Critical Thinking...

[Earl Moniz <emoniz@CHRISTCOM.NET>]

Hey there everyone...

I sent a query to Mike Eisenberg and he clarified some of the confusion
on my part, but he also recommended that perhaps I might share my
concerns with the group and see what responses I get in return...
Here goes...

I know that many of you have been following the thread on plagiarism
here on the LM_NET of late and I looked to the Big Six to solve
some of the controversy...

I didn't find it. . .  In fact, I didn't find anywhere in the Big Six scheme
of things
where the student (or researcher) actually uses the information located, his/her
own logic, and the background knowledge brought to the project by the
researcher to actually synthesize new knowledge or make it the researcher's
own.  I used to tell my students that until they learn something or understand
something well enough to explain it in their own words, it remains someone
else's _knowledge_ - it is simply _information_ to them at that point.
One of the women users on the list used an equation to sum up my view
by indicating that information+logic=knowledge.

In my mind, until the student understands and can coherently explain what
was found, how it applies to the student and current events, and what
new knowledge the endeavor has provided to the person doing the
searching, it seems to be nothing more than a giant information trivia hunt.
Without the actual higher level thinking skills being applied (from Bloom),
the student has only learned to compile information.  The problem-solving
part has been largely untouched.

In the synthesis stage, I would add comparing the information located to
actual real-life expriences, recalling similar incidents and situations that
either supported the concepts found or refuted them, and attempting to
form general or specific theories or guides from one's own logic and
reasoning processes that might be applied to similar situations now
or in the future.

I misunderstood the Big Six as a small piece of a larger pie...such as...
If our problem solving process has five steps:
1 - Identify the problem...
2 - Collect the facts...
3 - Devise alternatives...
4 - Implement the best alternative...
5 - Evaluate the choice and modify as required...
then the Big Six is a process through which all the information for
step number 2 is collected...it has nothing to do with the logic of
which choice is the best in Step 4.

Does anyone else share that confusion?  How do you explain or use
the talents of the student in this process?  Is it simply a trivia hunt?
Anyone have any comments to support or refute what I have said here?
I'll share any personal messages with the group (after removing headers
and ID elements). . .  I'd much rather it be an open discussion - but
contribute in your own way...

TIA

Aloha...



Earl J. Moniz (emoniz@christcom.net)
Public Reposting Permission Granted
WebMinion, Plebeian, and Pedestrian
emoniz@nccu.edu : emoniz@unccptv.unctv.org