What is critical thinking?

Guest contributor Stephanie Simoes is the founder of Critikid.com, a website dedicated to teaching critical thinking to kids and teens through interactive courses, worksheets, and lesson plans.

“Critical thinking” is a trendy term these days, especially in the education world. Alternative schools in Austin commonly advertise that they encourage kids to think critically. Conversations about critical thinking are often accompanied by some version of the Margaret Mead quote, “Children must be taught how to think, not what to think.” But such discussions often neglect a crucial question: “What does it mean to teach children how to think?” Critical thinking is an abstract term. Are we all on the same page when talking about it?

As the founder of a critical thinking site for kids, this question is important to my work. We all get what “thinking” is, so the real question is—what makes it “critical”? I like to use a simple definition: critical thinking is careful thinking. It requires slowing down and questioning our assumptions.

Fast and Slow Thinking

Our brains are hardwired to respond to stimuli quickly, a crucial advantage in emergencies. When faced with a potential threat, immediate reaction is essential—there’s no time for deliberation. While this quick thinking might make us mistakenly perceive a harmless situation as dangerous, it’s a safer bet to err on the side of caution in high-stakes moments. It’s a matter of survival: better to assume danger where there is none than to overlook a real threat.

While fast thinking[1] is a valuable skill, it is prone to errors.

Here’s an example. Try to answer this question in less than 5 seconds:

If 1 widget machine can produce a total of 1 widget in 1 minute, how many minutes would it take 100 widget machines to produce 100 widgets?

After you’ve given your quick, intuitive answer, take as much time as you need to think about it.

Many people’s initial, intuitive response is 100 minutes. However, with more careful thought, we see that the correct answer is 1 minute. (The production rate per machine is 1 widget per minute. The rate doesn’t change with the number of machines.)

The key takeaway of this puzzle is that careful, deliberate thinking is often more accurate than quick thinking.

Applying slow, careful thinking to every daily decision would be impractical. Imagine how long you would spend at the grocery store if you conducted a deep analysis of every single choice! In many cases, our intuitive, fast thinking serves us well. However, problems can arise when we cling to the conclusions drawn by our fast thinking—especially in situations where accuracy matters.

In the widget machine problem, it’s relatively straightforward to recognize and correct our intuitive response with a bit of careful thought. However, letting go of our intuitive conclusions is not always this easy.

Humility and Critical Thinking

We might cling to our intuitive answers, even when faced with clear evidence or reasoning that challenges them, for several reasons.

First, it can be hard to change our minds when the intuitive answer feels very obvious or the correct answer is very counterintuitive. A famous example is the Monty Hall Problem. The correct answer to this puzzle is so counterintuitive that when Marilyn Vos Savant published the solution in Parade Magazine in 1990, the magazine received around 10,000 letters (many from highly educated people) saying she was incorrect!

It can also be challenging to let go of wrong answers when we have invested in them, such as by spending time and energy defending them. Sometimes, it’s simply a matter of not wanting to admit we were wrong.

Critical thinking requires more than just slow, deliberate thought. It also demands an open mind, humility, and an awareness of our minds’ flaws and limitations.

Building Blocks of Critical Thinking

Paired with slow, deliberate thought and humility, the following tools help us to be better critical thinkers so we can communicate more clearly—even when communicating with ourselves:

1. An understanding of cognitive biases: These are systematic errors in our thinking that can lead us astray. There are many online resources that explore these biases in detail.

2. An understanding of logical fallacies: These are flawed arguments. Logical fallacies can be used deliberately to “win” a debate, but they’re often made accidentally. Recognizing logical fallacies helps us to keep conversations on track. You can learn about some common logical fallacies in my Logical Fallacy Handbook or teach your kids about them with my online course, Fallacy Detectors.

3. Science literacy: We were taught many facts in science class, but many of us never really learned what science is and how it works. This is the foundation of science literacy. For an introduction to this, I recommend biology professor Melanie Trecek-King’s outstanding article “Science: what it is, how it works, and why it matters.” Another important part of science literacy is knowing How to Spot Pseudoscience.

4. Data literacy: Data literacy is the ability to properly interpret data to draw meaningful conclusions from it (and to know when drawing certain conclusions is premature). It means understanding how data is collected, identifying potential biases in data sets, and understanding statistics. Data literacy helps us make sense of the vast amount of information we encounter daily. You can introduce your teens to some common errors in data collection and analysis in Critikid’s course A Statistical Odyssey—a course that adults have enjoyed and learned from, too!

