Student Successes With Thinking Maps
Student Successes With Thinking Maps
Student Successes With Thinking Maps
SECOND EDITION
School-Based Research,
Results, and Models for
Achievement Using Visual Tools
DAVID N. HYERLE
I LARRY ALPER
CORWIN
A SAGE Company
-----
FOR INFORMATION:
Corwin
A SAGE Company
2455 Teller Road
Thousand Oaks. Califomia 91320
(800) 233-9936
Fax: (800) 417-2466
www.corwin.com
SAGE Ltd.
1 Oliver's Yard
55 City Road
London EC1 Y 1SP
United Kingdom
Singapore 048763
111213141510987654321
Contents
List of Figures and Tables
Foreword
ix
xiii
Patricia Wolfe
Preface
xiv
xxii
xxiii
xxiv
Key Concepts
The Brain and the Mind
The Brain: Pattern Detector in the Dark
The Flow of Sequencing and Tree Hierarchies
The Physical Brain and the Brace Map
The Multiple Causes and Effects in Feedback Flows
On the Double Bubble Map: Comparing and Contrasting New Information
Describing Attributes: Making Sense Through Emotional and Sensory
Connections in Bubble Maps
Analogies: Bridge Map as the Corpus Callosum?
Defining in Context in the Circle Map: Using the Whole Brain for Holistic
Thinking
The Metacognitive Frame: Pulling It All Together
Why Metacognition Is So Important for Learning
Cooperative Learning, Emotions, and Assessing Leaining
Cooperative Learning and Emotions
Assessing Student Thinking Using Thinking Maps
Unifying Brain and Mind Through Mapping
References
1
1
5
10
12
12
13
14
14
15
15
15
19
21
22
23
27
28
30
30
30
31
32
32
33
Key Concepts
The Story of David
Gaining Fluency
What Can We Learn From David?
Seeing Patterns for Organization
Language for Learning: Supporting Oral Communication
Organized Thinking and Coherent Speaking
Closing the Gap for Underachievers
References
34
34
35
36
36
37
38
39
40
41
43
Key Concepts
Integrating Tools for Differentiation
Theories Into Practice
Linking to Emotional Intelligence
Linking to Multiple Intelligences
Linking Learning Styles
Linking Habits of Mind
Thinking Maps: A Unifying Set of Tools
Reflections: Emergent Thinkers and Lifelong Learners
References
43
44
44
46
46
47
48
48
49
50
Key Concepts
Finding Learning Solutions for Children in Urban Schools
Working With the National Urban Alliance for Effective Education
Bridging the Gap Between Teachers and Students in Urban Settings
The Pedagogy of Confidence
Critical Learning Needs of Students in Underachieving Schools
Teaching Inferential Thinking
Developing Memory as Part of the Mediation of a Student's Learning
Reversing Underachievement in Literacy Among Urban Learners
References
SECTION 2: INTEGRATING CONTENT AND PROCESS
6. Maps for the Road to Reading Comprehension: Bridging Reading Text
Structures to Writing Prompts
Thomasina DePinto Piercy, Ph.D., and David Hyerle, Ed.D.
Key Concepts
Thinking and Maps
Reading and Writing: From Phonemic Awareness to Metacognitive Processes
Phonemic Awareness
Vocabulary Instruction
Text Comprehension
51
51
51
52
52
54
54
57
58
59
60
61
62
62
66
66
68
69
69
70
70
71
72
72
73
74
75
81
81
82
82
83
83
83
85
86
88
92
92
93
93
94
95
99
101
102
104
104
109
111
111
112
112
112
113
113
114
115
116
116
117
118
Key Concepts
Breaking the Rules for Change
Teacher Learning
Teachers Teaching at a Higher Order
Differentiation of Instruction and English as a Second Language
Evaluation of Student Work
Climate and Culture Changes
Teacher Evaluation and Accountability
Implications for Implementation
Reference
118
118
119
121
122
123
123
124
125
125
12. Feeder Patterns and Feeding the Flame at Blalack Middle School
126
126
127
128
130
130
131
132
132
132
133
133
134
134
135
136
137
137
137
138
141
142
144
145
145
146
146
147
148
148
149
153
157
157
158
Key Concepts
Thinking Maps Implementation: Student-Centered Training
StudentVVorkshops
Teacher Training
Thought and Languages
Reference
158
159
160
162
164
166
167
168
Key Concepts
Responsible and Responsive Professional Development
Thinking Maps: A Model for Reflective Practice
Results of Teacher-Reported Reflections
Reflections on Student Learning and Behavior
Teacher Instruction and Planning
In-the-Moment Instruction
Planning
Beyond the Classroom
Creating a Culture of Change Through Inviting Explicit Thinking
References
17. Coaching and Supervising Reflective Practice
Kathy Ernst, M.S.Ed.
Key Concepts
Tools for Focused Observation and Reflection
Tools for Explicit Learning in Lesson Study
Part 1. Surfacing Questions: Framing the Lesson Study With
Teachers' Questions
Part 2. Lesson Planning: Defining the Lesson Goals and
Sequencing the Lesson Events
Part 3: Lesson Experience/Observation
Part 4: Lesson Debriefing
Conclusion
References
168
168
169
170
170
173
173
173
176
177
177
178
178
179
183
183
184
185
188
190
191
192
Key Concepts
Finding Our Way
Thinking Maps: A Language for Leading and Learning
Examining Our Practices
192
192
195
196
19. Bifocal Assessment in the Cognitive Age: Thinking Maps for Assessing
Content Learning and Cognitive Processes
David Hyerle, Ed.D., and Kimberly M. Williams, Ph.D.
Key Concepts
The Bifocal Lens
A Higher Order: A New Bloom for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing
Nonlinguistic Representations, Visual Tools, and Assessment
A Synthesis Language of Visual Tools Based on Cognitive Processes for
Assessment
From Novice to Expert
Developing Transfer of Thinking for Content Learning
Developing Reflective Assessment of Content and Cognition
MAPPER Rubric for Scoring Effectiveness
Seeing Through the Bifocal Lens
References
Index
198
200
203
204
204
204
205
207
208
209
211
213
213
216
216
217
List; of Figures
and Tables
FIGURES
Figure 0.1
Figure 0.2
Figure 1.1
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.3
Figure 1.4
Figure 1.5
Figure 1.6
11
Figure 2.1
Thinking Maps and the Brain Analogy Using the Bridge Map
16
Figure 2.2
17
Figure 2.3
18
Figure 2.4
20
Figure 2.5
22
Figure 2.6
24
Figure 2.7
26
Figure 2.8
Corpus Callosum
28
Figure 2.9
29
Figure 3.1
37
Figure 3.2
40
Figure 3.3
41
Figure 4.1
45
Figure 4.2
47
Figure 5.1
55
Figure 5.2
56
xvii
xix
ix
Figure 5.3
58
Figure 6.1a
63
Figure 6.1b
63
Figure 6.1e
64
Figure 6.1d
64
Figure 6.1e
64
Figure 6.1
64
Figure 6.1g
65
Figure 6.2
67
Figure 7.1
76
Figure 7.2
76
Figure 7.3
77
Figure 7.4
78
Figure 7.5
79
Figure 7.6
80
Figure 8.1
84
Figure 8.2a
85
Figure 8.2b
85
Figure 8.3
86
Figure 8.4
88
Figure 8.Sa
90
Figure 8.Sb
90
Figure 8.Se
91
Figure 9.1
94
Figure 9.2
96
Figure 9.3
97
Figure 9.4
98
Figure 9.5
99
Figure 9.6
100
Figure 9.7
101
Figure 9.8
105
Figure 9.9
106
Figure 9.10
107
Figure 9.11
107
Figure 9.12
108
Figure 9.13
109
Figure 9.14
110
Figure 10.1
115
Figure 11.1
120
Figure 11.2
121
128
129
129
Figure 12.2
130
Figure 12.3
131
Figure 13.1
139
Figure 13.2
140
Figure 13.3
140
Figure 13.4
141
Figure 13.5
141
150
150
151
151
Figure 15.1
161
Lesson Planning
163
164
Figure 15.3
166
Figure 16.1
171
Figure 16.2
174
Figure 16.3
175
Figure 16.4
175
Figure 17.1
181
182
Figure 17.2
xi
xii
Figure 17.3
184
Figure 17.4
Tree Map: What are the differences among tools, strategies, and
approaches in subtraction removal problems?
185
Circle Map: What math will students learn in this lesson, and
what knowledge and information influences our lesson planning?
186
Flow Map of Lesson Launch: What will the teacher do and say to
engage students in the lesson?
187
188
Figure 17.8
189
Figure 18.1
197
Figure 18.2
199
Figure 18.3
201
Figure 19.1
206
209
210
211
Figure 17.5
Figure 17.6
Figure 17.7
Figure 19.3
212
Figure 19.4
214
Figure 19.5
MAPPER Rubric
215
TABLES
Table 8.1
87
Table 8.2
87
ForeYtlord
he brain remembers what it has seen because humans are intrinsically visual beings. The
eyes contain almost 70% of the body's sensory receptors and send millions of signals
every second along optic nerves to the visual processing centers of the brain. It is not surprising
that the visual components of a memory are so robust. And it is not surprising that when
teachers use visuals in the classroom to represent concepts, their students retain the concepts
longer.
Visuals not only are powerful retention aids but also serve to increase understanding.
Imagine trying to comprehend governmental structure or the operation of an internal combustion engine without an accompanying diagram. The ability to transform thoughts into images
is often viewed as a test of true understanding.
Many studies have demonstrated the facilitating effect of visual representations on learning and memory. Bull and Wittrock (1973) reported a study examining sixth graders' understanding and recall of vocabulary words using two different strategies. One group memorized
the dictionary definitions of the words, while a second group illustrated the meaning of the
words. The second group's understanding and retention of the words were much higher.
Another study, concerned with learning Spanish vocabulary words, taught students to use an
imagery process that linked the sound of the word to an image of a concrete noun in English.
The students' retention of the words increased from 28% to 880/0 (Atkinson & Raugh, 1975).
The Thinking Maps program takes full advantage of the natural proclivity of the brain
to think visually. The authors describe Thinking Maps as a language of visual tools
grounded in the thinking process, a most neurally apt description. Neuroscientists tell us
that the brain organizes information in networks and maps. What better way to teach students to think about ideas and organize and express their ideas than to use the very same
method that the brain uses.
This book provides an invaluable way to help our students truly understand and retain the
concepts behind the facts, and to do this in an exciting and motivating way.
Patricia Wolfe
Coauthor, Building the Reading Brain
REFERENCES
Atkinson, R., & Raugh, M. R. (1975). An application of the mnemonic keyword method to the acquisition of
a Russian vocabulary. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 104, 126-133.
Bull, B. L., & Wittrock, M. C. (1973). hnagery in the learning of verbal definitions. British Journal ofEducational
Psychology, 43, 289-293.
Wolfe, P., & Nevills, P. (2004). Building the reading brain. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
xiii
Preface
RENOVATION IN PROCESS
I remember all too well when my wife and I were remodeling our small cabin in the woods
of New Hampshire after we realized that our family, and our home offices, needed more
space. We added two rooms, a home office, and a garage. The renovation was a difficult
process as we lived in a reconstruction zone-much more difficult than building a new
house-but in the end the core of our home and the feeling were very much the same and
we adapted to our new life. The renovation analogy maps nicely onto this second edition
of Student Successes With Thinking Maps. We let go of very little, and many authors revised
their chapters by adding significant new insights, data, and stories within the framework
we had established. We also have added three new chapters with plenty of room for future
growth: one on the deep connections between brain research and cognition, another
focused on inquiry-based learning in science, and a closing chapter on "bifocal assessment"
using Thinking Maps for seeing the formative growth of cognitive development and
content learning simultaneously.
Books offer an array of starting points for new discoveries, so we also have added virtual rooms for you to explore beyond this renovation. The first edition, which was published in 2004, and the expanding work with Thinking Maps around the world inspired
me to start up a nonprofit foundation-the Thinking Foundation-that supports continuing research, social networking, and broadcasting of results within and beyond the educational community. Many of the authors within this book have continuing updates, video
clips, and even complete case studies placed on our website (www.thinkingfoundation
.org). New research from Ethiopia, Brazil, and England is being added as we go to press.
One of our most exciting projects is a series of film documentaries, the first of which, The
Minds of Mississippi (set for release in January 2011), is about the Pass Christian School
District on the Gulf Coast of the United States. The town of Pass Christian was landfall for
Hurricane Katrina in 2005, wiping out homes, businesses, and school buildings and taking
lives. The story of how this school system was rebuilt from the ground up, with Thinking
Maps as a common ground for learning, is presented through this film documentary. The
hard work by educators and the results by students resulted in the school district becoming the top-performing district in the state, leading to federal Blue Ribbon status. This
story, along with the successes with Thinking Maps across the state, is introduced in
Chapter 14 of this book by Marjann Ball. Sometimes we must renovate, and sometimes we
need to start anew in the way we work; the transformative story of Pass Christian is written by Suzanne Ishee. A teacher in Pass Christian, Suzanne tells of amazing educators who
moved quickly to fully reengage the IIminds of Mississippi" in their classrooms.
Of course, when any kind of renovation or revision is being contemplated, you have to
take into account that the world around you has also changed and, thus, so has your vision of
what is possible. The results and research included in this book seem even more relevant now
that the educational community is responding to the needs of our time: Since 2004 when the
first edition was published, the educational community has been using the symbolic power
and realities of lithe 21st century" to see stark problems. Educators still haven't fully escaped
and shifted the early-20th-century paradigm dominated by rote learning and teaching, closedended standardized testing, and classroom inequities that act to lessen the chances of successful
xiv
PREFACE
school and work experiences for our children of color, those who come to school with the need
to learn English, and those in poverty.
Our world has changed in significant ways over the last decade. In fact, since the tum of
the 21st century, technologies have taken our children from passive viewers of static TV
screens in the living rooms of most homes to handheld devices through which information is
streamed to and from almost anywhere in the world. The guiding metaphor for this new
world is "flat world," meaning, as Thomas Friedman (2005) describes, that technologies will
ultimately connect all of us around the world-from developing to "first world" peoples-to
wide-open opportunities in the global marketplace of ideas and products. Linda DarlingHammond, a policy expert and leader in the field of promoting equity in classrooms through
the improvement of teacher quality based on transformational standards, draws Friedman's
metaphor into the title of her comprehensive analysis of the data in The Flat World and Education (2010). Darling-Hammond does not focus on technology as much as she does on the international data showing that thinking and problem solving must become the focus for learning.
The 2006 report by the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA; National Center
for Education Statistics, n.d.) is a linchpin for her argument:
Importantly, the PISA assessments require more advanced analysis and knowledge use
than most U.S. tests, going beyond the question "Did students learn specific facts?" to
ask, "What can students do with what they have learned?" PISA defines literacy in
mathematics, science, and reading as students' ability to apply what they know to new
problems. It is focused on the kind of learning for transfer that is increasingly
emphasized in other nations' curriculum and assessment systems, but often discouraged
by the kind of textbooks and testing most often used in the United States. Indeed, U.S.
students fall furthest behind on PISA tasks that require complex problem solving.
If we are using macrodata-based decision making on a student, classroom, school-wide,
school system, and nation-wide basis, we will systemically shift our focus to the explicit
nurturing of cognitive and critical skills development and rigorous training for transfer of
these skills into content-based and interdisciplinary problem solving. Actually, this is exactly
what the authors of Teaching the Digital Generation (Kelly, McCain, & Jukes, 2009) state:
"Learning must focus on 21st century thinking skills," and "Assessment must encompass both
knowledge skills and higher order thinking skills ... assessment of higher order thinking skills
must be an integral part of the teaching and learning process." Leaders of the "21st century
learning" movement are now demanding a focus on critical thinking, communication,
innovation, problem solving, and entrepreneurial thinking.
As you will find in this new edition of 19 chapters, lbinking Maps are a transfonnationallanguage for directly putting into students' hands eight visuals tools that are based on eight fundamental cognitive processes for moving students, teachers, and administrators to deeper, collaborative thinking. This integrative language becomes a nexus across whole schools for inspiring and
improving teacher performance, high-quality professional development, and coaching and leadership, as well as for engaging all students in deepening their abilities to think deeply within and
across disciplines, and improving their perfonnance on gate-keeping tests.
Linda Darling-Hammond (2010) offers that there is no greater challenge we now have as
educators than to bring these kinds of tools to those with the greatest needs. We as a people
are slipping behind in our educational performance in international assessments, and when
we look inside our own house, we are resegregating some of our family members into rooms
without windows and doors, as the prison population grows for young African American men
and boys and for the vibrant Hispanic population. It is time for a transformation in how we
perceive teaching and learning, and in the tools we deliver to explicitly facilitate students'
thinking in the 21st century.
xv
xvi
TREE OF TRANSFORMATIONS
From a big-picture point of view, the successes that shine through the research and results
discussed in this book reveal the development of rich content knowledge and, more important,
reflections on the continuous cognitive development of every leamer-student, teacher, and
Figure 0.1
Preface:
Thinking Maps as a
Transformational Language for Learning
Lr
Lr
_.
~.
Lr
)(
I
in-depth Thinking Maps ''Training
of Trainers" professional
development in Syracuse and
New York City shows growth in
teacher reflection and student work
I
supervision, coaching, and teaching
are improved through clarity
of Thinking Maps use during
teacher observations and
collaborative, reflective lesson
planning in New York City
constructivist conversations
using Thinking Maps engage
a Vermont elementary school
and faculty teams grappling with
complex and emotionally
challenging school-wide issues
xviii
Integrating Teaching, Learning, and Assessment. One of the greatest concerns in schools today is
how teachers can bring together curriculum and instruction in a way that is meaningful for
student learning, while focusing on content standards and assessments. Almost every author
in this book addresses this issue in some way, investigating how Thinking Maps become an
integration point for these areas, especially across the most crucial areas of performance:
reading, writing across disciplines, mathematics, and inquiry science (Chapters, 6, 7, 8, and 9,
respectively). For example, in Chapter 7, Jane Buckner shows how the maps support the
development of writing processes across disciplines and all grade levels, from emergent
writers to high school levels, by providing clear "structures for organization." She emphasizes
the need for teachers to model the integrated use of the maps across writing prompts and links
this work to specific state assessments. In a different vein, in a new Chapter 9, Lou-Anne
Conroy explains with great detail how inquiry-based learning in high school science classrooms
engages students in independent and collaborative processes and thus heightens their
awareness of their own thinking. In Chapter 19 on "bifocal assessment" I worked with
Kim Williams to describe and refine a pragmatic sequence of activities for moving students to
high levels of fluency with the maps, which, in turn, enables formative assessments of content
concepts and cognitive processes.
Displayed Metacognition. This term was coined by Dr. Art Costa as a description of the
power of visual tools, because these tools display before the learner a range of cognitive
patterns of thinking, thus enabling richer reflections. This phrase also captures a central
point made by many authors: When using Thinking Maps, students, teachers, and
administrators become self-reflective, looking into their own thinking, and become selfregulated learners. These patterns, as Kim Williams discusses in Chapter 2, are extensions
of how the brain works. The brain actively binds data together through neural patterns
and networks information, pruning as needed, chunking information, grasping bits of
linked information in working memory, and then holding onto them in long-term memory.
Kim goes deeper in a provocative essay that actually shows that the cognitive processes
grounding Thinking Maps are directly related to the unconscious patterning happening
within the complex neural functioning of the brain. Bonnie Singer follows in the next
chapter by telling "The Story of David," a boy with severe learning disabilities who,
Thinking Maps
asa
TRANSFORMATIONAL
LANGUAGE
COMMUNITY
OF
LEARNING
CONSTRUCTION
OF
KNOWLEDGE
I
INTEGRA TlNG
TEACHING, LEARNING,
AND ASSESSMENT
Curriculum:
contents
and processes
Instruction:
teaching
and learning
across all
disciplines
K-12
continuous
cognitive
development
across grades
mapping the
standards
contentdeep concept
development
software for
evolving content
knowledge
model for
applying
"best practices"
new
assessment
tools
mediating
student
learning
studentcentered
learning
tools for focused
cooperative
learning
richer classroom
discourse
><
DISPLAYED
META
COGNITION
TOOLS
FOR
EaUITY
Patterning
brain as pattern
detector
Reflection
thinking skills
defined
visual-verbalspatial
higher-order
thinking
text structures
selfassessment
writing prompt
patterns
procedural
knOWledge
flow in
mathematics
global and
analytic views of
knOWledge
self-regulation
of learning
I
WHOLESCHOOL
GROWTH
Leaders
Teachers
whole-school
language
for long-term
development
invites explicit
thinking
language for
dialogue
and perspective
taking
collaborative,
constructive
conversation
mentoring
and levels of
reflection
brings
teachers
together
across system
xx
through the use of these tools over two years, was transformed from being a student with
low performance to a self-regulated learner.
