Defining Higher Order Thinking

Author(s): Arthur Lewis and David Smith

Source: Theory into Practice, Vol. 32, No. 3, Teaching for Higher Order Thinking (Summer,
1993), pp. 131-137
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1476693
Accessed: 04-07-2015 07:54 UTC

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1476693?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/
info/about/policies/terms.jsp

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Theory into Practice.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 101.203.168.101 on Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:54:26 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
ArthurLewis
David Smith
Defining Higher Order
are being asked to develop more than
EACHERS
the basic skills in their classrooms. The variety
of labels for these new goals-higher order thinking,
critical thinking, problem solving, rational thought,
and reasoning-are confusing. Commenting on the
confusion, Cuban (1984) notes, "Defining thinking
skills, reasoning,critical thoughtand problemsolving
is troublesometo bothsocial scientistsandpractitioners.
Troublesomeis a polite word;the area is a conceptual
swamp" (p. 676). Unfortunately, little progress has
been made in clearing up the "conceptual swamp"
since Cuban made his statement.
In this article, the focus is on defining higher
order thinkingand differentiatingit from other terms,
particularlycritical thinking and problem solving. A
definition is derived from an investigation of three
arenas that contribute to an understandingof higher
order thinking: (a) the differing perspectives by phi-
losophers and psychologists as to the natureof higher
order thinking;(b) attemptsto differentiatelower or-
der and higher order thinking; and (c) a delineation
of the relationshipbetween critical thinkingand prob-
lem solving and what that means in terms of higher
order thinking.
Perspectives of Philosophers and Psychologists
Every discipline uses higher order thinking to
add to its store of knowledge. However, two disci-
Arthur Lewis is professor emeritus and David Smith is
dean of the College of Education at the University of
Florida.
THEORY INTOPRACTICE, Volume32, Number 3, Summer 1993
Copyright 1993 College of Education, The Ohio State University
This content downloaded from 101.203.168.101 on Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:54:26 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Thinking
plines have contributedin special ways to our under-
standingof higherorderthinking:philosophyand psy-
chology. The two disciplines are very different.Their
differences extend beyond terminology;they have di-
verse views regardingsuch fundamentalideas as the
nature of "truth"-how it is defined and how it is
found. In a sense, they are reflective of the two cul-
tures identified by C.P. Snow (1964)-the humani-
ties and the sciences-with philosophyassociatedwith
the humanitiesand psychology with the sciences. This
diversity has enabled each field to make a significant
contributionto the field of higher order thinking.
The contributionof philosophy to higher order
thinking extends from the time of Socrates, Plato,
and Aristotle. Socrates challenged the "loose" think-
ing of the youth of his day by asking such questions
as: "Whatis the evidence?" and, "If this is true does
it not follow thatcertainothermattersare true?" Since
that time, philosophers have believed that critical
thought could be used as a moral force to promote
the good. Resnick (1987) describes the natureof cur-
rent philosophical contributions:"Philosopherspro-
mote an approachdesigned to discipline thinking and
to guard against the propensitiesof humansto accept
fallacious argumentsand draw inappropriateconclu-
sions" (p. 30).
The application of critical thought to pedagogy
in our schools was given a major impetus in the mid-
dle of this century. According to Cuban (1984), "The
work of B.O. Smith in the 1950s and subsequently,
THEORYINTO PRACTICE/ Summer 1993
Teachingfor Higher Order Thinking
RobertEnnis, have provideda scholarlyrationaleand
specific ingredientsfor designing school programsto
develop critical thought"(p. 670).
The Philosophy for Children Program, devel-
oped by MatthewLipman,representsone way to in-
troduce critical thinking skills. A basic assumption
underlying the program is that when philosophical
issues are stated in terms that children understand,
ratherthan in the formal jargon of the professional
philosopher,childrenfind them intrinsicallyinterest-
ing (Nickerson, Perkins, & Smith, 1985, p. 281). In
Lipman'sprogram,fifth and sixth gradechildrenread
and discuss a set of novels. Throughthese activities,
studentsare encouragedto develop philosophicalrea-
soning skills including commitmentsto impartiality
and objectivity,relevance,consistency,and the search
for defensible reasons for behavior.
