Ritchhart (2007) Education Quarterly Australia 1 The.docx

Ritchhart (2007) Education Quarterly Australia
1
The Seven Rʼs of a Quality Curriculum
Ron Ritchhart
Project Zero, Harvard Graduate School of Education
To teach for understanding, teachers must be able to identify the
big
ideas of their subject and know what it is they truly want
students to
understand. They also must engage students in understanding
performances, that is, opportunities for actively building
personal
understanding, and provide meaningful feedback on learning as
it
unfolds. It is at this intersection of big ideas, understanding
goals,
performances, and assessment feedback that curriculum lives, in
what I
call the enacted curriculum.
Over the past fifteen years I have worked with teachers
exploring the

enacted curriculum of understanding. During that time I’ve had
the
opportunity to reflect on the qualities that make an activity, a
unit, a
curriculum something that effectively engages students in
developing a
deeper understanding. Seven common criteria emerge: rigorous,
rewarding, real, requires independence, rich in thinking,
revealing, and
reflective. I present these here as guidelines for the planning,
enacting,
and evaluating of a curriculum focused on understanding.
2
Rigorous
What does it mean for a curriculum itself to be rigorous? For a
task or a
lesson? Rather than think of difficulty, I think in terms of
affordances. A
rigorous curriculum embodies and affords students opportunities
to
develop a deeper understanding and not just show what they
already
know. Too often curricula state carefully defined objectives that
put an
unintentional cap on students’ understanding and obscure the
big ideas of
the discipline, leading to superficial coverage. A rigorous
curriculum
must point the direction for learning but be open enough to

extend
students’ understanding beyond a minimal outcome.
When I look at an activity a class is to do, I ask myself, “How
can
students further their learning of big disciplinary ideas through
this task?
How does this task launch the learning but avoid truncating it?”
I also
ask myself if students can do a particular task without
understanding, by
merely walking through the steps or repeating back information.
If so,
that performance doesn’t offer the rigor of understanding.
Real
Disciplinary learning can be thought of as a process by which
individuals
gradually increase their participation in communities of
practice. As
such, a curriculum that builds understanding must look to
engage
students in authentic disciplinary activities so that students’
classroom
activities mirror the real work of adults in the field. Rather than
learning
about math, science, writing, history, and so on, students must
become
mathematicians, scientists, authors, and historians to build true
disciplinary understanding. When a topic is assigned to a
curriculum, we
need to ask: When, where, and how does this topic arise and/or
become
significant in the lives of those working in the field? What
contexts give
rise to this topic and can imbue it with meaning? How can this

topic
intersect with the lives of our students in a meaningful way?
Requires Independence
Educational theorist Jerome Bruner defines understanding as the
ability
to use and apply one’s skills in novel situations to solve
problems, make
decisions, and advance new understandings. This means that
learners
must necessarily be able to spot occasions for the use of their
skills and
knowledge in the moment, make appropriate choices, and follow
through
with application. Too often schoolwork leaves students with few
choices
and strips them of opportunities to make the decisions that
meaningfully
3
shape learning and lead to a sense of accomplishment. Rather
than
engaging in deep learning, students merely complete work.
A quality curriculum must be filled with opportunities for
students to
make choices and to direct their learning. When students
experience
difficulty and are at the edge of their competence, support needs
to be
there, but as educators we need to be more comfortable with the

messiness and individuality of building understanding, asking
ourselves:
Where does the learning become personal? What choices were
made and
risks taken? Where and how did students learn from their
mistakes?
Rich in Thinking
A quality curriculum asks more of students than just
memorization and
replication. Students must make connections, observe closely,
ask
questions, form conjectures, identify points of view, consider
alternatives, evaluate outcomes, make evidence-based
judgments, and so
on. One of the most important questions educators can ask is,
“What is
the thinking students will do as they progress through this
activity?” If
teachers don’t know what and where the thinking is in a lesson,
it is
unlikely to be little more than an activity. Furthermore, to
assess
students’ developing understanding, educators have to find ways
to
uncover and make the thinking of students’ visible, which leads
to the
next point.
Revealing
A quality curriculum must constantly seek not only to reveal
what it is
that students do and do not understand, but how they understand
it. This
is the holy grail of ongoing assessment, which is not a separate
piece of

the enacted curriculum but part and parcel of it.
Students do lots of work over the course of a unit, but how does
it reveal
what they do and do not understand? Completion of a
worksheet might
tell you a student possesses a set of facts or mastered a skill,
but it
generally reveals little about understanding. Understanding goes
beyond
the possession of skills and knowledge to the use of that skills
and
knowledge. For example, solving for x in the equation y = 3x +
15 is a
simple application of skill, but describing a situation for which
that
equation could be a possible model requires understanding the
mathematics behind the equation.
4
A curriculum of understanding also should reveal students’
naïve
conceptions of a topic. In a coverage curriculum, these get
glossed over,
leading to fragile knowledge and what Howard Gardner has
dubbed the
“unschooled mind.” However, in teaching for understanding,
effort must
be made to reveal these early so that they can be explored and
addressed.

Rewarding
When you walk into a classroom where students are deeply
engaged with
learning, you know it right away. There is a sense of purpose to
the work
they are doing. They know what they are on about. Students can
articulate what they are learning and why. This goes beyond
activity and
fun. Their efforts feel directed toward a well-defined learning
goal. Talk,
discussion, and debate advance progress toward that goal.
Building
understanding goes beyond working for the grade. It has its own
intrinsic
rewards through a sense of efficacy, accomplishment, and
relevance.
The written curriculum seldom addresses the issue of intrinsic
rewards,
but the enacted curriculum must if it is to engage students in
building
understanding. Good teachers know this, but curricula often
loses sight
of it. Rather than prescribing a list of knowledge and skills that
might be
useful at some later date, in some other place, for some other
purpose,
the curriculum should do all it can to situate learning in the
present,
learning for now as David Perkins calls it.
Reflective
As a learner, it can be challenging to know what one really
thinks or
understands. It is even more difficult to know what others really
understand or where they are in their learning. Reflection can

help
address these challenges. Reflection on one’s learning—not
one’s
feelings about an activity or experience but on the actual
learning itself—
helps to anchor understanding and facilitates connection
making.
For example, responses to the prompt “I used to think…. But
now I
think….” can reveal a lot about students’ learning. Such
reflections help
make one’s thinking visible to oneself and others by revealing
thought
processes and lines of reasoning. Reflection on learning forces
us to
reconsider the purposes of that learning and situate it within an
ongoing
process of developing understanding.
5
In Conclusion
Curriculum work generally focuses on the topics to be covered,
skills to
be mastered, and facts to be learned in a particular grade level
in a given
subject. These aspects of the written curriculum are certainly
important
as they guide teachers’ planning, ensure some uniformity across
schools,
and provide a template for formal assessments. However, as

teachers
know, the written curriculum is just a shadow of the enacted
curriculum.
It is the enacted curriculum, what students actually experience
and how
they experience it, which ultimately shapes students’ learning.
In using curriculum as a tool to improve education, we need to
think
beyond the traditional division of curriculum and instruction
and focus
on the enacted curriculum. The seven criteria outlined here can
be a
useful tool for that discussion and in the creation of a
curriculum of
understanding.
6
The Seven R’s of a
Quality Curriculum
• Rigorous – embody and afford the demonstration of
a high level of understanding.
• Rewarding – intrinsically motivating to the student

and not just “work.”
• Requires Independence – students make choices
that shape the performance and are largely self-
directed.
• Real – have an authentic quality in that they mirror
work of adults working in the discipline.
• Rich in Thinking – require more than memorization
and replication. The types of thinking required can be
identified.
• Revealing – uncover students level of understanding
as well as any misconceptions.
• Reflective – written reflections on the process and
learning often enhances the performance
Thinking Dispositions:
A review of current theories, practices, and
issues
by Shari Tishman and Albert Andrade
Introduction

What does it mean to be a good thinker? Traditionally, the
answer to
this question has been formulated in terms of cognitive ability
or skill:
Being a good thinker means having certain sorts of critical and
creative
thinking abilities. Good thinkers certainly have thinking skills.
But
they also have more: Motivations, attitudes, values and habits of
mind
all play key roles in good thinking, and in large part it is these
elements
that determine whether people use their thinking skills when it
counts.
In an effort to account for the affective and attitudinal
dimension of
high-level thinking, many scholars and educators involved in
the
thinking skills movement have urged attention to what are often
called
"thinking dispositions." This document aims to outline current
trends,
issues and theories concerning the dispositional side of
thinking.
There are three parts to this document. Part One provides an
overview of some recent work around the definition,
classification,
assessment, and instruction of thinking dispositions. The four
sections
in Part One are organized according to the following four
questions:
1. How are thinking dispositions defined?