Tools for Equity. While the idea of facilitating cognitive and metacognitive development has
been central to the past 50 years of educational psychology and neuroscience, often the promise of thinking skills instruction has remained elusive and inaccessible to those in the greatest
need. Another theme that arises from this book is an understanding that the maps directly
support teachers in mediating students' thinking. In Chapter 5, Yvette Jackson discusses how
the maps become tools for mediating thinking and literacy development, especially when supporting children of color who are struggling to learn in underachieving, inner-city schools. As
Yvette points out, these children are often merely remediated through repetitive cycles of content learning but not deeply mediated through their thinking abilities.
Ultimately, the issue here is about equal access to high-quality tools for thinking and
instruction that support all students' thinking abilities, across languages and cultures at the highest level. This call for equity is answered throughout the book, most clearly in the stories by
Stefanie Holzman in Chapter 11 from a school in California and by Marjann Ball in Chapter 14
from a junior college in Mississippi. Both of these chapters present research and results showing significant gains for closing the achievement gap.
Whole-School Growth. The field of education is now faced with the complex problem of teaching
to the "whole child" while also attempting to transform "whole schools." We are moving away
from seeing students as individual learners in straight rows of desks to a model of learning
based on a circle of learning. Many schools are directly teaching to the social and emotional
needs of all children, understanding that these are not just pathways to learning content, but
are important in and of themselves. This involves consciously integrating conflict resolution
and cooperative and social-emotional learning into the classroom context.
A similar shift is now occurring in the area of organizational change across whole schools
as educators are becoming aware of how learning and leadership are intimately connected. An
undercurrent of every chapter in this book is the depth of self-learning attained by students,
teachers, and administrators in the context of'Working across whole schools. In Chapters 11-13, we
are offered detailed histories of how three very different schools across the K-12 spectrum
implemented Thinking Maps as a language in their whole schools, clearly demonstrating how
learning, teaching, and leadership are united through these common tools. In Chapters 16-18,
the authors focus on how educators learn to work together by visually surfacing perceptions
and ideas through their interactions with each other. Sarah Curtis details the implementation
process in Chapter 16 by looking at how high-quality professional development in Thinking
Maps proceeds from novice to expert levels. In a revised Chapter 17, Kathy Ernst nicely balances Sarah's focus on professional development by showing explicitly how coaching and
supervision are deepened by using the maps as tools in lesson observations and the pre- and
postconference sessions to support teachers in becoming more self-reflective in the practice of
teaching.
So often the conversations that happen in meetings in schools become procedural rather
than reflective, sometimes combative rather than constructive. Larry Alper brings to us in his
revised Chapter 18 an offering of new research on Thinking Maps as a language for leadership.
Within this new research, he engages us with the term constructivist conversations as an expression of how Thinking Maps become a new language for deepening conversations so that
people come together through the maps, facing their own and each other's thinking, "opening
the space" for problem solving, and transforming the quality of thinking and learning across
the whole school.
PREFACE
The four central ideas discussed above joined together for me as two major themes: construction of knowledge" as a framework for learning and communities of learning" expressing the communal quality of the educational experience. I finally reached the top of the tree,
discovering the overarching view from which I could see and make sense of the details within
the whole of the book Student Successes With Thinking Maps. The authors show us that Thinking
Maps are a transformative language for learning, for personal growth and self-assessment, for
collaborative work across complex and increasingly "virtual" technological organizations and
societies, and as common pathways for communicating across diverse languages and cultures.
As you may see in the written and graphic forms throughout this book, these maps have
simple starting points and spread organically as a seed maturing to full growth, providing for
the creation of infinitely complex patterns of knowledge for every child, drawing out our multiple frames of reference, and mirroring the richly textured landscape of our lives.
/I
/I
REFERENCES
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). The flat world and education. New York: Teachers College Press.
Friedman, T. L. (2005). The world is flat: A brief history of the 21st century. New York: Farrar, Strauss &
Giroux.
Kelly, F. 5., McCain, T., & Jukes, 1. (2009). Teaching the digital generation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
National Center for Education Statistics. (n.d.). A summary of findings from PISA 2006. Retrieved
November 8, 2010, from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2006highlights.asp
xxi
Appreciat:ions
t has been a delight working on this second edition with the folks at Corwin and all of the
authors who added to their original thinking. Importantly, Sarah Curtis, now an elementary
school assistant principal, was an editor of the first edition of this book, and her hard work still
shines through these pages. With this edition, many thanks go to Lou-Anne Conroy, who
helped bring this edition together by reorganizing chapters, figures, and flights of mind as we
struggled to the finish line!
Our deepest appreciations go to all of the authors who have contributed to the work and
research over the years as well as to the teachers, administrators, and students who continue
to inspire us as they use Thinking Maps. Many of the authors in this book and teachers and
administrators in the field were initially inspired to bring the maps into classrooms by the
hardworking consultants and representatives from Thinking Maps, Inc., who work their
hearts out and stretch their minds across several countries and across most of the United
States. We thank them for their passionate and determined efforts to bring their wide-ranging
knowledge to educators and students every day.
We also thank those students quoted in this book who offered their applications of Thinking Maps and their profound, magical insights such as these:
xxii
xxiii
About the
Contributors
Marjann Kalehoff Ball, Ed.D., is an independent consultant working in pre-K to college level
across Mississippi and Louisiana. Formerly a professor of English and Development of Critical
Thinking and Study Skills at Jones County Junior College in Mississippi, Marjann now works
with Thinking Maps, Inc. and focuses on implementing and supporting schools to bring
Thinking Maps into the daily life of the classroom. Believing that learning is a continuing process that can be fostered across all levels of education, she is convinced that Thinking Maps are
an indispensable tool of learning for age or ability differentiations.
Jane Buckner, Ed.S., is a national educational consultant and author of works focused on
developing writing proficiency in students from kindergarten through high school. She is
presently a lead consultant with Thinking Maps, Inc. and working with whole-school implementation of Write . .. from the Beginning and Write . .. for the Future. Jane most recently
authored a comprehensive teachers' and facilitators' guides to second language acquisition,
titled uPath to Proficiency" (Thinking Maps, Inc., 2009). These guides integrate IIthought and
language" using Thinking Maps to scaffold language learning for students.
Daniel CheIlJ', M.Ed., is currently bringing his knowledge of Thinking Maps and other approaches
to engaging learning and thinking at the highest levels to his sixth-grade students of Towle Elementary School in the town of Newport, New Hampshire. Before returning to the classroom Dan
directed the New Hampshire School Administrators Leading with Technology (NHSALT) program as part of a Gates grant for the New Hampshire State Department of Education. He was also
a former teclmology coordinator in the Lebanon, New Hampshire, school district.
Edward V. Chevallier, M.Ed., is currently serving as Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum
& Instruction in the Northwest Independent School District, north of Fort Worth, Texas. Previously, he has served as a principal, teacher, and educational consultant and Thinking Maps
trainer. As a middle school principal, Mr. Chevallier led his campus to make achievement
gains by helping students use Thinking Maps as learning, thinking, and assessment tools.
Upon leaving the principalship, he moved into district work in the area of curriculum and staff
development. In that role, he was able to apply Thinking Maps to organizational planning and
development. His work in public education began at the elementary school level as a teacher
and principal. Mr. Chevallier is an experienced trainer in topics that include school leadership,
instructional strategies, and brain-based learning.
Ho Po Chun, M.Ed., is a former teacher and elementary principal in the Singapore schools.
Presently she leads the implementation of Thinking Maps for the Innovative Learning Circle
in Singapore and is dedicated to developing the thinking abilities of students across Singapore.
Lou-Anne Conroy, M.A., has taught high school science for over 25 years. Presently she is
an instructor for Teaching Science through the Inquiry Process (TSIP) sponsored by
Massachusetts Science and Engineering Fair, Inc. and Gelfand Endeavor in Massachusetts
Schools (GEMS). She facilitates the implementation of inquiry-based teaching and learning
for education interns and works directly with classroom teachers to support sustainable
science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) education for all children. Through her
xxiv
work as a consultant for Designs for Thinking and Thinking Foundation, she is convinced
of the power of Thinking Maps to help children of all academic abilities learn science as
well as function as a very compelling tool for the mentoring of education interns and lesson planning. In addition to her work with science education, she is actively involved in
current scientific research institutions.
Alan Cooper, B.A., B.Ed. Dip Tchng. ANZIM, is a New Zealand independent consultant specializing in thinking skills and how learning occurs. As Headmaster of St. George's School (now a part
of Collegiate School) for 17 years, he was known for taking responsible risks in educational innovation, including the first implementations of Thinking Maps, Habits of Mind, Multiple Intelligences,
and the Dunn and Dunn Learning Styles models in New Zealand.
Sarah Curtis, M.Ed., is now assistant principal of the Bernice A. Ray Elementary School in
Hanover, New Hampshire.. a school that is part of the SAU 70 school system. She is passionate
about enhancing student and teacher performance by supporting educational discourse
through teacher reflection. Sarah was a co-editor of the first edition of Student Successes With
Thinking Maps (Corwin, 2004) and conducted her master's level research on Thinking Maps
and teacher reflection.
Kathy Ernst, M.S.Ed., is a national education consultant who has taught children and teachers
for over 30 years. At Bank Street College of Education she taught online mathematics courses
and served on the faculty of the Leadership in Mathematics Education Program. She is currently using Thinking Maps to develop visible processes of coaching, supervision, and professional development.
Stefanie R. Holzman, Ed.D., is the Co-Director and Internal Evaluator of the Charter and
Autonomous Schools Leadership Academy-a federal grant at California State University,
Dominguez Hills.. in Southern California. She is also an adjunct professor at CSUDH where she
teaches in the Education Administration Department. Prior to that she was Director of
Curriculum, Standards and Instruction for the Orange County Department of Education in
Costa Mesa, California. Formerly, she was the principal of Roosevelt Elementary School in
Long Beach.. California, a California Distinguished School and California Title I Academic
Achievement Award Winning School with 100% of students receiving free lunch, 85% ELLs..
and 99% minority. It was at Roosevelt that Stefanie found strategies to embed Thinking Maps
into all aspects of the curriculum, in all subject areas across all grade levels. She believed that
despite demographics, all Roosevelt students were capable of personal and academic excellence. Of her other professional endeavors, none was as fulfilling as when she was encouraging the daily empowerment of Roosevelt students to become life-long learners!
Gill Hubble, M.A., LTCL Dip Tchng, is an independent international consultant on teaching
thinking strategies, the design of whole-school thinking and learning programs, and organizational change. Associate Principal of St. Cuthbert's College for 16 years.. she has also been a
researcher and consultant to the Advanced Learning Center and Centre for Excellence at the
college's Collegiate Centre. Presently.. Gill is doing international consulting and giving keynote
addresses on how places of learning may also become "Thinking Schools."
Yvette Jackson, Ed.D., is the Chief Executive Officer for the National Urban Alliance for
Effective Education. In this capacity, she works with school district leaders and teachers across
the country to customize and deliver systemic approaches to elicit high intellectual
performances from all students. She is the author of PedagoglJ of Confidence, which is the
cornerstone of the design she oversees of tailored courses of study in cognitive strategies and
instructional practices that focus on identifying and amplifying the intellectual potential of
school dependent urban students.
XXV
xxvi
Janie B. MacIntyre, M.Ed., is a middle school teacher, researcher, and educational consultant
who was named as a USA Today Teacher Team member and a Christa McAuliffe Scholar. As a
trainer with Innovative Learning Group, she has facilitated Thinking Maps training with over
3,000 teachers in multiple states.
Thomasina DePinto Piercy, Ph.D., is a former principal with 18 years of K-5 teaching experience. As a collaborative writer about data-driven, whole-school student performance change,
she provides support for colleagues looking for similar significant and lasting results as have
occurred at her former school, Mt. Airy Elementary. Thommie is the Director of Elementary
Instruction for the Carroll Country Office of Education in Maryland and is author of the book
Compelling Conversations: Connecting Leadership to Achievement (Lead and Learn Press, 2010).
Bonnie Singer, Ph.D., is the president/CEO of Architects For Learning, where she provides
professional development for schools nationwide in instructional methods for teaching writing and literacy, and she directs a staff that provides academic assessment and intervention
services. In partnership with Dr. Anthony Bashir, she developed the EmPOWERTM method for
teaching expository writing. Dr. Singer received her doctorate from Emerson College, where
she was also an instructor and clinical supervisor in the department of Communication
Sciences and Disorders for many years. Currently, she holds an adjunct teaching appointment
in Graduate and Professional Studies at Endicott College.
Kimberly M. Williams, Ph.D., is currently a school professional development and assessment
consultant. She also serves on the graduate faculty of Plymouth State University in New
Hampshire. She has previous taught at Hobart and William Smith Colleges in Geneva,
New York, Dartmouth College in Hanover, New Hampshire, and Plymouth State University.
Dr. Williams's research and publications have focused on cognition and tools for improving
thinking in the classroom and she has two books forthcoming on assessment strategies for
assessing thinking and learning. She also writes and teaches about topics related to education
policy (specifically policies related to school security, students' rights, and funding), cognitive
neuroscience and learning, and foundations of education. Her most recent book was coauthored with Dr. Marcel Lebrun entitled Keeping Kids Safe, Healthy and Smart by Rowan Littlefield Publishers released in early 2009.
Thinking
Maps as a
Transforll1 at:ional
Language for
Learning
David Hyerle, Ed.D.
KEY CONCEPTS
A common visual language for thinking and learning
Visible learning, best practices, and brain research
Describing five essential characteristics of Thinking Maps using a Bubble Map
of these languages is based on unique graphic primitives that are interdependent and combined in
simple ways to create complex representations of ideas, emotions, analytic arguments, discoveries,
and works of art. These symbols are arbitrary; they don't mean anything in how they look other
than what we ascribe to them in our language community.
Thinking Maps (see Figure 1.1) are no different from other languages that have been developed
within or across cultures: Languages are inherently made by humans and thus are arbitrary and
incomplete, and have grey areas and ambiguous "rules" that sometimes govern strange usage. Yet,
we agree as communities to use these imperfect languages because we find them useful for
communication in our daily lives. But we have never had, as far as I know, a language of cognition,
or, more specificall~ a language for generating patterns of thinking based on human cognitive
structures. Certain1~ our spoken and written and mathematical languages are all based on being
able to represent our thinking, ideas, and concepts but not for explicitly representing thinking as
patterns. One would be hard pressed to argue that the words set in linear sequence found on this
page actually displrnJ thinking patterns such as comparisons or categories, metaphors, or complex
causal relationships. Our written languages have embedded within them all of these cognitive
patterns, but they do not appear before your eyes right now on this page. The thinking patterns are
embedded in the linearity of text, and you need to work a bit to dig them out. For example, in the
Preface, you can see my conceptual understanding of the themes of the book in a Tree Map that
would not be as easily represented in linear text. The most obvious example is this: When we Google
directions to a place we are going, we can get both the linear, line-by-line directions and a visual map
showing the network of back roads and major highways offering a multitude of options. Thinking
Maps offer mental maps of how we are thinking and new routes for understanding.
Figure 1.1
Thinking Maps
CY'-O -, ,
METAPHORICAL
THINKING
'
------s
~ .------..~
context/frame
of reference
analogies
describing
qualities
....
~~oo~
8c=K8
~OO~
compare
and contrast
i
_ _{
WhOle/~~
SYSTEMS DYNAMICS
THINKING
DIALOGICAL
THINKING
~i
EVALUATIVE
THINKING
classification
""-
pp ~
The term "Thinking Maps" with or without the graphic forms of the eight
Maps has a registered trademark.
Thinking Maps complement and support the integration of all the languages we use in
school, around the house, or at the workplace. As shown in this book, the maps directly
support language acquisition, reading comprehension, writing processes, mathematics
problem solving, and inquiry-based science. Thinking Maps offer a language that combines
symbols: All other symbols and pictorial representations may be used within each of the maps.
Maybe the most obvious link to other languages is in how Thinking Maps function. From a
blank page or computer screen, we can map iterations of basic cognitive patterns starting with
simple graphics, much like we write out sentences on a blank tablet. In Figure 1.2 you can view
the graphic primitives on the left side, the corresponding definition of each cognitive process
in the middle, and the depiction of an expanded map on the right side.
Psychologists, cognitive scientists, and educators have richly researched the eight
fundamental cognitive processes, as described in more detail below, reaching far back into the
early history of modem education. These eight structures were identified by Jean Piaget as
"mental operations" that are foundational: These cognitive processes are used in isolation and
in combination as we assimilate and accommodate new content and concepts. They are with
us as we shift from concrete to abstract thinking. Mental operations such as comparisons,
categorization, seriation, causality, and whole-part reasoning are with us our entire lives and
develop as "content knowledge" and conceptual understandings become more complex. Try
not using these patterns of thinking!
Thinking Maps, as a pattern language of cognitive processes, are a way for learners to
become conscious of and transfer these mental operations into any learning environment, from
early childhood to the adult workplace. Teachers use the maps to convey, facilitate, and mediate
thinking and learning as every student becomes more fluent with the maps as a language. In
single classrooms and across whole schools over multiple years, students are generating ever
more complex applications of single maps by their own hands and creating unique configurations
of multiple maps together in response to the content and concepts they are learning. Of course,
several of the graphic primitives have been used for a long time to help generate and communicate
processes, such as the Flow Map (or flowchart) for sequencing and cycles, the Tree Map for
conceptualizing hierarchies and taxonomies, and the Brace Map for diagramming the anatomy
of the major and minor parts of the human body. What is new about Thinking Maps is not the
idea of dynamic graphic primitives (all languages are built on this premise), but that there is a
coherent, interdependent, and universal array of thinking processes that are used in orchestration
by students and teachers as a common visual language for learning.
From the early 1990s, our focus has been on all teachers immediately training all of
their students across their whole school to become fluent with the tools. As you will read
below, I first developed Thinking Maps after teaching in the Oakland Unified School
District in Northern California in the mid-1980s. Over the years, thousands of wholeschool faculties have implemented the maps, thus representing a great multiplier effect as
large numbers of students from prekindergarten to college have become fluent in Thinking
Maps. From first introductions to complex applications over time, students, teachers, and
administrators move from novice to expert use in these tools, using maps independently,
in cooperative groups, and as participants in schools for visually sharing ideas and for
creating final products. Thinking Maps, introduced as a common visual language for thinking
and learning across whole learning communities, are taught to students in order for them
to improve their unique cognitive abilities and to transfer these processes deeply into
academic fields. Thinking Maps are also used as a set of visible tools for interdisciplinary
problem solving and decision making-not for a year or so, or just across a few classrooms,
but as a systemic language for change across whole school communities, across school
districts, and into the college level and workplace. Ultimately, within the networks of these
cognitive processes are found our capacities to reflect on and improve our thinking,
Fim.-.re 1.2 Thihking Maps Graphic Primitives and Definitions of Cognitive Processes
Graphic Primitives and Definitions
primitives
expanded maps
CJ--DCJDO DODO
improve ourselves, support others to do the same, and hopefully improve the world
around us.
VISIBLE LEARNING,
"BEST PRACTICES," AND THE BRAIN
Before going deeper into refined definitions of the map~, let's ask a qu~sti~n that drives. to the
heart of how Thinking Maps work: What is the connection between thinking and learmng? Is
this a simple question? I don't think so; as a matter of fact, I believe we as an ed~cational
community had in our hands in the late 1970s and 1980s an answer to many of the dilemmas
we face in classrooms today. Back then there was a "thinking skills" movement, and it was
derailed for many different reasons but foremost because many of the leaders of the movement
were in the discovery phase of a whole new paradigm for learning, exploring the possibilities
and the ultimate effects of focusing on cognition, mediation of thinking, critical reflection, and
metacognition. The "results" did not come soon enough, or the time was not ripe, or simply
the idea of focusing systematically on thinking in the context of content learning was too big
a shift. But now new research in the brain sciences (see Chapter 2) and comprehensive studies
of the primary effects on learning are bringing us back to the future. Let's first take a look at
some new research and then draw upon Robert Marzano's research on classroom strategies
that work (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001).
