什么才是高阶思维？——以“新旧知识关系建立”为核心的高阶思维概念框架

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2022.11.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

高阶思维是核心素养的重要组成部分，对其概念和内涵进行界定和剖析具有重要的理论意义和实践价值。高阶思维是个体适应环境、寻找认知平衡的关键能力。建构主义理论认为个体并非被动地接收外界的信息，而是主动的、积极的知识建构者。在具体的认知情境中，高阶思维表现为个体通过识别已有知识和外部信息之间的联系，将背景知识迁移到新的情境中，解决复杂环境中没有确定答案的问题。高阶思维并非单一的思维过程，而是多种认知成分协同作用的复杂思维过程。高阶思维的概念框架需要包含“对问题情境的分析”“新旧知识的关系建立”“不同维度信息的综合”“创新性知识的产生”，以及“对思维过程的监督、管理和调节”五个方面的认知成分，并且能够阐释五个认知成分之间如何相互作用、彼此影响、协调发展的过程。这一概念框架为解读高阶思维提供了新的理论视角，为深入研究高阶思维的发展规律和培养机制奠定了理论基础。

关键词: 高阶思维, 建构主义, 分析, 关系建立, 综合, 创造, 元认知

Abstract:

Higher-order thinking is a key competence for individuals to adapt to external environments and cope with future challenges. The theory of constructivism argues that people do not passively receive information from the environment, but actively construct knowledge to update their mental models. In authentic learning contexts, higher-order thinking manifests as the ability to identify the connection between prior knowledge and external information, transfer background knowledge to a new situation, and solve complex problems that do not have definite answers. Higher-order thinking is not a single thought process, but a complex cognitive process in which multiple mental operations coordinately work together. The conceptual framework of higher-order thinking incorporates the analysis of problem situations, the identification and formation of the relationship between old and new knowledge, the synthesis of information from different dimensions, the creation of new knowledge, and the monitoring, management and adjustment of the thinking process. The conceptual framework explains how the five cognitive components influence each other and synergistically regulate the process of cognitive development. The framework provides a new theoretical perspective for interpreting higher-order thinking, and lays a theoretical foundation for in-depth research on the developmental mechanism of higher-order thinking.

Key words: higher-order thinking, constructivism, analyze, identify connections, synthesize, create, metacognition

马淑风, 杨向东. 什么才是高阶思维？——以“新旧知识关系建立”为核心的高阶思维概念框架[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(11): 58-68.

Shufeng Ma, Xiangdong Yang. A Conceptual Framework of Higher-order Thinking[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educational Sciences), 2022, 40(11): 58-68.