2. What kinds of thinking dispositions are there?
3. Can thinking dispositions be assessed?
4. Can thinking dispositions be taught?
Part Two is a brainstorm of issues and questions concerning
thinking
dispositions that occurred in the Summer of 1994 at the 6th
International Conference of Thinking, held at Massachusetts
Institute of
Technology, in Cambridge, Massachusetts. This section, too, is
organized according to the four questions just listed.
Part Three is a bibliography of books, articles and programs that
either are directly about, or relevant to, thinking dispositions.
We recognize that, although interest in thinking dispositions has
increased in recent years, it is by no means a new concept.
Many
scholars and educators have been concerned with the
dispositional side
of thinking over the years, and have given it careful attention in
their
work. The theories and practices reviewed here are eclectic, and
do not
represent all the important historical or current work in the
field.
Almost certainly, most readers of this document will make
connections
to work they know about that is not represented in this text. The
authors acknowledge and honor these connections, and
apologize in
advance for any serious omissions.

Part One: Overview of Recent Work in the
Field
1. How are Thinking Dispositions Defined?
Broadly defined, thinking dispositions are tendencies toward
particular patterns of intellectual behavior. In an effort to
further
identify the nature of these patterns of thinking, several
scholars and
educators have proposed more precise definitions.
The concept of dispositions has always been of interest to
philosophers. For example, in his classic work, The Concept of
Mind, the
philosopher Gilbert Ryle claims that to possess a dispositional
property
"is not to be in a particular state, or to undergo a particular
change; it is
to be bound or liable to be in a particular state, or undergo a
particular
change, when a particular condition is realized" (Ryle, 1949).
So, Ryle
explains, glass has a brittle disposition even if it is not broken
into
pieces at a given moment. And a person can have the disposition
to
smoke, even if he is not smoking at a particular moment.
The philosopher of education Robert Ennis, who has been
involved in
the thinking skills movement since its inception, has long
recognized
the importance of critical thinking dispositions (Ennis, 1962).
Following
the philosophical tradition, Ennis defines a thinking disposition

as a
tendency to do something given certain conditions. Ennis
argues,
however, that, unlike the brittleness of glass, in order to qualify
as a
thinking disposition, the disposition must be exercised
reflectively. In
other words, given the appropriate conditions, dispositions are
not
automatic (Ennis, 1994).
Stephen Norris, another philosopher of education concerned
with
critical thinking dispositions, also defines a thinking disposition
as a
tendency to think in a certain way under certain circumstances
(Norris,
1994). In Norris' view, a thinking disposition is not simply a
desire or
predilection to thinking critically. He says, "...individuals must
either
have formed habits to use certain abilities, or overtly think and
chose to
use the abilities they possess. A person with an ability to think
critically
under certain conditions will do it, only if so disposed" (Norris,
1994).
Like Norris, psychologist Gavriel Salomon regards thinking
dispositions as not just a "summary label for a cluster in
interrelated
and relatively stable behaviors" (Salomon, 1994). According to
Salomon,

dispositions do more than describe behavior; they assume a
causal
function and have an explanatory status (Salomon, 1994). A
disposition
is a cluster of preferences, attitudes, and intentions, plus a set
of
capabilities that allow the preferences to become realized in a
particular
way (Salomon, 1994). In a similar spirit, Peter and Noreen
Facione,
authors of the California Critical Thinking Dispositions
Inventory, define
a thinking disposition as a constellation of attitudes, intellectual
virtues, and habits of mind (Facione, Sanchez, Facione 1994).
Most of the above definitions follow the everyday usage of the
term
disposition, which contrasts with the notion of ability. Thus, as
Norris
suggests, one can have an ability to do something - for example,
the
ability to seek balanced reasons in an argument - but not be
disposed
to do so. Following this everyday usage, one can say that good
critical
thinkers have critical thinking abilities and critical thinking
dispositions. In other words, the critical thinker who seeks
balanced
reasons in an argument has both the ability and the disposition
to do
so.
In a departure from this everyday usage, David Perkins, Eileen
Jay
and Shari Tishman have put forth what they call a "triadic
conception of

thinking dispositions," which includes the concept of ability. In
an effort
to explain the basic psychology of thinking dispositions, they
propose
there are three psychological components which logically must
be
present in order to spark dispositional behavior. These three
elements
are: (1) sensitivity - the perception of the appropriateness of a
particular
behavior; (2) inclination - the felt impetus toward a behavior;
and (3)
ability - the basic capacity to follow through with the behavior
(Perkins,
Jay & Tishman, 1993). For example, someone who is genuinely
disposed to seek balanced reasons in an argument is (1)
sensitive to
occasions to do so (for instance while reading a newspaper
editorial); (2)
feels moved, or inclined, to do so; and (3) has the basic ability
to follow
through with the behavior, for instance, he or she can actually
identify
pro and con reasons for both sides of an argument.
2. What Kinds of Thinking Dispositions Are There?
For starters, both positive and negative thinking dispositions
contribute to overall thinking performance. For example, on the
positive
side, one might be disposed toward fair and open-minded
intellectual
behavior. On the negative side, one might disposed toward

biased and
one-sided thinking. Most of the work being done in the field
focusses on
the productive thinking dispositions - dispositions that
contribute to
and characterize high-level critical and creative thought.
Many scholars have put forth views about what they see as the
key,
or most important, high-level thinking dispositions. Some
scholars
claim there is one overarching thinking disposition, while others
have
put forth taxonomies that include several high-level thinking
dispositions. Probably not all that much hangs on this
distinction: the
scholars who argue for one overarching thinking disposition
readily talk
about subdispositions. But the distinction serves as a useful
organizer
for this section.
One overarching thinking disposition. The view that high-level
thinking
is characterized by a single overarching thinking dispositions is
perhaps
most fully worked out by psychologist Ellen Langer. Although
she
doesn't use the term "thinking dispositions," she advances the
view that
good thinkers have the tendency towards "mindfulness."
According to
Langer, mindful thinkers tend to create new categories, or
simply "pay
attention" to given contexts; they tend to be open to new
information;

and they tend to cultivate an awareness of more than one
perspective
(Langer, 1989).
Educational psychologist Gavriel Salomon also recognizes
mindfulness as an overarching thinking disposition. However,
Salomon
offers his own list of key characterological components of
mindfulness.
These include a positive attitude toward ambiguous and
complex
situations, a preference for novelty and incongruity, and an
intention to
seek out such situations, or even shape situations in a way that
makes
them fit the preference (Salomon, 1994).
The philosopher Richard Paul argues that the "strong sense"
critical
thinker is characterized by the overarching disposition towards
fairmindedness (Paul, 1990). According to Paul, this
disposition
includes several traits of mind, such as intellectual humility,
intellectual courage, intellectual perseverance, intellectual
integrity, and
confidence in reason.
Although he doesn't use the term "thinking disposition,"
philosopher
of education Harvey Siegel talks about the "critical-
spiritedness"
required to engage in reason assessment. This tendency, he
argues, is
composed of objectivity, intellectual honesty, impartiality, a
willingness
to conform judgement and action to principle, and a

commitment to
seek and evaluate reasons (Siegel, 1988).
Peter and Noreen Facione speak of an overarching disposition to
think critically, and aim to measure it in their California
Critical
Thinking Dispositions Inventory (Facione & Facione, 1992).
An analysis
of their results indicates that this overarching disposition
factors into
seven subdispositions: openmindedness, inquisitiveness,
systematicity,
analyticity, truth-seeking, critical thinking self-confidence, and
maturity
(Facione, Sanchez, Facione, 1994).
Several key thinking dispositions. Another group of scholars
have
advanced taxonomies of high-level thinking dispositions that
include
numerous dispositions. For example, Robert Ennis currently
recognizes
not one, but fourteen separate critical thinking dispositions
(Ennis,
1994). According to Ennis, critical thinkers have a tendency to:
• be clear about the intended meaning of what is said, written,
or
otherwise communicated
• determine & maintain focus on, the conclusion or question
• take the total situation into account
• seek and offer reasons