While Lipman's programis designed especially
to be added to the curriculum, other philosophers
incorporatecritical thinkinginto the existing curricu-
lum. For example, Paul, Binker, & Weil's Critical
Thinking Handbook (1990) helps K-3 teachers re-
model their lesson plans in languagearts, social stud-
ies, and science in orderto incorporatecritical think-
ing. (Similar handbooksare available for teachers in
grades 4-6, 6-9, and high school.) "Critical think-
ing," according to Paul et al., "is disciplined, self-
directed thinking which exemplifies the perfections
of thinking appropriateto a particularmode or do-
main of thought"(p. 361). Paul identifies the follow-
ing perfections of thought: clarity, precision, speci-
ficity, accuracy,relevance, consistency, logic, depth,
completeness,significance,fairness,and adequacy(p.
361).
Whereas the field of philosophy has grown
throughdiscourseand argumentation,the field of psy-
chology has evolved from a traditionof experimen-
tation and research.While philosophersare basically
interestedin the use of logical reasoningand perfec-
tions of thinking to decide what to believe and do,
psychologists are more concerned with the thinking
process and how this process can help people make
sense out of their experience by constructingmean-
ing and imposing structure.Psychologists emphasize
problem solving rather than reflective thinking and
logic.
How are the findings of psychologists translat-
ed into school programs? One illustrationis the work
of the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
132
This content downloaded from 101.203.168.101 on Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:54:26 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
(NCTM) Commission on Standardsfor School Math-
ematics (1989). Their reportstates: "Problemsolving
must be the focus of school mathematics"(p.8). They
stipulate:
A genuine problemis a situationin which, for the
individualor groupconcerned,one or moreappropri-
ate solutionshave yet to be developed.The situation
shouldbe complexenoughto offer challengebut not
so complexas to be insoluble.(p. 10)
Elsewhere in the NCTM Commission report, "genu-
ine problems"are referredto as "non-routine."These
problems differ from routine problems or exercises
found in mathematicstextbooks, where the problem
solver knows an algorithm that, when applied, will
certainlylead to a solution (Kantowski,1977, p. 163).
The NCTM Commissionadds an additionalgoal
associated with higher order thinking: "Learningto
reason mathematically-Making conjectures,gather-
ing evidence, and building an argumentto support
such notions are fundamentalto doing mathematics"
(p. 6). The commission urges teachersto rewarddem-
onstrations of good reasoning even more than stu-
dents' ability to find correct answers (p. 6).
The problemsolving strategiesderivedfrompsy-
chology and the disciplined thinking representedby
philosophicalthoughtboth contributeto achieving the
goal of learning to reason. However, while each
of these skills is necessary, neither is sufficient
for a comprehensive understandingof higher order
thinking.
Lower and Higher Order Thinking Skills
Is there a difference between lower order and
higher order thinking skills? There is general agree-
ment that lower orderand higher orderthinkingskills
can be distinguished.However, differencesin a learn-
er's history may mean that a situation that requires
higher order thinking by one person may need only
lower orderthinkingby anotherperson. Furthermore,
in the classroom, the teaching of basic and higher
orderthinking skills are likely to be interwoven.
Higherorderand lower orderthinkinghave been
describedin differentways. Maier (1933, 1937) used
the terms reasoning or productive behavior in con-
trast with learned behavior or reproductivethinking.
He demonstratedexperimentallythatthe two are qual-
itatively differenttypes of behaviorpatterns.Learned
behavior,he found, came from contiguousexperiences
with previousrepetitionsof the relationshipsinvolved

in the learned behavior pattern.Learning the multi-
plication tables through repeated practice would be
an illustrationof learned behavior. However, behav-
ior integrationsthat are made up of two or more iso-
latedexperiencesarequalitativelydifferent:They arise
withoutpreviousrepetitionsandconsequentlyare new.
This constitutes "reasoning."
For example, assume a child knows the formula
for the area of a rectangle but does not know how to
compute the area of a parallelogram.If the child can
see how to "convert"a parallelogramto a rectangle
of the same area and thus "discover"the formulafor
the area of a parallelogram,then he or she will have
been involved in what Maier calls reasoning. "In or-
der for the termreasoningto have any value, it should
designate a process which is not only qualitatively
different from learning, but a process of a higher or-
der" (1937, p. 365).