Preparing Kids for the Misinformation Age

A quick scroll through social media reveals a minefield of bad arguments and misinformation. You have probably come across logical fallacies like these:

“You either support A or B.” (False dilemma)
“Buy our product—it’s all natural!” (Appeal to nature)

The lack of science literacy among influential voices is also concerning. I can’t count how many times I have seen or heard the phrase,

“Evolution is just a theory.”

This phrase confounds the scientific and colloquial definitions of theory. If unintentional, it demonstrates a lack of science literacy; if intentional, this is a logical fallacy known as “equivocation,” in which a word is used in an ambiguous way to confuse or mislead the listener.

The need for data literacy is also apparent. You may have heard arguments like:

“Illness X has increased since Y was introduced, so Y must be the cause.” (Mistaking correlation for causation)
“There are fewer cases of food poisoning among people who drink raw milk than those who drink pasteurized milk.” (Base rate neglect)

We have an incredible amount of data at our fingertips, but without data literacy, we don’t have the proper tools to make sense of it all.

Critical thinking shouldn’t be taught as an afterthought; it needs dedicated, explicit instruction. Children face a battlefield of misinformation and faulty logic every time they go online. Critical thinking is their armor. Let’s help them forge it.

Stephanie Simoes | Critikid.com

[1] Nobel-prize-winning psychologist Daniel Kahneman calls fast thinking “system 1 thinking” in his book Thinking, Fast and Slow. I highly recommend this book to anyone who finds the content of this blog post interesting.

Finding balance in a self-paced process

Samantha Jansky and Janita Lavani are co-founders of Ascent: An Acton Academy in North-Central Austin. With many years of experience as Socratic guides and Acton curriculum developers, they have a lot to say about the balancing act required of both learners and adults in a flourishing self-paced learning environment. We’re pleased they agreed to share some of their wisdom with us on the Alt Ed Austin blog.

The ingredients of a healthy self-paced learning process can prove empowering and set learners up for success for life. However, there’s an element of balance required to pull them all together. Paradoxically, autonomy requires accountability, and flexibility requires structure. While it might seem as though these are in conflict, they work in tandem to give much-needed balance to an individual’s learning process.

Autonomy, as you could have guessed, is at the core of self-paced learning. At Ascent, the learners determine for themselves how and when to approach their work. They do so when they are motivated through pursuing their curiosities, when they are equipped to engage freely in their environment, and when they practice toward mastery. Learners are not bound by limits placed on them because of their age. They can go as far and beyond what is expected of them in a particular subject. They can also choose when to work on the material; perhaps they are someone who likes to focus on a certain subject for weeks at a time, or perhaps they like a little balance each day. Ultimately, it is up to them to decide how to approach their work.

The flexibility of self-paced learning plays into genuine autonomy. Learners practice adjusting timelines, revisiting concepts, and incorporating feedback, allowing them to navigate their learning journey with resilience and a growth mindset. it offers the opportunity to practice adaptability in the face of unforeseen challenges and push through when faced with resistance.

This flexibility, however, doesn’t imply a lack of structure or discipline; rather, it encourages individuals to take ownership of their learning journey and create the structure themselves through tools introduced to them (some examples include SMART Goals, the Urgent/Important Matrix, squad frameworks, and the badge system to stay on track). Self-paced learning means you work on each subject at your pace—slowing down when you need to grasp something, and accelerating once you’ve mastered a topic. Self-paced learning empowers individuals to keep moving forward.

One of the most important tools offered to learners in a self-paced environment is goal-setting: establishing realistic objectives and timelines to maintain a sense of purpose and direction. Goal-setting ensures that the learners stay focused, motivated, and accountable. In a learner-driven environment, the learners are accountable to their growth. A key difference between this and more traditional learning environments is that a learner’s standing in any subject area is not compared to a predefined standard; rather, their progress is measured against their past achievements and efforts. The practice of setting SMART (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Tough/Time-Bound) Goals is critical in this regard. A true SMART goal is challenging. It pushes your limits to see what you can do, and it is built upon past progress and learning. This is where the rigor of a learner-driven environment comes into play.

