in the classroom them to use their analysis of features to understand and rate abstract criteria like value , validity , appropriateness , sequence or order of importance . Evaluative thinking is high on Bloom ’ s taxonomy , and it helps students to negotiate tasks from the simplest to the most complex .
Apples with apples
Comparison is the underestimated building block of critical thinking .
By Lili-Ann Kreigler
Systematic comparison is a highly underestimated component of critical thinking , considered one of the most important 21st Century skills .
A new Progressive Achievement Test in Critical Reasoning for measuring critical thinking was released by ACER in October , which assesses conceptual reasoning , basic logic and argument analysis . And knowing how to compare is a key pathway to implementing all those skills .
Comparison is not a single thinking skill but a compact battery of discrete skills worth unpacking with students of all ages . For the purposes of this article , let ’ s consider a focus entity A and a target entity B . The job of comparison is to determine how , why and to what extent they are equivalent , similar or different . And students regularly find this an overwhelming task . How can we assist them ? An answer is to provide a systematic approach .
ITEMISE THE UNIQUE FEATURES OF THINGS The first step of comparison is to understand the unique features of one thing before relating it to another . Once they understand how the whole relates to the parts and the parts relate to each other , they can identify specific features . In a square , the lines , corners and angles work together in a particular way . Right angles and straight lines are specific features of a square . Knowledge of features , or criteria for comparison , make it easier for students to extend that knowledge to another entity . Perhaps a hexagon .
They will have a clearer understanding of which features also apply to the target . Besides shapes , we can use fruits . Compare a mandarin and a lemon . Both share the features of being citrus fruits with a thick , pithy skin . Their internal structure contains nested wedges and they are both juicy . Features that differ are colour , shape and flavour . Learning the process during simple analyses will lead them to greater competence .
Knowing the features and internal relationships of entities facilitates the comparison task and children can do it from an early age . When comparing two friends , rather than offering a random statement , prime children to select specific criteria . They might compare height , hair colour , loyalty or personality . We call this ability comparing apples with apples . Targeted comparison is a very transferable skill and will help students as they struggle with literary character analyses and maths problems .
COMPARISON IS CONTEXTUAL The objective of comparison is determined by context . In one situation a square shape will be more suitable than a round shape to solve a problem . It is often the disregard of contexts that results in imperfect decisions . Challenge students to analyse things contextually so they acquire perspectival thinking .
MOVING FROM THE CONCRETE TO THE ABSTRACT Comparison might simply be descriptive . But we usually want our students to gain more from their comparative efforts . Even young children can move beyond description to the evaluation of concepts like relative speed , noise , friendship or emotions . We want
COMPARISON FACILITATES SOLUTIONS Once the evaluations are done , comparison enables students to determine the best solutions . This usually requires a process of summation that highlights the most important information and excludes irrelevant elements . Comparison provides the relational framework to make the best choices .
COMPARISON IN ASSESSING ABSURDITY Students are regularly required to compare entire systems . Interpreting absurdity relies on understanding the juxtaposition of entire systems of relationships . As children unravel a situation , they realise that you need to compare more than individual items . They need to focus on the relationships around them .
COMPARISON IS THE BASIS OF ANALOGICAL THINKING So much of what students encounter is based on implied meaning . Figurative language , in literature and life , compares things by dislocating meaning from an original location and applying it somewhere completely removed . ‘ They had a whale of a time !’ ‘ Her life was stitched with tears ’. If students can ’ t unpack the qualities being compared and embedded , they may be left behind when it comes to text comprehension .
COMPARISON MAKES THINKING MORE EFFICIENT Because systematic comparison helps students to define , analyse , relate , evaluate and prioritise toward solutions it makes thinking more efficient . They become more critical in their processes and conclusions .
As Dr Dan Vine , a research fellow in ACER ’ s assessment and reporting research program , states , developing students ’ critical thinking skills will be essential in a “ world characterised by an explosion of information and competing claims ”. ■
Lili-Ann Kriegler is an education consultant and author of ‘ Edu-Chameleon ’.
20 | educationreview . com . au