The most comprehensive synthesis of 800 meta-analyses ever completed on what drives
high-quality student performance was recently published. The book is Visible Learning by John
Hattie (2009), a professor of education at the University of Auckland, New Zealand. What is
the overarching key to improving student learning? In the summary of the book, Hattie states,
The story is about the visibility of teaching and learning: it is the power of passionate,
accomplished teachers who focus on students' cognitive engagement with the content
. . . developing a way of thinking, reasoning, and emphasizing problem solving and
strategies in their teaching about the content they wish students to learn.
We all may say we do this, but let's be clear: Content has trumped process decade after decade.
And our present assessment and evaluation instruments are mirrors for what we expect of children
in the 21st century. Educators around the world really do not explicitly focus on thinking and
cognitive development, even though we know that cognitive development is happening over the
prekindergarten through college years in every child, every day. Why don't we directly tap these
cognitive structures, make them visible, mediate them, assess them, enhance them, and give
students the tools to consciously transfer these thinking processes beyond the classroom?
John Hattie (2009) identifies an array of factors that foster learning, but his in-depth
analysis of data leads to a clear vision of the most influential foundations of learning: cognitive
engagement, metacognition, and dynamic feedback between students and teachers. These
focal points have the highest statistical "effects" on the lives of learners and teachers. Yet,
Hattie is also clear-cut in his warning-this is an explanation of results from across a range of
studies-and he does not pretend to suggest direct causality. This basically means these results
should not be read as a list of "to-dos" for every teacher to write up on the whiteboard. His
work gives us guidance and direction.
In another meta-analysis study more familiar to those in the United States, researchers at
Mid-continent Research for Education and Learning, led by Dr. Robert Marzano, have
identified nine essential areas that, when given systematic focus, have been shown to improve
student achievement (see Figure 1.3).
Figure 1.3
~,
',',
>,.,
To best understand how these research findings and John Hattie's (2009) new meta-analysis
can immediately, effectivel}', and practically translate to teaching and learning, let's explore a
classroom in which the use of Thinking Maps supported and connected the essential nine
effective areas and Thinking Maps. This classroom experience occurred years ago in Jackson,
Mississippi. In the 1990s, I was doing a lot of training in Mississippi, and after conducting
in-depth training in transforming curriculum and assessment using Thinking Maps and
cooperative learning techniques, I was invited into Norm Schuman's classroom. Norm had
attended the seminar series, and I was sitting in at his request so that I could give him feedback
on his integration processes.
Peek into Norm.Schuman's ~ixth-grade social stiJdiesciassroom in)ackson, Mississippi,and see groups of
s.tudents huddled over books, working together, busily and intently sketching a picture of information, and
drawing to the 'surface essential knowledge that was once bound bytext. All groups use a common visua.1
tlloJ-a hierar~hicalstrueturereftected by a Tree Map-to collect,ilnalyze,and synthesize the textintO a
clearly definedpkture ota tribe as shown in Figure 1.4. Each group will also share this mental picture in
an oral presentation, using the map as a visual guide on the. overhead projector. The six cooperative
-,Je~rninggr~ups have each bee." .asked to read a passage fr()m well-worn texts on.a different Native
',~merican tribeinorder t identHy critical information about each Native Amerieangroup: customs and
. ~lebrationsi . hC1~itats, foods, ge.nder roles and. relationships an10ngm~mberS,c.uldspiritual b~liefs ..Ndrm
emphasizes finding details about each of these topics, along with the fact that he will create the final test
questions from the information each group presents. He methodically moves around the room andloQ.ks
dawn at the developing Tree Maps, guiding here, scanning there, and nodding quietly in agreement at
Cl.nothertable. The groups: redraft these maps several times during two periods' of instruction until ()nly
.the rrio5tessentialideilshave'been distilled and organized frorrrttle text.
The following day, oral presentations begin. As each group member speaks about a key point of
interest from one area on the map, his or her peers are busy at their seats, listening, sketching out the
t;nap, and making notes and comparisons to their own work.
. Days after the presentations are over, Norm gives the students a test includingq~estibns based on text
information they presented ,and questions that require them to have linked information from~several ()f
t.he Tree Maps. He also ~skS qustions thatinvolve the use of other thinking skills defined by the maps,
suCh as the Double Bubble Map for comparing tribes. the Flow Map for showing the development of 'a
'culture, or the Multi-Flow Map for explaining the causes and effectS of outside in.terventions. Students are
ready for such questions because these tools have become a common way of communicating.
...
I:'
When asked about this processandr espe~ially,ab9ut the level of his questions (answered by students
who have come into his. classroom as supposed underachievers from low socioeconomic neighborhoods),
Norm responds, "I couid never have asked these qu~ons of my previous students, most of whom came
into my c1asssev~ral years behind ipgrade-Ievel reading! 'hadn't given them the tools to make inferences
like this. They didn't have the organizational abilitiesto work with so much information."
Figure 1.4 Native American Assignment Tree Map
Native Amerlcart
tiibe
I
customs
and
celebrations
I
habitats'
I
I
goods
--===r==----.,
1
.....
crafts
tools
food
I
gender roles
and
relationships
As you can see, Norm and his students apply and unite Marzano's effective strategy areas
into fluid practice rather than interpret the nine areas as a IJmodel" to be implemented. From
the beginning of the assignment, through the presentations, and ending with the formal
assessments, Norm and his students utilize Thinking Maps as tools to support processing,
sharing, understanding, refining, presenting, and questioning information in order to
transform information into knowledge. The clear categories of the Tree Map and the other
thinking processes embedded in the visual tools provide clear objectives, feedback, and a set
of cues, questions, and advanced organizers to direct and scaffold as students read for
information. Cooperatively, using Thinking Maps as cues and questions, Norm's students are
able to identify key similarities and differences and to synthesize chunks of information into
meaningfulleaming during their note taking. During the presentations and assessments, the
Thinking Maps continually provide the cues and questions to expand the learning, encouraging
students to generate and test their hypotheses as they listen and link one tribe to the next. This
Native American unit takes the list of nine essential classroom strategies, which could be
interpreted as isolated practices, and explicitly and richly weaves them together into a
multilayered, coherent learning experience.
Returning to John Hattie's (2009) research from Visible Learning, we can also see the thinking
going on the classroom: Students are being cognitively engaged, they are reflecting on their
thinking (metacognition), and they are getting direct feedback from their teacher, Norm
Schuman, but also from their peers. This is because their thinking has become visible and they
can share more easily what and how they are thinking together.
The link to "best practices" is apparent, and the link to present findings in brain research
is even more obvious. Thinking Maps work precisely because they are fundamentally
connected to how the brain thinks and learns. Just as the brain seeks patterns of information
to network, Thinking Maps teach and supply an explicit visual language for students to find
the patterns that exist and to construct their own networks of knowledge.
Long ago, most experts in brain-based research and learning agreed on two aspects of
brain theory: The brain is a pattern seeker and is dominantly visual. According to Eric Jensen
(1998), in his book Brain-Based Teaching and Learning, "Ninety percent of all information that
comes into our brain is visual." The importance of the maps as concrete pictures of abstract
concepts is linked to our ability to learn visually and the way the maps complement the
complexity of the structure and processing of our visual cortex. Thinking Maps, which are
visual patterns for thinking, are therefore well designed for teaching and learning. Because
each map is a visual representation of a thinking process by way of a pattern, teachers can take
advantage of a strategy that matches the natural learning tendencies of the brain. As we shall
see in Chapter 2, the brain processes information from the senses and remembers information
when it is meaningful and carries emotional value. When students u pay attention" using the
maps, they are strengthening and building networks. Chris Yeager, director of consulting for
Thinking Maps, Inc., has focused extensively on the linkages between what we know about
the brain and why the maps work for students and teachers. She has drawn from the work of
Pat Wolfe (Wolfe & Nevills, 2002), Robert Sylwester (1995), and David Sousa (2006) to create
a Flow Map that shows these basic functions (see Figure 1.5). Thinking Maps are a Upatternmaking language" that supports neural networking that is meaningful because the cognitive
processes are fundamental to how the brain works through the neural processes of sequences,
hierarchies, and causality. This is fully explored by Kim Williams in the next chapter.
Let's return to the classroom to reinforce this research in practice. Students in Norm's
classroom working on the Native American units have the concrete visual tools to find the
patterns embedded in reading and to see their own thinking emerge as they literally connect
Figurel.5
Lost
Senses
Register
Information
Meaning
Emotion
Building
Networks
Networks
Strengthened
Networks
Extended
Source: Adapted by Chris Yeager from Wolfe & Nevills, 2002; Sylwester. 1995; and Sousa, 2006.
LongTerm
Memory
their ideas on the maps. They don't have to hold all of the information in their brains in shortterm memory, or in repetitive, linear notes on a page. The s~dents and teacher can unders~and
each other from the note-making stage to the final presentations by way of the common VIsual
language. When they present their material, students and teacher have a clear visual picture
of their mental processes for understanding and for assessment.
When students repeatedly associate a concrete visual pattern with an abstract thought
process, they learn patterns for what thinking looks like. These patterns then automatically
signal the brain to recognize and even seek out thought processes in print, discussions, and
assessments and across all of the amazing media sources they are now required to access for
research purposes. In effect, students have wired together networks of neurons for
metacognition. Like Norm's class, students become fluent with these patterns of thinking and
begin to recognize them independently of teacher instruction, thus developing their own
thinking and learning toward higher levels.
I0
During my later research on Thinking Maps, I became intrigued by different types of visual
tools,. finally writing two comprehensive books on the theory, practice, and degree of
effectiveness of these tools. Recently, I synthesized these books with current research in
practice into a comprehensive text with a theme of 21st-century learning: Visual Tools for
Transforming Information Into Knowledge (Hyerle, 2009). I have discovered through research, my
own teaching, and experiences that each type of visual tool offers useful ways of visually
accessing knowledge.
I also fOWld that each kind of visual tool also has some weaknesses that cannot be overlooked.
Mind-mapping techniques that surfaced in the early 1970s facilitate open-minded thinking yet lack
the consistent structure and deeper levels of complexity required for today's classrooms. The now
familiar "graphic organizers," which surfaced in the 1980s, help students organize large amounts
of infonnation and scaffold their thinking, but fail when they become static, blackline masters
focused on isolated content tasks selected by the teacher, rather than initiated by the learner. These
tools are task-specific organizers, because they usually focus on a specific content task and are often
confined to the task at hand rather than easily transferable across disciplines.
A third kind of visual tool, "thinking-process" maps, is based on facilitating well-defined
thinking processes. Two of these forms, concept mapping and systems diagramming, richly
convey complex interdependencies in concepts and systems, respectively. Embedded in the
strengths of these two models are also limitations: These models are each dependent on one fonn
of visually structuring knowledge, hierarchical forms for concept mapping, and feedback loops for
systems diagrams. This leads to an underrepresentation of other thinking processes. In addition, in
practice, the translation of these complex models is often daunting to students and teachers alike.
The combined practical, theoretical, and critical attributes of these different types of visual
tools have informed the continuing evolution of Thinking Maps into a 21st-century language
for learning, synthesizing many of the best qualities of these other types of visual tools: an
evolution from the generative quality of brainstorming webs, the organizing structure of
graphic organizers, and the deep cognitive processing found in concept maps.
Consistent. The symbol grounding each map has a unique but consistent form that visually
reflects the cognitive skill being defined. For example, the process of sequencing is represented
by the Flow Map starting with one box and one arrow. This is the graphic primitive upon
which the map is used to show linear concepts. Thus, a Flow Map might show just the three
boxes, with key information written inside, showing the beginning, middle, and end of a story.
Flexible. The cognitive skill and the graphic primitive for each map lead to a flexibility in form
and to the infinite number of ways the map can grow and be configured. So a Flow Map of a
story may start at the beginning but grow in complexity to show many stages and substages
of the story. This map could be drawn rising from the bottom left to top right of the page,
reflecting the rising action of a story.
Developmental. Because of the consistent graphic primitives and flexible use, any learner (of
any age) may begin with a blank sheet of paper and expand the map to show his or her
thinking. A Flow Map can be a few boxes long or evolve over time to fill a whole page. The
leamer-and the content of the leaming-determines the complexity of the map. Every
leamer, from early childhood on, can use the Flow Map to show what he or she knows about
a story and thus produce a different configuration of the content.
Integrative. There are two key dimensions of integration: thinking processes and content
knowledge. First, all of the maps may be used and integrated together. Using the example of
a story, a learner could use the Flow Map to show the plot, a Double Bubble Map to show a
comparison of characters, and then a Tree Map to identify the main ideas and supporting
details. Multiple Thinking Maps are used for solving multistep problems, for comprehending
overlapping reading text structures, and for use during phases of the writing process. Second,
the maps are used deeply within and across content areas. For example, the Flow Map is used
for plot analysis in reading comprehension, order of operations in math, historical timelines in
social studies, and studying recurring natural cycles in science.
Reflective. As a language, the maps unveil what and how one is thinking in patterns. Not only
can the learner look down and reflect upon the pattern of content, but the teacher also reflects on
and informally assesses the content learning and thinking processes of the learner. In addition,
at any time and with every map, learners may draw a rectangular frame around a map. This
represents one's frame of reference, or metacognitive frame. For example, a high school student
may have sketched out a Flow Map and identified half a dozen turning points in the flow of a
novel. By drawing the frame around the map, the student can jot down what influenced this
analysis and the references in the text. The framing tool goes beyond merely referencing what
one knows, to ask the learners how they know the information within each map.
II
I2
REFERENCES
Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (2008). Learning and leading with Habits of Mind. Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Hattie, J. A. C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. New
York: Routledge.
Hyerle, D. (1996). Visual tools for constructing knowledge. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Hyerle, D. (2000). A field guide to using visual tools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Hyerle, D. (2009). Visual tools for transJonning information into knowledge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D. J" & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based
strategiesfor increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development.
Ogle, D. (1988, December-1989, January). Implementing strategic teaching. Educational Leadership, 46,
47-60.
Sousa, D. A. (2006). How the brain learns. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Sylwester, R. (1995). A celebration of neurons: An educator's guide to the human brain. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Wolfe, P., & Nevills, P. (2004). Building the reading brain. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Sect:ion I
Linking Thinking,
Language, and
Learning
2
Why and
H01M Thinking
Maps Work
A Language
KEY CONCEPTS
Cognition
Learning brain
Neural networks
Thinking Maps are grounded in eight cognitive universals-thinking processes that our brains use
every day: sequencing, hierarchical classification, part-to-whole, causation, comparing and contrasting,
describing, analogies, and defining in context. While these processes work in unison, so too does our
brain work in interrelated ways by patterning information. As Pat Wolfe states in the Foreword
to this book, because maps network and plot information in patterns, uThinking Maps are what the
brain does."
With this macro view as a starting point, this chapter will drive deeper to the microprocesses of the brain at work by providing a brief look at how the structures of the brain-from
the cellular level to the whole brain itself-actually engage in these same actions that are
embodied in Thinking Maps. We will investigate how the brain is constantly activating processes such as sequences, hierarchies, and comparisons and is-in large part-based upon the
continuous process of prediction, based on causal and analogical relationships. It is important
to note that these functions are completely neurological and therefore unconscious, whereas the
use of Thinking Maps in the classroom engages the conscious mind. These fundamental "process patterns" are, of course, only partially represented and activated by Thinking Maps. The
benefit of making explicit patterns using graphic primitives such as the Thinking Maps is that
all of us as learners become more aware of what we are thinking and also how we are thinking
(metacognition). Providing tools that allow students to show what they know and also how
14
they are thinking about it can be quite useful for assessing students' learning in the classroom.
How intriguing: Thinking Maps used as visual patterning tools based on cognitive processes
may express fundamental brain activity.
15
Figure 2.1
Thinking Maps and the Brain Analogy Using the Bridge Map
Brain part
responsible or
analogous
torrhinking Map
(cognition)
Relating Factor
"
~"~"',..' ,:~~,
...;"""""/01:' ..
",:~,.
Prefrontal
cortex
executive
function
Neuronal
message
sending
Flow
(sequencing)
~':$::'"'~";:':;"',l:-:-~' :'i.'
Brace
(part to
whole)
Tree
(classification)
~~.:"..,
' , .o!':I"......
>.:
I .. "
MultiFlow (cause
and effect)
Bridge
(analogies)
Double
Bubble
(compare and
contrast)
Bubble
(description)
Circle
Metacognitive
(defining
frame
in context/big
(Frame of
picture/brainstorming) Reference)
Figure 2.2
Ii
Electrical signal
Next nerve cell
passes to the
Initial stimulus
Stimulates
Signal passes
is stimulated
next nerve cell
sends
dendrites to
down the axon
either
to
speed
~
across the
electrical signal ~
release
;'---+
~ to dendrites and
up or slow
synaptic gap vial
down the axon
neurotransmitters
Ii
cycle repeats
down the signal
t
neurotransmitters
:j
.....,....".......,
__~.,....-,...,.....,,--...,......,.,....-.IJ
Jeff Hawkins, in his book On Intelligence (2004), explains how we can build intelligent
machines based on what we know about how the cortex works and the importance of neuronal
patterns. As he explains in the introduction to the book, his first interest in learning about the
brain was during his time at the University of California-Berkeley in the mid-1980s and then
at MIT, where he became entranced by the field of artificial intelligence. However, he ran into
an interesting problem: There was no comprehensive theoretical model for the brain, so he
began to study the neuroscience in search of the processes of the brain.
He argues that all areas of the cortex function largely the same way-they take signals
from our senses and translate them into a series of electrical impulses that are stored in a series
of sequential patterns.
By design, every cortical region attempts to store and recall sequences. But this is still
too simple a description of the brain ... The bottom up inputs to a region of cortex are
input patterns carried on thousands or millions ofaxons. These axons come from
different regions and contain all sorts of patterns. The number of possible patterns that
can exist on even one thousand axons is larger than the number of molecules in the
universe. A region will only see a tiny fraction of these possible patterns in a lifetime.
(Hawkins, 2004)
Thus, a primary process of the brain is to sequence information into patterns. Patterns are
then stored and retrieved. This may seem obvious, but Hawkins then offers that the cortex
functions hierarchically and sorts, filters, and classifies information by passing information
both up and down the hierarchy. For example, if lower levels of the cortex receive new
information through the senses (e.g., the eyes), and these lower levels do not recognize a given
sequential pattern, they will send the pattern up the hierarchy until the pattern reaches a level
of the cortex where it is recognized. Once the cortex recognizes a pattern, it sends signals back
down the hierarchy. If the cortex receives a pattern it doesn't recognize, the pattern
interpretation goes to the hippocampus where the pattern is either stored and remembered as
a new pattern or forgotten if it is viewed as insignificant.
So our brains do not just send electrical impulses sequentially. Electrical impulses and
synaptic/neuronal connections send messages up a hierarchy and back down. Neurons and
neuronal connections are structured in a six-layered hierarchy where information flows up the
hierarchy and back down as a pattern is translated and executed. How far up the hierarchy a
signal travels depends on its complexity and novelty. This sounds relatively simple until we
take into account what Robert 5ylwester (1995) describes as the 30 separate columnar subsystems
just for processing vision alone (see Figure 2.3).
17
18
Figure 2.3
Six Cellular
Layers
(the gray
matter)
r'.
f
Area of
Web of Axon
Connections
(the white
matter)
Source: Sylwester. R. (1995). A celebration of neurons:An educator's guide to the human brain (p. 46).Alexandria,VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Jeff Hawkins (2004), in his quest for a theory of the brain, then asks, "Why is the neocortex
built as a hierarchy?" and offers this response:
You can think about the world, move around in the world and make predictions of the
future because your cortex has built a model of the world. One of the most important
concepts in this book [On Intelligence] is that the cortex's hierarchical structure stores a
model of the hierarchical structure of the real world. The real world's nested structure
is mirrored by the nested structure of your cortex.
The words on this page are an example of hierarchical structure-letters make words,
words make sentences, sentences make paragraphs, paragraphs make pages, and so on. The
brain processes these patterns up the layers of the cortex.
These two fundamental brain processes, sequencing and hierarchical classification, which
are physically activated by the structure of the brain, are, of course, two of the eight cognitive
processes with the language of Thinking Maps. The Flow Map directly supports students in
consciously constructing sequences, and the Tree Map is used to build hierarchical structures.
