CC BY
51
Вестн. Моск. ун-та. Сер. 19. Лингвистика и межкультурная коммуникация. 2017. № 4
Ludmila A. Gorodetskaya
CRITICAL THINKING AND TEACHING ACADEMIC ENGLISH
Федеральное государственное бюджетное образовательное учреждение
высшего образования «Московский государственный университет имени М.В. Ломоносова» 119991, Москва, Ленинские горы, 1
History of critical thinking as a concept in British and American higher education is outlined and related to Bloom's taxonomy of lower-order and higher-order thinking skills. Critical thinking is considered from the viewpoint of its relevance for teaching Academic English. Common tasks in a language course set in class or for homework, such as name, describe, compare, complete, explain, list, summarize, find, choose, translate, plan, compose, etc., can be performed more effectively if their meta-cognitive character and relation to more abstract categories are explained to students. The difference is drawn between teaching children, which may be based on thoughtless imitation and game-like activities, and teaching adult learners, especially, students of Academic English, who must be fully aware of intellectual functions underlying their 2nd language acquisition. Examples are analyzed from 'Unlock', new 4-level course of Academic English, showing how the language skills are built upon cognitive ones and how careful and cautious one must be expressing an opinion and disagreement, debating an issue, contradicting another author or speaker. The importance of hedging and neutral tone in polite academic discussion does not contradict the principle of grammatical correctness but intensifies it by recognizing the principle of tactful communication which aims at avoiding embarrassment caused by too direct or negative comments.
Key words: critical thinking skills; Bloom's Taxonomy; cognitive development; Academic English; teaching polite communication; academic discussion; expressing disagreement; neutral tone.
The tradition of teaching critical thinking goes back to the early 20th century. It was introduced by American philosopher, psychologist and educator John Dewey (1859—1952) who is widely recognized as the father of critical thinking in education.
When people are engaged in critical thinking, they do not need to criticize anything or anyone. What they need to do is look at the facts and phenomena under study with an attempt to understand them rather than take existing explanations or theories for granted. Asking questions, analyzing and verifying the claims made in any area of knowledge is a necessary prerequisite of academic education. Critical thinking is, by its nature, a meta-cognitive skill.
Ludmila A. Gorodetskaya — Doctor of Cultural Studies, Professor of the Faculty of Foreign Languages and Area Studies, Lomonosov Moscow State University (e-mail: lgorodet@gmail.com).
There are several definitions of the term 'critical thinking' given by different scholars. In the early 20th century John Dewey described it as "Active, persistent and careful consideration of a belief or knowledge in the light of the evidence which supports it, and the further conclusions to which it leads" [Fisher, 2011: 2].
Later, other scholars added three elements to it: a) being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within a range of one's experience; b) knowledge of the methods of logical enquiry and reasoning; c) some skill in applying those methods. One more definition was given in the late 20th century by Fisher and Striven: "Critical thinking is skilled and active interpretation and evaluation of observations and argumentation" [Fisher, Striven, 1997: 21]. Developing these ideas, many authors determine the following cognitive actions as elements of fundamental critical thinking skills:
— Identify elements in a topic or case
— Identify reasons and conclusions
— Clarify and interpret terms and ideas
— Judge acceptability and credibility of claims
— Evaluate existing arguments
— Produce explanations
— Analyze, evaluate and make decisions
— Draw inferences
— Produce arguments of your own [Fisher, 2011: 8].
Benjamin Bloom, American educational psychologist (1913—1999), suggested a model now called Bloom's Taxonomy for describing critical thinking skills (CTS) involved in education and research as well as in psychological development at any age. It comprises six main intellectual capacities which are inborn in a human being but must be developed throughout one's life to become real skills. He presented them in the form of a pyramid: creating, evaluating, analyzing, applying, understanding, remembering (from top to bottom). Bloom's critical thinking skills are divided into lower-order CTS aimed at gathering information (remember, understand, apply) and higherorder CTS aimed at processing information (analyze, evaluate, create). Bloom introduced his taxonomy in 1950-s in order to differentiate between memorizing and thinking and promote higher forms of cognition in education, such as analyzing and evaluating concepts, processes, procedures and principles, rather than just remembering facts. This revolutionary approach has changed British and American university education to a great extent as it meant reconsidering not only the principles of tuition but also the content and structure of lectures and text books [Hoy, 2007].
Having said that, it is hard to deny that any classification of a complex phenomenon simplifies it in order to make it comprehensible and facilitate the process of its reconstruction and simulation. In fact, it can be argued
that any attempt to categorize cognitive processes into clear-cut classifications is, in a way, artificial as it undermines the holistic and interrelated nature of cognition. Indeed, looking at any two categories of Bloom's Taxonomy it is hard to perceive them as fully separate and independent. However, education is based on modeling natural, social and psychological processes in order to better understand and reproduce them. It refers to teaching and learning foreign languages as it refers to any other intellectual activity or academic discipline.
What impact does critical thinking have on language teaching?
If one looks at a contemporary ELT book for schoolchildren or adults, the tasks in it usually begin with one of the common verbs which refer to the activities in the English language classroom or at home, such as describe, discuss, compare, complete, identify, choose, decide, outline, plan, recommend, etc. The verbs can be linked to Bloom's model as each verb belongs to one or another critical thinking skill:
Remember: name, describe, relate, find, list, write, tell.
Understand: compare, discuss, restate, predict, translate, outline.
Apply: show, complete, use, classify, examine, illustrate, solve.
Analyze: explain, contrast, examine, identify, investigate, categorize.
Evaluate: decide, rate, choose, recommend, justify, assess, prioritize.
Create: create, invent, plan, compose, construct, design, imagine.
From the viewpoint of learning the English language, these lexical paradigms help learners internalize the vocabulary, particularly important in Academic English. These lexical sets systematize the activities every university student has to do when speaking or writing about facts, figures, ideas or results. The first three groups of tasks are more common as they reflect lower-order thinking skills. Language teachers deal with them at all levels and with all age groups of learners. The last three groups of activities are related to higher-order thinking skills which can be developed at higher levels of language command as they refer to more complex ideas which require more complex means of expression. Thus, a teacher or text book is unlikely to ask a primary school learner or even an adult beginner to categorize, prioritize or rate objects or processes in English. However, there is no strict correlation between language competences and cognitive functions. If the same activity (categorizing, prioritizing or rating) is done with picture cards, children and low-level adult learners will participate in it with pleasure. Such pre-verbal or partly verbal tasks are common in today's ELT materials for young learners as they help them learn the language while activating their mental skills at the same time. It is clear that children's language development goes hand-in hand with their cognitive development. Is the same relevant for university students?
Looking through the course books for Academic English, we can often encounter the tasks similar to the following:
— Look at the list of job criteria. Number them 1—10 in terms of importance for you.
— Look at the graph and answer the questions: what do the numbers on the left/right represent?
— Read the text and head each paragraph.
— Complete the table using information from the text.
— Look at the notes and create an outline for a talk.
— Which source of the energy described in the text is more suitable for your area?
— Read the text and learn the verbs printed in bold.
These tasks can be considered in terms of Bloom's Taxonomy, i.e. linked to certain critical thinking skills:
EVALUATE: Look at the list of job criteria. Number them 1—10 in terms of importance for you.
ANALYSE: Look at the graph and answer the questions: what do the numbers on the left/right represent?
UNDERSTAND: Read the text and head each paragraph.
APPLY: Complete the table using information from the text.
CREATE: Look at the notes and create an outline for a talk.
EVALUATE: Which source of the energy described in the text is more suitable for your area?
REMEMBER: Read the text and learn the verbs printed in bold.
The first of the tasks listed above (evaluating job criteria) can be followed by several options to consider: to make as much money as possible, to feel excited and challenged every day, to have friends at work, to work for a famous and important company, to travel for work, to speak more than one language at work, to manage other people, to feel happy and secure, to work close to home, to be creative. After evaluating and ranking the criteria, students can be asked to compare their top five answers with the partner's and then say why their job criteria differ. This will require comparison of the lists and, though brief, analysis of their own and another student's preferences, which also goes beyond a purely language work and is more closely related to CTS.
It goes without saying that understanding is a necessary prerequisite to analysis, evaluation and most other critical thinking skills in the Bloom's Taxonomy. That is why understanding is lower in the pyramid than more complex intellectual functions, and it cannot replace any of the higher-order skills that require additional mental efforts. University students will benefit from identifying a concrete cognitive function underlying every language activity. However, the same cannot be applied to primary or lower-secondary schoolchildren who benefit more from the activities based on imitating the models and role-playing than those in which they contemplate their cognitive processes [Gorodetskaya, Kozhevnikova, 2016].
A course incorporating critical thinking in teaching English is 'Unlock' published by Cambridge University Press where the examples used in this paper come from1. It is a five-level course of General English integrated with Academic English which brings university students from pre-A1 to B2+ level of Common European Framework with C1 to come out in the near future. The levels have been written by language teachers from all-over the UK, and the course is split into Reading and Writing VS Listening and Speaking editions for each level and is richly illustrated by authentic 'Discovery Education' videos introducing every unit in order to activate students' emotional perception while introducing the topic. Students are taught not only to analyze, evaluate, classify, etc., but also to reflect on what they are doing. The course can also be used with upper-secondary learners aged 15—16 if they are not only linguistically motivated but also inspired by scientific topics. It is worth noting that students of higher secondary and university levels are motivated by and benefit from the use of the internet in their education. With every Student's Book there comes a personal online code that gives access to a wealth of interactive exercises while the teacher can set the results of their automated checking through CLMS (Cambridge Learning Management System).
To illustrate how the course deals with teaching English, there is an example of a completion task in which students are asked to fill in the gaps in the following sentences:
The main advantage / disadvantage of... is that...
One point against... is that...
Perhaps the biggest concern about... is its...
A real benefit of... is their...
The main argument in favour of. / against... is...
The problem with... is that...
The good / bad thing about... is...
The main worry about... is...
Learners can choose from several options for the gaps: genetic engineering, robots, gas and oil, chemical fertilizers, the internet, new medicines, capital punishment, censorship, etc. However, with more advanced or active learners, the task can be formulated as an open cloze. The task has no answer key because there are many possible ways to complete the sentences. Every choice can provide new ideas for further discussion which may demonstrate, apart from providing speaking practice, that many of the resulting sentences are related to moral values, thus proving that science and technology are inseparably connected with society and culture. Some examples of resulting sentences are:
1 Lansford L. Unlock. Listening and Speaking Skills Level 4. Cambridge University Press, 2014.
A real benefit of robots is that they can replace humans in dangerous or high-precision work.
The main disadvantage of the new medicines is that they can bring about negative side effects.
The main argument against chemical fertilizers is that they pollute soil and water and, as a result, the crops they help to grow.
The biggest concern about the internet is that it can help spread harmful information related to firearms, drugs, suicide, etc.
While exchanging opinions in scientific communication, one has to be very cautious not to embarrass another person with too direct or negative comment. Thus, the terms 'hedging' or 'vague language' are now commonly used when teachers are explaining this feature of English to the students. The importance of hedging and neutral tone in polite academic discussion does not contradict the principle of grammatical correctness but intensifies it by recognizing the principle of tactful communication [Сафонова, 2016].
Phrases I think/believe/suppose are not the only way recommended for giving an opinion, others being What if we say that..., Have you considered..., I feel it's important to., The most important factor/thing/reason is... . The activities practicing the skill are aimed at agreeing and disagreeing with a speaker respectfully, and they help students realize why and how they should develop the skill: "In a discussion where speakers have different opinions, it is important to use formal language to disagree respectfully, apologizing before disagreeing (I'm sorry but I have to disagree) or recognizing the opposite point and then contradicting it (I see what you mean, but I have a different opinion). Other sentences recommended for politely disagreeing are I can see what you are saying, but., I'm not sure I share that viewpoint, Yes, but have you considered the other factors involved ?
Disagreeing may address not only an opinion, but also a proposed solution of a problem. When a problem is introduced, the following phrases can be used: The Problem is., The main issue seems to be., We need to find a way around., etc. Making polite suggestions can be taught by providing explanations and examples: "Making a suggestion in the form of a question can be more polite than using a direct statement such as I think, or We have to... . This approach. means the speaker is less likely to offend anyone."3. The examples given are Could we., Can I suggest we., Should we consider., How about., Have you thought about., Why don't we.
Responding to suggested solutions can also cause unintentional offence if the speakers don't realize the existing differences in expressing disagreement between L1 and L2, thus cognitive awareness and language skill prove to be inseparable, like in other examples considered above. Some ways of dealing with negative responses using but-clauses are also provided:
2 Ibid. P. 36.
3 Ibid. P. 136.
That's a good idea, but I'm not sure it addresses the problem. I thought that might be an option at first, but now I realize it won't work. That seems an obvious solution, but it doesn't address the issue of cost/facilities/equipment/staff4.
The course under consideration formulates recommendations in special boxes where they stand out as rules. One of them is called "Being firm but polite" and it recommends using expressions Could you possibly...'? or Would you mind.?by people chairing conference sessions or meetings when dealing with repetitive interruption or digression from a focused discussion. Examples are given of more direct and more polite interventions (it is interesting to note that words direct and polite are used as opposites):
Wait until Adil finishes. // Sorry, but would you mind waiting until Adil finishes, please?
That isn't what we are talking about. // Thank you for pointing that out, but it isn't really what we were talking about.
Save that for later in the discussion. // Please, could you save that for later in the discussion?5
Another rule of politeness in Academic English is using a neutral tone of voice and it says that when we feel upset, angry or excited our tone of voice can become challenging. Maintaining a neutral relaxed tone of voice can only be practiced through listening and speaking activities based on audiomaterial. Students have their individual codes in every 'Unlock' Student's Book that give them individual access to interactive exercises including those for practicing pronunciation and intonation. However, just imitating neutral tone is not enough: unlike everyday communication, adequate interaction in professional domains can hardly be developed without completely understanding why we have to use these rules. Indeed, they may seem excessive and unnecessary to speakers of other languages like Russian where more direct forms of expressing negative meaning may sound appropriate.