• try to be well-informed
• look for alternatives
• seek as much precision as the situation requires
• try to be reflectively aware of one's own basic beliefs
• be open-minded: seriously consider other points of view and
be
willing to consider changing one's own position
• withhold judgement when the evidence and reasons are
sufficient to do so
• use one's critical thinking abilities
• be careful
• take into account the feelings and thoughts of other people
Art Costa does not use the term "thinking dispositions, but
instead
refers to "passions of mind." (Costa, 1991). He identifies 5 key
passions
that characterize the good thinker:
• efficacy
• flexibility
• craftsmanship
• consciousness
• interdependence
Perkins, Jay, and Tishman advance a view of seven key critical
thinking dispositions. Building on their triadic conception of
disposition, they argue that each of these seven tendencies
involve
distinct sensitivities, inclinations, and abilities. The seven
dispositions
are:
1. The disposition to be broad and adventurous

2. The disposition toward wondering, problem finding, and
inves-
tigating
3. The disposition to build explanations and understandings
4. The disposition to make plans and be strategic
5. The disposition to be intellectually careful
6. The disposition to seek and evaluate reasons
7. The disposition to be metacognitive
3. Can dispositions be assessed?
The issue of assessment poses one of the greatest challenges to
the
concept of thinking dispositions. As Robert Ennis has noted, "a
fundamental problem in assessing critical thinking dispositions
"...is
that a disposition is something we want students to evidence on
their
own - without being pushed or prompted to evidence it" (Ennis,
1994).
Traditional assessments - particularly multiple choice tests -
measure
only ability, and tell us nothing about how the learner is
disposed to
think without external prompts or guidance. Essay tests, such as
the
Ennis-Weir critical thinking Essay test, do a better job of
eliciting
students' thinking dispositions, but they don't discriminate
between the
influence of disposition and ability on performance, and they
can even

fail to fully reveal critical thinking abilities, because of
students'
countervailing dispositional influences (Norris, 1994). Ennis
argues that
the most promising way to assess critical thinking dispositions
is
through guided open-ended opportunities (Ennis, 1994). These
are
opportunities for students to pursue any pattern of thinking they
want,
in response to a specific problem situation.
For example, Stephen Norris is exploring assessments that
challenge
students with an open-ended yet focused problem situation, such
as a
search for living creatures on another planet. The problem
provides
students with some information from which it is possible to
derive
hypotheses, interpretations, and conclusions, although students
are not
explicitly directed to do so. According to Norris, an analysis of
students'
responses can reveal the critical thinking dispositions they bring
to the
task.
Another quite different approach to the assessment of thinking
dispositions is through self-report of attitudes, opinions, beliefs
and
values. The most well-known example of this approach is the
California
Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI), developed
by Peter
Facione and Noreen Facione. This is a 75 item survey, to which

students respond to each item using a six-point Likert scale
ranging
from "strongly agree" to "strongly disagree." For example, two
items
chosen at random from the inventory are: We can never really
learn the
truth about most things, and The best argument for an idea is
how you
feel about it at the moment. Based on students' responses to
these and
similar questions, the CCTDI provides a profile of seven critical
thinking
sub-dispositions: truthseeking, openmindedness, analyticity,
systematicity, critical thinking self-confidence, inquisitiveness,
and
maturity. The CCTDI was written to be used at the college-
level, but
has been adapted with some success to earlier grades. Unlike
the
assessments proposed by Ennis and Norris, it is a measure of
critical
thinking disposition only; it does not measure cognitive ability,
nor does
discriminate between the contributions of ability and disposition
to
intellectual performance.
A third approach to the assessment of thinking dispositions is
currently being developed by David Perkins, Shari Tishman, and
Albert
Andrade. Based on the Perkins-Tishman-Jay triadic definition
of
thinking dispositions described earlier, this approach aims to

distinguish between cognitive ability, inclination, and
sensitivity, and
assesses their relative contribution to overall critical thinking
performance. The Perkins-Tishman-Andrade assessment
instruments
consist of a three-task sequence. Each task is designed to isolate
one
element of the dispositional triad.
In task one, thinking shortcomings are embedded in a story text
-
shortcomings such as overgeneralization, or a failure to seek
alternative
options. Students are asked to read the text and identify any
problems,
puzzles or concerns they have with it. Task one measures
sensitivity to
thinking occasions. In task two (which typically but not
necessarily
immediately follows task one), the embedded shortcoming are
made
salient, and students are invited to respond to them directly.
Task two
measures inclination, and it is similar to the "guided open-ended
opportunity" encouraged by Ennis and Norris. Task three, which
typically is administered a few days after tasks one and two,
reintroduces students to the shortcomings and explicitly asks
students
to respond to them in a particular way. For example, if the
shortcoming
consists of a character in a story failing to seek alternative
options in a
situation where it is important to do so, task three will
explicitly ask
students to generate alternative options for the character. In
this way,

task three "stands in" for sensitivity and inclination, and
directly
measures cognitive ability.
Early testing of the Perkins-Tishman-Andrade prototype
instruments
indicates that the three-task sequence can reveal reliable
information
about students' thinking dispositions. However, the instruments
are
still under development. With the exception of the Facione
California
Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory, there is as yet no
widely
available instrument to assess thinking dispositions, although,
in
different ways, Ennis, Norris, and Perkins-Tishman-Andrade are
all
working towards this goal.
4. Can thinking dispositions be taught?
The question of whether thinking dispositions can be taught
really
has two parts. The first part asks about basic human
psychology. Is it
possible to fundamentally change and improve the way people
think?
The second part asks about method. If thinking can be changed
for the
better, which techniques are most effective? The following
paragraphs
discuss each of these questions in turn.

Can thinking be changed for the better? The concept of
thinking
dispositions, particularly as put forth by the scholars and
educators
mentioned in this review, is a kind of conception of
intelligence. The
basic conception behind dispositions goes something like this.
A large
part of being intelligent means being able to think well. And
people who
think well have strong thinking dispositions. Therefore, a large
part of
being intelligent means having strong thinking dispositions.
This
doesn't imply that all good thinkers have the same thinking
dispositions, or that all good thinkers have equally strong
thinking
dispositions. As many of the scholars discussed in this review
suggest,
there are many different thinking dispositions, and therefore
many
different kinds of strong thinking-dispositional profiles.
However, if
intelligence is defined at least in part as consisting of strong
thinking
dispositions, then, to borrow a phrase from David Perkins, the
question
of whether thinking can be changed for the better really comes
down to
the question: is intelligence learnable?
Although there is a perennial debate about the degree to which
intelligence can be improved, there is no question that some
aspects of
intelligence are learnable to some extent. Because the concept

of
thinking dispositions is about high-level patterns of intellectual
behavior, to ask the learnable intelligence question means to ask
whether it is possible for people to learn to reason better, to be
more
openminded, to be more reflective, to be more strategic, and so
forth
(these are thinking-dispositional tendencies that most scholars
agree
are important).
In Outsmarting IQ: The emerging science of learnable
intelligence,
David Perkins looks at the research behind various programs for
teaching thinking, and presents evidence for the learnability of
these
sorts of dispositional tendencies. Reviewing the research around
such
thinking skills programs as Odyssey, Instrumental Enrichment,
CoRT,
and Philosophy for Children, Perkins concludes that people can
learn to
be more intelligent in a number of ways. For example, they can
learn to
be more reflective, to provide more reasons and explanations, to
seek
more alternatives, and to be more imaginative. Some research
indicates
that gains in these areas persist over a number of years, and
some
research indicates that these gains are reflected in modest gains
in IQ
scores.