It is interesting to note that these two processes are also the foundations, respectively, for fundamental text structures: narrative and main idealsupporting ideas/details.
between the Brace Map for showing whole-part patterns and the Tree Map for showing hierarchical patterns? The Brace Map looks like a Tree Map on its side. There are similarities, but the underlying
cognitive process of each is unique by definition and in how our minds structure the physical
objects in our world. Traditionally, the Tree Map has been used to distinguish hierarchical,
taxonomic, abstract category patterns such as the types of chairs and SUbgroups (rocking chair,
desk chair, ski lift chair, beanbag chair, etc.) that may exist in this world. The Brace Map, in its
traditional form used in anatomy classes, is used to show the physical, anatomical, concrete
parts of a tangible, "touchable" object, such as the parts and subparts of a whole chair (back,
seat, legs, cross braces). Simply put, you can't touch categories because all categories are
abstractions created by human beings!
Why do these two processes get confused so often? The answer is partially in how the
brain processes information on a most fundamental level. The brain as an unconscious
operator, in the dark, relies on general to specific scales for both physical and abstract
understandings of the world. The patterning of the "whole-to-part" processes of the Brace
Map focuses on tangible, touchable, concrete objects (a general, whole object such as the
"whole" chair and specific parts such as the legs, seat, and back). The hierarchical Tree
Map suggests that each level "up" the hierarchy is more inclusive and ultimately more
"abstract" and complex than the one below it (e.g., furniture as an overarching category,
then chairs in general, then office chairs specifically). Thus the brain operates hierarchically all the time using the cortical hierarchy of the brain, even when it is examining part-towhole relationships of the objects that surround us. This happens, remember, while the brain
continues to use neuronal sequencing to transmit messages.
As Hawkins (2004) wrote of the hierarchical structure of the cortex and the part-to-whole
relationship of the world,
Every object in the world is composed of a collection of smaller objects and most
objects are part of larger objects ... in a very analogous way, your memories of things
and the way your brain represents them are stored in the hierarchical structure of your
cortex. Your memory of your home does not exist in one region of [your] cortex. It is
stored over a hierarchy of cortical regions that reflect the hierarchical structure of the
home. Large-scale relationships are stored at the top of the hierarchy and small-scale
relationships are stored toward the bottom.
19
20
Figure 2.4
Planning
Thinking
RationaVexecutive/higher
order/problem solving
Frontal: Behind
the forehead!
prefrontal cortex
Regulates limbic/
emotional system
Personalityl
self-will
Occipital:
Back of the
brain
Visual
processing
Visual cells
Vision inverted
and crossed
Spatial orientation
Parietal: Near
the top of
the brain
Calculation
Some types of recognition
Sound
Music
Cerebral
cortex/cerebellum
(80% of the brain
by weight)
divided into
hemispheres
Temporal:
Above the ears
Face recognition
Object recognition
Speech (left side)
Controls body
movement
Motor cortex
Works with cerebellum
to learn new motor functions
Somatosensory
cortex
Left
Processes sensations
from touch
Language centers
Right
Coordinates movement
Cerebellum
("little brain")
Brain stem
Part of the "reptilian brain"
Thalamus
Limbic system
(duplicated
in both left and
right hemispheres
located between
cerebrum and
brain stem)
Hypothalamus
(below the
thalamus)
Hippocampus
Amygdala
While this discussion may seem esoteric and disconnected from the learning that goes
on in classrooms, it helps us realize that the spatial architecture and dynamics of the brain
are processing the physical world in which we live, and with it whole-to-part relationships,
as well as our perceptions of the abstract world of concepts often bound in the hierarchies
we create.
21
22
Figure 2.5
Stimulus/experience
interpreted by 1 or more I
of the 5 senses (from
the external
environment)
Synaptic changes II
(new pattern
established!
wired)
Emotional
connection
made to new
idea/experience
-
Connected
to prior
knowledge
~
c..
It---~
II
__
Learning/Change
In the Brain
1--_+1
Actively
processed
Pattern
established
'"
,.-
.~~..
...
.~,
If a pattern is so well
learned/established, it
may ~e used with little
conscIous effort (expert
brain) and can make
more complicated
connections
.',
:,
good, and I raise my hand and participate more in class. On the other hand, if I raise my
hand, get the answer incorrect, and am made to feel stupid, I am not likely to raise my
hand again. I feel unsafe and bad about myself, and I disengage. In the former example,
my amygdala interprets safety and rewards and repeats. In the latter, my amygdala interprets harm and pain and avoids. None of this may be conscious at all. The brain is making
causal inferences and adjusting behavior accordingly.
Prediction is an essential part of survival, learning, and creativity. While we might not see
hand raising as essential to survival, it is certainly a key part of school engagement and success. We use cause-and-effect thinking to make predictions. The amygdala is responsible for
keeping us alive-so if we encounter something dangerous, we learn to fear that thing (say, a
tiger or a poisonous snake). Our brains use causal thinking in a conscious way to make predictions, but also the amydgala bypasses our conscious brain to make causal relationships about
possible threats and dangers.
information, it maps this new information onto the existing neuronal patterns-thus
modifying, expanding, and enhancing these patterns. To accomplish these enhanced
networks or patterns or maps of associations that represent new learning building upon
prior learning, the brain must constantly compare and contrast new information with what
it already has stored. Within the language of Thinking Maps, the Double Bubble Map helps
generate and represent on the surface a pattern that is occurring nonstop within neural
networks. If we return to the fundamentals of cognitive science research-in Piagetian
terms-the brain must either assimilate and/or accommodate the new information or
discard it as unimportant or irrelevant to neural networks that already exist, and this takes
constant comparisons.
The hippocampus (a structure shaped like a seahorse located in the older part of the
brain's limbic system) is believed to bear primary responsibility for comparing and contrasting new incoming information with existing memories. Patients with severe damage
to their hippocampus lose the ability to form new memories, but typically their long-term
memories remain intact. Our hippocampus is believed to (among other things) compare
and contrast new information entering the brain to establish neuronal patterns in the brain
and revise and adjust these patterns accordingly (see Figure 2.6). Hence, this structure and
this act of comparing and contrasting is central to our learning, remembering what we
learn, and later recalling what we've learned.
23
24
2S
26
includes the amygdala, hippocampus, and basal ganglia). When we see the word fear flashed
subliminally (beyond our conscious awareness), our brains evoke a mini fear responseactivating the amygdala to trigger this fear response. When we experience pleasure when learning, the basal ganglia are stimulated, and pleasure chemicals such as dopamine are increased.
The actual structure of the nerve cell looks like a Bubble Map-with extensions coming off
of the center. The brain makes connections this way-as Thinking Maps users have said of
their use of the maps, JlThis is how my brain works!" Yes, it is! As Jeff Hawkins (2004) details,
there are actually centers where the incoming sensory information comes together.
It makes sense, from a macro view, that creating a Bubble Map with descriptors, attributes,
and properties is an emotional task because as one ponders descriptors of a particular object,
one cannot help but respond to those descriptors emotionally: Connections to emotions
enhance memory. Just think for a moment about the most emotional experiences in your own
life-these memories (both positive and negative) are powerfully ingrained in your brain, and
you will more than likely never forget them (e.g., failing your first test, falling in love, getting
fired, getting married, having a baby). The more powerful the emotional connection, the more
powerful the memory.
The brain, in the dark, is using sensory inputs from the body and always scanning for
attributes or qualities to make sense of what it is learning-and to better understand its context.
It must learn the attributes using the senses to be able to make meaningful connections to other
networks that have already been created. When we first learn something new, we examine the
attributes of it, and we assign our own attributes-many of which are emotionally grounded.
For students it might be "This is too difficult" or "This smells good" or "She is really pretty"
or "This book is really interesting" and so on. These emotional connections that the brain
makes can either inhibit or enhance learning. The more positive the emotional connection to
what is being learned-or the more significant the emotional connection to the attributes-the
more likely the brain is to remember this information later.
As your eyes read this text, the limbic system of your brain is also engaging in a series of
emotional reactions/responses that your cerebral cortex is interpreting into words. Hopefully,
these represent some of the descriptions your limbic system is feeling as you read this book
(see Figure 2.7).
Figure 2.7 Bubble Map ofText
27
28
Brain
The corpus callosum is the structure deep in the brain that connects the
right and left hemispheres of the cerebrum, coordinating the functions of
the two halves.
Figure 2.9
Research in cognitive
neuroscience
Hierarchical
thinking and the
6 layers of the cortex
Cause and
effect-neuronal
change in the brain
Prior knOWledge
and compare
Analogies and and contrast
Cerebral
bridge and
cortex
corpus callosum
Experiences in
the classroom
with the
Thinking Maps
8 forms of
universal
cognition
Patterns of
synapses
Emotions
and learning
Part to
whole-parts of the
brain and subparts
Sequencing
and neuronal
connections
Observations
of brain
development of
self and others
Limbic
system
Visual tools
Description and
connection to
emotional learning
Active engagement
and reflection
during learning cycle
Algorithm of the
brain universal
for all senses
Research on
learning and memory
from psychology and education
I think that the reason many of us who use Thinking Maps prefer to start a cognitive task
with a Circle Map is that we use our whole brains to bring together everything that we know
about something. We are not constrained by any other particular kind of cognitive strategy. We
write down descriptive words and images, look at parts and the whole, ponder causation, and
jot down members of categories. All of the ideas are put down to be sorted out later, and thus
we are using the whole brain for holistic thinking.
In this Circle Map (see Figure 2.9), I put down the initial ideas I had for this chapterdrawing from the stored patterns in my cortex. I also have emotional connections to these
ideas-triggering activation in the limbic structures of my brain. I type them out, using messages from my brain to my motor neurons to my muscles. Learning is a whole-brain activity.
The Circle Map reflects this whole-brain activity, pulling everything together.
29
30
3I
32
Our brains, like the Thinking Maps, do not operate in discrete isolated parts. The whole
brain is at work when we use the maps. What I outline here are the areas of the brain that are
most heavily implicated as they engage in the forms of cognition represented by each of the
maps. The Thinking Maps must work together-much like the parts of the brain must work
together-for good thinking to occur.
Once we see a person's Thinking Maps generated from a blank page or emerging in patterns on a computer screen, we have a chance to see the inner workings of the brain and cognition and use this information to give feedback. The use of the maps as an assessment tool to
examine how the brain may be processing content can be very powerful-almost like seeing
inside one's brain. As a teacher or leamer, what could be more important than that?
REFERENCES
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (with Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J./ Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R.). (1956). Taxonomy
ofeducational objectives: Handbook: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Hawkins, J. (2004). On intelligence. New York: Holt.
Immordino-Yang, M. H., & Damasio, A. (2007). We feel therefore we learn: The relevance of affective and
social neuroscience to education. In The ]ossey-Bass reader on the brain and learning. San Francisco:
John Wiley and Sons.
Johnson, D., & Johnson, R. (1994). An overview of cooperative learning. In J. S. Thousand, R. A. Villa, &
A. I. Nevin (Eds.), Creativity and collaborative learning. Baltimore: Brookes Press.
Medline Plus. (2010). Corpus callosum of the brain. Retrieved November 19, 2010, from www.nlm.nih
.gov/ medlineplus/ency/ imagepages/8753.htm
Sylwester, R. (2005). How to explain a brain: An educator's handout of brain terms and cognitive processes.
Thousand Oaks: Corwin.
33
3
Leveling "the
Playing Field
for All S"tuden"ts
Bonnie Singer, Ph.D.
KEY CONCEPTS
Thinking Maps as tools for developing students' executive functioning and metacognitive Habits of Mind
A revealing story of the transformation in writing processes, executive functioning, and
performance of one student with special needs
Improving writing, oral language, and thinking processes in unison
Those of us who are fortunate enough to work with children often find ourselves forever
changed by relationships with one or two of them. My life took a definite turn when I
met David. He taught me that the mind of an eight-year-old is capable of much more
than I had previously thought, and that even children with severe learning disabilities
can learn to play the game of school as well as or better than their nondisabled classmates. Through David, I learned just how powerful Thinking Maps can be, and I saw
how profoundly they can change a life. Thinking Maps not only got David back in the
academic game; they also leveled the playing field so that he could emerge as a leader
in his classroom.
As a speech-language pathologist in private practice, I have the luxury of being able to
work with any student who struggles with language, literacy, or learning. In addition to
David, I have had the opportunity to use maps with countless other children who are not
diagnosed with learning disabilities but just have trouble learning-the so-called underachievers. Though each story is unique, similar themes emerge from the students and whole
schools I have taught to use Thinking Maps. As a result, David's story is worth telling, for it
offers us insight into many children who struggle with school and inspires new hope for
their futures.
34
3S
36
to make it, and how to use it for writing. With this visual image now rooted in his mind, narrative writing ceased to be a problem for him. So did his sour attitude about writing.
GAINING FLUENCY
Over time, as David became more fluent with the maps, his demeanor changed. Though his
visual-spatial skills were indeed compromised, he was a quick study. With direct instruction
and a good deal of guided practice, he learned the visual array of the maps and the pattern of
thought each map represented. I realized we had turned a corner when his mother found him
on the couch on a Saturday making a Flow Map of his day. The frustrated, angry, and resistant
boy who had first walked into my office evolved into an enthusiastic, creative, and selfconfident boy who was truly excited about learning and said "Thank you for teaching me" at
the end of each session. David had learned a new language-a language of thinking. It was
both a visual language and a verbal one. This language paved the way for explicit consideration
of how, when, where, and why to apply specific thinking strategies to support his schoolwork.
In our second year of working together, David became so confident about his ability to think
that when we had extra time in a session he began to make up Thinking Map games. We took
turns creating problem scenarios and quizzing each other on how we would need to think to
solve them. Here, he demonstrated that he had truly developed an awareness of his thinking
and internalized the language of the maps, as he reported ways to use them that I had never
taught him. The maps were now truly tools for thinking, learning, and problem solving, and
these tools established a level of metacognition that I had never before seen in a child his age.
At the end of fourth grade, David had an updated neuropsychological evaluation before
he moved away to another state. His WISe-III verbal IQ remained in the superior range (138),
and his nonverbal IQ score rose 12 points (to a score of 98) from the below-average to the average range, as shown in Figure 3.1. Interestingly, significant gains were evident in some key
areas of cognition-namely, his attention to visual detail and his ability to perceive part-whole
relationships, integrate information, and plan and organize an approach to a task. In our two
years of working together, we used Thinking Maps to develop each of these skills in natural
and authentic learning contexts. When David moved and began to receive special education
services, his learning-center teachers could not determine what was wrong with him. Despite
significant cognitive discrepancies, he was metacognitively, motivationally, and behaviorally
active in his own learning process, which masked the severity of his learning disability and
allowed him to function on par with his peers.
At this point, David still had a significant discrepancy between his superior verbal skills
and his average nonverbal abilities, but his presentation as a learner was dramatically different. First and foremost, he knew how he was thinking and could identify what kind of thinking
any task demanded of him. As a result, he was highly self-regulated. He demonstrated the
three defining features of self-regulated learning (Zimmerman, 1989): the ability to selfmonitor, self-evaluate, and self-adjust. He had an arsenal of strategies that he could employ in
any learning situation, and he readily employed them when tasks demanded complex thinking.
Consequently, his self-efficacy for any learning task-even writing-was tremendously strong.
David moved from being stuck on the bench to being a varsity player when it came to school.
Figure 3.1
WISC-III SCORES
,....-----Ir---------Subtest
Second Grade
Fourth Grade
19
16
16
17
17
18
17
14
12
14
14
Information
Similarities
Arithmetic
Vocabulary
Comprehension
Digit Span
Verbal IQ
Picture Completion
Coding
Picture Arrangement
Block Design
Object Assembly
Symbol Search
Mazes
17
=139
VerballQ = 138
5
8
10
10
10
13
6
10
9
not given
12
6
9
8
Performance IQ
=86
Performance IQ
=98
disabilities are lifelong, and his cognitive profile remained indicative of these disorders even
after becoming proficient with the maps. However, the Thinking Maps did significantly affect
his cognition as well as other things that aren't measured through standardized tests, namely
his metacognition and his day-to-day performance in school. Consequently, they affected his
approach to problem solving, his enthusiasm for learning, his willingness to participate, and
his beliefs about himself as a learner.
Over the years, I have used Thinking Maps with students who are underachieving academically and with those who have a wide range of disabilities (including cognitive deficits, language
disorders, nonverbal learning disabilities, Asperger syndrome, high-functioning autism, and
ADHD. I have yet to encounter a smdent who cannot learn the maps or use them in productive
ways. The question remaining, then, is what exactly do the maps do for kids who struggle?
37
38
the task at hand, deciding what to attend to and what to do, shifting when necessary, monitoring
and evaluating his or her behavior, and adjusting his or her behavior and emotions in response
to perceived success or failure (Denckla, 1998; Singer & Bashir, 1999, in press). In essence, these
are the cognitive abilities CEOs tend to be good at.
Students with ADHD, by definition, have compromised executive functions, because
attention and executive functions are governed by the same part of the brain. However, students without ADHD can also have executive function problems. As a result, disorganization
is a common characteristic of a broad range of learning disabilities as well as general underachievement. Thinking Maps allow students to see patterns that go beyond the word or
sentence-patterns that capture the big picture. They offer students with varied learning
abilities and learning styles a means for organizing their thinking and their understanding of
the world. Further, they provide a vehicle for such students to represent and share what they
know and understand.
39
40
Not only does the nature of spoken communication change in classrooms using Thinking
Maps, but the amount of spoken language changes. Discussion and debate become more
elaborate when students have tools that allow them to see how all of the pieces of curriculum
content go together. As their ability to show what they know improves, so does their motivation for and investment in learning. Often, reluctant or reticent students begin to take more
risks and participate. After only six months of using Thinking Maps with students, many faculty members at the Learning Prep School reported that the students' spoken and written
output at least doubled. Indeed, one sixth-grade teacher in Chicago noted that she used to do
all the talking when she taught. Since teaching the maps to her students, she now talks far less
often. Her students do the talking, and she helps them see where their learning conversation
is going.
students to manage mainstream curriculum demands. Another group has significant learning
challenges that require special education services (e.g., students with language disorders,
learning disabilities, perceptual disorders, motor disorders, or compromised cognition). The
maps provide teachers of general and special education serving these students with a common
language and tool set for teaching, thereby fostering collaboration and partnership among
school faculty. Whereas these students generally lack flexibility in their learning styles and
have difficulty transferring new learning from one context to another, the maps provide them
with a set of tools they can use both in and out of the classroom. They form a bridge between
general and special education.
A third group in the bottom quartile consists of students who are poor CEOs of their own
learning. Lacking insight about how to meet academic task demands, they are underachieving
relative to their potential. As a result, they aren't sure how to get from A to Z when given a
task unless they are provided with explicit scaffolds. In some cases, such students fail to make
progress in the general education curriculum and are referred for special education services.
Too often, they don't qualify for extra support, and the gap between academic expectations
and their achievement continues to widen. For all groups in the lower quartile, Thinking Maps
can help students regulate their own learning and be more successful in the game of school
because the maps serve as a device for mediating thinking, listening, talking, reading, writing,
problem solving, and the acquisition of new knowledge and understanding. They can be used
for universal instructional design and the successful inclusion of allieamers.
The Thinking Maps, then, have the potential for reducing the number of students in special
education and allowing more students not only to survive but to thrive in general education
classrooms. Consequently, they have the potential to be a school's most powerful weapon when
it comes to closing the achievement gap. As the Flow Map in Figure 3.3 shows, having a small
set of flexible thinking tools lessens all students' anxiety and confusion about school work, which
brings forth an increased sense of control and self-efficacy, which leads in tum to increased motivation to participate and learn as well as to greater academic success. Success further decreases
anxiety and confusion, and the cycle continues. By leveling the playing field, Thinking Maps
provide students who are not doing well with the tools they need to win at school.
Sense of
control and
self-efficacy
increases
Motivation to
participate
and learn
increases
Greater
success with
academic
tasks
REFERENCES
Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1994). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Cazden, C. B. (1973). Problems for education: Language as curriculum and learning environment.
Daedalus, 102, 135-148.
41
42
Denckla, M. (1998, November). Understanding the role of executive functions in language, academics, and
daily life. Paper presented at American International College, Springfield, MA.
Singer, B. D., & Bashir, A. S. (1999). What are executive functions and self-regulation and what do they
have to do with language learning disorders? Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 30,
265-273.