Reasoning, as defined by Maier, is used to solve
problems. For Maier (1933), a problem arises when
behavior is blocked because a desired end is not at
once attainable.According to Maier, the solution of
such problems is finding a patternconsisting of parts
of past experiencethathave become integrated.Some-
times finding a solution patternmay requirea sponta-
neous combination of isolated experiences that may
never have been previously associated.In such a case,
Maier would say, the problemis solved by reasoning
or productive thinking. When the solution patternis
made up of past experiences that have been associat-
ed, such as recalling an algorithm,then, accordingto
Maier, the problem is solved by reproductivethink-
ing (p. 144). Maier's definitions of reproductiveand
productive thinking provide a useful distinction be-
tween lower order and higher order thinking.
Bartlett (1958), who also distinguishes lower
from higher orderthinking,gave furtherdefinition to
higher order thinking. He extends the idea of inte-
gratingpast experience by using the term gap filling.
Thinking,he believes, involves one of three gap-fill-
ing processes: interpolation(the filling in of informa-
tion that is missing from a logical sequence), extrap-
olation (extending an incomplete argumentor state-
ment), and reinterpretation(rearrangementof infor-
mation to effect a new interpretation).Bartlett de-
fines thinkingas "the extension of evidence in accord
with that evidence so as to fill up gaps in the evi-
dence: and this is done by moving througha succes-
sion of interconnectedsteps" (p. 75).
This content downloaded from 101.203.168.101 on Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:54:26 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Lewis and Smith
Defining Higher Order Thinking
According to the Commission on Science Edu-
cation of the AmericanAssociation for the Advance-
ment of Science, problem solving activity consists of
basic and integrated processes. The basic processes
include observing, measuring, inferring, predicting,
classifying, and collecting and recording data. The
integratedprocesses include interpretingdata, control-
ling variables,defining operationally,formulatinghy-
potheses, and experimenting.These processes form a
hierarchyso thateffectiveuse of the integratedprocess-
es requiresutilizationof the basic processes.The inte-
gratedprocesses, with the exception of experiment-
ing, have been defined as problem solving skills by
Gagne (Shaw, 1983). The basic processes provide the
data or the experiences that the problem solver needs
to manipulateand integratein order to solve a prob-
lem. The hierarchyrepresentedby the basic process-
es and the integratedprocesses used by the Commis-
sion on Science Education suggests a difference be-
tween lower order and higher orderthinking skills.
Although Resnick (1987) believes higher order
thinkingskills can be recognized(pp. 2, 3), she shows
how basic and higher orderskills may be interwoven
in the teaching process. Resnick's review of the re-
searchdemonstratesthathigherorderthinkingskills-
"elaboratingthe given material, making inferences
beyond what is explicitly presented,buildingadequate
representations,analyzing and constructingrelation-
ships"-are involved in even the most apparentlyele-
mentary mental activities (p. 45). For example, in
orderfor childrento understandwhat they read, they
need to make inferencesand use informationthatgoes
beyond what is writtenin the text. Thus the teaching
of readinginvolves an interweavingof basic and high-
er orderthinking skills.
Newman(1990) distinguishesbetweenlower and
higher order thinking. His definitions were derived
from observationsin classrooms and interviews with
teachers and departmentchairs in five high schools
selected because of their departmentalefforts to em-
phasize higher order thinking in social studies class-
es. From this experience he concludes that lower or-
der thinkingdemandsonly routine or mechanicalap-
plication of previously acquiredinformationsuch as
listing informationpreviously memorizedand insert-
ing numbersinto previously learnedformulas.In con-
trast, higher order thinking, according to Newman,
"challenges the student to interpret,analyze, or ma-
nipulate information" (p.44). Note the similarity
133
THEORYINTO PRACTICE/ Summer 1993
Teachingfor Higher Order Thinking
between Newman's definition of lower order think-
ing and Maier's definition of reproductivethinking;
note also the similaritybetween Newman's definition
of higher order thinking and Maier's definition of
productivethinking.
Newman makes the importantpoint that since
individuals differ in the kinds of problems they find
challenging, higher orderthinking is relative-a task
requiringhigherorderthinkingby one individualmay
require only lower order thinking by someone else.
