Thoughts on Thinking
Personal Essay - Portfolio

As small children pointing to every surrounding object, as students sitting behind desks, as adults watching the news - we add to our bank of knowledge. Our brains act as our personal bank accounts, Knowledge being the crisp bills deemed so valuable. We circulate through our Knowledge - making withdrawals, transferring funds, making deposits. We replace old ideas with new ones, spend our funds where needed, and save as much as we possibly can. Thinking manages the account. Thinking fills out the transaction slips and hits the buttons on the ATM. To manage effectively, Thinking needs to learn how the operation works. Growing minds need guidance. Without guidance our knowledge could be flawed; we might end up depositing counterfeit bills into our account. Schooling is a primary source of guidance in many lives. Schooling used to have Thinking’s best interest in mind. Schooling has become a pushy banker that started out by telling Thinking how to spend and use Knowledge, and has worked its way into Thinking’s position. Schooling is guilty of identity theft, and is now managing Knowledge in Thinking’s absence.
Thinking and Knowledge are meant to have a symbiotic relationship. Knowledge, according to the Oxford English Dictionary, “applies to any body of facts gathered by study, observation, or experience, and to the ideas inferred from these facts”(Oxford). Thinking is part of knowledge; it occupies the second half of its definition. In the same way, knowledge is a part of thinking: thinking is the application of knowledge. Both concepts are a part of the other, needing the other to be complete. Schooling has torn the words apart from their tight embrace, and has left Thinking in the dust while placing Knowledge on a pedestal.
Joseph E. Stiglitz of the World Bank introduced the concept of “knowledge as a public good” (Vinson). Knowledge proves to be the ultimate good in that it is “available to anyone, its use by one person does not limit its use by anyone else” (Vinson) and it does not depreciate. Competition and measurement accompany the mentality of knowledge being a type of revenue. Schooling reinforces this mentality as “teachers are required to ‘teach to the test’”(Fields). Suzanne Fields, a columnist of the Washington Times, is one of many who recognize critical thinking to be of little priority in schooling. Critical thinking is “self-guided, self-disciplined thinking that aims to take the reasoning we all do naturally to a higher level” (Elder). Thinking and Knowledge must work together and overlap in order to create critical thinking. Fields communicates how “critical thinking is limited to figuring out how to answer questions so that test scores are high enough that school districts don't lose federal money” (Fields). Schools are required to use knowledge as revenue, and have had to omit teachings of critical thinking from schooling as a trade off for high test scores and funding. Knowledge has become a substitute for thinking. Linda Elder, a prominent authority on critical thinking, recognizes “much of our thinking, left to itself, [to be] sloppy, distorted, partial, uninformed, or prejudiced” (Elder). Thinking needs guidance and direction because “the quality of our life and all of the decisions we make depend precisely on the quality of our thought” (Elder). Many people have fallen victim to schooling that “neither values fair-minded critical thinking nor encourages it” (Elder).
Schooling teaches students to want nothing more than the answers. My attitude throughout high school was all about having the answers. I was not concerned with what I learned; how well I did was what mattered. I wanted that fat splotchy red pen to mark an A at the top of my papers. I wanted the official gritty paper to have a vertical column of A’s and Bs. Give me the answers; tell me what answers I need to get the A and I will get them. This way of thinking was always rewarded in my schooling career. Many of my peers participated in the fierce competition of having a high measure of success on paper. My teachers and parents labeled this attitude as ambitious. It took my college experience thus far to realize the ignorance in simply wanting the answers. Grades measure effort, and I am happy to have grades reflecting the amount of work I put into a class. I deserve the A for effort. But as for caring about what I was taught, I give myself the first C I have ever received. It turns out, having the answers is not what education is all about. As an aspiring English teacher, the issue of critical thinking was first introduced to me in an education course. I was quick to realize how one special English teacher successfully integrated critical thinking into her classroom. Without the label, I had had no idea at the time what an amazing gift this teacher had bestowed upon me. After all, I had school all figured out; I knew how to get the grades I wanted.
I am part of the small percentage of students who had a teacher have critical thinking be a goal in their teachings. I am able to recognize a person’s ability (or inability) to think in an enriched and rewarding way in the classes I am currently taking. I find most students around me in dire need of structure. When given an assignment anything short of step-by-step instructions, a desperate and hopeless stare fills the eyes of my peers around me. It worries me to find this reality to be so overbearing and relevant. “Teachers must move beyond rote and merely active engagement, and work toward transforming how students reason through complex issues, to look beyond easy answers” (Elder). Future teachers who are unable practice critical thinking will leave their students lacking this valuable ability. Where will we break the cycle? It is important to fuse Knowledge and Thinking back together; to have Knowledge accompany Thinking rather than serve as a substitute. We can become great thinkers “by not accepting information at face value, but by thinking deeply for [our] selves, asking questions, and refining [our] thinking over time” (Elder). Students need to be introduced to this type of thinking early to leave time for its development. We must give the management of our Knowledge accounts back to Thinking. Although Thinking might make mistakes by over drafting the account or bouncing checks, there is value in learning lessons through your own thought. My hope for the future is that teachers who are able to practice and implement critical thinking into the classroom provide other teachers with the tools they need to do so as well. My hope is to help students identify what critical thinking is by clearly labeling specific thoughts they have as “critical”. Change is never easy, and is scary most of the time. To think differently is big step for anyone. To live lives of worth, we must think about thinking, and develop thoughts of true quality.