The combination of clear goals, accountability, and active engagement creates a tremendous amount of structure in a learner-driven environment—but it’s not a “top down” structure created by someone else. When the learners have autonomy over their learning and their work output, they are the ones creating the structure they need to thrive, leading to a strong sense of responsibility.

Here’s a story that pulls all of this together. It’s one of many examples we have seen over the years of the magic of balancing autonomy with accountability and structure with flexibility.

It was a chilly February morning, and one learner was celebrating. Running around the studio, she was ecstatic. “I got my level 2 Math badge, I got my math badge!” The other learners in the studio were not silent on the matter, either. Loud jubilation and high-fives took place all over the space.

This young hero had finally found her stride in math—a process that included a lot of help but that was hers to own. For a couple of years, she had struggled to find flow in this particular subject. Her squad frequently supported her in goal setting, and her guides engaged her with questions and challenged her to set tough goals and develop a regular practice. She had the tools, such as SMART goals, a watch that reminded her to take quick breaks before getting back to work, a badge system that offered extrinsic motivators in each subject area, and powerful online platforms. She had the support of her parents, who checked in with her frequently but were also aware of when they needed to give her space; they also left her plenty of space to fail (and to own that, too).

This recipe was one for success, but she needed time to find her stride—to accomplish big wins in math on her timeline, at her pace. This allowed her gradually to build up confidence. She faced setbacks and learned to lean on her support system when she got an answer wrong—asking for help when she needed it—and eventually built up the mental muscle she needed to resist the urge to give up when she got an answer wrong. After months of setting daily math goals to create a habit, having the discipline to tell friends she was working, using her watch, and rewarding herself with reading after she finished her math goal, she created a structure that worked for her and found flexibility in her practice.

She had full autonomy (no one was going to make her do her work) but was also accountable to her goals and to the people she pulled in for support. She felt pressure, but it was rooted in her self-paced striving toward mastery. Most importantly, she owned the whole process, all the ups and downs, and so in the end, she realized her potential all on her own.

Samantha Jansky and Janita Lavani | Ascent: An Acton Academy

The case for expectation-free, exploratory music learning

Grace Thompson is a voice and piano teacher based in Austin. She is a classically trained soprano who graduated from Kennesaw State University in 2021 with a bachelor’s degree in music–ethnomusicology. A longtime advocate for the neurodiverse community, Grace joins us on the blog to discuss her nontraditional methods of teaching music to kids through the Groove Garden program at Eastside Music School.

Musicking: (v.) any activity that includes playing, performing, listening, writing,
recording, or sharing music.

Childhood music lessons. We’ve all been there before, or maybe you haven’t. A parent has signed you up for a music lesson—piano, guitar, violin, or maybe even singing—and you’re getting ready to demonstrate to your teacher what you were meant to have practiced in the time since your last lesson.

Only you haven’t practiced or didn’t get as much practice time as you wanted. Teachers always can tell when a student hasn’t practiced, and you know walking in that your teacher will pick up on your lack of practice. Does this make me a bad student? A bad musician? Will my teacher be mad at me? Or disappointed? Will I ever learn to play this instrument?

As you go to play your instrument, these fears and anxieties course through your still-developing brain and begin to distract you and tell you that you’re not good enough. Playing your instrument has now turned from a fun hobby after school to an insurmountable test. The traditional private music lesson environment can, unfortunately, breed these sentiments in students, eventually turning students off from music as a whole.

Now imagine yourself as an atypical learner. Traditional learning environments are already not geared toward you, and now there is compounded stress from not being able to meet the expectations set by your teacher. These expectations have been set from a hegemonic system of learning music that is centuries old. This system of learning does not reflect the modern learner and is, in part, creating more failures than successes.

As a music teacher, I define success as a student being happily engaged in their studies, followed by an improvement in their technical and theoretical abilities. To support this type of musical education, the environment must be conducive to every learner, and we can create these environments by leading exploratory-driven, expectation-free music classrooms.

Musicking is a life-long process that no one will ever truly master. It is the embodiment of “about the journey, not the destination,” so we should present to students this idea of a musical journey. Twists, turns, and unforeseen circumstances may occur on our journey through a musical life, and allowing students to explore for themselves will well-equip them to navigate these changes. Perhaps a violin student watches a harpist and becomes enamored with this new instrument, or a classical piano student wants to begin playing jazz repertoire. These changes in instrument or repertoire are not typically supported in a traditional music education environment due to the expectations to stay with and master one particular instrument or genre.

