Thanks for a wonderful take on critical thinking, as well as some food for ,uh, critical thought! From my standpoint meeting the needs of students who have not (yet) developed decontextualized oral language skills (the ability to talk about things not physically present), I notice the most frequent discussions presume a high level of verbal exchange. While in search for a definition of critical thinking, why not ask about evidence of such in three-year-olds? We could ask ourselves if we think critical thinking is restricted only to advanced language users. While the current cultural models seem to indicate this, perhaps a theoretical model could encompass the impressive cognitive activity observed in students still acquiring language skills.
Here’s a source of some related thoughts: Construing Experience Through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition by C. M. I. M. Matthiessen and Michael Halliday.
Thanks for reminding me of Halliday’s functional grammar. I’m going to do a deep dive and refresh my understanding. It is highly relevant to critically thinking about grammar.
Is it possible to persuade you to cast your impressive reading interests in another direction? While the linguists, socio-linguists and psycholinguists have informed our understanding of language use, it is the educators and psychologists who have explored the impact of language on classroom learning. A wonderful compilation is Perspectives on Language and Literacy: Beyond the Here and Now, edited by Beck and Olah. In my years in K-8 classrooms, I have repeatedly observed evidence of the situation Snow, a contributor to this work, suggests when she writes, “Perhaps most children are not failing at reading or writing, but at comprehending and producing decontextualized language.” (page 183). In response to this need articulated by Snow (and others, lots and lots of others. I can send the list), I have designed and supported classroom activities that successfully address ways to support continuing oral language development, creating eager learners and relieved teachers. What I have learned is that the challenge is not in finding ways to help children meet curricular goals at lower stages of language decontextualization; it is in persuading prominent individuals, such as yourself, that this situation both exists and can be resolved. There’s a saying, “When you are being pursued by a demon, a physician can refer you and a psychologist can counsel you, but only a philosopher will pick up a stick and help you chase it.” I think we have a lot of fine philosophers in the field of education, and hope at some point that more of us will chase this particular demon.
Hi Terry,
Thanks for a wonderful take on critical thinking, as well as some food for ,uh, critical thought! From my standpoint meeting the needs of students who have not (yet) developed decontextualized oral language skills (the ability to talk about things not physically present), I notice the most frequent discussions presume a high level of verbal exchange. While in search for a definition of critical thinking, why not ask about evidence of such in three-year-olds? We could ask ourselves if we think critical thinking is restricted only to advanced language users. While the current cultural models seem to indicate this, perhaps a theoretical model could encompass the impressive cognitive activity observed in students still acquiring language skills.
Here’s a source of some related thoughts: Construing Experience Through Meaning: A Language-Based Approach to Cognition by C. M. I. M. Matthiessen and Michael Halliday.
Thanks for reminding me of Halliday’s functional grammar. I’m going to do a deep dive and refresh my understanding. It is highly relevant to critically thinking about grammar.
Is it possible to persuade you to cast your impressive reading interests in another direction? While the linguists, socio-linguists and psycholinguists have informed our understanding of language use, it is the educators and psychologists who have explored the impact of language on classroom learning. A wonderful compilation is Perspectives on Language and Literacy: Beyond the Here and Now, edited by Beck and Olah. In my years in K-8 classrooms, I have repeatedly observed evidence of the situation Snow, a contributor to this work, suggests when she writes, “Perhaps most children are not failing at reading or writing, but at comprehending and producing decontextualized language.” (page 183). In response to this need articulated by Snow (and others, lots and lots of others. I can send the list), I have designed and supported classroom activities that successfully address ways to support continuing oral language development, creating eager learners and relieved teachers. What I have learned is that the challenge is not in finding ways to help children meet curricular goals at lower stages of language decontextualization; it is in persuading prominent individuals, such as yourself, that this situation both exists and can be resolved. There’s a saying, “When you are being pursued by a demon, a physician can refer you and a psychologist can counsel you, but only a philosopher will pick up a stick and help you chase it.” I think we have a lot of fine philosophers in the field of education, and hope at some point that more of us will chase this particular demon.
I’m on it, Lyn. I have to catch up with you:)