Analysis is typically the first of the higher functions listed in taxonomies of higher order thinking. Academics consider these upper categories extremely worthwhile, but they are hard to teach and we are apt to ignore them. Today higher education is being criticized for “dumbing down” curriculum or lowering standards. To rectify this, many policies at the state or national level are requiring higher education institutions to change. In K‐12 education, Race to the Top and Common Core requirements are placing new demands on K‐12 teacher preparation, which include evaluation of the analysis skills of pre‐service teachers. But professors do not always view their disciplines as the proper place for teaching analytical skills. Others become frustrated when trying to teach analysis. But if we do not teach these skills, our teacher candidates will be poorly prepared for successful teaching, a problem which will cascade throughout our society, rendering our citizens less educated. In this paper, we describe our efforts to teach analysis in two courses from widely differing subject areas, literacy and mathematics education. We are now requiring pre‐service teachers to analyze simulated or actual samples of student work. We have developed a sequenced process of analysis education that we designate with the acronym CODE. It includes Compilation of information, Organization of data, Determination of patterns, and Explanation of understanding. We believe this technique can be generalized to many courses in where students’ ability to analyze poses a problem.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ETSU/oai:dc.etsu.edu:etsu-works-1229 |
| Date | 22 May 2013 |
| Creators | Nivens, Ryan Andrew, Gann, Rosalind Raymond |
| Publisher | Digital Commons @ East Tennessee State University |
| Source Sets | East Tennessee State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | ETSU Faculty Works |
Page generated in 0.0023 seconds