Works Cited

Elder, Linda. "Are You a Critical Thinker." 12 Mar. 2009. LexisNexis. CSU Library. Morgan
Library, Fort Collins. 01 May 2009 .

Fields, Suzanne. "Re-opening the American Mind." 20 Sept. 2007. LexisNexis. CSU Library.
Morgan Library, Fort Collins. 21 Apr. 2009 .

Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon P, New York, 1989.


Vinson, Jack. "Knowledge as a Public Good." 08 Sept. 2007. LexisNexis. CSU Library. Morgan
Library, Fort Collins. 16 Apr. 2009 .

Language Investigation #2

Growing up in a city referred to as white lily Littleton exposed me to no more than one ethnicity: Caucasian. I went to a high school where the number of students who were not the typical middle-class Caucasian could be counted on one hand. The few who were not white lived like they were, conforming to the “high class” attitude Arapahoe High School took pride in portraying. This school suffers from very few of the issues circulating within America’s schooling system. Updated technology, qualified teachers, cultural differences, textbooks, supplies, and funding were never issues that affected the student body. Going to a high school like this made me completely oblivious to the harsh consequences of these issues many schools in the United States undergo. Unlike most of the students, my family did not fall into the “upper-class” category of social hierarchy. My background as being part of the middle class did not hinder my language use in the classroom. Even though I am a first generation college student, I was exposed to an intellectual use of language at home. Going into a “privileged” high school, I was fully prepared for the kind of language I was expected to use in my writing. As I went through schooling at Arapahoe, my reading and writing skills improved as specific guidelines were laid out for each assignment.
In regard to English, my freshman year of high school was filled with structured five paragraph essays. We wrote about controversial issues and the literature we were reading. For the controversial issue paper, we were required to use research and quote the material as support for our stance on the issue. I specifically remember filling out a step-by-step outline for this paper and many others. It was literally blank lines with titles labeling them. We were expected to fill in the blank following each title, making writing feel very much like a math problem. Part of the outline went as follows:
Introduction Paragraph:
Introductory sentence:
Introductory paragraph:
Thesis Statement: Concerning the issue of (your issue) I feel that …. Because (Reason 1), (Reason 2), (Reason 3).
Body Paragraph 1: Reason 1
Introductory sentence:
Lead-in:
Quote:
Lead-out:
Explanation:
Transition:
This outline was literally a fill-in-the-blank task that left little room for creativity or originality. As a freshman, however, this type of outline was helpful as we learned what should be included within a thorough and “correctly written” paper. The regulation and structure of these essays allowed me to organize my papers, and exposed me to the many puzzle pieces that make up an entire essay; that form the big picture all the puzzle pieces make when put together.
Through my sophomore year of high school, my teachers expected this basic form of an essay when we were assigned to write. These were the rules and guidelines to follow when writing if you wanted a good grade. Teachers were able to clearly see the ideas and proof included within your paper as you organized your writing in this “correct” way. With little critical thinking involved, papers about literature or issues were simply math problems with words.
My junior year, I had an instructor who taught students how to think critically. She introduced us to idea of being able to jumble around the puzzle pieces of a paper, and still achieve the puzzle’s picture at the end. The picture you created in this way, however, had different shades, tones of color, and small details that would have been absent if the “rules” or writing an essay were followed to create it. Thesis sentences strayed from being a list of ideas you were going to prove with textual evidence or research; they became fancy academic ways to play with words and still get your point across. The use of appropriate academic language became the only regulations in writing. As creativity and freedom sparked within my writing, the love for literature and writing became a fire within me. This teacher conducted her class like a college course, assigning what seemed like insane amounts of reading each night. She created a positive self-fulfilling prophecy by having high expectations of her students, which inspired many students to work hard and meet those expectations.
Once I was taught how to think instead of do, I was prepared for college. After high school, I was able to easily adapt to college reading and writing. As far as grammatical regulations and rules go, I was never given any lessons about them past middle school. By the time I got to high school, I felt confident with my use of punctuation, and was rarely corrected past a few misplaced or needed commas. I never had a teacher address problems students were having with punctuation or grammar. Rhetorical Grammar is teaching me more about grammar than I have ever known. I am pleased to find the information Kolln presents to be guidelines and not “rules”. Without having a teacher who taught me how to think critically, I believe that I would find college reading and writing to be much more difficult. The basics of writing an essay are not enough for college. Reaching beyond the “rules” of writing and analyzing is needed to create the best picture possible. Without knowing the different possibilities you have with the pieces of writing, the picture you create will look like everyone else’s. Guidelines should never be disregarded, but need to be seen as an optional approach one can take. My background in school and at home prepared me for the language I would be expected to use in college. I was one of the lucky ones introduced to critical thinking early, and had time to practice its use. Using critical thinking reaches far beyond the classroom, and needs to be used in all situations. This will allow all people to have all the pieces they need to create their own perfect picture of life.