Accordingly, "to determine the extent to which an
individual is involved in higher order thinking, one
would presumablyneed to know something aboutthe
person's intellectual history"(p. 45).
The relative nature of higher order thinking is
recognized in the NCTM Commission's (1989) re-
port when they stipulatethat a "genuineproblemis a
situation in which for the individual or group con-
cerned, one or more appropriatesolutions have yet to
be developed" (p. 10). Thus, to returnto an earlier
illustration, a child who knows the formula for the
area of a rectanglebut does not know the formulafor
the area of a parallelogramwould be confrontedwith
a genuine problemif asked to find the areaof a paral-
lelogram, while the child who knows the formulafor
the area of a parallelogramwould be confronted by
an exercise but not a problem when asked the same
question.
In sum, there is a difference between lower and
higher order thinking. While the two may be taught
together in the classroom, for a given individual the
need to use higher order thinking will depend upon
the nature of the task and the person's intellectual
history.
Critical Thinking and Problem Solving
Inconsistentuse of the term critical thinkinghas
contributedto the confusion surroundingthe defini-
tion of higher order thinking. Critical thinking has
been assigned at least three distinct meanings: (a)
critical thinkingas problemsolving, (b) criticalthink-
ing as evaluation or judgment, and (c) critical think-
ing as a combinationof evaluationand problemsolv-
ing.
In the past, critical thinking was used by some
writersas synonymouswith problemsolving. For ex-
ample, Kemp (1963) used a definitionof criticalthink-
ing that made reference to five abilities associated
with problem solving (p. 321). These same problem
134
This content downloaded from 101.203.168.101 on Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:54:26 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
solving abilities were used by a committee that de-
signed the evaluation of critical thinking as a part of
the AmericanCouncil on Educationcooperativestudy
of evaluation in general education (Allen & Rott,
1969).
Morerecently,criticalthinkingandproblemsolv-
ing have been differentiated.Beyer (1985), in an arti-
cle entitled "CriticalThinking: What is It?" claims
that "specialists today appear to agree that critical
thinkingis the assessing of the authenticity,accuracy
and/or worth of knowledge claims and arguments"
(p. 271). Beyer concludes his articleby stating:"Crit-
ical thinkingis not problemsolving. It is not a cover-
all term for all thinking skills" (p. 276).
Probably the most common usage, particularly
amongphilosophers,has been to equatecriticalthink-
ing with evaluationandjudgment.For example, B.O.
Smith emphasizedthe judgmentaldimensions of crit-
ical thinking, that is, what a statement means and
whetherto accept or reject it. RobertEnnis elaborat-
ed on Smith's definition by classifying critical think-
ing into the skill clusters of "clarifying issues and
terms, identifying componentsof arguments,judging
the credibility of evidence, using inductive and de-
ductive reasoning, handling argumentfallacies, and
making value judgments" (Quellmalz, 1987, p. 88).
Note that all of these skill clusters are evaluative in
nature.
Defining critical thinking as both evaluation of
statementsand problem solving is becoming increas-
ingly common. Ennis, a majorcontributorto the field
of critical thinkingas evaluation,broadenedhis defi-
nition of critical thinking in the mid-1980s. In the
1981 yearbook of the National Society for the Study
of Education,Ennis presents an outline of a concep-
tion of rationalthinkingthat "combinescreativethink-
ing, critical thinking and problem solving-all skills
that are thoroughly interdependentin practice"(En-
nis, 1981, pp. 145-146). Note that in this definition
Ennis separatescritical thinkingand problemsolving
while pointing out their interdependencein practice.
In 1987, however, Ennis appearsto include problem
solving in his definitionof criticalthinking.He writes:
"Critical thinking is reasonable, reflective thinking
that is focused on deciding what to believe or do"
(Ennis, 1987, p. 10).
Ennis goes on to point out that his definition
does not exclude creative thinking.He states that for-
mulatinghypotheses, consideringalternativeways of

viewing a problem,posing questions,consideringpos-
sible solutions, and making plans for investigating
something are creative acts that would be included in
his definition. Although Ennis does not use the term
problem solving in his definition of critical thinking,
he refers to the usual steps in problem solving as
creative acts which are a part of his definition.
