A Proposal for the National Assessment of Higher-Order Thinking at the Community College, College, and University Levels.

Autor/inn/en	Paul, Richard W.; Nosich, Gerald M.
Titel	A Proposal for the National Assessment of Higher-Order Thinking at the Community College, College, and University Levels.
Quelle	(1991), (53 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Stellungnahme; Cognitive Measurement; College Students; Colleges; Critical Thinking; Educational Assessment; Educational Objectives; Educational Research; Evaluation Methods; Higher Education; Models; National Programs; Student Evaluation; Test Construction; Thinking Skills + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Collegestudent; College; Hochschule; Fachhochschule; Kritisches Denken; Education; assessment; Bewertungssystem; Educational objective; Bildungsziel; Erziehungsziel; Bildungsforschung; Pädagogische Forschung; Hochschulbildung; Hochschulsystem; Hochschulwesen; Analogiemodell; nicht übertragen; Schulnote; Studentische Bewertung; Testaufbau; Denkfähigkeit
Abstract	Conceptual foundations of a process for assessing higher-order thinking are reviewed, and a viable model for carrying out the process is presented. The first section of the paper formulates 21 criteria that should be met by any process adequate to the task. The second section outlines the basic concept of critical thinking on which the paper is based and explains how a rich and substantive concept of critical thinking, grounded in research, provides a plausible foundation for accomplishing the 21 objectives offered in response to the criteria. The third section explicates the following four domains essential to critical thinking: (1) elements of thought; (2) macro-abilities, or basic modes of reasoning; (3) traits of the mind (affective dimensions); and (4) universal intellectual standards. The fourth section contains recommendations for a process and a time-table for assessing higher order thinking skills at the postsecondary level. Six figures illustrate the discussion, and two appendices provide supplemental information. A 20-item list of recommended readings is provided. Also provided are critiques by L. Boehm, P. A. Facione, and R. K. Hambleton. (SLD)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC