Is Hardest best?

by Mary Lula Welch

Research has defined remarkable things about the brain since the invention of a microscope strong enough to reveal a dendrite system connecting neuron centers together. It has been clearly established and well documented that vast numbers of experiences are stored in memory which can be retrieved individually and used collectively to determine new dimensions in thinking, thus writing. Since one of the responsibilities of my employment is to teach students to think more critically, thus developing critical writing, I have become frightfully attentive to the tie between the writing I assign and the thinking it requires to complete these assignments. When examining the thinking process, I surprisingly discovered a direct relationship of the writing options and the steps in Bloom's "Levels of Thinking", a well-established taxonomy of "thinking levels". Writing options graduate from simple to complex following the very definitions in this taxonomy.

To make the hardest of concepts seem simple has been the continual set of my sail as an instructor for years, but I have always attributed the fight to make the "complicated seem simple" as a time- consuming quirk in my personality rather than a logical intelligent goal to pursue. With this new thinking-level-correlation discovery, I have come to understand the quirk heavily endowed within me is really a truism I have always known but could never explain--hardest is not always best. Establishing a thinking hierarchy of writing options clearly shows Narrative as the simplest of forms and Arguing the most complicated. Nevertheless, using a narrative often wins the favor of the audience reflecting there is nothing wrong with being simpleminded. Mastery of the simplest form--Narratives of either Remembering or Observation--augment writing effectiveness even in the most controversial of arguments because humanness taints our emotions, and emotions are a powerful appeal to an argument. Logically speaking then--simple enhances hard. It is interesting, isn't it?

Taxonomy Steps Comparison: LEVELS OF THINKING  =  LEVELS OF WRITING

					6. EVALUATION 		ARGUING---(Persuasion,                           Argumentation)
				5. SYNTHESIS 		EVALUATING---(Problem Solving)                                
			4. ANALYSIS		EXPLAINING---( Analysis, Cause/Effect)

		3. APPLICATION		DEFINITION--(Classification)

	2. COMPREHENSION 	INVESTIGATION---(Comparison/Contrast)

1. KNOWLEDGE	 	OBSERVING/REMEMBERING--(Description, Narration)    

Narrative)

• Step 1: Thinking: KNOWLEDGE Writing: REMEMBERING/OBSERVING The first level of thinking requires only one source of information. Whatever we observe, we can describe as is. Likewise, whatever we remember, we can describe as is. We can narrate (tell) this information convincingly if it is our own experience, Primary, or we can narrate (show) this experience colorfully if it happened to someone else, Secondary. Narratives of both observed and remembered events (show and tell) promote a high level of interest because the reader often has experienced something similar and will readily bond (interact/relate) to it. If the reader buys interest in your story, a receptive audience is established, and a receptive audience will likely accept other points more readily. Thus, narrative modes are extremely effective for softening hard hearted readers.
• Step 2: Thinking: COMPREHENSION Writing: INVESTIGATING The second level of thinking requires that two sources of information be consulted. Investigation looks at the new information with reference to an established norm, and is often called Comparison/Contrast for the very reason that it is looking at two things at once. Investigation is a strong tool for establishing the perimeters of an essay resulting in clarity for the baseline expectations of the reader.
• Step 3: Thinking: APPLICATION Writing: DEFINITION The third level of thinking requires that after two sources of information are consulted, the information is clarified according to a written standard called definition or grouped into categories called classification. Common denominator information is effective because chunks of ideas (categories) allow the writer to cover broader scopes while enabling the reader to follow the logic without confusion. Presenting the ideas in chunks is a wonderful way to entice the reader to stretch. This stretching pushes previous thinking into a new realm.
• Step 4: Thinking: ANALYSIS Writing: EXPLAINING The fourth level of thinking requires a complete examination of all pieces. To achieve this, information has to be dissected, examined, and described accurately. The process of Explaining (Defining, Analyzing, Cause/Effect) is a very effective tool to pull the reader's and writer's knowledge onto the same plain. Rhetorically stated, "Nothing is more frustrating than to have two people read from different pages at the same time," or "I need to see where you're coming from." Reader's and writer's need a meeting of the mind. Explaining is the best tool to establish a common knowledge background.
• Step 5: Thinking: SYNTHESIS Writing: EVALUATION The fifth level of thinking requires putting pieces together in order after the levels of Knowledge, Comprehension, Application, and Analysis have been addressed. Evaluation requires judgement on the part of the writer to place information into groups showing impressive evidence that supports the writer's opinion. As a child my son could take apart anything in the house and study the pieces--analysis. It was his dad's responsibility to put them back together--synthesis. Sometimes new objects resulted such as one two-seated bike made from two one-seated bikes. With language, marking the compound subject and verb when the sentence is provided--analysis-- is quite different from constructing a sentence with a compound subject and verb--synthesis. This fifth level of thinking allows previous ideas to be assembled in a new way and challenges critical thinking ability.
• Step 6: Thinking: EVALUATING Writing: ARGUMENTATION The sixth level of thinking requires completion of the judgmental process begun by putting new formations together in synthesis. With thinking, all the evidence must be brought to a consensus in the mind. In writing, all the evidence must be presented, so the reader accepts the same conclusion as the writer. . . and change is painful.

NOTE: Bloom's Taxonomy can be studied at these on-line resource addresses:
	1. Bloom's Taxonomy (1997) DLRN (Distance Learning Resource Network) Technology 
Resource Guide, Chapter 4 http://www.lib.ua.edu/crit_think/bloom.htm
	2. Major Categories in the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives  (Bloom 1956) 
http://weber.u.washington.edu/~krumme/guides/bloom.html
	3. Question Types Based on Bloom's Taxonomy
http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/hccinfo/facdev/Questioning.html

Published: New Perspectives

Return to Top

© Mary Lula Welch