Many undergraduate students struggle when asked to engage in critical thinking. One approach we have found useful in fostering critical thinking is scaffolding, a process that involves the use of prompts, supports, and modeling to build a removable structure from which students can learn complex thinking skills. Through the development of these critical thinking skills, students are better able to analyze and formulate recommendations for real world applications. This paper discusses how to incorporate a critical thinking scaffold to guide the design and facilitation of a case-based learningdiscussed

Browne, Laurie

Hough, Melissa

Schwab, Keri

English

DigitalCommons@CalPoly

114 SCAFFOLDING AND CRITICAL THINKING LEARNING ACTIVITIES Scaffolding: A Promising Approach to Fostering Critical Thinking Laurie Browne Univers ity of Utah Department of Parks, Recreation, and Tourism 250 South 1850 East Room 200 Salt Lake C ity, UT 84112 Phone: (801) 585-1551 • Fax: (801) 581-4930 • E-mail: laurie.browne@hsc.utah.edu Melissa Hough and Keri Schwab Un ivers ity of Utah melissa.hough@health.utah.edu • keri.schwab@health. uta h .edu Abstract Many undergraduate students struggle when asked to engage in cri tical think­ing. One approach we have found useful in fostering critical thinking is scaffold­ing, a process that involves the use of prompts, supports, and modeling to build a removable structure from which students can learn complex thinking skills. Through the development of these critical thinking skills, students are better able to analyze and formulate recommendations for real world applications. This paper discusses how to incorporate a critical thinking scaffold to guide the design and facilitation of a case-based learning <1ctivity in a semester-long commercial recre­ation management course. Implications for the use of scaffolding in the classroom will also be discussed. KEYWORDS: Critical thinking, scaffolding, case studies 115 BROWNE, HOUGH, SCHWAB Teaching students how to think rather than what to think is a primary goal of higher education (Daly, 2001; Kronholm, 1996; Myllykangas & Foose, 2007), yet many of our undergraduate students struggle when asked to engage in critical thinking. Thinking critically means learners are engaged in "reflective and reason­able d1inking that is focused o n deciding what to believe or do" (Ennis, 1985 p. 44), and many college instructors already employ various strategies to engage in this process (e.g. service learning activities, case studies, and joumaling). However, the extent to which critical thinking occurs in the college classroom depends largely on students' abil ity to challenge assumptions, deconstruct information, and reflect o n personal bel iefs (Brookfield, 1987). In our experiences teaching in higher education, many undergraduate students lack these skills, which may be problematic as diey begin to engage in real world contexts. To better prepare our students to be effective leaders in the field, today's learners must be taught how to think cri tically. Scaffolding One approach we have found useful in fostering critical d1inking is scaffolding, which, as both a pedagogical teclu1ique and a process, provides a structure for critical th inking. The process of scaffolding involves both the construction and systematic deconstruction of a cognitive support structure that accommodates a student's indi­vidual needs (Wood, Bruner, & Ross, 1976). Additionally, die scaffolding technique serves as a tool that assists learners in completing complex tasks that otherwise would be beyond their capabilities (Puntambekar & Htibscher, 2005). Integral to scaffolding is the social interaction between the learner and instruc­tor. Togedier, they develop a mutual understanding of the activity and its goals, thereby sharing ownership of the process. Through this, the instructor provides support and ongoing diagnosis of the learner's abi li ties by altering th e scaffold to accommodate the learner's needs. Instructional teclu1iques such as expert model­ing, student-expert colhtboration, and on-going assessment are employed to con­struct th e scaffold. Eventually, the instructor removes the scaffold so the learner takes responsibility for his or her own learning (Wood et al., 1976), which, once completed, leaves d1e Ieamer more capable than before the use of the scaffold (Lepper, Drake, & O'Donnell-Johnson, 1997). Application of Scaffolding Techniques In an effort to teach critical thinking during a semester-long commercial recreation management course, we designed a scaffolded syllabus that incorpo­rated case-based learning activities. Case studies, as a pedagogical tool, are realistic scenarios that require students to interpret evidence, analyze information, and for­mulate an argument (Klebba & Hamilton, 2007). T h e abili ty to demonstrate each of these skills requires students to employ critical thinking. Therefore, we imple­mented a critical thinking scaffold to guide die design and facilitation of these case study analyses. Following the fundamentals of scaffolding, we integrated these elements into the syllabus: shared understanding of the scaffold, expert modeling, ongoing assessment, and deconstruction of the scaffold. 