Singer, B. D., & Bashir, A. S. (in press). Developmental variations in writing. In B. Schulman, K. Apel,
B. Ehren, & E. Silliman (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy. New York: Guilford Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Zimmerman, B. ]. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of
4
Tools for
In"tegra"ting
Theories and
Differen"tia"ting
Prac"tice
Alan Cooper, B.Ed.
KEY CONCEPTS
Differentiating instruction through student-centered tools in New Zealand
Using a Flow Map for simultaneously enriching Habits of Mind, multiple intelligences,
and learning styles
Facilitating emotional and cognitive development using Thinking Maps'~
There are a number of ways in which we enrich the experiences our students have in our classrooms in any given year and over time in our schools. As we grow as teachers and administrators through these changes, we also enrich our learning community. In the short term, new
techniques and theories implemented in schools may leverage new learning, but ultimately a
long-term question may remain below the surface and undermine change: In what ways do
these practices and theoretical models integrate with the existing approaches we have in place
so that the individual efforts are unified? A school may react to yearly changes and become
additive but not integrative. Sustaining a larger vision while creating a coherent educational
experience for students requires constant orchestration of the overlapping teaching strategies,
student tools, and various theories introduced into the school.
If the leadership of the school community does not address this question, then new processes may not be used together by teachers and students. The educational program risks
becoming perceived by all concerned as merely a jumble of discordant instruments sounding
off, rather than a richly synchronized, high-quality performance. As the headmaster of
St. George's School, a K-8 private school in New Zealand, for 18 years, I had the opportunity
to bring many practices and theories together and help facilitate conversations with our
43
44
board, and parents to make sense of this integration. I was equally concerned
about both the practical and the theoretical integration of models. Over the years of my service, I have become particularly intrigued by how Thinking Maps have helped integrate the
theories and practices of Goleman's views on emotional intelligence, Gardner's multiple intelligences, the Dunns' learning styles model, and Costa's Habits of Mind in our school.
encyclopedias and textbooks. Another student, Douglas, is the opposite. As an analytic leamer,
he prefers factual nonfiction, less emotive articles, and encyclopedic information. He wrote up
the fact file on Auschwitz and drew the geographical map of Europe with great attention to
detail. Harry would have none of this. He started by drawing a barbed wire border-anything
to avoid or at least delay getting on with the work. He did read excerpts from Anne Frank: The
Diary ofa Young Girl, nonfiction reading, but not in the cold-hard-fact form. It was the emotional
content that motivated him. He wrote a very good emotive poem. Harry constantly discussed
research with Douglas that Douglas had found, but the teacher worried at times that neither was
really learning because Harry seemed to be interrupting Douglas all the time.
However, both Harry and Douglas were learning, and they were using a common tool-a
Flow Map-that served to focus their widely ranging styles (see Figure 4.1). One of them was
engaged at the global, emotive level and the other at the analytical, factual level, but the information appeared together on their map. The map became a reference point and place that
brought their two styles together. When it came time for the formal presentation to the class,
Harry was quite verbose and could recall fully the information that was required in the study
and shown explicitly in the map. This success story is a starting point for investigating, albeit
in short form, the linkages made below between the Thinking Maps and very complex theories
of emotions, intelligences, habits, and styles. A wider understanding may come about as we
consider how teachers and students are becoming conscious and conversant about how these
models work together to support deeper learning.
Figure 4.1
I
I
/
First
concentration
camps
,....
""
Jews banned
from some
professions
Jews banned
from higher
education
30,000 Jews
arrested
and
91 killed
Thousands
of shops
and
businesses
looted
1935Citizenship
rights
removed
I
1938 Jewish children
expelled from
public schools
---------
1942Final solution
to kill all
European
Jews
approved
1942About 20% to
25% of Jews
who would die in
Holocaust
already dead
194380% to 85%
of Jews who
would die in
Holocaust dead
....
-------
1938 - Nazis
take control
of Jewish
businesses
1940German Jews
deported to
Poland
and first mass
murder
1,000
synagogues
set on fire
1936Boycott
of Jewish
businesses
"-
/'
1944 -12,000
Hungarian
Jews deported
each day to
Auschwitz
where murdered
1941Mobile killing
units kill 33,771
Ukrainian Jews,
and systematic
killina beains
45
46
47
'"=::=================~================. =:ilI':~=!
.....:,:.If.
Harry, the analytic leamer, was the conventional model pupil. He preferred being seated
formally; he worked carefully and methodically through factual detail, completing each piece
before moving on. Eventually, the details that he had compiled would become the whole-the
complete picture. His work was also characterized by persistence, in the sense that he liked to
complete what he was doing before moving on. Douglas, the global leamer, was the conventional problem pupil. He needed a more informal seating arrangement, such as soft furniture
or being allowed to sprawl on the floor rather than sit at a desk. He needed to be free to move.
He focused on the emotional side of things by seeking the big issues, dashing about in this
search rather than methodically working from the bottom up. Thus he could be said to lack
persistence in that he did not complete what he was doing before turning his attention to
something else, searching for the next big picture. Not even his barbed wire border around the
Flow Map, an artistic touch, was completed before he was off doing another task. However, in
the end, in his own time, he got it completed with Harry.
48
on. Thus, the global mind is able to avoid rushing about looking for an organizing purpose as
it settles in on it quickly and can then proceed to work deductively down into the detail.
The same map is flexible enough to provide the detailed structure that an analytical mind
needs to build inductively, detail by detail, in order to arrive at the main idea. For example, the
Flow Map for sequencing a complex event such as a war can be started with an overarching
rectangular phase with smaller boxes expanding as stages, leading to ever more refined details
shown as substages within each major stage. In the same way, the Tree Map for categorizing
can be built with details from the ground up by the analytic leamer, while the global learner
is creating the same map from the top down.
However, there are extra spin-offs from this flexible, evolving, visual structuring of content
and processes. The Habit of Mind Costa calls persistence is one of the major areas separating
analytical and global learners in the Dunn and Dunn learning style model. At one end of the
persistence continuum are those learners high on responsibility, who do not want to stop until
they have completed their task. These learners are last to leave the classroom as they copy the
homework fully and accurately. They are the students whose parents complain that there is too
much homework because they spent two hours completing the half hour's work the teacher
thought had been assigned. They are driven to be perfect. Part of that perfection is making sure
that the task is completed exactly, with all the details in place. Each of the Thinking Maps has
an adaptive structure and consistency so that students who are high on persistence can complete steps before moving on, or they can easily chunk the maps in order to provide for closure
when there are time constraints. When several maps are being used in sequence, each map can
be completed as a single unit in an overall project. In this way, closure is there at the end of
each map, which satisfies those who see completion as an attribute of responsibility and
removes the frustration of not completing an assignment.
For global learners, who are often low on persistence, moving from task to task is facilitated. Interestingly, the low-persistence student can keep on working for an extended period
just as the high-persistence student can. The difference is that the low-persistence student
often needs multiple tasks to work on, thus creating an interplay between focal points, but
focusing nonetheless. Thinking Maps provide an alternative way of progressing through
assignments. Continuity of task is not essential, so leaving off the work at any stage and then
coming back later works. Where a sequence of maps is being used, the global learner can move
through the sequence bit by bit, developing single ideas as they arise and moving back and
forth between maps. In this way, the multitasking that provides optimum learning for the
globalleamer is also made possible.
49
SO
REFERENCES
Cohen, J. (Ed.). (1999). Educating minds and hearts. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (2000). Activating and engaging Habits of Mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Dunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1992). Teaching elementary students through their individual learning styles. Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it matters more than IQ. New York: Bantam.
5
Closing t:he ~~Gap"
by Connect:ing
Cult:ure,
Language,
and Cognit:ion
Yvette Jackson, Ed.D.
KEY CONCEPTS
Pedagogy of Confidence in urban schools to develop cognitive mediation across cultures and language
Revealing codes of power" through using Thinking Maps by students in underachieving schools
Literacy results from urban school systems across the country
1/
51
52
students: They depend on school to provide the mediation and enrichment needed to elicit and
nurture their potential. I looked at Feuerstein's work, and that's when I said to myself, "I can
capture the same idea if I know more about mediation." So often, students go through something called "remediation," but that is the basic remediation or redelivery of the content information and language skills. What we are talking about is the mediation of their thinking. The
pedagogy that transmits this mediation anchored in the fearless expectation that urban students
are capable of high intellectual performance is the Pedagogy of Confidence.
If you know about learning and how learning happens, you can improve the instructional
technique, and if you really believe that kids have potential, you can set high expectations and
have them meet those expectations with the tools that you give them.
misunderstanding of the student's intentions inhibits many well-meaning teachers from trying
instructional strategies that motivate and support the learning of their culturally different
students. Instead, they continuously use methods that not only minimize learning but very
often result in students resisting. It's a vicious cycle resulting in the underachievement that we
see around this country.
There are three interconnected factors that are key to bridging the gap between teachers and
their underachieving urban students. One is addressing the fear that teachers have in not being
able to address the needs of their underachieving students so they can meet the standards. The
second factor directly relates to the first component of how to address the learning needs. To
address learning needs we need to shift the focus from what has to be taught (content) to how
learning happens (cognition, metacognition, process) and what affects it. The third factor is to
provide teachers and students with a language that enables them to communicate with each
other, building the mutual respect and relationships that are so vital to students of color.
I address the first and second factors by trying to simplify the research about learning
through a symbolic representation that would illustrate the critical targets to address in learning instruction:
L: (U + M) (C1 + C2)
Learning: (Understanding + Motivation) (Competence + Confidence)
We know that in order for people to gain academic knowledge they have to understand the
concepts of that knowledge. Another equally significant catalyst of learning is motivation.
Both understanding and motivation are affected by what Eric Jensen (1998) describes as brain
realization of relevance and meaningfulness. But the critical question we have to address in
order to stimulate motivation is "What makes something relevant to an individual?" Well, it
is a cultural frame of reference that makes something relevant and meaningful, thereby
stimulating motivation. So we can't ignore that culture affects how one understands something,
the perspective one takes on something, and the experiences one brings to reading affect how
one infers. It's also one's cultural orientation that plays a large part in one's thinking. Feuerstein
(1980) and Vygotsky (1962) point out that the other significant factors in stimulating motivation
are competence and confidence. Jensen addresses the importance of confidence in relation to
the positive impact challenge has on students when they feel a sense of competence and
confidence to meet the challenge. Delpit (1995) refers to the importance of building confidence
through competence as "codes of power" or higher-order thinking and literacy skills.
These understandings about learning and what affects it bring us to the third factor to
address when bridging the cultural gap between teachers and students, and that is language.
Just as culture shapes relevance, it's important to realize how language is affected by culture
and how they both affect cognition, learning, and communication. Culture molds language,
and language is a way of thinking. Addressing this interrelationship is critical in bridging the
gap, and this is where Thinking Maps playa role of major importance.
I believe that Thinking Maps are essential tools in bridging the cultural gap between teachers and students because they address all three related factors. First of all, each of the eight
Thinking Maps facilitates the development of one of the cognitive skills that are critical to
learning and are also identified in all the state standards as skills students must have. They
need to be able to define and generalize concepts or themes; describe, identify, categorize, and
organize details; compare and contrast; sequence; identify cause and effect; analyze parts of a
whole; and understand analogies. Second, Thinking Maps provide a language about thinking
that allows teachers and students to communicate with precision, bridging the cultural gap.
Equally important is that they provide students with the tools for building competence in
learning and communicating and learning with confidence. The maps are like tools of power
for unlocking the "codes of power" Lisa Delpit (1995) discusses.
53
54
Figure 5.1
CULTURE:
explicitly surfacing
students' cultural
frames, language,
thinking
collaborative
processes: social
phenomena
composing
(speaking
and writing)
vocabulary
'--
----J
concepts
comprehension
student
voice
READING
WRITING
PROGRAM
GOALS:
attitude
action
5 CRITICAL
EXPERIENCES:
respond: variety of text
composing (oral/written)
language patterns
sustained reading
learning how to learn
translating
standards
and assessments
into meaningful
instruction
understanding
+
motivation
cognition is
mediated and
students
become
independent
NUA
Pedagogy
of Confidence
fluency, construct
meaning, compose
competence
understanding
codes of
power
intelligence
is modifiable
reframe
"the
gap"
+
confidence
brain
research
teachers'
perception
generating
resistance
behaviors
from students
students,
teachers,
administrators,
community
mastery of intellectual
behaviors
engagement
of all
stakeholders
Figure 5.2
Points of
Mediation for
Learning
.---------r-="JI....-------r--self
teacher
1-
purpose and
goal
identification
identifying
students'
frame of
reference
and prior
knowledge
thinking-skills
identification
planning an
instructional
sequence for
students to
construct
meaning
self
and other
student
identifying
strategy or
pattern
selecting an
approach
awareness
of personal
frame
I
student
and
student
discussion
and inquiry
about
approach
exploring
possible
thinking
strategies or
approaches
understanding
and validating
each other's
thought
process
student
and
teacher
understanding
points of view
awareness
of personal
and other's
context
self
and material
self
and author
predicting and
identifying the
patterns and
structure
embedded in
text, standards,
and questions
awareness
of author's
purpose
teacher
and
teacher
planning a
common
approach
discussing
thinking of
student
accurate and
clear
representation
of thinking
exploring
different
opportunities
equity in
communication
reflecting on
strategies
and learners
identifying
main idea
investigating
author's
context
Thinking Maps mediate students' and teachers' individual metacognition as they reflect on
their own thinking about thinking. For the teacher, the Thinking Maps encourage the identification of the purpose and goals of the lesson before instruction in order to determine what
kind of thinking is involved. Teachers' reflective conversations help them establish the prerequisites that students need to be able to construct meaning. Similarly, before students begin a
task, they can ask themselves, by using the cognitive language embedded in the Thinking
Maps, "How can I approach this task?" or "What do I notice about this assignment?" In both
situations Thinking Maps foster metacognition, the first step in mediating one's own learning.
Besides supporting internal dialogue, Thinking Maps mediate thinking between individuals in the classroom. With the Thinking Maps, a teacher mediates learning by addressing specific learning needs in a way that engages students and activates those cognitive skills involved
in the process of constructing meaning. The Circle and Frame Map, used for defining in context, is excellent for guiding students in analyzing and defining the focus of understanding or
concept learning critical to guiding underachieving students in constructing meaning. The
Thinking Maps encourage discussion between the teacher and the students about the kind of
thinking required from the text by analyzing which Thinking Map is best for reflecting that
kind of thinking. These explicit conversations about language, process, and cognition develop
the focus on thinking, which can be transferred across disciplines. With shared visual representations, teacher and student can understand and communicate in the same language, shifting the power in the classroom.
In addition to understanding and communicating with oneself or with someone else, Thinking Maps mediate learning between student and teacher with text or content. Thinking Maps
create a clearer pattern for a teacher to teach with and for students to analyze text and to demonstrate understanding of the text in the pattern required. Thinking Maps guide students in
identifying and analyzing the understandings, skills, and text structures or patterns needed to
construct meaning from a reading or unit of study in any discipline. Thinking Maps help teachers identify and analyze the kind of thinking that's going to be required to read a particular text
as demanded by the text structure used by the author. The process fosters the great link between
reading and writing. So Thinking Maps help students analyze text structure and really internalize the pattern, and then use that pattern to write their thoughts and demonstrate their thinking.
This process of transferring between reading and writing is a complementary response to Ernest
Boyer's (1983) definition of reading and writing. He said,"Reading is unlocking frozen thoughts
and writing is freezing thoughts." Thinking Maps help students unlock the frozen patterns of
thoughts and instead take their thoughts and freeze them in a pattern of thinking.
Teaching inference can be extremely difficult because inference is contingent upon connecting
one's prior experience-and culture-with that of the author. Consider that individuals who are
asked to author texts have years of expertise in their discipline or area of focus on which to base
the ideas they want to convey and the meaning they want to imply. These books are given to
students who often don't have any experience that connects to that of the author, and yet the
expectation is that students should be able to infer, or read between the lines, to connect their
experience with that of the author to speculate about ideas that are not literally presented. That's
what you do when you're inferring. You've got to go from your personal reference to what the
author is saying, which is why it's easier to infer with narrative or fiction than expository text.
Fiction is written about themes that everyone has experiences with or can relate to
(such as love, fear, longing), but in discipline-based textbooks that are nonfiction or expository,
concepts are more technical, more remote, and frequently harder for underachieving, schooldependent students to relate to. Guiding students without exposure to experiences that reflect
57
58
what the author is writing about requires tools to engage the teacher and students in the kind
of conceptual discussion that creates bridges for the students so that they can make a connection between the author's experience and their own. Perhaps Thinking Maps can mediate learning at yet another level-between the author of the text and the learner. A tool that engages
students in this type of discussion is the Frame of Reference that can be drawn around any of
the maps. An example of this would be using a frame around a Bubble Map to develop characterization. In the Bubble Map shown in Figure 5.3, you identify adjectives that describe a character; the frame elicits exploration or inferences of why the adjectives were selected to describe
the character. Why is the character the way he or she is? If "angry" is identified as one of the
descriptions, in the frame a student would infer why the character was angry. If the character
is described as discontented, the frame would elicit why he or she is discontented. What happened in the characters' lives to cause them to be this way? The Frame of Reference enables
students to infer ideas, speculations, or theories about who this character really is. It's not just
about description; it's the inference behind the description that is the core of characterization.
Figure 5.3 Supporting Inferential Thinking With Bubble and Frame Map
experience/evidence
that supports knowing
the trait or quality
learning is not about patterning but memory is. Students' achievement has a lot to do with
their memory of things. The Thinking Maps strengthen learning by becoming external memory
patterns for students when they use them to freeze their thinking. The maps provide a place
where students can refer to all the interrelated ideas and from these ideas make the extractions.
If students tried to hold the quantity of ideas their brains explore, they would be expending a
lot of their mental energy focusing on just trying to remember all the details instead of
generalizing and elaborating on these ideas. Thinking Maps elucidate patterns and function as
external memory, so the maps can fortify and expand students' learning that relies on memory.
In a sense, first students refer to the pattern of information, and then they can infer from that
pattern. This is the shift from frozen information to the construction of knowledge.
REVERSING UNDERACHIEVEMENT IN
LITERACY AMONG URBAN LEARNERS
We work to reverse underachievement, predominantly underachievement in reading and
writing, the major deficit being identified in inferential thinking, vocabulary, and language
usage. We focus our professional development around the acceleration of intellectual
performance, specifically in literacy. We know that literacy is the catalyst to empowering
students, so we go beyond the standard definition of literacy and embrace the definition
described by Elliot Eisner (1994) as the ability of an individual to construct, create, and
communicate meaning across disciplines in many forms of representation (such as written
text, drawing, mathematical symbols, and dance). We resonate with this definition because it
expands pedagogical focus to include the cognitive functions that are the prerequisites to
accelerating learning and achievement throughout life.
We believe that literacy for urban learners is best developed when the teacher mediates the
learning process by providing lessons that foster social interaction for language development
and guide the application of cognitive skills that assist students in constructing and communicating meaning. The Thinking Maps are a core component of the cognitive strategies we provide because they are tools that have a direct impact on how students construct, communicate,
and create meaning. In each district in which we work, we have witnessed how teachers immediately employ Thinking Maps as one of the most-used tools of their pedagogical repertoire.
The result has been what administrators and parents associate with the most impressive and
valued impact our literacy initiatives have on learning-significant growth in the achievement
of students who have previously been labeled "low achievers." In Indianapolis, schools experienced a 12- to 20-point jump in scores, which is significant. While across the state of Indiana
scores had fallen since 1998 by 1.2%, the "vanguard schools" in Indianapolis participating in the
literacy initiative experienced an average increase of 10.4%, with seven of the elementary
schools showing double-digit gains. In Seattle, a study showed that African American students
who failed the reading section of the Washington Assessment of Student Learning (WASL) in
1999 and then spent at least two years with teachers who participated in the initiative passed
the 2002 test at twice the rate of those students who spent a year or less with participating teachers. In just three years of implementation by the City School District of Albany and the National
Urban Alliance, students in Grades 3-8 who met or exceeded proficiency standards on the New
York State exams increased by 14% in English language arts (ELA) and 21 % in mathematics. In
2009, the entire district's elementary and middle schools exceeded New York State Education
Department ELA benchmarks for students in Grades 3-8. Overall, 61 % of the district's students
in Grades 3-8 achieved proficiency this year, attaining Level 3 or Level 4. That's a 240/0 gain over
2008, when 49% of the district's students achieved the top two levels in ELA. Aside from the
quantitative data, we are seeing improved student performance with tasks requiring higherorder thinking such as reasoning, problem solving, and theme-based classroom projects.