Taking out the expectations of a traditional music classroom environment gives students fewer restrictions to explore different areas of music they might not have been exposed to before, and more confidence to try without the fear of failure or rejection. Expectation-free learning passes the baton into the hand of the students to create and express themselves without any limitations. Autonomy is given back to the child, therefore creating a more enthusiastic student. Exploration-led classrooms also promote social growth through a free exchange of ideas between peers, unclouded by any pre-existing musical “rules.”

Music education is vital to all people, but especially children, as it has been linked with a plethora of brain-boosting qualities such as supporting language and reasoning skills, emotional intelligence, coordination and fine motor skills, memorization and imagination, and intellectual curiosity, among many others (see nafme.org). Learners who find themselves on the Autism spectrum or any other spectrum of learning differences can especially reap the benefits from any of these characteristics.

Music plays a part in many other fields of academia, and finding an interest in music can help support other areas of interest for students as well, such as math, science, visual arts, and history. Music also supports a social outlet for students who lack interaction with peers, whether because of developmental differences or more solitary forms of education such as homeschooling or virtual learning.

Eastside Music School’s Groove Garden is an inclusive music class for children of all ages, backgrounds, and learning styles. It’s designed for kids to learn and make music together in a way not normally offered in traditional music classes or private lessons. Parents are also welcome to join their students as parents play a fundamental role in the student/teacher relationship. We encourage exploration-based learning as well as expectation-free instruction. In this class, we aim to give students the basics of music education, such as rhythm, melody, harmony, and instrument types, while also allowing for independent and group playing as well as encouraging student leadership and autonomy. While children in traditional music education are often given very little voice, if any, in what they choose to study, at the Groove Garden, we allow students to have a say in what kinds of music to study and activities they enjoy.

The next Groove Garden class will be held on Thursday April 27, from 3pm to 4pm at Eastside Music School.

Grace Thompson | Groove Garden

Why I instruct my students in the art of lock picking

Guest contributor Ken Hawthorn is the founder of Austin School for the Driven. Students at Driven smash educational silos and question the premise of the question in their learning journey. Hawthorn is the author of Super Arduino. Outside of Driven, he consults with both Austin Community College and the University of Texas at Austin on makerspace education and design.

The Real Deal

Over the last eight years, I have offered my students instruction in lock picking. I am not talking about just sticking a paperclip in a hallway doorknob, but how to systematically pick the same locks you find on 80 percent of residential and business front doors. I offer this instruction starting in 5th grade. For students to get consistent at this skill, they need quite a few hours of practice. Why would I take class time to do this?

A Physical Analogy for Life

The person who does not know how to pick locks lives in a world where every locked door is a hard no. There is no choice to open that door. Having taught perhaps 400+ people to pick locks over the years, I have never had one student, child or adult, report back to me that they changed their behavior in any way after learning to do it. So why am I teaching this skill?

The answer is that there is a huge mental shift in someone who has learned to pick most of the locked doors that surround them every day. It’s a shift from “every locked door is a hard no” to “every locked door is a polite request to please keep out”—the choice is now up to the individual. This is really significant in the context of personal agency—the level of internal belief that you can change the world around you. When my students have learned lock picking and then have an idea in high school or college and someone says, “That’s a stupid idea,” they are more likely to reply with a “Thank you for your perspective; I will make my own judgment.”

We don’t normally raise our children with a lock on the cookie jar through age 18. Pretty early on, students need to know that they can open the cookie jar at any time and must use their executive function skills to do so when given permission and not count on a physical lock to deter them. 

I have found that around 5th grade is the right time to give students this lens through which they can see that the world is theirs to navigate and that they should have the knowledge and tools to go where they want—all the time doing so in the context of social rules and contracts that they choose to follow. From cars to kitchen knives, students going into high school will need to wield tools that require this commitment to using them correctly and within the social context they are navigating.

The Lock as a System

What is the nature of a lock? A lock is a system. Our goal is to turn the keyway in a lock. This requires that the internal pins of a lock line up in just such a way where each pin is held not too low or too high. For most front door locks, this means about 31,000+ possible key patterns to lift each pin into exactly the right position. Without a key, we need to use micro-tactile feedback with the pick and a turning tool to set each pin correctly and keep each pin in position as we are working on the next pin. This is difficult and takes concentration, but with practice, locks go from a black box to a well-understood system that can be opened with the application of skills and the right tools.