Unfortunately, there is still relatively little long term research
on
thinking skills programs, so there is much we don't know about
the
learnability of high-level thinking. But it is worth noting that a
commitment to the view that high-level thinking dispositions
are
learnable is a mainstay of the thinking skills movement. This is
because educators concerned with the teaching of thinking are
not
concerned simply to impart thinking skills so that students do
better on
tests. The hope is to teach students to transfer and internalize
the
thinking skills they learn, so that they will be better thinkers on
their
own, in a variety of contexts inside and outside of school. In
short, the
hope is to help students develop strong and stable thinking
dispositions. While continued research into the learnability of
intelligence is sorely needed, Perkins' work suggests that this
hope is
not ill-founded.
Which instructional methods best teach thinking dispositions?
This
aspect of the question, too, is difficult to address, because the
main
emphasis of most thinking skills programs to date is on just
that: skills.
Very few instructional programs have been designed that
explicitly
emphasize the dispositional side of thinking. However, it can
be argued
that thinking skills programs that are successful in the long term

-
successful in the sense that students transfer and internalize
their
learned thinking skills so that they become a stable part of their
intellectual behavior - do teach thinking dispositions, even if
that is not
their explicit intent.
Shari Tishman and her colleagues at Harvard Project Zero have
suggested a set of criteria for assessing how well an
instructional
approach might be expected to teach thinking dispositions, even
if the
focus of the approach is skills-centered (Tishman, Jay &
Perkins, 1993;
Tishman, Perkins & Jay, 1995). Their view is based on the idea
that
thinking dispositions are learned through a process of
enculturation,
rather than direct transmission. Thinking dispositions, they
argue, are
characterological in nature, and, like many human character
traits,
they develop in response to immersion in a particular cultural
milieu.
The cultural milieu that best teaches thinking dispositions is a
culture
of thinking - an environment that reinforces good thinking in a
variety
of tacit and explicit ways. An effective program for teaching
thinking
dispositions, therefore, should create a culture of thinking in the
classroom. Such a culture will have the following four

elements: Models
of good thinking dispositions, explanations of the tactics,
concepts and
rationales of good thinking dispositions, peer interactions that
involve
thinking dispositions, and formal and informal feedback around
thinking dispositions.
Here is an example. Suppose you want to design or acquire a
program to teach reasoning to your eighth graders. If the
program is to
effectively enculturate strong reasoning dispositions, it should
meet the
following four criteria.
1. It should provide models of good reasoning behavior, for
example
by providing historical or literary examples of good reasoning,
by
providing opportunities for the teacher to model reasoning, by
structuring experiences in which students model reasoning for
themselves, and by helping students identify reasoning behavior
(or the lack of it) in everyday situations. The purpose of the
models criterion is to make sure that students are provided with
exemplars of what thinking dispositions look like in practice.
2. The program should also provide direct explanations about
the
purpose, concepts and methods of good reasoning. In other
words, students should be told why good reasoning is important,
and directly taught some key reasoning concepts and moves. For
example, they should be provided with explanations about such
concepts as evidence, hypothesis, justification, and theory. And
they should also be provided with explanations about methods
for seeking evidence, constructing hypotheses, an so on. The
purpose of the explanation criterion is to ensure that students

are directly provided with information about the core concepts
and methods of the thinking disposition.
3. A program for teaching reasoning should provide plenty of
opportunity for peer interaction around reasoning. These are
interactions in which students reason together, discuss
reasoning with one another, evaluate reasoning together, an so
on. The purpose of this criterion is to bring the thinking
disposition alive for the student by anchoring it in meaningful
interpersonal interactions.
4. Last but certainly not least, the program should provide
plenty
of opportunities for formal and informal feedback around
thinking dispositions. Through teacher feedback, peer feedback,
and self feedback, students should learn about the strengths
and weakness of their reasoning behavior. Feedback is one of
the most powerful ways a culture teaches and expresses its
values, and the purpose of the feedback criterion is to make sure
that classroom environment is one in which reasoning behavior
is supported, encouraged, and truly valued in a way that is clear
to the student.
HABITS OF MIND
By
Arthur L. Costa, Ed. D.
and

Bena Kallick, Ph.D.
Habit is a cable; we weave a thread of it each day, and at last
we cannot break it.
Horace Mann
American Educator
1796-1859
By definition, a problem is any stimulus, question, task,
phenomenon, or discrepancy, the explanation for which is not
immediately known. Thus, we are interested in focusing on
student performance under those challenging conditions
that demand strategic reasoning, insightfulness, perseverance,
creativity, and craftsmanship to resolve a complex
problem. Not only are we interested in how many answers
students know, but also in knowing how to behave when they
DON'T know. Habits of Mind are performed in response to
those questions and problems the answers to which are
NOT immediately known. We are interested in observing how
students produce knowledge rather than how they
merely reproduce knowledge. The critical attribute of
intelligent human beings is not only having information, but
also
knowing how to act on it.
A "Habit of Mind” means having a disposition toward behaving
intelligently when confronted with problems, the
answers to which are not immediately known. When humans
experience dichotomies, are confused by dilemmas, or
come face to face with uncertainties--our most effective actions
require drawing forth certain patterns of intellectual

behavior. When we draw upon these intellectual resources, the
results that are produced through are more powerful, of
higher quality and greater significance than if we fail to employ
those patterns of intellectual behaviors.
Employing "Habits of Mind" requires a composite of many
skills, attitudes cues, past experiences and proclivities. It
means that we value one pattern of thinking over another and
therefore it implies choice making about which pattern
should be employed at this time. It includes sensitivity to the
contextual cues in a situation which signal this as an
appropriate time and circumstance in which the employment of
this pattern would be useful. It requires a level of
skillfulness to employ and carry through the behaviors
effectively over time. It suggests that as a result of each
experience in which these behaviors were employed, the effects
of their use are reflected upon, evaluated, modified and
carried forth to future applications
HABITS OF MIND ATTEND TO: .
• Value: Choosing to employ a pattern of intellectual
behaviors rather than other, less productive
patterns.
• Inclination: Feeling the tendency toward employing a pattern
of intellectual behaviors.
• Sensitivity: Perceiving opportunities for, and appropriateness
of employing the pattern of behavior.
• Capability: Possessing the basic skills and capacities to carry
through with the behaviors.
• Commitment: Constantly striving to reflect on and improve

performance of the pattern of intellectual
behavior.
DESCRIBING HABITS OF MIND
When we no longer know what to do we have come to our real
work and when we no longer know
which way to go we have begun our real journey. The mind that
is not baffled is not employed. The
impeded stream is the one that sings.
Wendell Berry
What behaviors are indicative of the efficient, effective problem
solver? Just what do human beings do when they
behave intelligently? Research in effective thinking and
intelligent behavior by Feuerstein (1980), Glatthorn and Baron
(1985), Sternberg (1985), Perkins (1985), and Ennis (1985)
indicates that there are some identifiable characteristics of
effective thinkers. These are not necessarily scientists, artists,
mathematicians or the wealthy who demonstrate these
behaviors. These characteristics have been identified in
successful mechanics, teachers, entrepreneurs, salespeople, and
parents—people in all walks of life.
Following are descriptions and an elaboration of 16 attributes of
what human beings do when they behave intelligently.
We choose to refer to them as Habits of Mind. They are the
characteristics of what intelligent people do when they are

confronted with problems, the resolution to which are not
immediately apparent.
These behaviors are seldom performed in isolation. Rather,
clusters of such behaviors are drawn forth and employed in
various situations. When listening intently, for example, one
employs flexibility, metacognition, precise language and
perhaps questioning.
Please do not think that there are only sixteen ways in which
humans display their intelligence. It should be understood
that this list is not meant to be complete. It should serve to
initiate the collection of additional attributes. Although 16
Habits of Mind are described here, you, your colleagues and
your students will want to continue the search for additional
Habits of Mind by adding to and elaborating on this list and the
descriptions.
1. Persisting
Persistence is the twin sister of excellence.
One is a matter of quality; the other, a matter of time.
Marabel Morgan,
The Electric Woman
Efficacious people stick to a task until it is completed. They
don't give up easily. They
are able to analyze a problem, to develop a system, structure, or
strategy to attack a
problem. They employ a range and have repertoire of alternative
strategies for problem

solving. They collect evidence to indicate their problem-
solving strategy is working, and
if one strategy doesn't work, they know how to back up and try
another. They
recognize when a theory or idea must be rejected and another
employed. They have
systematic methods of analyzing a problem which include
knowing how to begin,
knowing what steps must be performed, and what data need to
be generated or
collected. Because they are able to sustain a problem solving
process over time, they are
comfortable with ambiguous situations.
Students often give up in despair when the answer to a problem
is not immediately known. They sometimes crumple
their papers and throw them away saying, "I can't do this," "It's
too hard," or, they write down any answer to get the task
over with as quickly as possible. Some have attention deficits;
they have difficulty staying focused for any length of
time, they are easily distracted, they lack the ability to analyze
a problem, to develop a system, structure, or strategy of
problem attack. They may give up because they have a limited
repertoire of problem solving strategies. If their strategy
doesn't work, they give up because they have no alternatives.
2. Managing Impulsivity
"....goal directed self-imposed delay of gratification is perhaps
the essence of emotional self-regulation:
the ability to deny impulse in the service of a goal, whether it
be building a business, solving an
algebraic equation, or pursuing the Stanley cup.