59
60
This evidence has been significant in demonstrating the learning potential of underachieving students, which has in tum altered the expectations of thousands of educators, but
to me there is additional evidence that has great implications regarding the impact of the
Thinking Maps. Insights about the benefits of district-wide institutionalization of the use of
the Thinking Maps as critical instructional tools have been felt from the classroom to the
boardroom.
After our third year in the Indianapolis project, the board of education summoned the
assistant superintendent to explain why it should continue to fund the literacy initiative. We
decided that the most convincing way to respond would be for teachers from kindergarten
through high school to share with the board the effects of the strategies and practices they had
been implementing in their classrooms. Everyone of the teachers talked about the impact the
Thinking Maps had on the achievement of their students: A kindergarten teacher presented
samples of her students' studies in science through each of the eight Thinking Maps; middle
school literacy teachers shared examples of student expository and narrative writings; a chemistry teacher demonstrated how he applied the maps in chemistry. Beyond the strong impression these presentations made on the board, the real epiphany was experienced by the high
school teacher who exclaimed, "Wait! The kindergarten teachers are using the same maps we
are. If every teacher is working on this kind of thinking with his or her students, think how
strong they'll be by the time they get to high school." A similarly impressive revelation was
the focus of a story told by a teacher about two brothers doing homework. A kindergartner
said to his middle school brother, "Oh, you're doing a Bubble Map. That's for describing." The
older brother asked how he knew that. The younger brother informed him that he learned
about that at school, surprising the older brother completely. The very same presentation took
place last spring by teachers and administrators in the Albany Public Schools for their school
board, with identically passionate responses.
Thinking processes are universal, and Thinking Maps help students transfer these cognitive skills across content areas and grade levels. Children are born understanding cause and
effect. They know how to think sequentially. In urban settings where there may be historic
underachievement, providing tools that enable teachers to build on the capacity of the students to think critically through instruction that provides them with the means to fortify their
understanding, competence, and confidence results in students who are motivated to excel
and do excel. It becomes part of the common culture of the classroom, of the school, and, as
we have seen, of whole systems.
REFERENCES
Boyer, E. (1983). High school: A report on secondary education in America. New York: Harper and Row.
Delpit, L. (1995). Other people's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: New Press.
Eisner, E. (1994). Cognition and curriculum. New York: Teacher's College Press.
Feuerstein, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press.
Jensen, E. (1998). Teaching with the brain in mind. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Levine, M. (1993). All kinds of minds. Cambridge, MA: Educators Publishing Service.
Mahari, J. (1998). Shooting for excellence. New York: Teacher's College Press.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Sect:ion 2
I n"tegra"ting
Con"ten"t and
Process
6
Maps for t:he
Road t:o Reading
Comprehension
Bridging Reading Text Structures
to Writing Prompts
Thomasina DePinto Piercy, Ph.D., and David Hyerle, Ed.D.
KEY CONCEPTS
Linking reading text structure research to cognitive patterns
Results from first graders' fluency with Thinking Maps
Multiple Thinking Maps applied to phonics, vocabulary, and reading comprehension
"While I am reading, my mind adds to my Thinking Maps all by itself, and suddenly I know
more than I knew!"
-student in Christina Smith's first-grade class,
Mt. Airy Elementary School, Maryland
At Mt. Airy Elementary School, in a classroom of first-grade students, on a morning in
mid-May, we watched as a third-year teacher read the guiding question for the day:
"How will you organize your thinking about this book?" While this may seem to be an
unfocused question, the teacher knew the students could meaningfully respond. The
book, How Leo Learned to Be King, rested on the chalkboard tray with its colorful picture
of a crowned lion on the cover, set there after it had been read aloud the day before. This
is an inclusive classroom of students in a modest suburban neighborhood school, a school
that had experienced a 15% decline in writing scores over the previous two years and
62
mediocre reading scores as the population swelled beyond the original building and into
portables.
This year, student performance moved significantly upward. This was reflected on state
tests, while scores across Maryland generally fell. Mt. Airy Elementary School has become the
highest-performing school in its county since it started using Thinking Maps in reading and
writing instruction. Data support the observations we see in classrooms: Thinking Maps significantly impact instruction and improve student performance.
While this is important news, a closer look shows that students have changed how they
are understanding texts: They are surfacing dynamic patterns of content from the linear
landscape, the wall of text. The range of structures bound within line-by-line text becomes
unveiled in the form of mental maps as shown in Figures 6.1a-g. They are changing the
form, transforming text. Step into a classroom and observe a teacher and you will see how
this works.
Figure 6.1 a
Figure 6.1 b
63
64
."Figure. 6.1 c
Figure 6.ld
Leo
I
looks like
Figure 6.1 e
I
is like
did
Leo took
Leo felt
He walked
off the
~
~
~
off
embarassed
crown
Leo helped
the mouse
over the
water
f--+
Leo built a
friendship
I
found out he
had power
without the
crown
"-
~'
..
....
L,..= .~=~=,,~=
.:;=_::!:::::q~=~~~.,U!:!~,gt:;:::~~~_~=~=
__ ~.~~~_':~~:N::;::-~==,;;~,~~._.~
..:::I.:::;;
.. !"'=.:::O::'''::;:;:';'.9.=~'~''~:';~>{'~""'':'":::;:'
VI:>.~_~~..7;::?,.;~~,_.~;:::;;',,::":!!:.:-"~_.~=:;O'~~'lc'.~
...;,::....
::;lT..::::;:<:~.~~:::.'~.
~'.~i~:t::~~::':;::l)~"l-;c.::;.
~;;~:::;;:_:
__ :trn=_n\l;:;:O::_~~-!'7.::':4~;:::;~:;;;;;;"'~~";:;:;;:'.<~::::'
. =~~
,..'Q:;::;':.~.:I;::.~;::;::_=~=.;;;;:.I~=.:::7_:i)'::;;;_._~=
=_:~= ::::~~.:'=U""~;:~:::";~"":'=:;:~~';;;::lilll::;;::'"lS'::;;;=~"~'~'"
Figure 6.1 f
Leo was
mean
no one
liked him
D
as
While observing Ms. Christina Smith's classroom, I sat down behind the students: As principal and instructional leader, I began clacking away notes on my laptop. Students gathered
on the floor near their teacher, just below the blank, open space on the chalkboard that held
the guiding question for discussion. The book How Leo Learned to Be King had been read aloud
the day before, but the students and all of the teachers and administrators across our school
had learned about Thinking Maps the year before. These excerpts and the related maps may
heighten your understanding of Thinking Maps and still underrepresent the richness of the
classroom conversation. Here is how first graders organized their thinking about this book:
Erin:
You could use the Circle Map ... put the topic in the middle and all ideas that you
get in your mind from that topic, you write down in the circle ... Leo ... details
about Leo ... he was mean and he was nice.
Megan:
A Bubble Map about a mouse. You say a word about what the mouse is ... like furry
... describing words.
Billy:
We could do a Double Bubble. We could compare How Leo Learned to Be King and
The Lion and the Mouse . .. they [both books] both have a lion and a mouse.
Mark:
A Tree Map. I am thinking of ... about Leo ... what he looks like ... and, urn, I
think, and what he is like ... and what he did.
Thomas: You could organize it with a Bridge Map. In The Lion and the Mouse, the lion was
mean to the mouse, but in How Leo Learned to Be King, the lion was nice to the mouse
by helping him get over the river.
Alexis:
You could use a Flow Map. First, he was mean. Then, when they took off the crown
he, like, got a little embarrassed. He walked away, he got surprised, because he met
a mouse. And at the end he helped the mouse and they became friends.
Regan:
Multi-Flow ... what caused him to be mean. The crown made ... the crown could
have caused him to be mean.
Erin:
No one liked him. They took away ... they didn't want him to be their king.
Shawn:
The discussion between Ms. Smith and her students is within reach of any school, is
replicable, and may refine and even reframe reading and writing instruction or offer a new
direction for cognitive science research. This teacher had brought students to such a high level
of fluency with Thinking Maps that they could begin to identify text patterns on their own.
They were able to use fundamental thinking-skills vocabulary (words such as describing,
compare, causes, and so on) and respective cognitive maps (Bubble, Double Bubble, Multi-Flow)
and had the metacognitive awareness to be able to explicitly transfer these processes and tools
65
66
to rea?ing comprehension through identifying text structures. They were then able to return
to their sea~s Wl~ ~lank sheets of paper and, with varying results, choose a Thinking Map and
expand their thinkmg. They later went on to write about the story using the maps they had
chosen to organize their ideas.
This sample of classroom activity is a practical and symbolic representation of a new form
of literacy and a transformation of how we perceive the interrelationships between thinking
patterns and the fundamentals of reading comprehension.
Reading
Thinking Skills
Text Structures
Writing
Prompts
THiNKING MAPS
Circle
Map
DEFINING CONTEXT,
PERSPECTIVE
Defining in Context
DESCRIPTION,
CHARACTERIZATION
Bubble
Map
DESCRIPTIVE
WRITING
Describing
Double
Bubble Map
COMPARISONCONTRAST
POINT-OF-VIEW
ESSAY
COMPARISON
ESSAY
Comparing/Contrasting
I
THEME,
MAIN IDEA-DETAILS
~_
Tree
Map
==
==
PERSUASIVE
WRITING ESSAY
Classifying
SETIING,
PHYSICAL PARTS
_{-
Map
TECHNICAL
WRITING
-{={==
- - Whole-Parts
CHRONOLOGY,
SEQUENCE-PLOT
NARRATIVE
WRITING
PROBLEM-SOLUTION,
CONFLICT
PREDICTION,
CAUSE-EFFECT
COMPARISON
BY ANALOGY
Bridge
Map
Seeing Analogies
REASONING BY
ANALOGY
67
68
How else does one explain the deficits our nation is experiencing in reading as indicated
by National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) scores from 1971 to 2000? NAEP has
reported that our at-risk population has improved only slightly despite receiving enormous
resources. For our students who are not at risk-those who have the fundamentals of decoding, fluency, and pertinent vocabulary-reading comprehension scores are not much better
than they were 25 years ago. It is time to accept the minimal impact on reading comprehension
that the present paradigms of research and translations into instruction have made since the
1980s. Why has there been limited change in standardized and performance-assessment scores
of reading comprehension despite the enormous effort over nearly two decades to overhaul
reading comprehension instructional techniques?
Our work with Thinking Maps points to a third way. One missing link is the cognitive
underpinnings, interconnections, and interdependencies between the processes of phonemic awareness, vocabulary learning, and meaning making. Sasha Borenstein (as quoted in
Hyerle, 2000), director of the Kelter Center, which serves students from the Los Angeles
region, states that
the recent research in the area of literacy done by the National Institute of Child Health
and Human Development has documented the need for explicit, systematic instruction
in ''breaking the code," phonics and word stud)', as well as in "making meaning"
strategies for comprehension. The research supports an active, thoughtful instructional
approach rather than a return to repetitive, passive work.
Reviewing the three areas of the Put Reading First (Armbruster, 2002) report distributed
widely by the U.S. Department of Education reveals how Thinking Maps provide a cognitive
bridge to phonemic awareness, vocabulary instruction, and text comprehension.
Phonemic Awareness
Sasha Borenstein has found that Thinking Maps are also a set of tools for helping students
to see words, break them down, and put them back together. Through her work with students
who are at risk and falling behind in the Los Angeles area (for a related story from Los
Angeles, see Chapter 11, A First Language for Thinking in a Multilingual School"), she and
her staff have found that Thinking Maps work as microcognitive tools for seeing how to work
with words:
/I
Thinking Maps are flexible, active tools for exploring literacy. The maps are studentcentered, pushing learners to discern patterns and interactions in materials and
concepts. Thinking Maps are used in discerning the concepts which organize the
expectancies and rules of phonics. Performing the sOWlds of the past tense, ItI, I d/,
and lid/, can lead to the understanding that the sound of this morpheme is based
upon the last sound in the root word to which it is affixed. The Brace Map is used by
students to identify these part-whole relationships. Finding the similarities and
differences between syllable types using the Double Bubble Maps leads to the
understanding that each syllable is defined by its vowel. Creating a Flow Map for
sequencing the spelling of IchI, ch or tch, Ij/, ge or dge, and Ik/, k or ck, at the end
of a word can lead to the concept that the spelling depends upon what type of vowel
is in that word. (Hyerle, 2000)
The summary page for phonemic awareness research in Put Reading First recommends
guiding students to categorize phonemes, see part-whole patterns in words, and put them
back together through blending. These are key strategies for developing this one area of early
reading development while facilitating language and cognitive skills development.
Vocabulary Instruction
A second area of Put Reading First focuses on learning vocabulary. Vocabulary learning is
a networking process involving not only direct vocabulary learning through word-learning
strategies and repetition but also the indirect acquisition of vocabulary in different contexts.
This is because the brain is constantly networking bits of information, and the maps facilitate
patterning of related words, which become a context for definitions (see Chapter 2, "Why and
How Thinking Maps Work: A Language of Brain and Mind").
Returning to the above reading of How Leo Learned to Be King, Thinking Maps create multiple pathways for students and teachers to gather vocabulary from the story into several
patterns. These are explicit visual patterns that show a word in context. When a student independently voiced that the Circle Map could be used, she stated that you put the topic (Leo) in
the center and the details around it. The Circle Map is defined by the visual representation of a
circle within a circle and by the thinking skill of defining in context. Students learn to use this
tool to look for and gather in the outer circle of the map context words and build vocabulary
and meaning around a key topic in the center. Contextualization requires that students attempt
to give definition to a word not just by what precedes it, but often by reading ahead so that the
full context may be brought to bear on the word. All eight Thinking Maps are vocabulary builders, and in practical and metaphorical terms, they are the scaffolds for the building process.
Text Comprehension
Correlating with NAEP data is the national report explaining that future implications for
reading comprehension include evidence-based assessments. Affirming this concern, Donald
Graves (1997) asserts that educators and the public are in a frenzy over how to boost reading
comprehension scores.
We must teach students how to synthesize and show their thinking. What we have needed
is the physiology of reading comprehension, the actual working parts as a reader interacts
with text. But what would the working parts look like? Graves writes that when a reader
engages with print, in the past we have had no idea what types of thinking are in process. Over
20 years ago, Lauren Resnick (1983) noted that if we cannot produce a more substantial explanation of the internal events that produce improved comprehension, it will be difficult to
develop an instructional training approach. She later suggested that research has located a
psychological (metacognitive) space, in which educationally powerful effects seem to occur,
but it has not yet adequately explained what happens in that space to produce the effects. A
synthesis of these reading researchers (DePinto Piercy, 1998) confirms the need to change our
instructional focus. We must move from the panoramic lens of a wide variety of strategic
instructional techniques to include a zoom lens for specific instruction focused directly on
what students do during the process of reading.
In the document Put Reading First (Armbruster, 2002), proficient readers are described as
active and purposeful, and strategies are suggested for guiding students to self-monitoring
and metacognition. Central to this section of the report is the focus on graphic organizers and
maps that support students in identifying text structures within fictional and nonfictional
texts. The report states that these visual tools
help students focus on text structure as they read,
provide students with tools they can use to examine and visually represent relationships
in a text, and
help students write well-organized summaries of a text.
Dr. Bonnie Armbruster, one of the lead authors of Put Reading First, was an early leader in
the research on text structures. For example, her work showed that using a problem-solution
69
70
graphic before reading gave students an advanced organizer of this key structure, and their
comprehension improved on those specific texts. Of course, texts are not identified as problemsolution or chronology texts for students, and quality responses to open-ended writing
prompts are not completed by staying inside the lines of a graphic template (see Chapter 7).
Thinking Maps extend this work by having students become fluent in a cognitive and
metacognitive tool set for adapting their thinking to varying contexts.
conversation at Mt. Airy Elementary School, but in the quantitative results on the school's state
assessments. Following the first year's implementation of Thinking Maps, writing scores
realized a 15% increase on the state-mandated assessment, the Maryland School Performance
Assessment Program. Later, Mt. Airy Elementary rose from being a school in the middle
of testing to becoming the highest-performing school of the 21 elementary schools in Carroll
County.
In addition, the No Child Left Behind legislation requires that each state test content
knowledge and how well students perform. Maryland meets this requirement by using the
new 2003 Maryland School Assessments. The cornerstone for Maryland's accountability system is the measure of Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). Again this year, Mt. Airy Elementary
is the highest-performing school in the county. Mt. Airy's scores are higher than the Maryland
state average and higher than the county average, remarkably achieving AYP in all eight subgroups, including special education. The results across our student population show that literacy and cognitive development work together as teachers help students cross the road to
reading comprehension with Thinking Maps as a new language for literacy.
To move beyond the inadequacies of past research and practice and to shift literacy to a
new form require a shift in tools and a mind shift by leaders. Literacy alone is not power in
the age of information and technology, multicultural and multilingual communication, and
global economies (see Chapter IS, liThe Singapore Experience"). A new critical literacy is
required, based on research showing that phonemic awareness and metacognitive strategies
must develop together with vocabulary development and comprehension strategies across
first and second languages. Many students, and unfortunately most students at risk, are given
an overwhelming, repetitious panoply of strategies that merely heighten their awareness of
words without deepening their comprehension abilities. From our experiences and results,
we have found, however, that students are not left behind on the road to reading comprehension when given tools for actively reflecting on how they are thinking and the patterns emerging from text.
REFERENCES
Armbruster, B. (Ed.). (2002). Put reading first. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
DePinto Piercy, T. (1998). The effects of multi-strategy instruction upon reading comprehension. Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland-College Park.
Graves, D. (1997). Fonvard: Mosaic of thought. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Hyerle, D. (2000). A field guide to using visual tools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Resnick, L. B. (1983). Toward a cognitive theory of instruction. In S. Paris, G. Olson, & H. Stevenson
(Eds.), Learning and motivation in the classroom. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Vygotsky, L. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
71
ElI1polNering
St:udent:s Froll1
Thinking t:o
Writ:ing
Jane Buckner, Ed.S.
KEY CONCEPTS
Writing as thinking from a developmental viewpoint
The Tree and Flow Maps as organizing structures for developing written expression
Results from Thinking Maps schools using a common language for thinking and
writing
According to the business community and those in higher education, it is time for a writing
revolution in American schools. In September 2002, the College Board-composed of more
than 4,300 schools and colleges---established the National Commission on Writing in America's
Schools and Colleges. The decision to create the commission was motivated in part by a decision by the board to make a writing assessment an additional component of the new SAT
beginning in 2005. However, a greater impetus for the study was a growing concern within the
education and business communities regarding the quality of student writing.
In April 2003, the commission issued a report, The Negle~ted "R," that revealed disturbing
findings regarding the writing proficiency of students in the United States. Among those findings was the fact that most fourth graders spend less than three hours per week writing. This is
15% of the amount of time they spend watching television each week. In grades 4,8, and 12,
only 50% of students assessed met basic requirements for writing, while only 20 % were considered to be proficient. In addition, 66 of high school seniors do not write a three-page paper as
often as once a month for their English teachers. Further findings revealed that 50% of college
freshmen are not able to produce papers that are relatively free of language errors. It is estimated
that these writing weaknesses of incoming college students cost campuses up to $1 billion
annually for remediation. Unforhmately, this writing deficiency is spilling over into the business
%
72
world as business leaders complain about the writing skills of new employees. This grim picture
was the motivation for numerous recommendations presented in The Neglected "R."
The commission called for a major effort to improve teacher training in writing to include
all discipline areas, as well as a greater allocation of time devoted to s~dent writing ins~c
tion both during the school day and in the form of daily homework assIgnments. The corru:russian acknowledged that our problems regarding writing proficiency did not occur .~vermght
and that to fix the problem "the amount of time and money devoted to student wnting must
be dramatically increased in school districts throughout the country, and state and local curriculum guidelines must require writing in every curriculum at all grade levels." In addition,
the commission report suggested that writing has been shortchanged in the school reform
movement launched 20 years ago and, since writing has not received the attention it deserves,
the acquisition of proficient writing skills now must be put squarely in the center of the school
agenda beginning in elementary school.