How to Learn More

Now that you know why I teach my students how to pick locks, let me leave you with the resources to learn this on your own.

Image Credit: Deviant Ollam / deviating.net

Deviant Ollam has a great set of open-source materials to learn lock picking. This link is a rabbit hole of knowledge. He came out and led a great workshop for students at the Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired.

In Austin you have a couple of free hands-on resources to learn lock picking:

• The Longhorn Locksport Club meets every other Saturday at Batch Brewery.

• Austin School for the Driven puts out a free table at the SFC farmer’s market every other Saturday (weeks Longhorn Locksport is not meeting).

My hope is that groups of students and adults learning to pick locks will start to be described as engaged in locksport vs. lock picking. Whatever you want to call it, I will continue to teach these skills because I have seen the benefits for my students.

Ken Hawthorn | Austin School for the Driven

What I learned at the Education Reimagined Symposium 2019: #whyLCE

I was excited to learn recently that a new learner-centered school, Gantry Academy, is launching soon in Round Rock. Soon after, I had the serendipitous pleasure of meeting its founder and director, Jennifer Phillips, at the Education Reimagined Symposium in Washington, D.C. It was the best education conference I’ve ever attended, and I’m grateful that Jennifer offered to share her takeaways and insights from the symposium in this guest post. —Teri Sperry

The time is now. Kelly Young, president of Education Reimagined, at the organization’s symposium, January 17, 2019.

While many parents feel that the standard modern education system doesn’t work for their child, we might not know that there is another way. We just have this nagging feeling that our children are not widgets to be produced by an educational factory. So, some of us are moving to private schools, where lower ratios and individual attention give us hope for a better outcome. But then we hop from school to school, looking for the right fit that we can’t articulate, only knowing that something about each offering is just not working for our child. What we are developing alone together is the concept that education should start with the learner, rather than the institution.

Education Reimagined hosted a one-day symposium in Washington, D.C., on January 17 focused on sharing the message of Learner-Centered Education (LCE). There were over 200 educators, philanthropists, vendors, and learners present; chances are you missed it, quite possibly just because you haven’t even heard the term LCE, and you aren’t alone.

A true learner-centered education is more than a majority consensus on a thematic unit topic. It allows each learner to strive for mastery at their own pace (competency-based), with personalized, relevant, and contextualized content that they themselves engage in designing (learner agency). It is rooted in meaningful relationships (socially embedded) and it does not stop in the classroom (open-walled).

As it turns out, I was sent to the symposium because the educational goals I have for my own children align directly with the purpose of Education Reimagined. This organization is fully committed to transforming all education into the learner-centered paradigm. I didn’t realize it before, but my family is just a small piece of a much larger movement. I knew intrinsically what I wanted education for my girls to look like. I could describe it to other parents as “learner-driven” or “passion-driven” or even a “hack school” model, and I could cite specific studies supporting this approach, but what I lacked was the common vocabulary and the knowledge of the sheer magnitude of the existing efforts pushing in the same direction.

After a full day of immersion with these passionate, dedicated innovators, I came away inspired and recommitted to building a better educational method for every single child! It may sound fantastical or like an unreachable goal, but here are my top takeaways from the symposium that make this dream possible. 

1. This is not a “fancy liberal fad.”

At the conference, I spoke with leaders from both private programs and public school districts, from northern states like Vermont and from heartland states like Missouri. I was not the only person from Texas there. The idea that each person is unique and learns best in their own unique way has so much research to back it up that LCE is not just trending; it’s only a matter of time before it is the new standard. How can anyone make that claim? It’s already happening in most other major industries, from personalized television programming from Netflix and Hulu, to personalized medications based on your DNA. Personalized education is not just preferable; it’s inevitable.

Jasmine McBride, a student who spoke at the symposium about her experiences in a learner-centered high school.

2. Kids are people NOW.

While this may sound like an obvious statement, how many times have you heard “Children are our future?” Implying that age limits the usefulness of a person is not only harmful but also wasteful. There are now high school students who are published authors, Emmy award winners, and mentees of Broadway superstars, all thanks to their experiences with LCE. Learner agency, the ability for a student to make decisions about their own education, seems to generate one particularly interesting outcome (among the many additional benefits): sense of self. Self-confidence. Self-esteem. Self-efficacy. I heard from the young learners I spoke with directly that even one year in an LCE program can have a major lifelong impact. The more this seed grows in learners now, the more exponentially it will take off as they take on leadership roles in the community.

