Talk:Higher-order thinking: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
Some advanced new methods of research on natural complex systems and relationships exist, like mine, for recognizing organization in nature from its continuities of change. |
Some advanced new methods of research on natural complex systems and relationships exist, like mine, for recognizing organization in nature from its continuities of change. |
||
<ref>http://synapse9.com/home.htm#sci |
<ref>[http://synapse9.com/home.htm#sci]J L Henshaw methods</ref> |
||
<ref>http://synapse9.com/jlhpub.htm |
<ref>[http://synapse9.com/jlhpub.htm]J L Henshaw papers</ref>JLHenshaw 17:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC) |
||
Revision as of 17:09, 22 March 2013
 | Education Stub‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Psychology Stub‑class Low‑importance | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
 | Text and/or other creative content from Higher order thinking skills was copied or moved into Higher-order thinking with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Merge
Merger Proposal Higher order thinking skills and Higher-order thinking. Enough said, right? It might even be advisable to merge both pages back to Bloom's Taxonomy, maybe under a subsection practical concerns. In any case, it's been quite some time since I last logged on, and would appreciate it if someone else could process the merger. Thanks, samwaltz (talk) 15:45, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
I certainly agree that Higher order thinking skills and Higher-order thinking should be merged. Not sure if merging back to Bloom's Taxonomy is necessary, however I can see why that might be appropriate. Thedeepestblue (talk) 09:53, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
I think merging is not required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.197.118.33 (talk) 21:45, 16 February 2012 (UTC)
They either need to be merged or made different....as they stand, the content is practically the same. I vote to merge. DNApop (talk) 17:46, 29 June 2012 (UTC)
Higher order learning
Could someone explain the exact relationship to "higher order learning"? 193.140.194.148 (talk) 16:55, 15 January 2012 (UTC)
"Higher Order Thinking" needs to get bigger
It would be a step forward if the range of higher cognitive thinking and learning skills expanded.
They should also included the awareness of the non-cognitive design in our natural world. That involves the recognition of "natural systems" and their "complex relationships", as we deal so much with in cultural, ecological, economic and personal behavioral contexts. They're all forms of complex organization that emerge by development as a complex environmental process. They're normally learned about holistically, using both a kind of whole system empathy and careful pattern recognition, like good moms get amazingly good at, as well as good politicians and scientists too.
Some advanced new methods of research on natural complex systems and relationships exist, like mine, for recognizing organization in nature from its continuities of change. [1] [2]JLHenshaw 17:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)