Eight years later, the business community is still focused on the ability of its future employees to communicate well, both orally and in writing. According to an article in USA Today
(Marklein, 2010), 89% of those surveyed regarding what they want most from future employees said "effective communication, both orally and in writing." In other words, just having a
college degree is not the most important concern; rather, the degree must have value. The
results of these two surveys reflect the need for quality instruction in written communication
that spans from the early grades through college.
As elementary and high schools prepare to develop greater writing proficiency among their
students, they must find a high-quality writing approach and a professional development plan
that systematically supports the writing process from idea generation to the final product, as
well as writing development from the early grades through high school. Currently, schools
across the nation have improved whole-school writing performance through comprehensive
training in a developmental K-12 writing framework: Write . .. from the Beginning (Buckner, 2000)
and Write . .. for the Future (Buckner & Johnson, 2002). Both frameworks use Thinking Maps as
the foundational tools to teach the thinking patterns and processes involved in composing in the
narrative, expository, and other domains of writing, thus uniting writing explicitly with thinking.
DEVELOPING COMPOSITION
Child development experts contend that writing proficiency begins with oral communication
well before the elementary grades. From the moment of birth, children use their newly
developed lungs to communicate with those around them. Caregivers soon learn to distinguish
among the different cries of an infant and to associate those cries with the specific needs of
their young charges. As children grow into toddlers, language begins to develop, and the early
babbles and coos become decipherable verbiage through which the child learns to communicate.
At approximately the same time that language is developing, fine motor control is developing,
thereby enabling these youngsters to make their first written marks on the world, often in the
form of crayon scribbles in inappropriate places.
By the age of three, a child's scribbles become more decipherable, yet primitive, drawings
that represent something or someone in the child's world. For a developmental period, drawing actually becomes the child's form of written communication. Once the child is exposed to
picture books, environmental print, and the opportunity to observe adults engaging in writing, an awareness of the distinguishing attributes of written communication develops, and the
child comes to the understanding that a message is communicated through the written word
as well as through pictures. At this point, the child seeks to imitate what he has observed.
The earliest attempts to imitate writing often appear to be squiggles and nonsense to the
untrained eye. However, the value of these scribbles and squiggles has been documented as
73
74
an ~dicator o~ early developmental stages in writing. Marie Clay (1975), among others, has
studied extensIvely these early writings of children and has described certain principles chil~en must master to make m~rks that resemble writing. Clay maintains that seven basic princll?le~ must be learned by children before they can be said to write, and that many of these
pnnclp!es may be seen emerging in the scribbles of children before anyone notices that they
are trying to produce real writing. With repeated writing practice, children will produce
marks, accordmg to Clay, that resemble more and more the writing they see in print around
them. At first the child's writing will appear as a form of "mock" writing. Over a period of
time, and with opportunities for practice, the writing becomes decipherable. For this reason,
children in preschool and kindergarten should be encouraged to engage in writing throughout
the school day. In some instances the teacher will provide a model for writing, while in other
instances the teacher will facilitate spontaneous and self-selected writing engagement.
Once students have begun to communicate with confidence through the written word and
can produce several sentences using inventive spelling, they are ready for formal instruction
in writing in much the same way that they become ready for formal instruction in reading. Just
as a teacher's manual serves as a valuable resource to provide a guide for the how-to of reading instruction, Thinking Maps can be and have been used by teachers to facilitate, enhance,
and expedite the acquisition of writing proficiency for students from the primary grades
through high school. Reading and writing share common text structures, and for this reason
each is taught most effectively through a step-by-step cumulative process, vertically aligned
from one grade level to the next.
VVRITING AS THINKING
In an effort to alleviate the writing fears of their students, teachers have been known to tell
their charges that writing is just"talk written down." This statement is a gross oversimplification
of a complex process-writing is actually "thinking written down." Perhaps one reason for
inefficiencies in student writing is connected to this misunderstanding. To write well, one
must first think well about what is to be communicated. The foundation of formal writing
instruction begins with the essential understanding of the purpose for writing, as well as the
various organizational patterns that can be used to accomplish this purpose. These patterns
correspond to the types of thinking that are involved for a reader to be able to comprehend the
writer's message. Each organizational pattern needed for writing can be visually represented
by one of the eight Thinking Maps, depending on the specific purpose for writing. For
example, the purpose of narrative writing is to entertain through relating a story or memorable
experience in sequential order; therefore, a Flow Map would be used to organize the writing.
Teachers who consistently model the use of Thinking Maps for organizing writing have
witnessed increased writing proficiency in their students and in their schools.
Within the past several years, more and more states have begun to implement an assessment to ensure writing proficiency in their students. In Florida, for example, all fourth-grade
students are assessed annually on either narrative writing or expository writing "to explain
why." A passing score is a 3.0 on a 6-point holistic scale. In 1999, the percentage of fourth-grade
students passing the Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) at Brookshire Elementary School in Orange County was approximately 840/0. The goal of the teachers and administration at this site was to move their overall school grade of C to an A by targeting improvement in their writing scores. Kindergarten through fifth-grade teachers participated in training
at the beginning of the school year in the use of Thinking Maps in all curriculum areas.
Follow-up sessions focused exclusively on using Thinking Maps for organizing and modeling
writing. Teachers were taught the specific attributes of both narrative and expository writing,
as well as the thought processes and Thinking Maps to use with each.
Following the training, a spiraled curriculum plan for teaching writing using consistent
visual tools was implemented school-wide. Grade-level training sessions for writing were held
to ensure that teachers knew how to model the use of the Thinking Maps for organizing writing with their students and how to demonstrate taking the information"off of the map" and
onto the page. All teachers had the opportunity to observe demonstration lessons using Thinking Maps for student writing. The administration monitored and supported the teachers'
efforts, providing individual assistance as needed. Within one year, the number of students
passing the writing assessment had risen to approximately 97%. At the end of the second year,
every student taking the FCAT writing assessment scored at least a passing 3.0, and the school
achieved a state grade of A.
Principal Ken McGuire and his staff at Bluebonnet Elementary School, part of the Keller
Independent School District in Fort Worth, Texas, led their students to outstanding writing
achievement on the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) in 2008. Following two
full years of implementing Write . .. from the Beginning (Buckner, 2000), the number of students
scoring a 4 (the highest possible score) rose from 3 to 75. The same year, 81 % of fourth-grade
students received "commended" status on the TAKS writing test. This was one of the highest
levels of commended performance in the state of Texas, which had a 30% state average for
commended performance that year.
At Euclid Elementary in Ontario, California, Principal Rhonda Cleeland and Literary
Coach Monica Ibarra Ayala led their school in a school-wide implementation of Thinking
Maps and Write ... from the Beginning (Buckner, 2000). Within two years, the school's Academic
Performance Index on the California Standards Test had risen from 624 to 735. In addition, 90
out of 100 fourth-grade students passed the state writing assessment. Of the 90 students, 50
exceeded the state expectations. According to Ayala, "The difference was having the right tools
and a common language."
This same escalation of writing scores can occur all the way through secondary school as
students are taught to plan and organize their writing using Thinking Maps. In 1995, Melba
Johnson, a high school English teacher in Brunswick County, North Carolina, attended Thinking Maps training and immediately used the maps in her classroom to teach her students how
to organize for writing. Within one semester, the scores of her students taking the 10th-grade
state English II Writing Examination on literary analysis rose 5 points. One year later, Johnson
attended training on the use of Thinking Maps specifically for the teaching of writing, and for
the last five semesters of her teaching career, 100% of her students have passed the high school
English II Writing Examination. The only difference in her instruction was teaching her students how to use Thinking Maps to plan and organize for writing based on the specific purpose and thought processes involved in the assignment. In addition, Johnson experienced
the same success with her 11th- and 12th-grade advanced placement students by using this
same process.
75
76
:Figure 7.1
A c.o.rro-+
Carrots
A c.o.rro-+
What do
they look
like?
N -+o..s-+e svJee-l.
1-+ c.o.r. be pv-+
Us
0..
~eU~y
TJ,ey jrovJ
ill
yov dj -+hefYl vp
ill
-r-green leafs
SOV p.
How do
they taste?
How do
they grow?
sweet
in soup
in spring
dig in fall
-r---r--
arm
v':je-lo.bIe.
5 pr;1lj o..r.d
ill
-+~e
fo./l.
By organizing in this manner, the writer ensures better comprehension by his reader
since the writing is set up like a familiar reading text structure. Another familiar text structure found in literature is the presentation of a series of events in sequential order to establish a story line. Another first-grade student used a Flow Map to organize her writing to tell
a story about what her grandmother did when she came home (see Figure 7.2). The sequence
of the Flow Map will become the sequence of the writing. Writing to explain why requires
the writer to take a stance or make a choice that is supported with reasons. This type of writing has yet another organizational pattern that can be represented with a partial Multi-Flow
Map. Figure 7.3 is a sample of writing by a first-grade student to explain why a certain food
is her favorite snack.
,:igure '7.2..
Firs-+
GJ
...
c.o.fYle
J..OfYle.
c.offee.
Alld -+hel1
pv-J.
~
011
~/"e
I
I
SOfYle
,
Lis-+elled -10
Do.ds fYlVSic.
ill
c.lo.J.t,es.
0..
c.ho.ir.
I
I
ii
~~:=.~=,.=.~==~~.,~=:,;.~~=:~j.It=.J.><+.~~:;:::_,~~,~=. 1;;;;;f'!~=.~,~~";~=_~;;:;~;;:.,"~;;::;: ~':'lt='~ ='~"F:;:'~-~: ;-;'~" ~:~=_:"'-"I.=~",~: : ; _" ",~ : : "!+-M=.X='-0"; ; '5;. 7.;';":~!I r~ ~=. ' ' '~.! zt';~,.,~.i.~~~~qr;;;:;. ~,_: : :t:~ ; ~:;;:;;;,
; ;. ~=.,
;;:;;~~:;w.
="=';:;:~~~"'t"&t=.
_~~,.~=,-,::;;;;,::;;:;,
. ~;;;;::;;::;
..:;::::;o;;;:~~~~:;::;:;!i:
=,
...
... ;:;;;
.. ..,,,.,=,
..
,;;t;;
p"-/rple jro.pes
pvrpie jro.pes o.re l'1y
fo.Vori-te sl'\o.c.k T~ey to-'I'e
0.
SOllr
ir.side.
peel o.l1d
T ~ey o.re
0.
swee.f
Sf"',oJ I
yov'l wlM~
"",r'!
The teacher had modeled how to use a Circle Map and a partial Multi-Flow Map to
develop reasons (the initial thinking part of writing) and then to organize for writing. The
student began by brainstorming all of her favorite snacks in a Circle Map. Once this was
done, the student was instructed to make a choice regarding the food about which she
would write and to compose a sentence about her favorite snack and write it in the center
box of the partial Multi-Flow Map. Next, the student engaged in thinking about "what
caused me to select this snack as my favorite" or "what are the reasons why this snack is
my favorite" and then recorded her thoughts in the small boxes on the left-hand side of the
map. The teacher had explained that when others read her writing, they will be thinking
about her choice and her reasons for that choice. The readers should "see" her thinking as
they read.
An example of narrative writing by a second-grade student who used Thinking Maps to
help him plan and organize for writing shows that this student has combined two Thinking
Maps to help with his plan (see Figure 7.4). He used a combination of the Flow Map for
sequencing events and the Tree Map for recording details related to those events. The flexibility of the maps allows students to combine maps as needed when engaging in a task that
requires more than one thought process. Had the student used only the Flow Map, his writing
could have become nothing more than a sequence of events that reads like a list. The elaboration or details related to each event were planned on lines borrowed from the Tree Map and
located just under each of the stages or events. Note also that the Flow Map is nonlinear in
appearance, allowing the student to plan a beginning and an ending to his story.
As students mature, the Thinking Maps used for writing become more sophisticated in
appearance; however, the correlation between the maps, the thinking, and the writing is still
apparent. Figure 7.5 is a re-creation of a visual representation of eight-year-old Cagney/s thinking about her favorite summer vacation and the reasons why it is her favorite. She began with
a partial Multi-Flow Map to develop her reasons; she then used a combination of a Flow Map
77
78
Figure 7.;4
hOy..!
Firlo.ll y
I- - - > I
'.
11----'1
I
..J.~,ey
blo.s..J.ed off
\
'Iery 1,-"c.kly
ov..J.side
lIf
I'::
I'
t
I;
1\
If
I
I~
I"
1;\
fl/e.~";'
..f..~,el"1
wj..J.~
0.
fi/(>'1 roll
e'/erl
..J.~,e
\.Jerl..f..
J,jh o.bov'e
I.,
roc.ke..J.:s.
and a Tree Map to organize the parts of her writing, to decide the most appropriate sequence
for presenting her reasons, and to plan the elaboration of her selected reasons. By the time
Cagney wrote her essay, the hard part of the thinking had already been done. It is important
to notice in this example how multiple patterns of thinking-based on common, well-defined,
and flexible graphic structures-are adapted by the student to progress to more complex
thinking and more elegant writing.
Thinking Maps for writing can be valuable to the global learner as well (see Chapter 4,
"Tools for Integrating Theories and Differentiating Practice"). In every classroom, there are
those students who do not grasp the concept of putting together a piece of writing from the
parts to the whole as it is often modeled by teachers. With these students, teachers can use a
process referred to as "reverse mapping," in which the teacher assists the student in analyzing
his essay from the whole to its parts. The teacher provides a blank template of the Thinking
Map that is used for organizing the particular type of writing, and the student cuts apart a
copy of his essay and places the parts on the template. The student can immediately see the
"holes" that represent the parts of the essay that are underdeveloped. At this point the student
Figure 7.5
Using a Multi-Flow Map, a Flow Map, and a Tree Map to Plan Expository Writing
It
c:::J
Activities with
Pa
Water sports
My
favorite
vacation
place
is at
the
beach
with my
grandparents
Another reason
To begin with
Good
Food
Activities
With
Pa
Grandmother
fixes my
favorites
He takes time
off work to
be with us
Macaroni and
cheese, pork
chops, biscuits
and gravy
Carnival rides,
putt-putt,
movies
~
~
Water
Sports
It is a time
for the family
to have fun
together
Boat riding,
swimming,
playing in the
sand
80
can create the needed information and fill the "holes." The flexibility of the Thinking Maps
empowers teachers to adjust instruction to the individual needs of students.
Eight-year-old Alecia was a student who needed individualized assistance in her understanding of the components of narrative writing. She was attentive in class and conscientious
about completing her assignments correctly. However, as she tried to use the Thinking Maps
modeled by her teacher for organizing writing, she often produced an underdeveloped story.
Using the reverse mapping procedure, the teacher was able to instruct Alecia in how to
develop her story more fully. Alecia's work has been reverse mapped with teacher assistance
(see Figure 7.6).
.Figure. 7.6
Or.e do.y fYly -leo.c..~er, fllrs. Ho. y c.o.("1e ;/\-10 -l~,e c..Io.SsroofYl.
All
0/\
0.
s0("1e-lJ1illj jO ~'5 week sweek" o.l1d -Ihe bo.j -lips oVer o...,.f
pops 0. fYlovse. Mrs. Ho. y c..O("1es 60.c..k i/\ ..J.J,e rOOfYl o.rd
so.ys "T~iS ;s Go.rry, Ovr /\ew c../o.s.s pe-l."
/ /lever
-I~,OL'j~-I
SCARRY.'
One day my teacher Mrs. Hay came into the classroom. All she said was
"Good morning," laid a brown paper bag on her desk and left.
All of a sudden
I hear something go
"Sweek sweek" and the
bag tips over and out
pops a mouse.
I
I wonder what could be in
this bag.
II
81
82
impression scoring, looks at multiple elements or characteristics associated with effective writing and provides the most information from which to draw conclusions about writers and
writings. As an assessment system, analytic scoring offers information that can best assist
instruction because each element in the writing is evaluated separately, with each characteristic marked on a scale that indicates how well it has been presented.
Students who are trained in analytic scoring rubrics and understand the meaning of qua lity content" have a better chance to be successful on writing assessments. The tools of Thinking Maps to organize their writing and a means to self-evaluate the quality of their content are
the very least that teachers should provide during writing instruction.
II
REFERENCES
Buckner, J. (2000). Write . .. from the beginning. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
Buckner, J., & Johnson, M. (2002). Write . .. for the future. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
Clay, M. (1975). What did I write? Beginning writing behavior. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (2000). Encouraging and engaging Habits ofMind. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Marklein, M. B. (2010, January 20). Group wants emphasis on quality in college learning. USA Today.
Retrieved October 31, 2010, from http://www.usatoday.com/LIFE/usaedition/201D-Ol-21collegelearning21_ST_NU.htm
National Commission on Writing in America's Schools and Colleges. (2003, April). The neglected "R": The
need for a writing revolution. Princeton, NJ: College Entrance Examination Board.
8
The Challenge
of High-S"takes
Test:ing in
Middle School
Ma"thelnat:ics
Janie B. Macintyre, M.Ed.
KEY CONCEPTS
Students moving from concrete to abstract mathematical concepts using Thinking Maps
Multiple-year results from research on Thinking Maps applied to procedural knowledge
by students with special needs
Fostering clear and meaningful communication between students and teachers in mathematics classrooms
more rigorous. Student proficiency must be demonstrated on annual statewide math and
reading end-of-grade tests for elementary and middle schools. Secondary school assessment is
conducted through end-of-course tests in core areas. Student performance and proficiency are
directly linked to promotion, unit credit, and graduation. With the knowledge that students
with special needs would have to meet the same standards as their regular education
counterparts to be eligible to receive a high school diploma, a pivotal personal and professional
realization occurred. Morally, and with full awareness that my students were counting on me
and others like me, it became essential to find and develop strategies that would allow them
to adapt to and compensate for learning difficulties, differences, and deficits to have an
opportunity to earn what would represent the pinnacle of formal education for many of my
students: a high school diploma.
83
84
Prior to the reforms, the underachieving students in my seventh-, eighth-, and ninth-grade
mathematics classes at George R. Edwards Middle School in Rocky Mount-both those coded
as having a learning disability and those achieving in the lower quartile-performed basic
computation for whole numbers and decimals, learned to tell time to the nearest 5 minutes,
made change for purchases of under $20, and, perhaps, studied fractions. Today, my students
have made cognitive leaps and are successfully mastering concepts of solid and plane geometry,
exponents and scientific notation, two-step equations, and graphing linear and nonlinear systems of equations, to mention only a few. Students are truly light-years ahead of where they
were and are able to access and master those concepts, as our research has shown, because of
Thinking Maps.
From the onset of Thinking Maps implementation within the instructional process, I have
been astounded by the ease with which students with learning disabilities and those in the
regular education program have been able to not only grasp new concepts but also demonstrate comprehension and application with accuracy. For over a decade, teachers at my school
have observed that Thinking Maps provide the vehicle by which students with special needs
are able to adapt to and effectively compensate for learning difficulties and perceptual deficits
with tremendous efficiency and success. This inherently concise, consistent, and flexible visual
language transcends age and ability and aids students by providing accurate, concrete connections between what is already known and new skills to be acquired. For example, by using a
Circle and Frame Map with my students (see Figure 8.1), I was able to connect the concrete
ideas of coordinate planes within a real-world context for their reference.
Figure 8.1
shopping:
aisle
markers for
grocery and
drug stores
store
directories
real-life
uses of
coordinate
plane skills
travel or
geography:
maps, globes,
navigation, bus
routes
parking:
sporting
events,
large theme
parks, malls
number lines
containing
the x-axis
and y-axis
intersection
is called the
origin
positive
and
negative
numbers
four
quadrants
point of
intersection
is zero on
both number
lines
weather:
hurricane
tracking,
Doppler
radar
seating or
accommodations:
plays, concerts,
planes, cruises
computer
spreadsheets,
cell addresses
mall: house
number and
street name
While I intuitively knew the value of Thinking Maps from over a decade of results gained
from examples as shown in the figure, I also knew that in today's data-driven field of education, increases in student performance need to be stated in observable, measurable, and replicable terms to be valid. I used my opportunity as a Christa McAuliffe Fellow in 1999-2000 to
conduct a control group study to determine the impact of Thinking Maps on math achievement. I found that after an entire year of Thinking Maps implementation, end-of-grade test
results for both exceptional and traditional students indicated four years' worth of developmental gains in one year's time.