图/表 1

参考文献 0

	褚宏启核心素养的国际视野与中国立场——21世纪中国的国民素质提升与教育目标转型教育研究 2016 37 11 8 18 褚宏启. (2016). 核心素养的国际视野与中国立场—21世纪中国的国民素质提升与教育目标转型. 教育研究,37(11),8—18.
	林崇德中国学生核心素养研究心理与行为研究 2017 15 2 145 154 林崇德. (2017). 中国学生核心素养研究. 心理与行为研究,15(2),145—154. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2017.02.001
	师曼, 刘晟, 刘霞, 周平艳, 陈有义, 刘坚, & 魏锐 21世纪核心素养的框架及要素研究华东师范大学学报(教育科学版) 2016 34 3 29 37+115 师曼, 刘晟, 刘霞, 周平艳, 陈有义, 刘坚, & 魏锐. (2016). 21世纪核心素养的框架及要素研究. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),34(3),29—37+115. doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2016.03.004
	王瑞明, 莫雷, 贾德梅, 冷英, 李利, & 李小健文本阅读中情境模型建构和更新的机制心理学报 2006 38 01 30 40 王瑞明, 莫雷, 贾德梅, 冷英, 李利, & 李小健. (2006). 文本阅读中情境模型建构和更新的机制. 心理学报,38(01),30—40.
	姚计海, 屈智勇, & 井卫英中学生自我概念的特点及其与学业成绩的关系心理发展与教育 2001 16 4 57 64 姚计海, 屈智勇, & 井卫英. (2001). 中学生自我概念的特点及其与学业成绩的关系. 心理发展与教育,16(4),57—64. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1001-4918.2001.04.011
	杨向东基于核心素养的基础教育课程标准研制全球教育展望 2017 46 10 34 48 杨向东. (2017). 基于核心素养的基础教育课程标准研制. 全球教育展望,46(10),34—48. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1009-9670.2017.10.004
	杨向东关于核心素养若干概念和命题的辨析华东师范大学学报 (教育科学版) 2020 38 10 48 59 杨向东. (2020). 关于核心素养若干概念和命题的辨析. 华东师范大学学报 (教育科学版),38(10),48—59.
	Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A Revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objective. New York: Longman.
	Anderson, R. C Some Reflections on the Acquisition of Knowledge Educational Researcher 1984 13 9 5 10 Anderson, R. C. (1984). Some Reflections on the Acquisition of Knowledge. Educational Researcher, 13(9), 5—10. doi: 10.3102/0013189X013009005
	Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J., & Anderson, M. C Schemata as Scaffolding for the Representation of Information in Connected Discourse American Educational Research Journal 1978 15 3 433 440 Anderson, R. C., Spiro, R. J., & Anderson, M. C. (1978). Schemata as Scaffolding for the Representation of Information in Connected Discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 15(3), 433—440. doi: 10.3102/00028312015003433
	Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1968). Human memory: a proposed system and its control processes. In K. W. Spence & J. T. Spence (Eds. ), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (pp. 89–195). New York: Academic Press.
	Baker, E. L. (1990). developing Comprehensive Assessment of Higher order Thinking. G. Kulm (Ed.), Assessing higher order thinking in mathematics (pp. 7-21). Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
	Beghetto, R. A., & Kaufman, J. C. (2007). Toward a broader conception of creativity: A case for “mini-c” creativity. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 1(2), 73−79.
	Birgili, B Creative and critical thinking skills in problem-based learning environments Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity 2015 2 2 71 80 Birgili, B. (2015). Creative and critical thinking skills in problem-based learning environments. Journal of Gifted Education and Creativity, 2(2), 71—80. doi: 10.18200/JGEDC.2015214253
	Bloom, B. S., & Krathwohl, D. R. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: Longmans.
	Brewer, W. F., & Nakamura, G. V. (1984). The nature and function of schemas. In R. S. Wyer & T K. Srull (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition (pp. 119-160). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
	Brookhart, S. M. (2010). How to assess higher-order thinking skills in your classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
	Care, E., Griffin, P., & Wilson, M. (Eds.). (2018). Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills: Research and applications. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
	Cropley, A. J. (2011). Teaching creativity. In M. A. Runco & S. R. Pritzker (Eds. ), Encyclopedia of creativity (Second, pp. 435–445). New York: Elsevier.
	Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention. New York: Harper-Collins.
	Day, S. B., & Goldstone, R. L. (2012). The import of knowledge export: Connecting findings and theories of transfer of learning. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 153-176.
	Dewey, J. (1910). How We Think. Boston: DC Heath.
	Dunbar, K. (1997). How scientists think: On-line creativity and conceptual change in science. In T.B. Ward, S.M. Smith, & J. Vaid (Eds.), Creative thought: An investigation of conceptual structures and processes (pp. 461–493). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
	Duncker, K. On problem-solving (L. S. Lees, Trans.) Psychological Monographs 1945 58 270 Duncker, K. (1945). On problem-solving (L. S. Lees, Trans.). Psychological Monographs, 58(270).
	Ennis, R. H Critical thinking: A streamlined conception Teaching Philosophy 1991 14 1 5 24 Ennis, R. H. (1991). Critical thinking: A streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy, 14(1), 5—24. doi: 10.5840/teachphil19911412
	European Union. (2018). Council recommendation of 22 May 2018 on key competences for lifelong learning. Retrieved from https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:32018H0604(01)&rid=7.
	Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B Structure Mapping in Analogy and Similarity American Psychologist 1997 52 1 45 56 Gentner, D., & Markman, A. B. (1997). Structure Mapping in Analogy and Similarity. American Psychologist, 52(1), 45—56. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.52.1.45
	Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J Analogical problem solving Cognitive Psychology 1980 12 3 306 355 Gick, M. L., & Holyoak, K. J. (1980). Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology, 12(3), 306—355. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(80)90013-4
	Greeno, J. G A Perspective on Thinking American Psychologist 1989 44 2 134 141 Greeno, J. G. (1989). A Perspective on Thinking. American Psychologist, 44(2), 134—141. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.44.2.134
	Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. Two courses of expertise. Research and Clinical Center for Child Development Annual Report Research and Clinical Center for Child Development 1984 83[Annual Report] 27 36 Hatano, G., & Inagaki, K. (1984). Two courses of expertise. Research and Clinical Center for Child Development Annual Report. Research and Clinical Center for Child Development, 83[Annual Report], 27—36.
	Herrington, J., & Oliver, R Using Situated Learning and Multimedia To Investigate Higher-Order Thinking Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia 1999 8 4 401 421 Herrington, J., & Oliver, R. (1999). Using Situated Learning and Multimedia To Investigate Higher-Order Thinking. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 8(4), 401—421.
	Hmelo-Silver, C. E., & DeSimone, C. (2013). Problem-based learning: An instructional model of collaborative learning. In C. E. Hmelo-Silver, C. A. Chinn, C. K. K. Chan, & A. M. O’Donnell (Eds. ), The international handbook of collaborative learning (pp. 370–385). New York, NY: Routledge.
