In general, teachers want to make sure that their students are learning and thinking well, and we tend to get excited when students demonstrate their learning by answering questions correctly. But what happens when teachers reward students by validating their answers? Unfortunately, when we reward a student’s valid answer, that answer becomes the answer, and the thinking in the classroom tends to stop at that point.
Picture yourself in a 9th grade classroom. The students are studying imperialism, reading George Orwell’s short essay, “Shooting an Elephant.” Desks are arranged in a large circle with students facing one another. The teacher is seated in the circle and wants to facilitate a robust class discussion about Orwell’s motivation for shooting the elephant and the nature of imperialism.
The teacher asks the class, “Why does Orwell shoot the elephant?”
After several seconds of contemplation, a student raises her hand and says, “I think Orwell shoots the elephant because he wants to save face in front of the locals.”
The teacher responds, “Very good,” validating the student’s response.
The student feels that she has done enough “work” in this class discussion. She has, after all, offered a correct answer, so she checks out of the discussion, relaxing into the background of the classroom environment. Other students are unwilling to raise additional answers, as the teacher has already validated what they perceive as the right answer rather than a potential correct answer.
In answering and validating the question, the thinking stops, and a dynamic opportunity has been wasted.
The problem with cognitive closure, or closing down the process of thinking-through what something may mean, is that students become intellectually passive, rather than developing a persistent and tenacious stance toward problem-solving. Cognitive closure is instant gratification. Thinking through multiple potentially correct answers requires a stick-with-it mentality that is central to developing critical thinking in a classroom.
Critical Thinking Works 
Great point Kriko. I completely agree. In my own math class, I’ve started giving far more problems with no single correct answer, and validating the multiple approaches my students take to solve problems. I’m also working on stopping the “yes, great work, you got it” response to when a student has a good solution to a problem, and working more on respond with “so how do you know your answer is good? What are some other ways to solve that problem?”
I have a long way to go, but reminders like yours are invaluable.
Dwees, please send me a list regarding potential articles about critical thinking curriculum and instruction (and/or other educational essentials) that YOU would read. Also, how did you find out about us? Thanks for the kind words and look forward to future dialogue!
Kriko
Hey there Kriko,
I found out about your post via Reddit. Someone had posted it there.
As for your question about potential articles, I’m not sure I can remember off the top of my head to be honest. I do have many, many articles in my Delicious link, so I can probably find them if pressed.
David
Dwees, what success have you had with universalizing and unpacking BOTH right AND wrong answers with students?
Would you agree with our promotion that there is huge value in tracking and exposing the logic for both? If you’ve given it a whirl, then what are your success stories and what have you found challenging?
Curiously,
Kriko