116 SCAFFOLDING AND CRITICAL THINKING We established the critica l thinking scaffold in the course syllabus by design­ing case analysis assignments th at increased in complexity and value as the semes­ter progressed . The first case analysis consisted of a 5-point in-class discussion structured around concrete questions such as, "Name the primary stakeholders in this orga nization," "State your recommendation," and "Identify evidence d1at supports your recommendation." After the activity, students reflected on the processes d1ey used to formu late a recommendation, specifically with regard to the acn .on words "Name," "S tate," and "Id entl.fy" S . evera 1students expressed frustra­tion at d1e constrained nature of rl1is analysis, which in turn generated discussion on the goal of the exercise with in the larger scaffold. Fin ally, the critical thinking scaffold was outlined on a rubric that students used to reflect on the cognitive processes they employed in each case analysis (See Figure 1). The rubric defined each aspect of the case ana lysis (identify stakeholders, interpret conten t, evaluate evidence, an alyze assumptions, explain main issues, and construct a final recom­mendation) in terms of the demonstration of critical thinking (no d emonstration, some demonstration, demonstrated, and high proficiency). Once a shared nnderstanding of rl1e scaffold was established, the instructor and students served as expert critical thinking models. This was accomplished in two ways. First, the instructor demonstrated each critical thinking level as outlined in the rubric and asked students to identify aspects of critical thinking as they were observed. Furd1er, expert modeling was employed rl1rough peer-to-peer in-class in­teractions. At midterm, students identified the ir person al strengths as they related to crit ical thinking, and from that point forward they were paired during activities to serve as expert models. In additio n to the feedback given by d1e expert models, students also received on-going assessme n t from the instructor. Each case an alysis served as an indicator of the students' development of critical thinking skills and we used each assign­ment to provide individualized and specific feedback. For example, one student assessed her own critical thinking as "highly proficien t." The instructor met with h er and adjusted her case assignments to allow for a less structured analysis wh ile other students maintained a more structured analysis until later in the semester. This individualized assessment process allowed us to adjust and fade the scaffold as students gained critical thinking skills. Deconstructing, or fading a scaffold , shou ld occur incremen tally over time such that each student thinks critically without using prompts o r expert modeling. Once removed, a scaffold should leave the learner with new and readily-employed cognitive skills. In our case study class for example, we first asked the studen ts to analyze cases by identifying and naming co ncrete pieces of information. Subse­quent case analyses required students to think a bit more critically about the case by evaluating types and sources of information. After demonstrating rl1eir evalu­ative skills, students were asked to make inferences about information implicit to the case. By the end of the semester, studen ts were not given case assign ments per se. Instead, they analyzed cases in an open-ended paper format. Each aspect of the critical thinking scaffold was faded in this way. 117 BROWNE, HOUGH, SCHWAB No Demonstration Some Demonstration Demonstrated High Proficiency ldcntifv Fails to identify all Idenrifies and Identifies and de· Idenrifies all Stakeholders key stake holders as rl1ey are presented in the case. exp lains all key stakeholders as rhey are presented in rhe case. scribes all key sta ke­holders as they are presented in rhe case as well as add itional stake holders nor ex· ()licitly ment ioned, begi1lS to descr ibe re· lationships berween stakeholders. stakeholders (explici t and second· ary) and describes the relationsh ips between these stake· holders and issues embedded in these relationsh ips. Interprets Fai Is to inte rpret I nte rprers all key In terpre ts all key I nte rprers exp licit Content all key strengths, weaknesses, oppor­tun ities, and threats as presented in th e case . strengths. wea k.­nesses, opportunities, and threats as pre.. sentctl in tht: case. Strength:;, we:..k .. nesses, opponun ities, and threats as they are preSC!ntctl in the case as somt: thal is implicit ro rhe ~ituation. and im p licit content as it relates to the strengths, weak.. nesse::s, oppornm ities, anu threa ts and de­scri bes connections between all four. Evaluates Fails to iuentify uata Successfully iuenti· Identifies all Nor only identifies Evidence and information rhat councs as evidence and fails to evaluate its credib ilit y. lies data and infor­marion char counts as evidence but fuils to thorough ly evalu­are irs credibi lity. imporranr ev idence and evaluates it be de:;cribing its :source, type, and how it is useful. anu evaluates all important evidence (by de.o;cribing source, type, and usefulness), but also p rovtdes new data or information for consideration. Analyze Fails to identify and ldenc16es some of Identifies and Not only Jdencifies AsslLmptions evaluate any of the important assump.