All said above shows that teaching Academic English is inseparable from developing students' critical thinking skills. Moreover, unlike children, adult learners will only benefit from reflecting on their cognitive actions underlying any communicative task they are engaged in when learning a foreign language.
References
1. Ershova T.A., Korenev A.A. 2016. Ispol'zovanie integrirovannykh zadanii na chtenie i pis'mennuyu rech' dlya razvitiya professional'no-kommunika-tivnykh i kognitivnykh umenii studentov pedagogicheskikh spetsial'nostei [Integrated Reading and Writing Tasks for the Development of Trainee
4 Ibid. P. 137.
5 Ibid. P. 155.
Teachers' Professional Communicative and Cognitive Skills]. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 1, pp. 159-168. (In Russ.)
2. Safonova V.V 2016. Printsipy mezhdistsiplinarnogo sodruzhestva v proek-tirovanii obrazovatel'nogo kommunikativnogo prostranstva v vysshei shkole [Principles for interdisciplinary university co-operation in designing educational communicative space]. Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 4, pp. 17-26. (In Russ.)
3. Fisher A. 2011. Critical Thinking. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press.
4. Fisher A., Striven M. 1997. Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment. University of East Anglia, Edgepress and Centre for Research in Critical Thinking.
5. Gorodetskaya L.A., Kozhevnikova L.A. 2016. Using CLIL Approach in Primary and Secondary School Education, Moscow State University Bulletin. Series 19: Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 2, pp. 31-38.
6. Hoy A. 2007. Education Psychology. 10th ed. Boston Pearson, Allyn and Bacon.
Л.А. Городецкая
КРИТИЧЕСКОЕ МЫШЛЕНИЕ И ОБУЧЕНИЕ АНГЛИЙСКОМУ ЯЗЫКУ ДЛЯ АКАДЕМИЧЕСКИХ ЦЕЛЕЙ
Рассматриваются определения критического мышления и его история в британском и американском высшем образовании. Навыки критического мышления связываются с таксономией мыслительных операций Бенджамина Блюма. Анализируется влияние критического мышления на обучение английскому языку для академических целей. Обычные языковые задания (назови, опиши, сравни, заполни, объясни, перечисли, кратко изложи, найди, выбери, переведи, составь план, напиши текст и пр.) могут выполняться более эффективно, если их мета-когнитивный характер и связь с более абстрактными категориями объясняются студентам. Проводится различие между обучением детей, основанным на имитации и игре, и обучением взрослых, особенно университетских студентов, изучающих академический английский, которые должны больше рефлексировать и осознавать интеллектуальные действия, лежащие в основе изучения ими иностранного языка. Приводятся примеры из 'Unlock', нового 4-уровневого курса по академическому английскому, показывающие, как языковые навыки развиваются на основе когнитивных и как осторожен должен быть говорящий и пишущий при выражении мнения, несогласия, противоречия в научной дискуссии. Принцип такта не противоречит принципу грамматической правильности, но усиливает его, помогая избегать слишком прямых и негативных оценок оппонента.
Ключевые слова: навыки критического мышления; таксономия Блюма; когнитивное развитие; английский язык для академических целей; обучение вежливому общению; научная дискуссия; выражение несогласия; нейтральный тон.
Список литературы
1. Ершова Т.А., Коренев А.А. Использование интегрированных заданий на чтение и письменную речь для развития профессионально-коммуникативных и когнитивных умений студентов педагогических специальностей // Вестн. Моск. ун-та. Сер. 19. Лингвистика и межкультурная коммуникация. 2016. № 1. С. 159—168.
2. Сафонова В.В. Принципы междисциплинарного содружества в проектировании образовательного коммуникативного пространства в высшей школе // Вестн. Моск. ун-та. Сер. 19. Лингвистика и межкультурная коммуникация. 2016. № 4. С. 17—26.
3. Fisher A. Critical Thinking. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2011.
4. Fisher A., Striven M. Critical Thinking: Its Definition and Assessment. University of East Anglia: Edgepress and Centre for Research in Critical Thinking, 1997.
5. Gorodetskaya L.A., Kozhevnikova L.A. Using CLIL Approach in Primary and Secondary School Education // Вестн. Моск. ун-та. Сер. 19. Лингвистика и межкультурная коммуникация. 2016. № 2. С. 31—38.
6. Hoy A. Education Psychology, 10th ed. Boston Pearson // Allyn and Bacon, 2007.
Сведения об авторе: Городецкая Людмила Александровна — доктор культурологии, профессор факультета иностранных языков и регионоведения МГУ
имени М.В. Ломоносова (e-mail: lgorodet@gmail.com).