Daniel Goleman Emotional Intelligence (1995) p. 83
Effective problem solvers have a sense of deliberativeness:
They think before they act.
They intentionally form a vision of a product, plan of action,
goal or a destination before
they begin. They strive to clarify and understand directions,
develop a strategy for
approaching a problem and withhold immediate value judgments
about an idea before
fully understanding it. Reflective individuals consider
alternatives and consequences of
several possible directions prior to taking action. They
decrease their need for trial and
error by gathering information, taking time to reflect on an
answer before giving it,
making sure they understand directions, and listening to
alternative points of view.
Often students blurt the first answer that comes to mind.
Sometimes they shout out an
answer, start to work without fully understanding the directions,
lack an organized plan
or strategy for approaching a problem or make immediate value
judgments about an idea—criticizing or praising it—
before fully understanding it. They may take the first
suggestion given or operate on the first idea that comes to mind
rather than considering alternatives and consequences of several
possible directions.
3. Listening To Others—With Understanding and Empathy

Listening is the beginning of understanding.....
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening.
Let the wise listen and add to their learning and let the
discerning get guidance –
Proverbs 1:5
Highly effective people spend an inordinate amount of time and
energy listening
(Covey, 1989). Some psychologists believe that the ability to
listen to another person,
to empathize with, and to understand their point of view is one
of the highest forms of
intelligent behavior. Being able to paraphrase another person's
ideas, detecting
indicators (cues) of their feelings or emotional states in their
oral and body language
(empathy), accurately expressing another person's concepts,
emotions and problems—
all are indications of listening behavior (Piaget called it
"overcoming ego-centrism").
They are able to see through the diverse perspectives of others.
They gently attend to
another person demonstrating their understanding of and
empathy for an idea or
feeling by paraphrasing it accurately, building upon it,
clarifying it, or giving an example
of it.

Senge and his colleagues (1994) suggest that to listen fully
means to pay close attention to what is being said
beneath the words. You listen not only to the "music", but also
to the essence of the person speaking. You
listen not only for what someone knows, but also for what he or
she is trying to represent. Ears operate at the
speed of sound, which is far slower than the speed of light the
eyes take in. Generative listening is the art of
developing deeper silences in yourself, so you can slow your
mind's hearing to your ears' natural speed, and
hear beneath the words to their meaning.
We spend 55 percent of our lives listening yet it is one of the
least taught skills in schools. We often say we are listening
but in actuality, we are rehearsing in our head what we are
going to say next when our partner is finished. Some students
ridicule, laugh at, or put down other students' ideas. They
interrupt are unable to build upon, consider the merits of, or
operate on another person's ideas. We want our students to
learn to devote their mental energies to another person and
invest themselves in their partner's ideas.
We wish students to learn to hold in abeyance their own values,
judgments, opinions, and prejudices in order to listen to
and entertain another person’s thoughts. This is a very complex
skill requiring the ability to monitor one's own thoughts
while, at the same time, attending to the partner's words. This
does not mean that we can't disagree with some one. A
good listener tries to understand what the other person is
saying. In the end he may disagree sharply, but because he
disagrees, he wants to know exactly what it is he is disagreeing
with.
4. Thinking Flexibly

If you never change your mind, why have one?
Edward deBono
An amazing discovery about the human brain is its plasticity--
its ability to "rewire",
change and even repair itself to become smarter. Flexible
people are the ones with the
most control. They have the capacity to change their mind as
they receive additional
data. They engage in multiple and simultaneous outcomes and
activities, draw upon a
repertoire of problem solving strategies and can practice style
flexibility, knowing when
it is appropriate to be broad and global in their thinking and
when a situation requires
detailed precision. They create and seek novel approaches and
have a well-developed
sense of humor. They envision a range of consequences.
Flexible people can approach a problem from a new angle using
a novel approach
{deBono (1970) refers to this as lateral thinking.} They
consider alternative points of
view or deal with several sources of information
simultaneously. Their minds are open to change based on
additional
information and data or reasoning, which contradicts their
beliefs. Flexible people know that they have and can develop
options and alternatives to consider. They understand mean-
ends relationships being able to work within rules, criteria
and regulations and they can predict the consequences of
flouting them. They understand not only the immediate

reactions but are also able to perceive the bigger purposes that
such constraints serve. Thus, flexibility of mind is
essential for working with social diversity, enabling an
individual to recognize the wholeness and distinctness of other
people's ways of experiencing and making meaning.
Flexible thinkers are able to shift, at will, through multiple
perceptual positions. One perceptual orientation is what Jean
Piaget called, egocentrism--perceiving from our own point of
view. By contrast, allocentrism is the position in which we
perceive through another persons' orientation. We operate from
this second position when we empathize with other's
feelings, predict how others are thinking, and anticipate
potential misunderstandings.
Another perceptual position is "macro-centric". It is similar to
looking down from a balcony at ourselves and our
interactions with others. This bird’s-eye view is useful for
discerning themes and patterns from assortments of
information. It is intuitive, holistic and conceptual. Since we
often need to solve problems with incomplete
information, we need the capacity to perceive general patterns
and jump across gaps of incomplete knowledge or when
some of the pieces are missing.
Yet another perceptual orientation is micro-centric--examining
the individual and sometimes minute parts that make up
the whole. This "worm’s-eye view", without which science,
technology, and any complex enterprise could not function,
involves logical analytical computation searching for causality
in methodical steps. It requires attention to detail,
precision, and orderly progressions.

Flexible thinkers display confidence in their intuition. They
tolerate confusion and ambiguity up to a point, and are
willing to let go of a problem trusting their subconscious to
continue creative and productive work on it. Flexibility is
the cradle of humor, creativity and repertoire. While there are
many possible perceptual positions--past, present, future,
egocentric, allocentric, macro centric, visual, auditory,
kinesthetic--the flexible mind is activated by knowing when to
shift perceptual positions.
Some students have difficulty in considering alternative points
of view or dealing with more than one classification
system simultaneously. THEIR way to solve a problem seems
to be the ONLY way. They perceive situations from a
very ego-centered point of view: "My way or the highway!"
Their mind is made up; "Don't confuse me with facts, that's
it."
5. Thinking About our Thinking (Metacognition)
When the mind is thinking it is talking to itself
Plato
Occurring in the neocortex, metacognition is our ability to know
what we know and
what we don't know. It is our ability to plan a strategy for
producing what information
is needed, to be conscious of our own steps and strategies
during the act of problem
solving, and to reflect on and evaluate the productiveness of our
own thinking. While
"inner language," thought to be a prerequisite, begins in most
children around age five,

metacognition is a key attribute of formal thought flowering
about age eleven.
Probably the major components of metacognition are developing
a plan of action,
maintaining that plan in mind over a period of time, then
reflecting back on and
evaluating the plan upon its completion. Planning a strategy
before embarking on a
course of action assists us in keeping track of the steps in the
sequence of planned behavior at the conscious awareness
level for the duration of the activity. It facilitates making
temporal and comparative judgments, assessing the readiness
for more or different activities, and monitoring our
interpretations, perceptions, decisions and behaviors. An
example of
this would be what superior teachers do daily: developing a
teaching strategy for a lesson, keeping that strategy in mind
throughout the instruction, then reflecting back upon the
strategy to evaluate its effectiveness in producing the desired
student outcomes.
Intelligent people plan for, reflect on, and evaluate the quality
of their own thinking skills and strategies. Metacognition
means becoming increasingly aware of one's actions and the
effect of those actions on others and on the environment;
forming internal questions as one searches for information and
meaning, developing mental maps or plans of action,
mentally rehearsing prior to performance, monitoring those
plans as they are employed--being conscious of the need for
midcourse correction if the plan is not meeting expectations,
reflecting on the plan upon completion of the
implementation for the purpose of self-evaluation, and editing
mental pictures for improved performance.