Ennis explains that he abandonedhis narrower
definition of critical thinking "because, although it
providesmore elegance in theorizing,it does not seem
to be in accord with currentusage" (Ennis, 1987, p.
11). The importance of usage is evident in the fact
thatby 1987 three states (California,Connecticut,and
New Jersey) had incorporatedcritical thinking com-
ponents in their state competency testing programs.
Those responsible for such an inclusion were proba-
bly thinking of critical thinking in a broader sense
than evaluation of statements.
While critical thinking is being equated with
problem solving through "common usage," Facione
(1984) developed a theoretical conception of critical
thinking that incorporates evaluation and problem
solving. Starting with a classical definition of argu-
ment as a set of statements,one of which (the conclu-
sion) is presentedas implied or justified by the others
(the premises), Facione concludes that it is possible
to evaluate critical thinking by evaluating the ade-
quacy of the arguments that express that thinking.
From this conclusion, Facione proposes an operation-
al understandingof critical thinking: "Criticalthink-
ing is the development and evaluation of arguments"
(p. 259).
Whatis new is thatFacionedefines criticalthink-
ing as an active process involving constructingargu-
ments, not just evaluating them. Facione states that
constructing arguments includes the usual steps of
problemsolving: determiningbackgroundknowledge,
generatinginitially plausible hypotheses, developing
procedures to test these hypotheses, articulatingan
argumentfrom the results of these testing procedures
and evaluatingthe argumentsand, where appropriate,
revising the initial hypotheses. According to Facione,
"Learningargumentconstructionmeans learning the
methodologies that generations of researchers have
refined for the specific needs of each discipline"
(p. 259).
Whereas Ennis and Facione include problem
solving in their use of the term critical thinking, oth-
ers do not. For example, B.O. Smith, Ennis's col-
This content downloaded from 101.203.168.101 on Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:54:26 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Lewis and Smith
Defining Higher Order Thinking
league in developing the field of critical thinking,
continued to prefer the term higher order thinking,
with criticalthinkingand problemsolving being com-
ponents of separatedomains. From an analysis of re-
searchstudies, Smith and othersidentified a series of
domains of teaching embodiedin what they designat-
ed as higher order thinking (see Underbakke,Borg,
& Peterson, this issue). One domain involves think-
ing associated with the analysis of arguments.Smith
(1991) states, "When this thinking is done in a rea-
sonable reflective manner it may be called critical
thinking"(p. 3). A separatedomaininvolves thinking
related to problem solving.
Definition
The foregoing discussion may help the reader
see why Cuban (1984) referred to the defining of
thinking skills, reasoning, critical thought, and prob-
lem solving as a conceptual swamp. Given the con-
ceptual problems in the field, it is difficult to merge
the philosophicalbase and the psychological base. As
a result, the sciences and mathematics are for the
most part utilizing a scientific problem solving ap-
proachand the humanitiesare primarilyusing critical
thinking in the evaluative sense. But all disciplines
need both types of thinking skills.
For example, increasinglyphysicians, who have
received a rigorous training in the scientific method
of problem solving, find themselves confrontedwith
ethical problems that requireskill in critical thinking
for their resolution. For anotherexample, teachers of
social studies need to help studentsdevelop the abili-
ty to critically evaluate the accounts of historians.
They also need to help studentsdevelop the ability to
generalize and form hypotheses based on relevant
data-a problem solving skill. Thus there is the need
to develop a conceptualizationthat will encompass
both problemsolving and criticalthinkingin the eval-
uative sense.
While, as notedearlier,"criticalthinking"is com-
ing into common usage, the use of the term to en-
compass the thinking skills of critical thought and
problem solving would not be acceptable to at least
some psychologists. Russell (1965) states, "Fromthe
psychological point of view, critical thinking is the
most dubiousof the six labels by which I am attempt-
ing to summarizeresearchin thinking"(pp. 374-375).
More recently, Benderson(1990) notes thatboth
philosophers and psychologists have come to view
135
THEORYINTO PRACTICE/ Summer 1993
Teachingfor Higher Order Thinking
the teaching of thinkingas their own special skill, but
their perspectives and their language are intrinsically
different. "Philosophers stress the need for critical
thinking,while psychologists preferthe term thinking
skills" (p. 2). Benderson goes on to quote the psy-
chologist Irving E. Sigel: "I don't like the term 'crit-
ical thinking' because it gets confused with literature
and critiquing"(p. 3).