3. This is the best-kept secret in your neighborhood.

Remember when I mentioned that we are each developing this feeling “alone together”? The latest study shows that up to 60 percent of the public feels that education should be aimed at preparing individual learners for personally fulfilling lives. And yet, those same people think that only 5 percent feel the same way! Start the conversation with those around you. Even if they don’t have the same vocabulary, it’s something we can discuss together rather than in isolated pockets.

What can I do for my child NOW?

First, read about Learner-Centered Education at Education Reimagined to learn more about the national conversation happening now. Familiarize yourself with the vocabulary so we can all be having the same conversation locally as well as nationally. Decide if a fully personal, engaging educational path is right for you or your child. 

Second, act locally! While some public schools near us have shifted to competency-based report cards and portfolio assessments, they are still required to teach to the standardized tests. Work with your PTA to encourage change within your school. Some private schools are run democratically. Take a proposal to your leadership circle to discuss the LCE concept in depth.

Third, drop in to one of the regular workshops hosted by Gantry Academy to help us develop the LCE method that best offers custom, individualized programs to each learner right here in Round Rock, Texas!

[For a more comprehensive review of the symposium’s specific events, read Suzanne Freeman, Ph.D.’s blog post here.]

Jennifer Phillips

Should all children be provided gifted education?

Guest contributor Srinivas Jallepalli is the founder of Sankalpa Academy, a growth mindset school that seeks to offer gifted education to all children. Sankalpa Academy is located a few blocks from the Thinkery in the Mueller area and will be launching in Fall 2018.

Srinivas received a B.Tech. degree from the Indian Institute of Technology, Madras (now Chennai) in 1991 and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees from the University of Texas at Austin in 1993 and 1996 respectively, all in Electrical Engineering. After two summers at AT&T Bell Laboratories, he joined Motorola in 1996 and spent the last two decades researching advanced semiconductor process challenges affecting low power and high performance circuits. He also had the honor of serving on the modeling and simulation sub-committee of the International Electron Devices Meeting in 2006 and 2007 and finally as its chair in 2008. He is currently a Technical Director at NXP Semiconductors and holds four U.S. patents and has contributed to over fifty papers in IEEE conferences and refereed journals.

Srinivas has a keen interest in understanding child development research and the challenges that are preventing us from bringing this research to our schools. This passion has led him to conduct an extensive meta-analysis of published research and to also author a broad-ranging survey of parents and teachers.

“It has been a disastrous half. His work has been far from satisfactory. His prepared stuff has been badly learnt, and several of his test pieces have been torn over; one of such pieces of prepared work scored 2 marks out of a possible 50. His other work has been equally bad, and several times he has been in trouble, because he will not listen, but will insist on doing his work in his own way. I believe he has ideas about becoming a Scientist; on his present showing this is quite ridiculous, if he can't learn simple Biological facts he would have no chance of doing the work of a Specialist, and it would be sheer waste of time, both on his part, and of those who have to teach him.” Mr. Gaddum, an Eton College science teacher, made these comments on the 1949 report card of a 16-year-old John Gurdon. A short 13 years after the summer at Eton, Gurdon showed that the DNA from specialized cells of frogs, like skin and intestinal cells, could be used to generate new tadpoles. The pioneering work of Gurdon has opened new doors as scientists now attempt to create replacement tissues for treating diseases like Parkinson's and diabetes. Sir John Gurdon was the 2012 winner of the Nobel Prize for Medicine.

While it is tempting to dismiss the comments of Sir Gurdon's teacher as the product of a culture of a bygone era, this episode does offer a valuable lesson. We see time and again that profound learning and growth happen only when one has agency and is invested in his/her work and is inspired by the challenge in front of them. This is the underlying premise of Dr. Maria Montessori’s work and the Waldorf movement and of most child-centered schools. Yet, how many of us would go so far as to offer gifted education and higher expectations as the solution to struggling students in failing schools? Henry (Hank) Levin is just such a pioneer.