Interestingly, not all humans achieve the level of formal
operations (Chiabetta, 1976). And as Alexander Luria, the
Russian psychologist found, not all adults metacogitate
(Whimbey, 1976). The most likely reason is that we do not take
the time to reflect on our experiences. Students often do not
take the time to wonder why we are doing what we are
doing. They seldom question themselves about their own
learning strategies or evaluate the efficiency of their own
performance. Some children virtually have no idea of what they
should do when they confront a problem and are often
unable to explain their strategies of decision making (Sternberg
and Wagner, 1982). When teachers ask, "How did you
solve that problem; what strategies did you have in mind"? or,
"Tell us what went on in your head to come up with that
conclusion". Students often respond by saying, "I don't know, I
just did it.'
We want our students to perform well on complex cognitive
tasks. A simple example of this might be drawn from a
reading task. It is a common experience while reading a
passage to have our minds "wander" from the pages. We "see"
the words but no meaning is being produced. Suddenly we
realize that we are not concentrating and that we've lost
contact with the meaning of the text. We "recover" by returning
to the passage to find our place, matching it with the
last thought we can remember, and, once having found it,
reading on with connectedness. This inner awareness and the
strategy of recovery are components of metacognition.
6. Striving For Accuracy and Precision
A man who has committed a mistake and doesn't correct it

is committing another mistake.
Confucius
Embodied in the stamina, grace and elegance of a ballerina or a
shoemaker, is the desire
for craftsmanship, mastery, flawlessness and economy of energy
to produce exceptional
results. People who value accuracy, precision and
craftsmanship take time to check over
their products. They review the rules by which they are to
abide; they review the models
and visions they are to follow; and they review the criteria they
are to employ and confirm
that their finish product matches the criteria exactly. To be
craftsmanlike means knowing
that one can continually perfect one's craft by working to attain
the highest possible
standards, and pursue ongoing learning in order to bring a laser
like focus of energies to
task accomplishment. These people take pride in their work and
have a desire for
accuracy as they take time to check over their work.
Craftsmanship includes exactness,
precision, accuracy, correctness, faithfulness, and fidelity. For
some people,
craftsmanship requires continuous reworking. Mario Cuomo, a
great speechwriter and politician, once said that his
speeches were never done—it was only a deadline that made
him stop working on them!
Some students may turn in sloppy, incomplete or uncorrected
work. They are more anxious to get rid of the assignment

than to check it over for accuracy and precision. They are
willing to suffice with minimum effort rather than investing
their maximum. They may be more interested in expedience
rather than excellence.
7. Questioning and Posing Problems
The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its
solution, which may be merely a matter
of mathematical or experimental skill.
To raise new questions, new possibilities, to regard old
problems from a new angle, requires creative
imagination and marks real advances.....
Albert Einstein
One of the distinguishing characteristics between humans and
other forms of life is our
inclination, and ability to FIND problems to solve. Effective
problem solvers know
how to ask questions to fill in the gaps between what they know
and what they don't
know. Effective questioners are inclined to ask a range of
questions. For example:
requests for data to support others' conclusions and
assumptions—such questions as,
"What evidence do you have.....?"
"How do you know that's true?"
"How reliable is this data source?"

They pose questions about alternative points of view:
"From whose viewpoint are we seeing, reading of hearing?"
"From what angle, what perspective are we viewing this
situation?"
Students pose questions, which make causal connections and
relationships:
"How are these people (events) (situations) related to each
other?"
"What produced this connection?"
They pose hypothetical problems characterized by "iffy"-type
questions:
"What do you think would happen IF.....?"
"IF that is true, then what might happen if....?"
Inquirers recognize discrepancies and phenomena in their
environment and probe into their causes: "Why do cats
purr?" "How high can birds fly?" "Why does the hair on my
head grow so fast, while the hair on my arms and legs grows
so slowly? "What would happen if we put the saltwater fish in a
fresh water aquarium?" "What are some alternative
solutions to international conflicts other than wars?"
Some students may be unaware of the functions, classes, syntax
or intentions in questions. They may not realize that
questions vary in complexity, structure and purpose. They may
pose simple questions intending to derive maximal
results. When confronted with a discrepancy, they may lack an
overall strategy of search and solution finding.
8. Applying Past Knowledge to New Situations
"I've never made a mistake. I've only learned from experience."

Thomas A. Edison
Intelligent human beings learn from experience. When
confronted with a new and
perplexing problem they will often draw forth experience from
their past. They can
often be heard to say, "This reminds me of...." or "This is just
like the time when I..."
They explain what they are doing now in terms of analogies
with or references to
previous experiences. They call upon their store of knowledge
and experience as
sources of data to support, theories to explain, or processes to
solve each new
challenge. Furthermore, they are able to abstract meaning from
one experience, carry
it forth, and apply it in a new and novel situation.
Too often students begin each new task as if it were being
approached for the very
first time. Teachers are often dismayed when they invite
students to recall how they
solved a similar problem previously and students don't
remember. It's as if they never heard of it before, even though
they had the same type of problem just recently. It is as if each
experience is encapsulated and has no relationship to
what has come before or what comes afterward. Their thinking
is what psychologists refer to as an "episodic grasp of
reality" (Feuerstein 1980). That is, each event in life is a
separate and discrete event with no connections to what may
have come before or with no relation to what follows.
Furthermore, their learning is so encapsulated that they seem
unable to draw forth from one event and apply it in another
context.

9. Thinking and Communicating with Clarity and Precision
I do not so easily think in words.... after being hard at work
having arrived at results that are perfectly
clear... I have to translate my thoughts in a language that does
not run evenly with them.
Francis Galton, Geneticist.
Language refinement plays a critical role in enhancing a
person’s cognitive maps, and
their ability to think critically which is the knowledge base for
efficacious action.
Enriching the complexity and specificity of language
simultaneously produces effective
thinking.
Language and thinking are closely entwined. Like either side of
a coin, they are
inseparable. When you hear fuzzy language, it is a reflection of
fuzzy thinking.
Intelligent people strive to communicate accurately in both
written and oral form taking
care to use precise language, defining terms, using correct
names and universal labels
and analogies. They strive to avoid overgeneralizations,
deletions and distortions.

Instead they support their statements with explanations,
comparisons, quantification,
and evidence.
We sometimes hear students and other adults using vague and
imprecise language. They describe objects or events with
words like weird, nice, or OK. They call specific objects using
such non-descriptive words as stuff, junk and things. They
punctuate sentences with meaningless interjections like ya
know, er and uh. They use vague or general nouns and
pronouns: "They told me to do it". "Everybody has one."
"Teachers don't understand me. They use non-specific verbs:
"Let's do it." and unqualified comparatives: "This soda is
better; I like it more".
10. Gathering Data through All Senses
Observe perpetually.
Henry James
The brain is the ultimate reductionist. It reduces the world to
its elementary parts:
photons of light, molecules of smell, sound waves, vibrations of
touch--which send
electrochemical signals to individual brain cells that store
information about lines,
movements, colors, smells and other sensory inputs.
Intelligent people know that all information gets into the brain
through the sensory
pathways: gustatory, olfactory, tactile, kinesthetic, auditory,

visual, Most linguistic,
cultural, and physical learning is derived from the environment
by observing or taking
in through the senses. To know a wine it must be drunk; to
know a role it must be
acted; to know a game it must be played; to know a dance it
must be moved; to know a
goal it must be envisioned. Those whose sensory pathways are
open, alert, and acute
absorb more information from the environment than those
whose pathways are withered, immune, and oblivious to
sensory stimuli.
Furthermore, we are learning more about the impact of arts and
music on improved mental functioning. Forming
mental images is important in mathematics and engineering;
listening to classical music seems to improve spatial
reasoning.
Social scientists solve problems through scenarios and role-
playing; scientists build models; engineers use cad-cam;
mechanics learn through hands-on experimentation; artists
experiment with colors and textures. Musicians experiment
by producing combinations of instrumental and vocal music.
Some students, however, go through school and life oblivious to
the textures, rhythms, patterns sounds and colors
around them. Sometimes children are afraid to touch, get their
hands "dirty" or feel some object might be "slimy" or
"icky". They operate within a narrow range of sensory problem
solving strategies wanting only to "describe it but not
illustrate or act it", or "listen but not participate".
11. Creating, Imagining, and Innovating

"The future is not some place we are going to but one we are
creating. The paths are not to be found,
but made, and the activity of making them changes both the
maker and the destination."
John Schaar, Political Scientist,
University of Santa Clara
Author, Loyalty in America
All human beings have the capacity to generate novel, original,
clever or ingenious
products, solutions, and techniques—if that capacity is
developed. Creative human
beings try to conceive problem solutions differently, examining
alternative possibilities
from many angles. They tend to project themselves into
different roles using analogies,
starting with a vision and working backward, imagining they are
the objects being
considered. Creative people take risks and frequently push the
boundaries of their
perceived limits (Perkins 1985). They are intrinsically rather
than extrinsically
motivated, working on the task because of the aesthetic
challenge rather than the
material rewards. Creative people are open to criticism. They
hold up their products

for others to judge and seek feedback in an ever-increasing
effort to refine their
technique. They are uneasy with the status quo. They
constantly strive for greater
fluency, elaboration, novelty, parsimony, simplicity,
craftsmanship, perfection, beauty, harmony, and balance.
Students, however, are often heard saying, "I can't draw," "I
was never very good at art," "I can't sing a note," "I'm not
creative". Some people believe creative humans are just born
that way; in their genes and chromosomes.
12. Responding with Wonderment and Awe
The most beautiful experience in the world is the experience of
the mysterious."
Albert Einstein.
Describing the 200 best and brightest of the All USA College
Academic Team
identified by USA Today, Tracey Wong Briggs (1999) states,
“They are creative
thinkers who have a passion for what they do.” Efficacious
people have not only an "I
CAN" attitude, but also an "I ENJOY" feeling. They seek
problems to solve for
themselves and to submit to others. They delight in making up
problems to solve on
their own and request enigmas from others. They enjoy figuring
things out by
themselves, and continue to learn throughout their lifetimes.