Even if psychologists were willing to have their
work incorporatedunder the rubric of critical think-
ing, would philosophers welcome psychologists and
scientists into what has historically been their do-
main? One indicationmight be a demographicanaly-
sis of presentersat the Tenth Annual Conference on
Critical Thinking and Educational Reform held in
1990 under the auspices of the Center for Critical
Thinking and Moral Critique. This highly regarded
annualconference offered over 300 sessions and was
attended by more than 1,200 participants.The posi-
tion titles of the presenters indicated that 37 were
teachers of philosophy, 33 were teachers of English,
and 26 were teachers in such fields as art, history,
music, political science, sociology, and social scienc-
es. There were eight psychologists, two science teach-
ers, and one mathematicsteacher who made presen-
tations. Judging from the titles of the sessions, very
few, if any, were devoted to reporting on research
studies. In this major conference, the narrowdefini-
tion of critical thinking as evaluation and judgment
was exemplified, not the broaderdefinition advocat-
ed by Ennis and Facione. This would suggest that
"criticalthinking"remainsthe domainof philosophers.
Therefore, a broaderterm than critical thinking
is needed to include problem solving, critical think-
ing, creative thinking,and decision making. The term
higher order thinking is proposed here as such an
encompassingterm. A clear and comprehensivedefi-
nition of higher order thinking has the potential to
help educatorstranscendthe split between the scienc-
es' "problem solving" and the humanities' "critical
thinking."To this end, the following definition is of-
fered: Higher order thinking occurs when a person
takes new informationand informationstored in mem-
ory and interrelates and/or rearranges and extends
this informationto achieve a purpose or find possible
answers in perplexing situations. A variety of pur-
poses can be achieved throughhigher order thinking
as defined above. These would include:deciding what
to believe; deciding what to do; creating a new idea,
136
This content downloaded from 101.203.168.101 on Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:54:26 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
a new object, or an artisticexpression;making a pre-
diction; and solving a nonroutineproblem.
This definition utilizes insights from psycholo-
gy going back to Maier'swork and includingBartlett's
concept of "gapfilling" throughinterpolation,extrap-
olation, and reinterpretationof information.Critical
thinking in the evaluative sense is included in this
definition. Suppose, for example, a studentis given a
statement that presents an argument. In deciding
whether or not to believe the argument,the student
would need to examine the information given-the
claims, the grounds (premises or evidence)-and,
based on her or his own experience or information,
makejudgmentsregardingsuch questions as: the reli-
ability of the evidence presented,the possible use of
fallacies in the language used, and the appropriate-
ness of the logic applied.
Implications for the Classroom Teacher
The definition of higher order thinking used in
this article has several implications for classroom
teachers:
1. Learningto be effective in higher orderthink-
ing is importantfor everyone; it is not a frill, nor is it
a skill that only "gifted children"can or need to de-
velop. Any time an individual is faced with a per-
plexing situation or a situation where it is necessary
to decide what to believe or do, higher orderthinking
is necessary.
2. Whether or not an activity requires higher
order thinking will depend upon the intellectual his-
tory of the learner. If it is possible for a learner to
achievehis or herpurposethroughthe recallof informa-
tion and withouta need to interrelateor rearrangethis
information,then higherorderthinkingdoes not occur.
3. In order to evaluate students' higher order
thinking skills, it is necessary to present them with a
situationor a questionthatcannotbe answeredthrough
simple recall of information.
4. The teaching of basic and higher order skills
may closely interwoven in the classroom.
be
5. Helping children with learning difficulties to
develop skills in higher order thinking may be espe-
cially important.Researchsuggests that failureto cul-
tivate aspects of higher order thinking skills may be
the source of major learning difficulties even in ele-
mentaryschool (Resnick, 1987, p. 8).