	Holyoak, K. J. (2012). Analogy and relational reasoning. In K. J. Holyoak & R. G. Morrison (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning (pp. 234–259). New York: Oxford University Press.
	Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. K Examining the effect of problem type in a synchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment Educational Technology Research and Development 2007 55 5 439 459 Kapur, M., & Kinzer, C. K. (2007). Examining the effect of problem type in a synchronous computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 55(5), 439—459. doi: 10.1007/s11423-007-9045-6
	Kintsch, W An overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in comprehension: The CI perspective Discourse Processes (Vol. 39 2005 39 2-3 125 128) Kintsch, W. (2005). An overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in comprehension: The CI perspective. Discourse Processes (Vol. 39, 39(2-3), 125—128).
	Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A Toward a model of text comprehension and production Psychological Review 1978 85 5 363 394 Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85(5), 363—394. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.85.5.363
	Lewis, A., & Smith, D Defining Higher Order Thinking Theory Into Practice 1993 32 3 131 137 Lewis, A., & Smith, D. (1993). Defining Higher Order Thinking. Theory Into Practice, 32(3), 131—137. doi: 10.1080/00405849309543588
	Mayer, R. E Learners as information processors: Legacies and limitations of educational psychology’s second metaphor Educational Psychologist 1996 31 3 151 161 Mayer, R. E. (1996). Learners as information processors: Legacies and limitations of educational psychology’s second metaphor. Educational Psychologist, 31(3), 151—161. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3103&4_1
	Mercer, N Sociocultural discourse analysis: Analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking Journal of Applied Linguistics 2004 1 2 137 168 Mercer, N. (2004). Sociocultural discourse analysis: Analysing classroom talk as a social mode of thinking. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 137—168. doi: 10.1558/japl.v1i2.137
	Mercer, N. , & Dawes, L. (2008). The value of exploratory talk. In N. Mercer & S. Hodgkinson, Exploring Talk in School: Inspired by the Work of Douglas Barnes (pp. 55–72). London: Sage.
	Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., Firetto, C. M., Hendrick, B. D., Li, M., Montalbano, C., & Wei, L Quality Talk: Developing Students’ Discourse to Promote High-level Comprehension American Educational Research Journal 2018 55 5 1113 1160 Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., Firetto, C. M., Hendrick, B. D., Li, M., Montalbano, C., & Wei, L. (2018). Quality Talk: Developing Students’ Discourse to Promote High-level Comprehension. American Educational Research Journal, 55(5), 1113—1160. doi: 10.3102/0002831218771303
	Okuda, S. M., Runco, M. A., & Berger, D. E Creativity and the finding and solving of real-world problems Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 1991 9 1 45 53 Okuda, S. M., Runco, M. A., & Berger, D. E. (1991). Creativity and the finding and solving of real-world problems. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 9(1), 45—53. doi: 10.1177/073428299100900104
	Osborn, A. F. (1963). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative thinking. New York: Scribner’s.
	Parnes, S. (1967). Creative behavior guidebook. New York: Scribners.
	Pellegrino, J. W., & Hilton, M. L. (Eds.). (2013). Education for life and work: Developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
	Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.
	Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of intelligence. Totowa, NJ: Littlefield Adams.
	Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1966). The Psychology of The Child. New York: Basic Books.
	Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T Why Isn’t Creativity More Important to Educational Psychologists? Potentials, Pitfalls, and Future Directions in Creativity Research Educational Psychologist 2004 39 2 83 96 Plucker, J. A., Beghetto, R. A., & Dow, G. T. (2004). Why Isn’t Creativity More Important to Educational Psychologists? Potentials, Pitfalls, and Future Directions in Creativity Research. Educational Psychologist, 39(2), 83—96. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3902_1
	Resnick, L. B. (1987). Education and Learning to Think. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
	Resnick, L. B., & Schantz, F. (2015). Talking to learn: The promise and challenge of dialogic teaching. In L. B. Resenick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds.), Socializing intelligence through academic talk and dialogue (pp. 441–450). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
	Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L., Clark, A., Miller, B., Jadallah, M., Anderson, R. C., & Nguyen‐Jahiel, K Collaborative reasoning: A dialogic approach to group discussions Cambridge Journal of Education 2009 39 1 29 48 Reznitskaya, A., Kuo, L., Clark, A., Miller, B., Jadallah, M., Anderson, R. C., & Nguyen‐Jahiel, K. (2009). Collaborative reasoning: A dialogic approach to group discussions. Cambridge Journal of Education, 39(1), 29—48. doi: 10.1080/03057640802701952
	Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding: An inquiry into human knowledge structures. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
	Schraw, G. (1998). Promoting general metacognitive awareness. Instructional Science, 26(1–2), 113–125.
	Treffinger, D. J Creative Problem Solving: Overview and educational implications Educational Psychology Review 1995 7 3 301 312 Treffinger, D. J. (1995). Creative Problem Solving: Overview and educational implications. Educational Psychology Review, 7(3), 301—312. doi: 10.1007/BF02213375
	Wechsler, S. M., Saiz, C., Rivas, S. F., Vendramini, C. M. M., Almeida, L. S., Mundim, M. C., & Franco, A. (2018). Creative and critical thinking: Independent or overlapping components? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 27, 114–122.
	Wu, X., Li, W., & Anderson, R. C Reading instruction in China Journal of Curriculum Studies 1999 31 5 571 586 Wu, X., Li, W., & Anderson, R. C. (1999). Reading instruction in China. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 31(5), 571—586. doi: 10.1080/002202799183016
	Zimmerman, C The Development of Scientific Reasoning Skills Developmental Review 2000 20 1 99 149 Zimmerman, C. (2000). The Development of Scientific Reasoning Skills. Developmental Review, 20(1), 99—149. doi: 10.1006/drev.1999.0497
	Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A Situation Models in Language Comprehension and Memory Psychological Bulletin 1998 123 2 162 185 Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation Models in Language Comprehension and Memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123(2), 162—185. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.123.2.162