Some children and adults avoid problems and are "turned off" to
learning. They make
such comments as, "I was never good at these brain teasers,"
or "Go ask your father;
he's the brain in this family. "Its boring." "When am I ever
going to use this stuff?"
"Who cares?" "Lighten up, teacher, thinking is hard work,” or "I
don't do thinking!"
Many people never enrolled in another math class or other
"hard" academic subjects after they didn't have to in high
school or college. Many people perceive thinking as hard work
and therefore recoil from situations, which demand "too
much" of it.
We want our students, however to be curious; to commune with
the world around them; to reflect on the changing
formations of a cloud; feel charmed by the opening of a bud;
sense the logical simplicity of mathematical order.
Students can find beauty in a sunset, intrigue in the geometric
of a spider web, and exhilaration at the iridescence of a
hummingbird's wings. They see the congruity and intricacies in
the derivation of a mathematical formula, recognize the
orderliness and adroitness of a chemical change, and commune
with the serenity of a distant constellation. We want
them feel compelled, enthusiastic and passionate about learning,
inquiring and mastering.
13. Taking Responsible Risks.
There has been a calculated risk in every stage of American
development--the pioneers who were not
afraid of the wilderness, businessmen who were not afraid of
failure, dreamers who were not afraid of

action.
Brooks Atkinson
Flexible people seem to have an almost uncontrollable urge to
go beyond established limits. They are uneasy about
comfort; they "live on the edge of their competence". They
seem compelled to place themselves in situations where
they do not know what the outcome will be. They accept
confusion, uncertainty, and the higher risks of failure as part
of the normal process and they learn to view setbacks as
interesting, challenging and growth producing. However, they
are not behaving impulsively. Their risks are
educated. They draw on past knowledge, are thoughtful about
consequences and have a
well-trained sense of what is appropriate. They know that all
risks are not worth taking!
Risk taking can be considered in two categories: those who see
it as a venture and those
who see it as adventure. The venture part of risk taking might
be described by the
venture capitalist. When a person is approached to take the risk
of investing in a new
business, she will look at the markets, see how well organized
the ideas are, and study
the economic projections. If she finally decides to take the risk,
it is a well considered
one.

The adventure part of risk taking might be described by the
experiences from project
adventure. In this situation, there is a spontaneity, a willingness
to take a chance in the moment. Once again, a person
will only take the chance if they know that there is either past
history that suggests that what they are doing is not going
to be life threatening or if they believe that there is enough
support in the group to protect them from harm. Ultimately,
the learning from such high-risk experiences is that people are
far more able to take actions than they previously
believed.
It is only through repeated experiences that risk taking becomes
educated. It often is a cross between intuition, drawing
on past knowledge and a sense of meeting new challenges.
Bobby Jindal, executive Director of the National Bipartisan
Commission on the Future of Medicare states,
“The only way to succeed is to be brave enough to risk failure.
“ (Briggs, 1999 p 2A)
When someone holds back from taking risks, he is confronted
constantly with missed opportunities. Some students
seem reluctant to take risks. Some students hold back games,
new learning, and new friendships because their fear of
failure is far greater than their experience of venture or
adventure. They are reinforced by the mental voice that says, “
if
you don’t try it, you won’t be wrong” or “if you try it and you
are wrong, you will look stupid”. The other voice that
might say, “if you don’t try it, you will never know” is trapped
in fear and mistrust. They are more interested in knowing
whether their answer is correct or not, rather than being

challenged by the process of finding the answer. They are
unable to sustain a process of problem solving and finding the
answer over time, and therefore avoid ambiguous
situations. They have a need for certainty rather than an
inclination for doubt
We hope that students will learn how to take intellectual as
well as physical risks. Students who are capable of
being different, going against the grain of the common, thinking
of new ideas and testing them with peers as well as
teachers, are more likely to be successful in this age of
innovation and uncertainty.
14. Finding Humor
Where do bees wait? At the buzz stop.
Andrew, Age six
Another unique attribute of human beings is our sense of humor.
Laughter
transcends all human beings. Its’ positive effects on
psychological functions include
a drop in the pulse rate, the secretion of endorphins, an
increased oxygen in the
blood. It has been found to liberate creativity and provoke such
higher level
thinking skills as anticipation, finding novel relationships,
visual imagery, and
making analogies. People who engage in the mystery of humor
have the ability to
perceive situations from an original and often interesting
vantagepoint. They tend
to initiate humor more often, to place greater value on having a

sense of humor, to
appreciate and understand others' humor and to be verbally
playful when interacting
with others. Having a whimsical frame of mind, they thrive on
finding incongruity
and perceiving absurdities, ironies and satire; finding
discontinuities and being able
to laugh at situations and themselves. Some students find
humor in all the "wrong places"--human differences,
ineptitude, injurious behavior, vulgarity, violence and profanity.
They laugh at others yet are unable to laugh at
themselves.
We want our student to acquire the characteristic of creative
problem solvers, they can distinguish between situations of
human frailty and fallibility which are in need of compassion
and those which are truly funny. (Dyer, 1997).
15. Thinking Interdependently
Take care of each other. Share your energies with the group.
No one must feel alone, cut off, for that is when
you do not make it.
Willie Unsoeld
Renowned Mountain Climber
Human beings are social beings. We congregate in groups, find
it therapeutic to be
listened to, draw energy from one another, and seek reciprocity.

In groups we
contribute our time and energy to tasks that we would quickly
tire of when working
alone. In fact, we have learned that one of the cruelest forms of
punishment that can
be inflicted on an individual is solitary confinement.
Cooperative humans realize that all of us together are more
powerful, intellectually
and/or physically, than any one individual. Probably the
foremost disposition in the
post industrial society is the heightened ability to think in
concert with others; to find
ourselves increasingly more interdependent and sensitive to the
needs of others.
Problem solving has become so complex that no one person can
go it alone. No one
has access to all the data needed to make critical decisions; no
one person can consider as many alternatives as several
people can.
Some students may not have learned to work in groups; they
have underdeveloped social skills. They feel isolated, they
prefer their solitude. "Leave me alone--I'll do it by my self". "
They just don't like me". "I want to be alone." Some
students seem unable to contribute to group work either by
being a "job hog" or conversely, letting others do all the
work.
Working in groups requires the ability to justify ideas and to
test the feasibility of solution strategies on others. It also
requires the development of a willingness and openness to
accept the feedback from a critical friend. Through this
interaction the group and the individual continue to grow.
Listening, consensus seeking, giving up an idea to work with

someone else's, empathy, compassion, group leadership,
knowing how to support group efforts, altruism--all are
behaviors indicative of cooperative human beings.
16 Learning Continuously:
Insanity is continuing to do the same thing over and over and
expecting different results.
Albert Einstein
Intelligent people are in a continuous learning mode. Their
confidence, in combination
with their inquisitiveness, allows them to constantly search for
new and better ways.
People with this Habit of Mind are always striving for
improvement, always growing,
always learning, always modifying and improving themselves.
They seize problems,
situations, tensions, conflicts and circumstances as valuable
opportunities to learn.
A great mystery about humans is that we confront learning
opportunities with fear
rather than mystery and wonder. We seem to feel better when
we know rather than
when we learn. We defend our biases, beliefs, and storehouses
of knowledge rather than
inviting the unknown, the creative and the inspirational. Being
certain and closed gives
us comfort while being doubtful and open gives us fear.
From an early age, employing a curriculum of fragmentation,
competition and