It is not safe and hence not desirable to assume
that teachersknow, or have been taught,how to teach

higher order thinking skills. Research is needed on
how to teach such skills and how to incorporatethe
findings from that researchinto inservice and preser-
vice preparationprograms.A clearly delineateddefi-
nition of higher order thinking is needed in order to
develop appropriateresearch strategies. It is hoped
this article will provide an impetus for dialogue lead-
ing to this greaterclarification.
References
Allen, R.R., & Rott, R.K. (1969). Thenatureof critical
thinking.(ERICDocumentReproduction ServiceNo.
Ed. 036 861)
Baron, J.B., & Sternberg,R. (Eds.). (1987). Teaching
thinkingskills: Theoryand practice. New York:
W.H. Freeman& Co.
Bartlett,F.C. (1958). Thinking:An experimentaland so-
cial study.London:Allen & Unwin.
Benderson,A. (1990). Criticalthinking:Criticalissues.
Focus, 24, 1-20.
Beyer,B.K. (1985). Criticalthinking:Whatis it? Social
Education,49, 270-276.
Cuban,L. (1984). Policy and researchdilemmasin the
teachingof reasoning:Unplanneddesigns. Review
of EducationalResearch,54, 655-681.
Ennis,R. (1981). Rationalthinkingandeducationalprac-
tice. In J.F. Soltis (Ed.), Philosophyand education:
Eighteenthyearbookof the NationalSocietyfor the
Studyof Education(pp. 143-183).Chicago,IL:The
Universityof ChicagoPress.
Ennis,R. (1985, October).A logical basis for measuring
criticalthinkingskills. EducationalLeadership,43,
44-48.
Ennis,R. (1987). A taxonomyof criticalthinkingdispo-
sitions and abilities.In J.B. Baron& R. Sternberg
(Eds.), Teachingthinkingskills: Theoryand prac-
tice (pp. 9-26). New York:W.H. Freeman& Co.
Facione,P.A. (1984). Towarda theoryof criticalthink-
ing. LiberalEducation,70, 253-261.
TiP
This content downloaded from 101.203.168.101 on Sat, 04 Jul 2015 07:54:26 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Lewis and Smith
Defining Higher Order Thinking
Kantowski,M.G. (1977). Processesinvolved in mathe-
matical problem solving. Journal for Research in
Mathematics Education, 8, 163-180.
Kemp,C.G. (1963). Improvement of criticalthinkingin
relationto open-closedbelief systems.TheJournal
of Experimental Education, 31, 321-323.
Maier, N.R.F. (1933). An aspect of humanreasoning.
British Journal of Psychology, 24, 144-155.
Maier,N.R.F, (1937). Reasoningin rats and humanbe-
ings. The Psychological Review, 44, 365-378.
NationalCouncilof Teachersof Mathematics(NCTM).
Commissionon Standardsfor School Mathematics.
(1989). Curriculum and evaluation standards for
school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
Newman,F.M. (1990). Higherorderthinkingin teach-
ing social studies:A rationalefor the assessmentof
classroom thoughtfulness. Journal of Curriculum
Studies, 22, 41-56.
Nickerson,D.S., Perkins,D.N., & Smith, E.E. (1985).
The teaching of thinking. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Paul, R., Binker, A.J.A., & Weil, D. (1990). Critical
thinking handbook: K - 3. Rohnert Park, CA: Foun-
dationfor CriticalThinking.
Quellmalz,E.S. (1987). Developingreasoningskills. In
J.B. Baron& R. Sternberg(Eds.), Teachingthink-
ing skills: Theory and practice (pp. 86-105). New
York:W.H. Freeman& Co.
Resnick, L. (1987). Education and learning to think.
Washington,DC: NationalAcademyPress.
Russell,D.H. (1965). Researchon the processesof think-
ing with some applicationsto reading.Elementary
English, 42, 370-378.
Shaw, T.J. (1983). The effect of a process-orientedsci-
ence curriculumuponproblem-solvingability.Sci-
ence Education, 67, 615-623.
Smith,B.O., Peterson,D., Borg,J.M.,Bullerman,M., &
Underbakke, M. (1991). Teaching for higher order
thinking(THOT),domain3: Assessingarguments.Tam-
pa, FL:TeacherEvaluation
andAssessmentCenter.
Snow, C.P. (1964). The two cultures: And a second look
(2nd ed.). London:CambridgeUniversityPress.
137