­rions behind rhe claims in the case. the most i mportant n:;:;umption:;, hut does not evaluate them for plausibiliry or clarity. evaluates a II rhe im­portant a:):;umption:s, bur not rhe ones that are deeper in the hackgr<>unu -the more abscracr ones. and evaluates a II rhe important a:;:>l.llnp~ tions, bur also some of the more hidden, more abstract one.:s (the ones not stared exp l icirly in rhe case). Ex1>lain Fails ro iuentify, ldentifie:s main Successfully iuent i· Clearly iden tifies anu :Main Issues summanze, or explain rhe main pr<>blem(s). Represents the issues maccw·arely or inap propr iately. issues bur does nor summarize O t' explain them clearly or suf­licien tl y. fies and summarizes rbe main issues, bur does not explain why/how they are problems or create questi<ms. surnmarizes main is· sues and successfully expla•ns why/how they are problems or questions, idencifies embedueu or implicit issues, addresses lheir relanonsh ips to each other. Construct Fai Is to make a Makes a reasona ble Successfully Successfully Recoru.mendation clear anu reasonable recommendation. n::cc>mmendation but does nor provide any support fo r the recommendatio n constructs a recommendation and provides clear support for the rec .. ommendation based on evidence from the case. c<>nsrruct$ a recommendarion and provides clear support for the rec­ommendarion based on ev idence from within and from ourside of tbe case. FigureI tU.iaptedfrom Gilman & Casey (2006) p. l Figure 1: Case Smdy Critical Thinking Rubric 118 SCAFFOLDING AND CRITICAL THINKING Learning Outcom es and Recommendations Learning activities designed within a critical thinking scaffold may produce a variety of observable short and long-term outcomes in smdent learning. ln general, students enjoyed the incremental design of the case studies and felt prepared to tackle the less-scaffolded cases as the semester progressed. Another positive outcome was improved classroom discussion. Students felt comfortable sharing opinions because discussions were supported by predictable cues and strucmres throughout the semester. Several students said d1ey felt better able to contribute verbally in class because discussion norms were so clearly laid out. A negative outcome resu lting from the cr itical thinking scaffold was the anxiety several stu­dents felt about grading ambiguity. Because work done on the case studies did not receive a letter grade, students felt unsure of d1eir overall semester grade. While the student learning outcomes seem mostly positive, instructors seeking to implement a critical th inking scaffold should be prepared to invest ample time and consideration into student assignments, individual needs, and assessments. This process begins by outlining the goals of me class and the skills necessary to meet those goals. Next, instructors should identify tl1e culminating assignments or projects that will demonstrate reaching those goals. To accomplish this task, instructors should dissect the assignments into smaller portions or sub-skills and format mem into mini-projects that will allow students to gain skills progressively rhroughout rhe semester. In keeping witl1 tl1e fundamental concept of scaffold­ing, it is important that instructors give students the opportunity to reflect on. the scaffold at each incremental stage and to engage in self-, peer-, and instructor-as­sessment throughout tl1e semester. Finally, instructors should encourage students to engage their newly-developed critical thinking skills while simultaneously giving them indiv idualized feedback as often as possible. Conclus io n We believe tl1e long-term outcomes from me critical tl1inking scaffold are ben­eficial to student lea rning. Through d1e development of critical thinking, students are better able to analyze and formulate recommendations for future real world applications (Ennis, 1985). By gaining this skill mrough a scaffolded learning environment, students appreciate instructional supports such as expert models, re­flection, and assessment in od1er contexts. Considered collectively, these skills may contribute to students' self-efficacy and academic success in other learning settings. R eferences Brookfield, S. D . (1997, Fall). Assessing critical t h inking. Nett' Direaions for Adult & Continuing Education, 75, 17-30. Daly, W. M. (2.001). The development of an a lternative method in t he assessment of critical t h inking as an outcome of nursing education. Journal of Adt~anced Ntming, 36(1), 120-130. Ennis, R. (1985). A logica l basis for measuring critical t hinking skilL~. Educational Leadership, 43(2), 44-48. 119 BROWNE, HOUGH, SCHWAB Gilman, R., & Casey, J. (2006, Spring). Measuring Critical Thinking. TooU<it, 4(4). Retrieved February 14, 2009, from Imp://wvvw.niu.edu/assessment/Toolkit/vo l4_ish4.pdf Klebba, J. M., & Hami lron, J. G. (2007). Srrucrured case analysis: Deve loping critical thinking skills in a marketing case course. Journal of Ma.rketing Education, 29(2), 132-139. Kronholm, M. (1996). The impact of d evelopmenta l insrruction on reflective judgment. Review of Higher Education, 19(2), 199-225. Lepper, M. R., Drake, M. F., & O'Donnell-Johnson , T. (1997). Scaffolding techniques of exper t human tu tors. InK. H ogan & M. Pressley, (Eds.), Scaffolding student learning: lnstmctional approaches and issues (pp. 108-144). Cambridge, MA Brookline Books. Myllykangas, S. A., & Foose, A. K. (2007). Building cr itical thinking one article at a time. Scho!e: A Journal of Leisure Studies & Recreation Education, 22, 79-84. PLU1tambekar, S., & Hubscher, R. (2005). Too ls for scaffolding srud cncs in a complex learning environmen t: What have we gained and what have we missed. Educational Psychologist, 40(1), 1-12. Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G . (1976). The role of tutor ing in problem solving. Journal of Child Psychology & Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 17(2), 89-100 . 

Scaffolding: A Promising Approach to Fostering Critical Thinking

https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1040&amp;context=rpta_fac

Scaffolding: A Promising Approach to Fostering Critical Thinking

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

DigitalCommons@CalPoly