Editorials: Race to the Top of the bottom: a Failure of Insight
Linda Elder
President and Fellow, Foundation for Critical Thinking
August 31, 2010
The Race to the Top Winners are in. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan announced them on Tuesday; they are of course looking forward to their money. Given today’s economy, what school districts wouldn’t? Some are upset because most of the winners are from the urban east coast. Of course the rural schools want their share of the pie. But considering that more than $3 billion is funding these awards, it is helpful to know what is in fact being funded, and more importantly whether it will lead to any true reforms of the nature we need. At the 2009 Governors Education Symposium, Secretary Duncan said higher standards need to be developed and adopted in education. He said students need to be held to these news standards and teachers need to be held accountable if their students don’t achieve them. Other initiatives being funded with these Race to the Top billions of dollars include terminating “ineffective” principals, “turning around” lowest achieving schools, improving student data-tracking systems and increasing the number of charter schools. At the same time, Obama has several times said that schools need to focus more on critical thinking. Yet I wonder how the Race to the Top winners plan to rethink schooling so that they begin to value critical thinking and take it seriously. I wonder what plans are in place to begin teaching subjects as modes of thinking rather than bits and pieces of this and that. I wonder when schools will design standards that lead to depth of understanding rather than the teaching of disconnected information. I wonder how teachers will begin to learn the critical thinking skills they themselves need if they are to foster critical thinking in the minds of their students. I wonder how they will equip students with the intellectual skills to think through the problems they will and do experience. I wonder how teachers will begin to place thinking at the front and center of instruction (which is, by the way, the only way we will work our way out of the problems we face). After President Obama announced his intention to support critical thinking last year I sent him a letter of congratulations and said I was looking forward to learning how he planned to do this. When I sent a letter to the Secretary of Education, I received a nice letter back stating that though critical thinking was important, the job of the department of education was not to establish education policy but to make sure the No Child Left Behind project was effectively carried out. At least three presidents in the last few decades have called for critical thinking in schooling. Yet we are as far away as ever from realizing critical thinking in instruction at any level. Though I am attracted to the concept of charter schools and my own children have attended them, I see no evidence to suggest that they are fostering intellectual development any more than other schools. Though I think ineffective teachers and principals should be doing something other than teach and leading, how do we define ineffective? What if the system discourages the advancement of critical thinking? What if teachers and principals who support the emancipation of the mind are seen as a threat? Would they be considered ineffective? Should they be fired? And how are we to “raise” the standards? Raise them to what? How can we cut through the mountain of “standards’ and begin to foster deep understanding and internalization of intellectual standards such as clarity, accuracy, relevance, logic, precision, significance andreasonability in thought (or in other words, critical thinking standards)? How can we design instruction so that students become skilled at analyzing thought, able to identify and clarify their purposes in thinking, the key questions at the heart of issues, the information they need to solve problems, the concepts guiding their thinking, the beliefs they are taking for granted (or their assumptions), the point of view within with they are thinking, the implications of the reasoning, and the conclusions they are coming to? How can we design instruction so that students develop intellectual traits of mind like intellectual humility, intellectual empathy, fair-mindedness, intellectual integrity andconfidence in reason? If we are ever to create fair-minded critical societies, critical thinking skills, abilities and traits must be the heart and soul of education. I don’t see that the Race to the Top initiative will do anything like lead us in this direction.
Dr. Linda Elder is an educational psychologist and a prominent authority on critical thinking. She is President of the Foundation for Critical Thinking and Executive Director of the Center for Critical Thinking. Dr. Elder has taught psychology and critical thinking at the college level and has given presentations to more than 20,000 educators at all levels. She has co-authored four books and twenty thinker’s guides on critical thinking.
Editorials: Race to the Top of the bottom: a Failure of Insight
Sublinks:
Please do not pass this message by.
CRITICAL THINKING IS AT RISK.
Here are some of the big reasons why:
- 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.
- There are many misguided academicians, and some outright charlatans, pushing forth and capitalizing on a pseudo-, partial, or otherwise impoverished concept of critical thinking.
- 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).
- 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.
- 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.
- On the whole, fairminded critical thinking is neither understood, fostered, nor valued in educational institutions or societies.
- 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.
- 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.
Hide