Understanding Teaching and Assessing Reasoning

“Reason and free inquiry are the only effectual agents against error,” believed Thomas Jefferson (Lewis, 2009 par. 53). What is reasoning? How can it be best taught? What is the best format for assessing reasoning? These questions breakdown the foundation of assessment and the architecture of how it works. Reasoning occurs when a student takes a piece of knowledge and skill and applies it to make connections, comparisons, contrasts, and conclusions about more than one item of information. A higher level of cognition is required when reasoning skills are applied. Webster’s (2009 par. 2) defines reasoning as, “a statement offered in explanation or justification; a rational ground or motive; a sufficient ground of explanation or logical defense: something that supports a conclusion or explains a fact; the thing that makes some fact intelligible.”

This component makes up the ideals that arch over Blooms Taxonomy. Reasoning has been and will continue to remain at th e center of educational discussion and planning. Rick Stiggins devotes a good portion of his book An Introduction to Student-Involved Assessment FOR Learning to the break down of reasoning and how it is met with purposeful assessment. Stiggins states that reason is, “the ability to use knowledge and understanding to figure things out to solve problems.” (2008, p. 51) The following are some elements that are present in the act of reasoning: analyzing to solve, comparing, contrasting, inductively/deductively reasoning, error analysis, abstracting and/or evaluating.

How do you teach a student to reason well? This is one of the great questions in studying metacognition. There must be an understanding of how the brain categorizes thoughts and culminates them in order to come to a solution (Stiggins, 2008). Stiggins declares six patterns of reason and it is through these patterns that reason is studied, taught, and classified. Analysis, synthesis, comparison, classification, inductive/deductive inferences, and evaluation are the six identified patterns of reason (2008). The mind starts by wanting to understand a pattern of how a thought or action plays. At this point synthesis, classification, and inductive/deductive reasoning skills are being used. It is rare that only one pattern of reason is used to come to a solution . These six patterns are overlapped and combined to work to a secure final solution.

Analytical reasoning is used to find the purpose of the pieces that are apart of a whole. In this pattern of reasoning two main points are considered; how do these pieces match up and how does the culmination of the entire piece work together (p.57). A teacher might use a dissection or simulation to teach analytical reasoning, because in this the students could identify the parts that make up the whole and clarify how all the identified parts work together to accomplish the purpose.

Synthesizing involves two or more pieces of information coming together for a solution(p.57). Using this pattern, teachers often use cross curricular skills in developing integrated units (p.57). Writing up lab reports taps into synthesizing by combining predicting, data collection, data analysis, math, theories, and a final solution in the form of writing. Stiggins (2008) says, “Thematic instruction encourages students to bring knowledge and productive patterns of reasoning together from several disciplines, as they explore their particular theme, whether it be the study of a particular culture, scientific problem, or social issue.”(p.57)

Comparative reasoning is the act of determining the similarities and differences of something (p.58). In order to effectively teach a student to analyze things through similarities, differences or both the student must have a clear understanding of the items they are to compare (p.58). Then the student must choose what elements they will consider in comparing and/or contrasting the items (p.58). After gathering information about similarities and differences a final response is given. This should answer why the elements were chosen to highlight similarities and differences and how the items compare in these areas. For example in a language arts course students could compare and contrast The Diary of Anne Frank with To Kill a Mockingbird. The elements to compare might be author, main character, setting, theme, and conflict. Students would have to have read and have a basic understanding of the stories. Then the student must pull out major information from both text and view this information side by side to declare similarities and/or differences and highlight comparison points.

Classifying is the pattern of reasoning that calls for categorizing (p.59). Again in this type of reasoning the student must begin with understanding the characteristics of the item that is being classified and the definite categories that are being used as guidelines (p.59). This type of reasoning is used and taught in the classroom in science when we learn how to classify living organisms and in political science as we categorize political candidates and officials.

Inductive and deductive reasoning is asked when we ask students to either build on a piece of information or breakdown from a piece of information (p.59). Inductive reasoning demands that students make inferences, draw conclusions, or create generalizations based on facts gathered (p.59). A specific fact moves to a common guideline or rule (p. 59). Two examples of this are as follows: “Now that you have read this story, what do your think is its general theme or message? Given the evidence provided in this article about the stock market what is the relationship between interest rates and stock values?”(Stiggins, 2008, p.60-61). Deductive reasoning requires that students apply a common guideline to develop a answer to a specific task (p.60). Within this pattern reason moves from broad to particular (p.60). Two examples of how this pattern of reasoning plays out in classroom questioning.
Given your theory about criminal behavior, who did the killing? Given what you know about the role of a tragic hero in classic literature, if this character is a tragic hero, what do you think will happen next in the story?(Stiggins, 2008, p.60)
Evaluative reasoning is used to place a value on an item based on specific defined components (p.61). Evaluating an item requires the evaluator to logically assess an item by the components set to define the elements that are key to identify (p.61). Instructing students on the Evaluative reasoning pattern is focused in getting students to understand the defined components that they need to identify (p.61). With this in focus students can identify the component and use there findings as evidence in the explanation of their evaluation (p.61). An example of an assignment that might specifically target this skill is asking student to, “evaluate conclusions drawn from an experiment for legitimacy.”(Stiggins, 2008, p.63)

Assessment of reasoning can occurs in a variety such as selected response, essay, performance assessment and personal communication. When creating assessments for selected response the target that is necessary is the correct use of some patterns of reasoning (p.63). With essay assessment the target is if a person can supply an example of adept reasoning (p.63). In assessing by performance the target we are watching for is that students workout a problem or test a product and infer about reasoning competency (p.63). Personal communication assessments must focus on the students ability to ask students to verbally express thoughts or ask concluding and evaluating questions to look for reasoning (p.63). Marzano believes that the keys to purposeful and effective assessment of any skill are that they must be done frequently, in a variety of forms, and then timely feedback must be clearly presented to the student (Silvia, 2009).

It is clear that to be an effective reasoner one must have basic knowledge first, as well as the ability to analyze, synthesize, compare, contrast, analyze, breakdown inductively and deductively, and evaluate. Reasoning is a higher level skill that demands the student to take information to the next level by unlocking patterns and piecing the larger and sometimes unseen puzzle together. In order for this higher level skill to be assessed it must be met by tasks, and measuring tools that parallel its purpose. The assessments must be frequent, valid, relevant, and results must be returned quickly and in a comprehensive manner to ensure effectiveness for the student and the classroom. “When I'm getting ready to reason with a man, I spend one-third of my time thinking about myself and what I am going to say -- and two-thirds thinking about him and what he is going to say,” Abraham Lincoln (Lewis, 2009 par. 2).


References
Lewis, Jone Johnson. (1995). Wisdom quotes. Retrieved June 25, 2009, from http://www.widomquotes.com/cat_reason.html.
Peverini, Silvia. (2009). The value of teacher expertise and good judgement: recent inspiring reading about assessment. [Electronic Version]. Language Arts, 86(5), 3 98-402. Retrieved June 25, 2009, from Proquest Educational Journals database.
Reason. (2009). Merriam-webster online dictionary. Retrieved June 23, 2009, from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/reason.
Stiggins, Rick. (2008). An Introduction to Student Involved Assessment FOR Learning. New Jersey: Pearson.
.