[1]	顾小清, 李世瑾. 人工智能促进未来教育发展：本质内涵与应然路向[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(9): 1-9.
[2]	曾开富, 王孙禺, 陈丽萍. 中美研究型大学工程教育制度与理念研究——基于语料库的批判话语分析方法[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(8): 19-30.
[3]	蔡庆丰, 吴冠琛, 陈武元. 交通基础设施改善会提升家庭教育期望吗？——基于“中国家庭追踪调查”的实证分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(8): 96-114.
[4]	顾泠沅. 45年：一项数学教改实验[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(4): 103-116.
[5]	雷万鹏, 马红梅. 基于学生成绩的教师教学质量及其经济价值[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(3): 89-98.
[6]	侯浩翔, 张先义, 王旦. 教育机器人可以提升学生创造力吗?——基于48项实验与准实验研究的Meta分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(3): 99-111.
[7]	薛海平, 师欢欢. 起跑线竞争：我国中小学生首次参与课外补习时间分析——支持“双减”政策落实的一项实证研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(2): 71-89.
[8]	庞维国. 创造性心理学视角下的创造性培养：目标、原则与策略[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(11): 25-40.
[9]	姜怡. 高中生学习动机发展模态及其对学业成绩的影响[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(11): 80-91.
[10]	雷浩, 李雪. 数字工具支持的教学对学生学习结果有何影响？——来自137项实验与准实验的元分析证据[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(11): 92-109.
[11]	时晨晨. 美国基础教育项目效果评估经验何在？——基于25项高质量评估研究的主题文本分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2022, 40(1): 43-59.
[12]	张静, 唐一鹏, 郭家俊, 邵志芳. 中国青少年社会与情感能力测评之技术报告[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(9): 109-126.
[13]	邵志芳, 刘志, 杨舒豫, 黄忠敬. 开放能力：中国青少年社会与情感能力测评分报告之四[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(9): 77-92.
[14]	武法提, 田浩, 王瑜, 樊敏生. 智慧教育视野下基于Rasch模型的知识掌握与认知能力分析研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(8): 57-69.
[15]	雷万鹏, 马红梅, 黄华明. 基于学生成绩残差分解技术的教师教学质量评价[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2021, 39(7): 84-91.