Hello everyone,

 

When I refer to critical thinking, I'm thinking along the lines of a
continuum ranging from lower-order to higher-order thinking skills.  It's
based on Bloom's Taxonomy and subsequent variations thereof, and really can
cross all three instructional domains that Terry mentions below.  One
website I found that lays this out pretty well, in my opinion, is at
http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Bloom%27s_Taxonomy#creatin
g. 

 

The ability to think critically, as I understand it, is not dependent upon
any level of reading and writing literacy, nor significantly linked to L1 or
L2.  It actually resides more in Cummins' notion of a Common Underlying
Proficiency (CUP).

 

That's why, to make a useful distinction, I'd rather describe Terri's and
others' use of the terms "critical thinking" as "critical pedagogy," which
does appear to relate to socioeconomic status, power, and literacy, although
not absolutely so by any means, as Terri herself indicates in her
description of the "second base" below.

 

Michael

 

 

 

world10

 

Michael A. Gyori, M.A. TESOL

Owner-Teacher

Maui International Language School

Phone 808.205.2101 (U.S.A.)

Fax 808.891.2237 (U.S.A.)

E-mail mgyori at mauilanguage.com

Website www.mauilanguage.com

 

 

 

From: englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov
[mailto:englishlanguage-bounces at nifl.gov] On Behalf Of Terry Pruett-Said
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2009 5:23 PM
To: englishlanguage at nifl.gov
Subject: [EnglishLanguage 4726] Re: adult esl approaches and critical
thinking

 

I've been following this exchange for some time and there are two parts to
this "disagreement" I think. One is the definition of critical thinking
which is open to many interpretations and definitions. We recently tried to
solve this conundrum on a higher education ESL list I'm on to no avail.

 

But another aspect that needs to be understood is that in the US there are
at least three distinct bases for ESL teaching. The first is adult
education. Many of the approaches used in adult ed ESL in the US stem from
literacy practices used for native speakers who lacked literacy skills. Many
times these students were/are poor and lacked social and political power as
well as formal education.  Some new immigrants in the US also fall into this
category. This is, no doubt, one reason that adult education teachers feel
the need to spend time dealing with these issues which some may refer to as
teaching critical thinking. In the US, most new adult immigrants initially
find themselves in adult ed ESL classes. They do not have the option of
taking time to wait for output. They must go to the doctor, their child's
school, and their job tomorrow in a new language and culture. However, that
being said, for those of us who were ESL teachers first and adult education
teachers second, we do have some reservations about this approach especially
for students who do come with a high level of education in their own
language and have already been successful professionals. 

 

The second base stems from applied lingusitics and second language
acquisition, and is the approach most commonly used at the college and
professional level. I think these are the approaches that Steve is most
familiar with. These are sometimes made even more specific by calling them
English for Academic Purposes and English for Specific Purposes. These
approaches focus mainly on teaching a second language and possibly aspects
of another culture, but I'm not sure that teaching differences in culture is
necessarily critical thinking. The assumption is (though not always true)
that students in these programs have good literacy in their first language.
However, critical thinking related to college such as argumentative writing
is frequently taught in ESL classes focused on students beginning college in
the US such as international students. 

 

The third base is a combination of language arts and bilingual education
which are often the approaches used in public education for ESL children. I
feel as an ESL teacher that some language arts approaches used for native
speakers have not been successful for English language learners. I've also
had the experience of observing teachers who have not worked with adults try
these approaches with adults and all too often they come off as
condescending. 

 

All of these approaches have their uses for the right group of students, but
sometimes teachers, administrators, (and students themselves) do not take
into account what their students' backgrounds and needs are, so they do not
make the right match. I think a large part of this discussion has stemmed
from the fact that we are discussing two different categories of approaches.


 

Terry Pruett-Said

ESL/EAPP coordinator

Macomb Community College

Warren, Michigan

 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/englishlanguage/attachments/20090802/828a67e9/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 7994 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.nifl.gov/pipermail/englishlanguage/attachments/20090802/828a67e9/attachment.jpe