information banking and retrieval model that the status quo favors. This is not to say that we should not persevere in our efforts to foster critical thinking, but we should also be mindful that, to the degree that we succeed, we will be challenged.

References

Freire, P. (1973). Education for critical consciousness. New York: Continuum.

Moore, K. (2010). The three-part harmony of adult learning, critical thinking, and decision-making. Journal of Adult Education, 39(1). Retrieved from: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ917394.pdf.