Language Investigation #1

The use of language depends on similarities and differences among the members of a community. In a setting where people have diverse backgrounds, communication is easier to achieve if the language exchanged is simple. In these communities, going back to the roots and basics of language ensures comprehension. Within the communities of my small group of five friends, my work, and my cheerleading squad, I have experienced three different uses of language according to similarities.
There is a time and place to be casual with language. Within the community of your small group of friends, there is no better place. My friends and I have ages that range no more than two years apart and have many similarities. We all share the same neighborhood, school, ethnicity, and experiences. Within our group, we have words and phrases we have our own meanings to. Our group is very connected through music. When any of us have had a bad day or experience, we tell each other “just dance, it will be ok”. These are the lyrics of a song we all listen, dance, and sing to in the car together. Hearing these words brings you back to those good times and instantly makes you feel better. In regular conversation, we look to the most basic way of words. We speak the way we text. We say “brb” and “omg” to each other to communicate we will “be right back” or that we are surprised. We are comfortable to use abbreviations, incorrect tenses, and a simple vocabulary. This language would not be appropriate or understood in a sophisticated setting.
In a professional environment, language use is formal. I work at a small pizza restaurant called Il Vicino in Denver. For the sake of being courteous and suitable to a business surrounding, one must adapt to proper language. We must use formal and appropriate language around customers and managers. Within the restaurant, we have phrases and terms that employees are familiar with that would confuse the public. We have positions of runners, register, and barista, which would confuse anyone unfamiliar to restaurant work. The titles are straightforward, but what each job description requires if assigned is something only the employee would know and understand. As a runner, the employee runs the drinks, salads, and pizzas to tables while the barista prepares the drinks, takes care of To Go orders, and buses empty tables. The person on register takes the customer’s order and manages sales. We have labels for tables (A1-D9) that only employees would be able to indicate. We have terms such as “as a calzone”, “sos”, “as an entrée”, “1st outs” and many more that is part of our common language during a shift. These terms tell the cook to make the pizza a calzone, to put the sauce on the side (salad dressing or marinara sauce), and to time a salad or bowl of soup to come out with the meal. “First outs” is a term servers use to indicate what jobs need to be done before clocking out for a shift. Everyone who understands and uses these terms has the commonality of being employed at Il Vicino. Every member of a sports team or club becomes engaged in a language only that group or sport has to offer.
The language of a cheerleading squad is impossible to decode without being familiar with the terms that accompany the sport. The language usage on a cheerleading squad is jargon. Some terms for stunting include flyer, base, back spot, full, arabesque, liberty, extension, elevator, heel stretch, cradle, pop, re-load, and basket-toss. To explain a few, the flyer is the person who stands on her bases, the people holding her up, and has a back spot behind her to catch her. A full is twisting in the air before cradling, which is where the bases and back spot catch the flyer. For tumbling, or gymnastics, the labels round off back-hand-spring, back tuck, full, and layout are used. The counting, the motions, the uniforms and more are all included in the language of practices, games, and competitions. All cheerleaders can speak this language and comprehend what everything is because they have being a cheerleader in common. To any outsider, the terms and phrases used would sound like a different language.
Types of language use have their time and place. Based on similarities or differences, a person can judge how well a community will comprehend the type of language they use. The environment and connections around a person are the source to determining what type of language will be appropriate and understandable. Without different communities in our lives, the many wonderful aspects of language would be left unexplored.

Memory Vignette

Competition

With an identical twin sister, life is a competition. Growing up, we have seen other twins take off in separate directions to make comparisons among one another more difficult for onlookers. However, it is always relevant among twins, you are always comparing each other no matter how different you are. Making note of differences is comparing. My sister and I took the same path. We did not want to deny one or the other opportunities just to make sure we were different. This had its positives and its flaws. My sister and I played the same sports, took the same classes, and had the same friends. We shared a car, room, and cell phone. Everything we did was compared. When you grow up answering questions about which one is smarter, better at sports, etc, it is hard not to compete with your sister. What we were soon to realize, was that we were comparing ourselves to each other more than the people around us were. Everything we measured ourselves by was more relevant to us than to everybody else. Our competition in everything we did hurt our relationship. Your main opponent in life was your roommate, family member, and mirror image. It took up until our senior year of high school to realize that competition should not be about who is better. We realized that goals should have the motive of being a better person for you and by your standards. Going to separate colleges allowed us to build a better relationship. Without consistencies, comparison is more difficult for others and us. Growing up as a twin in a competitive environment has had its positives in my life; it has shaped me as a person. I fight to be the best I can be; not for another person, but for me. My goals are set for me, not for others. Competition needs to be with you, and for you. Compete with yourself to be the best you can be. My sister and I found that putting our feelings into words helped with this realization. As thoughts were written out on paper, we found that our feelings were as similar as twin’s thoughts are expected to be. Coming to this mutual agreement about competition became official as it was written out. Our concrete idea of competition was clear and the savior of our close relationship as sisters and best friends. Language allowed us to communicate and to understand each other. Language allowed us to transform our relationship into a close, meaningful, fun, and noncompetitive harmony.