Translate this page from English...

*Machine translated pages not guaranteed for accuracy.

Click Here for our professional translations.


Print Page Change Text Size: T T T

Content Is Thinking, Thinking is Content

A Foundation for The Logic of Teaching
Richard Paul and Linda Elder
March 22, 1999
 
 
The first and most important insight necessary for the appropriate design of instruction and curriculum is that content is, in the last analysis, nothing more nor less than a mode of thinking. Let us explain.
 
There are many ways to begin to grasp the profound truth that all content is nothing more nor less than a mode of thinking (about something), a way of figuring something out, a way of understanding something through thought. Here are just three ways of beginning to grasp this truth:
 
1) All "content" in school is content in a subject. All subjects are areas of study. All areas of study are "things" that we are interested in "figuring out". All fields of study have been advanced insofar as we have discovered ways to figure out whatever is being studied. There is no way to figure out something without thinking. There is no way to learn how to figure something out without learning how to think it through.  There is no way to learn mathematical content without learning how to figure out correct answers to mathematical questions and problems. There is no way to learn historical content without learning how to figure out correct or reasonable answers to historical questions and problems.  There is no way to learn biological content without learning how to figure out answers to biological questions and problems. Any subject or "content area" can therefore be understood as a mode of figuring out correct or reasonable answers to a certain body of questions. We study chemistry to figure out chemicals (to answer questions about chemicals). We study psychology to figure out people (to answer questions about certain human problems). All subjects can be understood best in this way.
 
2) All "content" involves concepts. There is no way to learn a body of content without learning the concepts which define and structure it. There is no way to learn a concept without learning how to use it in thinking something through. Hence, to learn the concept of democracy is to learn how to figure out whether some group is functioning democratically or not. To learn the concept of fair play is to learn how to figure out whether someone is being fair in the manner in which they are participating in a game. To learn the concept of a novel is to learn how to distinguish a novel from a play or short story. To learn the concept of a family is to learn how to distinguish a family from a gang or club. To learn any body of content, therefore, it is necessary to learn to think accurately and reasonably with the concepts that define the content.
 
3) All "content" is logically interdependent. To understand one part of some content requires that we figure out its relation to other parts of that content.
 
For example, we understand what a scientific experiment is only when we understand what a scientific theory is. We understand what a scientific theory is only when we understand what a scientific hypothesis is. We understand what a scientific hypothesis is only when we understand what a scientific prediction is. We understand what a scientific prediction is only when we understand what it is to scientifically test a view. We understand what it is to scientifically test a view only when we understand what a scientific experiment is. Etc....etc.....etc.... To learn any body of content, therefore, is to figure out (i.e., reason or think through) the connections between the parts of that content. There is no learning of the content without this thinking process.
 
To this point the majority of teachers and students approach content, not as a mode of thinking, not as a system for thought, or even as a system of thought, but rather as a sequence of stuff to be routinely "covered" and committed to memory. When content is approached in this lower order way, there is no basis for intellectual growth, no deep structures of knowledge formed, no basis for long term grasp and control.


Please do not pass this message by.

CRITICAL THINKING IS AT RISK.

Here are some of the big reasons why:

  1. Many people believe that critical thinking should be free and that scholars qualified to teach critical thinking should do so for free. Accordingly, they do not think they should have to pay for critical thinking textbooks, courses, or other resources when there is "so much free material online" - despite how erroneous that material may be.
  2. There are many misguided academicians, and some outright charlatans, pushing forth and capitalizing on a pseudo-, partial, or otherwise impoverished concept of critical thinking.
  3. Little to no funding is designated for critical thinking professional development in schools, colleges, or universities, despite the lip service widely given to critical thinking (as is frequently found in mission statements).
  4. Most people, including faculty, think they already know what critical thinking is, despite how few have studied it to any significant degree, and despite how few can articulate a coherent, accurate, and sufficiently deep explanation of it.
  5. People rarely exhibit the necessary level of discipline to study and use critical thinking for reaching higher levels of self-actualization. In part, this is due to wasting intellectual and emotional energy on fruitless electronic entertainment designed to be addictive and profitable rather than educational and uplifting.
  6. On the whole, fairminded critical thinking is neither understood, fostered, nor valued in educational institutions or societies.
  7. People are increasingly able to cluster themselves with others of like mind through alluring internet platforms that enable them to validate one another's thinking - even when their reasoning is nonsensical, lopsided, prejudiced, or even dangerous.
  8. Critical thinking does not yet hold an independent place in academia. Instead, "critical thinking" is continually being "defined" and redefined according to any academic area or instructor that, claiming (frequently unsupported) expertise, steps forward to teach it.

As you see, increasingly powerful trends against the teaching, learning, and practice of critical thinking entail extraordinary challenges to our mission. To continue our work, we must now rely upon your financial support. If critical thinking matters to you, please click here to contribute what you can today.

WE NEED YOUR HELP TO CONTINUE OUR WORK.

Thank you for your support of ethical critical thinking.