reactiveness, students are trained to believe that deep learning
means figuring out the truth rather than developing
capabilities for effective and thoughtful action. They have been
taught to value certainty rather than doubt, to give
answers rather than to inquire, to know which choice is correct
rather than to explore alternatives.
Our wish is for creative students and people who are eager to
learn. That includes the humility of knowing that we don't
know, which is the highest form of thinking we will ever learn.
Paradoxically, unless you start off with humility you will
never get anywhere, so as the first step you have to have already
what will eventually be the crowning glory of all
learning: the humility to know--and admit--that you don't know
and not be afraid to find out.
IN SUMMARY
Drawn from research on human effectiveness, descriptions of
remarkable performers, and analyses of the characteristics
of efficacious people, we have presented descriptions of sixteen
Habits of Mind. This list is not meant to be complete
but rather to serve as a starting point for further elaboration and
description.
These Habits of Mind may serve as mental disciplines. When
confronted with problematic situations, students, parents
and teachers might habitually employ one or more of these
Habits of Mind by asking themselves, “What is the most
intelligent thing I can do right now?”
• How can I learn from this, what are my resources, how can I

draw on my past successes with problems
like this, what do I already know about the problem, what
resources do I have available or need to
generate?
• How can I approach this problem flexibly? How might I look
at the situation in another way, how can I
draw upon my repertoire of problem solving strategies; how can
I look at this problem from a fresh
perspective (Lateral Thinking).
• How can I illuminate this problem to make it clearer, more
precise? Do I need to check out my data
sources? How might I break this problem down into its
component parts and develop a strategy for
understanding and accomplishing each step.
• What do I know or not know; what questions do I need to ask,
what strategies are in my mind now, what
am I aware of in terms of my own beliefs, values and goals with
this problem. What feelings or emotions
am I aware of which might be blocking or enhancing my
progress?
• The interdependent thinker might turn to others for help.
They might ask how this problem affects
others; how can we solve it together and what can I learn from
others that would help me become a better
problem solver?
Taking a reflective stance in the midst of active problem
solving is often difficult. For that reason, each of these Habits
of Mind is situational and transitory. There is no such thing as
perfect realization of any of them. They are utopian
states toward which we constantly aspire. Csikszentmihalyi

(1993, p. 23) states,
"Although every human brain is able to generate self-reflective
consciousness, not everyone seems to use it
equally."
Few people, notes Kegan (1994) ever fully reach the stage of
cognitive complexity, and rarely before middle age.
These Habits of Mind transcend all subject matters commonly
taught in school. They are characteristic of peak
performers whether they be in homes, schools, athletic fields,
organizations, the military, governments, churches or
corporations. They are what make marriages successful,
learning continual, workplaces productive and democracies
enduring.
The goal of education therefore, should be to support others and
ourselves in liberating, developing and habituating
these Habits of Mind more fully. Taken together, they are a
force directing us toward increasingly authentic, congruent,
ethical behavior, the touchstones of integrity. They are the tools
of disciplined choice making. They are the primary
vehicles in the lifelong journey toward integration. They are
the “right stuff” that makes human beings efficacious.
"We are what we repeatedly do. Excellence, then, is not an act
but a habit."
Aristotle
REFERENCES

Briggs, Tracey, W. Passion For What They Do Keeps Alumni
On First Team. U. S. A Today. February 25, 1999. Vol. 17,
No. 115 pp. 1A-2A.
Chiabetta, E. L. A. Review Of Piagetian Studies Relevant To
Science Instruction At The Secondary And College Levels.
Science
Education. 60. pp. 253-261.
Costa, A. (1991) The Search For Intelligent Life. in A. Costa,
(Ed.) Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching
Thinking: pp. 100-106
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1993). The Evolving Self: A Psychology
for the Third Millennium. New York, NY: Harper Collins
Publishers, Inc.
Covey, S. (1989) The Seven Habits Of Highly Effective People.
New York: Simon and Schuster.
DeBono, E. (1991) The Cort Thinking Program in A. Costa
(Ed) Developing Minds: Programs for Teaching Thinking.
Alexandria, VA pp.
27-32: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Dyer, J. (1997) Humor As Process in A. Costa, A and R.
Liebmann, (Eds.) Envisioning Process as Content: Toward a
Renaissance Curriculum
pp. 211-229 Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Ennis, R. (1985). Goals For A Critical Thinking Curriculum.
In A. L. Costa (Ed.), Developing Minds: A Resource Book for
Teaching Thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1985.

Feuerstein, R. Rand, Y.m, Hoffman, M. B., & Miller, R.
(1980). Instrumental Enrichment: An Intervention Program For
Cognitive
Modifiability. Baltimore: University Park Press.
Glatthorn, A. & Baron, J. (1985). The Good Thinker. In A. L.
Costa (Ed.), Developing Minds: A Resource Book for Teaching
Thinking. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Goleman, D. (1995) Emotional Intelligence: Why It Can Matter
More Than I. Q. New York: Bantam Books.
Kegan, R. (1994) In Over Our Heads: The Mental Complexity
Of Modern Life. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University Press.
Perkins, D. (1985). What Creative Thinking Is. In A. L. Costa
(Ed.), developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking.
pp. 85-88
Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Perkins, D. (1995) Outsmarting I. Q.: The Emerging Science of
Learnable Intelligence. New York: The Free Press.
Senge, P., Ross, R., Smith, B., Roberts, C., & Kleiner, A.
(1994) The Fifth Discipline Fieldbook: Strategies And Tools
For Building A Learning
Organization. New York: Doubleday/Currency.
Sternberg, R. and Wagner, R. Understanding Intelligence:
What’s In It For Education? Paper submitted to the National
Commission
on Excellence in Education.
Sternberg, R. (1984). Beyond I.Q.: A Triarchic Theory of

Human Intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sternberg, R. (1983) How Can We Teach Intelligence?
Philadelphia, PA: Research for Better Schools
Whimbey, A. and Whimbey L. S. (1975) Intelligence Can Be
Taught. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
HABITS OF MIND
Habits of Mind are dispositions displayed by intelligent people
in response to problems, dilemmas, and
enigmas, the resolution of which are not immediately apparent.
1. Persisting: Stick to it! Persevering in task through
to completion; remaining focused
2. Managing impulsivity: Take your Time! Thinking before
acting; remaining calm thoughtful and deliberative.
3. Listening with understanding and empathy:
Understand Others! Devoting mental energy to
another person's thoughts and ideas; holding in
abeyance one's own thoughts in order to perceive
another's point of view and emotions
4. Thinking flexibly: Look at it Another Way! Being able to
change perspectives, generate alternatives, consider
options.
5. Thinking about your Thinking
(Metacognition): Know your knowing! Being aware
of one's own thoughts, strategies, feelings and
actions and their effects on others.
6. Striving for accuracy and precision: Check it again! A
desire for exactness, fidelity and craftsmanship.

7. Questioning and Problem Posing: How do you
know? Having a questioning attitude; knowing
what data are needed and developing questioning
strategies to produce those data. Finding problems
to solve.
8. Applying past to new and situations. Use what you
Learn! Accessing prior knowledge; transferring knowledge
beyond the situation in which it was learned.
9. Thinking and Communicating with clarity and
Precision: Be clear! Striving for accurate
communication in both written and oral form;
avoiding over generalizations, distortions and
deletions
10. Gathering Data Through all Senses: Use your natural
pathways! Gathering data through all the sensory
pathways--gustatory, olfactory, tactile, kinesthetic,
auditory and visual.
11. Creating, imagining, and innovating Try a
different way! Generating new and novel ideas,
fluency, originality
12. Responding with Wonderment and awe: Have fun
figuring it out! Finding the world awesome, mysterious and
being intrigued with phenomena and beauty.
13. Taking Responsible Risks: Venture out! Being
adventuresome; living on the edge of one's
competence
14. Finding Humor: Laugh a little! Finding the whimsical,
incongruous and unexpected. Being able to laugh at
oneself.

15. Thinking Interdependently: Work together! Being
able to work in and learn from others in reciprocal
situations.
16. Remaining Open to Continuous Learning: Learn from
experiences! Having humility and pride when admitting we
don't know; resisting complacency.
This article is adapted from Costa, A and Kallick, B (2000)
Habits of Mind: A Developmental Series. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
Book I: Discovering and Exploring Habits of Mind
Book II: Activating and Engaging Habits of Mind
Book III: Assessing and Reporting Growth in Habits of Mind
Book IV: Integrating and Sustaining Habits of Mind

Ritchhart (2007) Education Quarterly Australia 1 The.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Ritchhart (2007) Education Quarterly Australia 1 The.docx

Similar to Ritchhart (2007) Education Quarterly Australia 1 The.docx (20)

More from WilheminaRossi174

More from WilheminaRossi174 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Ritchhart (2007) Education Quarterly Australia 1 The.docx