Hank Levin is an education economist who first came to fame in 1966 when he challenged the findings in the Coleman Report and the statistical analyses on which they were based. The Coleman Report, requested by the U.S. Office of Education, sought to identify the determinants of academic achievement. Levin’s passion for improving the educational outcomes of disadvantaged children led to decades of research in the areas of education reform, equity, and efficiency and eventually to the launch of the Accelerated Schools Project for at-risk children in 1986. The idea was that treating at-risk children as gifted and talented students was the best way to engage them and to significantly accelerate their learning. His program built upon students’ strengths and creativity. By immersing them in relevant and meaningful real-world projects, he built their capacity for insight and thus their agency. Contrast this with the prevalent remedial approaches in 1986. In fact, even today, many schools offer drills, worksheets, and other “chew and pour” approaches to disadvantaged children and thus drive them farther away from the love of learning. An independent evaluation of the Accelerated Schools found that they produced strong academic results on test scores (as weak an indicator as they are!) at a relatively low cost (Bloom 2001). In 1992, the New York Times named Levin one of “nine national leaders in education innovation,” and American Educational Research Association presented him with the Distinguished Contributions to Research in Education Award in 2017.
 

Through a very different path, Professor Joseph Renzulli, educational psychologist and distinguished professor in the Neag School of Education at the University of Connecticut, arrived at very similar conclusions as Levin. While many look at IQ and processing speed to determine giftedness, Renzulli proposed a three-ring model that looked at ability, creativity, and task commitment. Based on his model for giftedness and his understanding of child development, he advocated that schools should provide all students with the opportunities needed to develop higher-order thinking skills. He felt that all children can and should pursue more rigorous content. His Schoolwide Enrichment Model or SEM (Renzulli 1985), which supports child-led exploration through enrichment clusters, has been gaining significant popularity in recent years. Laurel Mountain Elementary school in RRISD is one example of a local public school that has adopted the SEM approach.

As one might expect, similar improvements have been taking place in schools outside the United States as well. Levin’s Accelerated Schools have also been established in Hong Kong, for example. It is noteworthy that in Ghana's capital city of Accra, about 80 percent of children are now enrolled in preschool by age 3. More interestingly, the preschools in Accra are in the process of retooling their programs to enhance their children’s learning and development. They are moving away from rote memorization to a curriculum that values open-ended questions, reasoning, and reflection. Very similar fundamental changes are also taking place in the elementary classrooms across China, only on a much grander scale. For example, Adream Foundation has built over 2,700 “Dream Centers” across China to foster curiosity and creativity in their young children. To promote risk taking, the foundation has explicitly prohibited judgment and criticism at these centers.

The large body of research on human abilities (Gardner 1983; Sternberg 1984; Bloom 1985; Renzulli 1986; Reis 1995; Levin 2013) bolsters the claim that the strategies employed in gifted and talented education are essential for general education as well. Given the decades of research and investment, and a lengthy federal report on improving education for the gifted and talented (National Excellence: A Case for Developing America’s Talent; U. S. Department of Education, 1993), is there consensus on what gifted education entails? Please stay tuned as I explore this further in my next blog post (the second of a three-part series) here.

Srinivas Jallepalli

References

Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1985). Developing talent in young people. New York, NY: Ballantine Books.

Bloom, H.S., Ham, S., Melton, L., & O’Brient, J. (2001). Evaluating the accelerated schools approach: A look at early implementation and impacts on student achievement in eight elementary schools. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Levin, H. (2013) “Acceleration for All,” with Pilar Soler, In J. Hattie & E. Anderman, Eds., International Guide to Student Achievement (New York: Routledge, 2013), 209-211.

Reis, S. M., Gentry, M. L., & Park, S. (1995). Extending the pedagogy of gifted education to all students (Research Monograph 95118). Storrs: University of Connecticut, The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented.

Renzulli, J. S. (1986). The three-ring conception of giftedness: A developmental model for creative productivity. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (pp. 53-92). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Renzulli, J. S. (1993). Schools are places for talent development: Applying “gifted education” know-how to total school improvement. Unpublished manuscript. The National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented: The University of Connecticut, Storrs.

Renzulli, J. S. (1994). Schools for talent development: A comprehensive plan for total school improvement. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

Renzulli, J. S., & Reis, S. M. (1985). The schoolwide enrichment model: A comprehensive plan for educational excellence. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.

Sternberg, R. J. (1984). Toward a triarchic theory of human intelligence. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7, 269-287.

U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement. (1993). National excellence: A case for developing America’s talent. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.