Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
Thinking skills resist the precise forms of definition we have come to associate with the
setting of specified objectives for schooling. Nevertheless, it is relatively easy to list some
key features of higher order thinking. When we do this, we become aware that, although we
cannot define it exactly, we can recognize higher order thinking when it occurs
The features that she then goes on to list are all characteristic of the kind of
thinking found in complex real dialogues, for example:
•
Higher order thinking is non-algorithmic. That is, the path of action is not fully
specified in advance. Higher order thinking tends to be complex. The total path
is not “visible” (mentally speaking) from any single vantage point.
•
Higher order thinking often yields multiple solutions, each with costs and
benefits, rather than unique solutions.
•
Higher order thinking involves nuanced judgment and interpretation.
•
Higher order thinking involves the application of multiple criteria, which some-
times conflict with one another.
•
Higher order thinking often involves uncertainty. Not everything that bears on the
task at hand is known (Resnick, 1987).
Although Resnick was conceptualising these as individual skills they are all evi-
dently the kind of skills found in a complex open-ended dialogue (where a dialogue
is defined with Bakhtin as a “shared inquiry” 1986, p. 168). Research findings on the
effectiveness of teaching general thinking skills programmes suggest that the depth
of dialogic engagement is relevant to evidence of learning that supports problem-
solving and general thinking and learning skills and dispositions generally beyond
the context in which they are learnt (e.g., Mercer et al., 2004; Wegerif et al., 1999;
Trickey & Topping, 2004).
Whereas in the neo-Vygotskian socio-cultural tradition technology is often con-
ceptualised as a mediating means for cognition, from this more dialogic perspective
technology is seen as a facilitator opening and shaping dialogic spaces that would
not otherwise be there. A dialogic perspective on cognition does not render the net-
worked perspective on learning obsolete because dialogues always occur within
networks. The dialogic perspective reveals, however, that the question “how can
networks be made more intelligent?” is misleading and should be replaced with the
very different question “how can networks open up, expand, deepen and generally
resource creative dialogic spaces of reflection?”
Bahktin's dialogic principle of holding two or more voices together in tension
without combining them into one thing characterises a type of creative non-identity.
Bakhtin, some of whose own creative ideas sparked from dialogue with the ancient
Greeks, sought to understand how voices from every age and culture could so fruit-
fully engage in dialogue with each other. He called the universal context of dialogue
“great time”. Teaching thinking on the dialogic model stimulated by Bakhtin is
about drawing students from narrow concerns to the more universal thinking of
“great time” which is the extraordinary space where all possible voices can talk
together. This space cannot be characterised in positive terms; it does not have a
fixed content such as a set of universal rational laws and it is the negative space of
