Higher-Order Thinking and Transfer

Those proposing that 21st Century Skills are different place a premium on developing higher order thinking skills (Trilling & Fadel, 2009). In an environment of greater international competition and a greater focus on "knowledge work", it is the capacity for problem-solving, creativity and critical thought that offer unique advantages.

It is not easy to provide a simple definition of higher-order thinking, but it is possible to list some of its attributes. Higher-order thinking meets the following criteria (Resnick, 1987):

• It is complex. The tasks involved can often be accomplished in several ways, and the entire process often unfolds in stages without a complete course of action being evident from the beginning.
• It is effortful. The tasks require conscious effort.
• It is self-regulated. Metacognitive planning and monitoring are necessary.
• It frequently involves judgment—the evaluation of conflicting information.

Ways to Teach Higher-Order Thinking

There are three distinct approaches to the instruction of higher-order thinking skills within a classroom setting, defined by the manner in which this instruction relates to the instruction of other areas of the curriculum (Wakefield, 1996):

1. Stand-alone approach. Class activities are focused on the development of higher-order thinking skills. Instruction in thinking skills is independent of instruction in content-area skills and knowledge.

2. Dual-agenda approach. Instruction in higher-order thinking is combined with instruction in another area of the curriculum. Instruction in both areas may be provided independently within the course, but the content-area learning tasks provide an opportunity for practicing thinking skills.

3. Authentic task approach. This approach requires the application of higher-order thinking in performing activities that lead to the development of both thinking and content-area skills and knowledge. Rather than being developed independently, thinking skills are learned through the application within domain-appropriate activities.

The following table summarizes some key points about these three approaches to developing higher-order thinking skills. The following examples, mentioned in the last row of the table, show how technology has been used in implementing each instructional approach:

The HOTS Project (Higher Order Thinking Skills; Pogrow, 1996) was created as a way to develop higher-order thinking skills in struggling upper-elementary students. It is a pullout program in which a teacher assists a small number of students who need extra attention with instructional software applications that require critical thinking and problem solving. Because the computer experiences and the interactions with the teacher focus directly on the development of thinking skills, HOTS is a good example of the stand-alone approach.

Teaching computer programming to young students is an example of the dual-agenda approach. The teaching focuses both on learning to use a programming language—a content area—and on the skills of problem solving. (We say more about computer programming in the next section.)

Data loggers (discussed elsewhere) allow students to collect raw information—for instance, on temperature variations. When these tools are used in authentic student research, the students must not only gather the data, but also organize and analyze it to complete the project. Higher-order thinking becomes an essential part of the task they are performing.

The debate over which approach is best is unresolved at this point. By now, though, our own interest in the authentic task approach should be obvious. If it can be assumed that all three approaches have the potential to develop higher-order thinking skills, efficiency may be an issue to consider. How many schools are willing or able to offer a course dedicated only to thinking skills? And is it reasonable to involve students in computer programming, a course that probably is not central to the standard curriculum, because it provides a good opportunity to practice higher-level thinking? For many schools, we believe, the authentic task approach offers the best alternative.

Transfer: The Low Road and the High Road

The process by which specific skills and knowledge learned in one situation prove generally useful in a variety of new situations is referred to as transfer. When you think about it, transfer is what formal education is all about. Unless what we teach and learn in our classrooms has some general value in other classrooms and outside the school setting, why bother acquiring the knowledge in the first place?

Transfer can occur in two ways, sometimes referred to as low- and high-road transfer (Salomon & Perkins, 1987). In low-road transfer, behavior is practiced extensively and in a variety of situations and learned to the point of automatization—that is, to the point at which the person can complete a task without thinking about it. For example, if you drive or are a competent typist, you have practiced the skills involved so much that many of your behaviors have likely become automaticized. When you move from your car to someone else’s car, your automatized behaviors carry over to the new situation.

In high-road transfer, skills must be deliberately transferred from one context to another. For this kind of transfer to occur, two requirements must be met:

1. The individual must be capable of re-representing the original skill at a level that includes a greater range of cases than was covered by the context in which the skill was first acquired.

2. The student must be willing to make a conscious effort to use past experiences to attack current problems. Such an approach requires both motivation and metacognitive skill.

Some of the most extensive research on the transfer of higher-order thinking skills has focused on the teaching of computer programming. Programming is nearly a classic problem-solving activity. In fact, descriptions of what experienced programmers do (Pea and Kurland, 1987b) are almost identical to more general descriptions of the problem-solving process (Bransford & Stein, 1984; Hayes & Simon, 1974). Over the years, therefore, various studies have attempted to determine whether students who learn computer programming can transfer their skills to other problem-solving situations. Salomon and Perkins (1987) reviewed a number of such studies to see whether they met the requirements for either high- or low-road transfer. According to this analysis, when students did not (1) spend enough time programming to develop a reasonable level of skill or accumulate enough diverse experiences, (2) consider and discuss how they solve problems when they program, and (3) consider how the problem-solving skills involved in programming might apply to other domains, the research studies were unlikely to demonstrate that students could transfer programming skills to other areas. For more information about the value of teaching computer programming to students, see the textbook web site.

What are the implications of these findings for classroom teachers? For higher-order skills, we cannot think of many classroom experiences that meet both conditions necessary for low-road transfer (extensive practice, a variety of situations). High-road transfer seems the more practical of the two alternatives. However, high-road transfer establishes clear expectations for educators. Teachers must help students identify and understand the skills being developed and see how these skills might be used in other settings and for other tasks. For example, when students learn to approach a complex computer-programming problem by breaking it down into individual tasks, teachers need to help them recognize what they are doing and understand that the same process can be useful in other situations. In that way, the students will re-represent programming knowledge in an abstract and verbal fashion that can apply to many tasks.

Our general point here is a straightforward one: Technology can make a significant contribution to instruction aimed at higher-order thinking skills, but only if teachers structure the experiences in a way that maximizes the transfer value.

Return to Chapter Topics