Creating Disequilibrium: Building Confidence in Pre-Service Teachers Using Critically Engaging Constructivist Methods

Introduction

If the expectation is for teachers to “step out of their classrooms to be leaders as a part of their daily activities, then we must engage in curriculum changes at the preservice level where teacher development begins” (Katzenmeyer & Moller, 2009, p. 49). Knowledge is created every time a new concept is acquired, building upon one’s personal internal knowledge structures (Halpern, 2014). It is not enough to store information for recall, but rather, one must engage in the active, mental process of thinking in order to develop understanding.

Today’s teachers must be prepared to be both classroom researchers and expert collaborators who can learn from and share with one another the vast range of knowledge for teaching and infinitely diverse ways of learning which their students bring to the classroom (Darling-Hammond, 2006). Teachers are tasked with not only knowing the material to be presented, but also challenged to present it in such a way that multi-leveled students will understand. This charge to constantly create learning opportunities which foster analysis, inferencing, and evaluation to promote intellectual growth in others, requires educators to also possess the ability to think critically. Educational psychologist, Diane Halpern (2014) contends: “Critical thinking is more than merely thinking about your own thinking or making judgments and solving problems—it is effortful and consciously controlled. Critical thinking uses evidence and reasons and strives to overcome individual biases” (p.8).

Oftentimes within the field of education, the levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956) such as remembering, understanding, and applying are referenced when creating student goals and learning objectives. These verbs and levels can be a valuable source for creating products or outcomes of lessons; however, students need explicit instruction, modeling, and experience with the processes of critical thinking in order to acquire the necessary skills for application. Traditionally, post-secondary schools have required students to absorb, recall, make decisions, solve problems and reflect without ever teaching them how to do so, under the assumption that adult learners already know “how to learn” (Halpern, 2014).

While there are various definitions, phrases, and examples associated with critical thinking, in his research Facione (2015) has generated the following expert consensus statement: “We understand critical thinking to be purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based” (p. 28). This statement aligns closely with the basis of the author’s desire to further enhance students’ ability to decide what to do or believe in a given context (Quitadamo, Faiola, Johnson, and Kurtz, 2008), most specifically related to teacher education. As a faculty member at a small, private, liberal arts women’s college, the opportunity to construct an academic setting where development of critical thinking could thrive in an interactive and personalized environment, proved to be one which resulted in both reflective and intellectual growth for students (Kurfiss, 1988).