BEYOND INTUITION
During the first two years of integrating Thinking Maps, a variety of experiences convinced
me that Thinking Maps positively influence student performance. Many times in sharing
student accomplishments I was told, "Yes, but Janie, you are a wonderful teacher." In response
I would state, 1/1 know I'm a good teacher, but this is not my magic-this is because of Thinking
Maps!" I used Thinking Maps throughout all stages of the instructional process: from
determining prior knowledge of a given topic through directed and independent instruction
to assessment and self-evaluation of curricular growth. If we were working on a particular
skill, I could use the same tool to differentiate instruction depending on the developmental
level of the students involved. In Figures 8.2a and 8.2b, two students were working through a
process of how to make a graph using a Flow Map for sequencing. Notice the different levels
of sophistication each student applied.
Figure 8.2a How to Create a Graph LevelJ Flow Map
_ _- '
Use given
numbers
to mark
graph
Put "0" in
bottom
center
Establish
vertical
and
horizontal
axes
...,
Label
graph
...,
Indicate
origin
,...
Establish
even
intervals
,...
Mark
graph
based on
data
In Figure 8.3, the Bridge Map, used for analogies, was applied to transfer familiar language
to the mathematical language needed for this concept. This is just one example in which
Thinking Maps scaffold the learning of mathematical language and processes.
85
86
FigureS.3
is
developmentally
appropriate
language for...
Relating Factor
the y-axis
as
the bottom
part of the "l"
mark lines
evenly
as '---_ _
...J
the x-axis
origin
establish
even
intervals
Not only did the maps foster students' increased personal awareness of their individual
cognitive and metacognitive style, but they allowed me to glimpse students' metacognition,
thus enabling me to assess areas of inherent student strength and weakness.
As a result of this type of instruction in my math classes, 6 out of 11 students with special
needs scored "proficient" or "exceeds expectations" in math. Eighth graders were learning
46% beyond what they were expected to learn in one year's time, with one student demonstrating a remarkable 21-point gain in developmental growth. In an even more needy population, in an intensive math remediation class for ninth graders who had previously failed the
eighth-grade exit exam, 84% passed the retest. It was apparent that when Thinking Maps
applications were incorporated consistently and frequently within the math instructional process, these exceptional students were able to demonstrate, on average, two years' worth of
growth in one year.
North Carolina end-of-grade math tests for three consecutive years were mandatory to be
included in the project's comparisons. A variety of factors may prevent the administration of
a test to individual students, including illness, exemption, transfers into a system, or moving.
Of the 291 students identified in the research, 133 possessed a score for all three consecutive
years. Based on individual performance, the increases in the developmental growth of these
students after the implementation of Thinking Maps strategies are significant.
The average developmental growth of the exceptional children as eighth graders at all
three school sites for the 1997-1998 and 1998-1999 school years, prior to the implementation
of the McAuliffe Fellowship project in 1999-2000, is shown in Table 8.1. I included data from
the students in my classes (MacIntyre) who had used the Thinking Maps during both the
1997-1998 and 1998-1999 school years. The students in my classes exceeded exemplary growth
in both years, and, in one case, their growth was almost as much as 7 times that of seventh
graders at another site. Shown in Table 8.2 are the scores that indicate the 1999 pretest and 2000
posttest developmental growth scores for eighth graders who participated in the Thinking
Maps implementation during the McAuliffe Fellowship project in 1999-2000.
1997-1998
Expected
Exemplary
Edwards
Nash Central
Southern Nash
Macintyre
5
5.5
1998-1999
3.8
4.3
3.7
1.6
2.7
7.6
6.25
4.33
3.88
7.33
Eighth~Grade Developmental
Growth
Pretest
Posttest
Expected
Exemplary
Edwards
Nash Central
Southern Nash
3.8
3.7
4.3
4.93
1.28
4.2
',,
: 1
~~_._
'
_. "":-odt. ;&;=.. 1
8.02
6.94
9.71
1.33
:::~";,,,.J_t
f...,~~.:.~3 .. ,.,....
.....,JF.7l.!~~.-:
.W . ~.: .f
,. ~>.'
;;..s::"".
""''':c
p.,
~.,~ _
_:A,'C'!!
.~
"":."'.
<:,
.~< .~.j
,,1,,:.
p, ...'
At the time of the 1999 pretest, expected developmental growth for these students was
3.8 points, while exemplary developmental growth was 4.3 points. As the figure indicates,
the actual pretest developmental growth for the students involved in the research was
measured at 1.28 points for Nash Central Middle School and 1.33 points for Southern Nash
Middle School. Therefore, at the time of the pretest, only students at Edwards Middle
School, who had to some extent used Thinking Maps, met the expected growth. In fact,
they exceeded it.
87
88
perceptual
-----1---------,1
r-I
memory
..-,- ----1-------.1
figure-ground
discrimination
spatial
short-term
long-term
frequently
loses place on a
worksheet-use
a Flow Map
on steps to
complete
work
reading
multi-digit
numbers-use
a Tree Map on
place value
differentiating
between
numbers,
coins. operation
symbols-use
a Bridge Map
of symbols
and their
meanings
putting
decimals in
the right placeuse a Tree
Map of rules
for computing
with integers
based on operations
using a number
line with directional
concepts of negative
and positive-use
a Tree Map with
Integer terms with
negatives on left
and positives
on right
retaining the
meaning of
symbols-use
a Bridge Map
with symbols
and their
meanings
remembering
all the steps
inan
algorithm-use
a Flow Map
initial difficulty
with review
sessions or mixed
probes-Use
a Bridge Map
of associations
to be made
with key math
concepts
sequential
completing
all steps
in multi-step
computation
or word
problem-use
Flow Maps with
appropriate task
analysis
In the 2000 posttest, given after Thinking Maps implementation, the results show a fivefold
increase in the average developmental growth scores of the research participants at Nash Central
Middle School and a sevenfold increase in the average developmental growth scores at Southern
Nash Middle School. As expected, the more profound change in individual developmental
growth occurred overall at our sister schools that had not previously used Thinking Maps at all.
The less dramatic increase in scores at Edwards could have been due to my six-week absence
from my classroom to conduct the Thinking Maps training as part of my fellowship. Of the 133
students formerly labeled as low-achieving, 71 demonstrated proficiency on the first trial.
What we have learned about Thinking Maps during this era of high-stakes testing and
accountability continues to evolve, but this study confirmed two findings:
1. When Thinking Maps are utilized in daily math instruction, student learning and demonstration of mastery exceed exemplary developmental growth expectations on state
tests.
2. Thinking Map strategies and applications in math are replicable.
receptive
words that
have multiple
meanings-use a
Tree Map
classifying
different
meanings
relating term to
meanings-use
Bridge Maps
behavioral patterns
language
expressive
verbalizing the
steps in
solving a word
problem-use a
Flow Map
the vocabulary
of arithmetic-use
a Bridge Map of
terms and
meanings
impulsive
short attention
multistep
attending
computation-use
to details in
a Aow Map to
solving
include
problems-use
a Flow Map
all steps
including
needed details
completing
work in
assigned
time-use
a Flow Map
that includes
amount of
time for
completion
of each part
I
perseveration
may work
very slowly
or go over
work several
times-use a
Flow Map
in which
each
completed
step is
checked
off as
completed
with ''You are
now finished" in
last step
reading
reasoning
word
problems-Use
a AowMapon
how to
translate
verbal
expressions
into
numerical or
algebraic
expressions
understanding
the vocabulary
of math-use a
Bridge Map of
terms and their
meanings
the abstract
level of
mathematical
concepts and
operations-use
a Bridge Map
to link
concrete
examples
of abstract
concepts
symbols in
math-use a
Bridge Map to
link symbols to
meanings
teachers to clearly and visually explain, understand, monitor, and assess mathematical
processes and problems.
Students who typically find math enjoyable and readily grasp new concepts are those who
have developed and use analytical skills. According to some researchers, "giving students
advanced organizers does have the desired effect of increasing recall of critical information"
(Deshler, Schumaker, Lenz, & Ellis, 1984). In addition, students with learning disabilities
"experience deficits in cognitive processes including disorganization, acquisition, retrieval,
integration or association, expression, sequencing, analyzing, and evaluating information,"
according to Wallace and McLoughlin (1988). With Thinking Maps, teachers are able to graphically demonstrate and model analytical thinking to students, furthering opportunities for
them to develop, practice, enhance, and apply the analytical skills necessary to be able to truly
understand and apply mathematical concepts.
In addition to analytical skills that may be immaturely developed, some students possess
learning difficulties, differences, or disabilities that can directly impact math performance. In
the following Tree Map, Cecil Mercer's (1983) work has been expanded to include sample
Thinking Maps applications (see Figure 8.4). The application of Thinking Maps is directly targeted to diminish the impact of the acquisitional and behavioral problems experienced by
students with learning disabilities in math. From this Tree Map, it is clear that language and
procedure playa large role in contributing to mathematical understanding.
Students need support not only with the concepts of math but also with the symbols and
multiple steps involved in the construction of the concept. In the following multiple map
example (Figures 8.5a-e) introducing and explaining "the coordinate plane," teachers
and students work together to understand the language, processes, points, and purposes of
plotting and using coordinates.
89
90
Real-Life Uses
of Coordinate
Plane Skills
I
shopping
entertainment
travel
weather
spreadsheets
mall
directories
cruise: cabin
assignments
map
locations
aisle
markers
airplane
seats
air traffic
controllers
hurricane
tracking
charts
locating
specific cell
addresses
house
number and
street name
parking
concert
seating
navigation
sporting
events
longitude,
latitude
Doppler
radar
bus routes
plays
parking
Figq~>8.5b
1
1. Begin at given point
1
2. From that point look up or
down to find number along
x-axis
!
3. Open parentheses, and
write down that positive or
negative number
!
4. From the given point look
left or right to find the y-axis
1
5. Write down that positive or
negative number, and close
parentheses
~igure 8.5c
Quadrant I
(+, +)
Quadrant II ~
( -, +)
Quadrant III
( -, -)
1\
Quadrant IV
(+, -)
We also know from theories of brain-based research and theories of emotional intelligence
(Goleman, 1995) that for learning to occur, new information must have either personal relevance and meaning or an emotional connection to the learner. Through the use of Thinking
Maps, particularly the Frame of Reference, graphics can be constructed depicting the relevance
of math goals to real-life applications in ways that are compatible with the triune brain's
innate, natural preferences for pictures, determining patterns, establishing order, making connections, and completing processes. While students should realize that perhaps only in a math
class would they be asked to determine the coordinates for a point on a coordinate plane, those
skills are used often in real-life situations without being referred to specifically by name. Reallife applications can and should be made for every goal and content area to enhance student
awareness of personal relevance and the need to acquire those skills.
We can see that Thinking Maps foster clear, deliberate, and meaningful communication
between students and teachers. When students are involved in study where instruction is
effective, goals are clear, and opportunities for success are frequent, enhanced levels of selfconfidence will emerge and render students willing to take more frequent appropriate academic risks leading to upward spirals of student achievement.
In applying the theory that all knowledge is either declarative or procedural to the area of
mathematics, declarative knowledge would include content vocabulary, theorems, laws, rules,
and contributions of mathematicians-the factually based, continually true information, or the
absolutes. Procedural knowledge would include everything else: How to bisect an angle or use
the Pythagorean theorem to determine a missing measurement of a right triangle; how to
graph a point on a coordinate plane; and how to determine the mean, median, mode, and range
of a set of data are all examples involving procedural knowledge. Because of the inherent
procedural nature of math, the list could go on and on. Using a Flow Map for a procedure,
students can guide themselves or can be guided from where they presently function toward
the acquisition and subsequent mastery of curricular goals with amazing rates of growth.
A student from Edwards Middle School explained how Thinking Maps scaffolded her
learning by translating abstract thinking processes and mathematical processes into explicit
and tangible visual representations: "Thinking Maps help me in math class by explaining
something complex or abstract in a simple way. They allow you to see where you have made
your mistake, and how to show your math in words that make sense. I wish someone had
taught me math this way before. Now, I can understand exactly what we're doing in class."
The student added, "The more we use Thinking Maps, the more I understand, and the easier
the work becomes to do."
Teachers also celebrate the changes in students' organizational ability, self-efficacy, and
attitude toward learning: "Students get excited and are becoming much better at organizing
and maintaining their 'map' notes.... Students are consciously aware of wanting to have their
math Thinking Maps with them. The students know the tools are helping and will refer to
91
92
previous maps to verify their current work. It is very encouraging to me to assist students to
develop strategies that enable them to become independent learners." Students and teachers
indicated that Thinking Maps fostered students' ability to articulate how they were thinking
or to reflect with a metacognitive stance to self-assess. Students who previously had trouble
organizing now had a predictable road map that they could navigate.
Math teachers in general have a tendency to be highly organized and analytical. Because that
can be such a natural part of our way of thinking and frame of reference, we sometimes fail to
remember that others don't necessarily think that wa)T, particularly adolescents who are still developing cognitively. The use of the Flow Map for procedural knowledge acquisition in math forces
highly organized, analytical teachers to view concepts and skills from the student's perspective to
determine what is truly needed to ensure student mastery while incorporating the language that
is developmentally appropriate for that particular group of students.
The Flow Map used for sequencing is the same graphic design used in math, English, science, social studies, physical education, art, foreign language, or any other subject being
taught. This repetitive and consistent link to cognition is extremely positive and beneficial in
helping students, particularly students identified as having special needs, to become more
efficient and organized in their thinking across all facets of educational pursuit. This success
breeds increases in self-esteem and the willingness of students to take appropriate academic
and responsive risks during the instructional process. Through the use and internalization of
this consistent language, students are enabled to quite literally state a more figurative phrase:
III see what you mean.
If
REFERENCES
Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., Lenz, B. K., & Ellis, E. E. (1984). Academic and cognitive intervention
for learning disabled adolescents, Part n. ]ounzal of Learning Disabilities, 17, 170-179.
Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it matters more than IQ. New York: Bantam.
Mercer, C. (1983). Common learning difficulties of LD students affecting math performance. In Arithmetic
teacher (p. 345, Table 14.2). New York: Reston Publishing.
Wallace, G., & McLoughlin,
MacMillan.
J.
9
Thinking Like
a Scientist
Lou-Anne Conroy, MA., and David Hyerle, Ed.D.
KEY CONCEPTS
A pattern language for the science inquiry process
The cognitive foundations of scientific thinking in elementary and secondary classrooms
Explicit thinking in an inquiry classroom
Have you noticed over the past 10 years how often scientists in fields such as biology and the
neurosciences-as well as the social sciences-use the term mapping for describing how they
understand and solve problems within complex areas such as weather systems, ecosystems,
the human genome system, and, of course, the human brain? Mapping has become the overarching metaphor for research, discovery, invention, creative and analytic thinking, and, in
practical terms, a new way to visually represent knowledge in the 21st century. There is even
a new field: knowledge cartography. Increasingly, scientists are becoming aware that we must
consciously learn how to transform bits of information and data (as our brain does unconsciously) into mapped patterns of knowledge.
Across the sciences, we are mapping the human genome system, as well as all the systems
of the brain and body. The brain is based on pattern seeking and mapping, and thus we even
now use cartographic means to discover how we think; for example, we use fMRIs (functional
magnetic resonance imaging) to map that organ of our body that is continuously and unconsciously remapping reality for us at every moment. This is because we now accept that our
world is more fully understood when we investigate interdependent patterns in systems rather
than isolated, linear data points for informing our scientific research. The use of mapping in
the 21st century represents a paradigm shift in the way the "contents" of knowledge are generated and represented. The form in which we present knowledge is thus a critical dimension of
scientific process, inquiry, and innovation.
Thinking Maps are, simply, a pattern language that supports teachers and students in discovering and representing linear and nonlinear knowledge structures. These visual tools based
on generative cognitive structures-when used in combination and embedded within
each other-are congruent with the patterns at work within our brains. Below we will view a
correlation of the underlying cognitive processes of Thinking Maps to scientific processes and
then investigate classroom-based work that shows the dynamic use of the tools from elementary to high school.
93
94
The scientific method that is often found inside science textbooks has an overarching, often
dull linear design from hypothesis building to testing. Yet within this method the scientific thinking, discove~ problem solving, and invention are not linear processes and involve seeking complex nonlinear patterns, interdependencies, and systems within information. Scientists think by
defining a problem in context (Circle Map),
describing properties of things (Bubble Map),
comparing things and establishing criteria for evaluation (Double Bubble Map),
creating taxonomies and hierarchical categories (Tree Map),
analyzing the part-whole anatomy of objects (Brace Map),
ordering information in sequences (Flow Map),
analyzing the physiological feedback systems (Multi-Flow Map), and
using analogies and metaphors to understand concepts (Bridge Map).
Above all, scientists are often constrained and/or enlightened by the existing body of research
and theoretical paradigms within their domains. In the best cases, scientists seek to understand
how their own belief systems and the existing body of research inform their biases and frame
their perceptions and beliefs while also influencing their methods and interpretation of
evidence. Within the language of Thinking Maps, a rectangular frame (Frame of Reference)
may be drawn around the map(s) as a metacognitive mirror for establishing and reflecting on
the personal and cultural influences on one's thinking.
How does this all play out in the classroom? We first look at a unit of study at the elementary level focused on students' collaborative learning about scientific discovery and
how to create a rubric for further analysis of data. We then turn to a few examples from a
high school student who mapped out an entire biology textbook. These foundational pieces
lead us into an in-depth view of how Thinking Maps may be integrated into the processes
of inquiry in science.
(Continued)
95
96
(Continued)
or infer some kind of hierarchical ordering of their ideas and/or making connections between and
anumg their comments. In ~his way, the Circle Map served as a classroom mirror, reflecting the fluency
and flexibility of students' thinking, ideas, and information at that moment in tirn.e.Asthe students
continued to brainstorm what t~eyknew about rocks, Ipegan to see the Circle Map as rnore than a
mirror that reflected thestLidehts' responses. The map was also serving as a window, providing a means
tQaccess and assessthe'$tudents' thinking; I could identify their priorknowledgeandsutface Se)(l1e
possiblemisconceptions'and'alternativet:onceptual frameworks. Indee~, the Circle Map was emerging
~s,a.n effective tool for both-assessment and brainstorrning.
get colors
from minerals
finding and
obselVing
used to
make fire
some are
made of other
rocks
lava is melted
rock
minerals
that are
microscopic
used to
make concrete
made of
atoms
a leaf can
become a
fossil
.studying
abotitrocks
break and
make sand
crystals
ancJgeodes
speEirs and
arroWheads
some have
layers
three kinds
(igneousi sedimentary,
metamorphic)
.~.
~:
used'forbUilding
cahbemade
by volcanoes
crushed by
water
boulders
break other
things
can be formed
from dirt, le$ves,
mud, and sand.
pressed
r~adlhg
about
rocks
used for
crushing
things
seeing rocks
inamus~um
.... Forme, the distingUishing feature of the eight Thin kirig Maps, . as compared with.' rt,loretraditional
VisJ.I'.lltQPls,isthe "Frame of8efer(!nce," which, a$~ me~acQgnitive device, added ano~herdimension to
ttl~lessQn.As the. students, and I reviewed the Circle. Mapl we acknowledged that l'we already knew
many things a,bout rocks;" Transferring our attention to the Frpme of Reference, laskedthe students,
~HoV{did you learn what you already know?" In responding to this question, the students reflected on
their own learning and atthe same time informed me as to the diversity of learning experiences that
had been their avenues for acquiring knowledge and constructing meaning. The students identified
their "ways of knowing and learning"intheoutside frame.,
97
Havingsurfaced,.andassessedthestudents'priorknowledge,.I distributedrock,samples.{gra.nite) to
eachstudehtandir1troduc:edth~~PQble. Map. Withthe aid .ofhand lenses, the students examaned the
samples of .gr,mite usin'g multisensory . observations and, usingtheau~ble, Map, recorded
their descri,ptions of the properti~s . ofgral1ite. ,A.ffer.ia few'minutes, thestudentsshared. their map
{see Figure 9.3}.
Figure 9.3
luster
teXture
shape
patterns
Most important, as they shared their maps,theisecond, graders identified the discrete types of
properties ,thatthey ,had .beenobserying:c()fQT, t~xture, . shape, patterns,IUst~r,. minerals .in the' rock
(composition), size,andsmeILWed.efinedth~ generated listof rock properties as flOur R()ck Rubric,"
The students subsequently referredtQ the rock rl.!~ric:as they began to observe more rock samples
{gneiss).. and. recorded' theirobservations4siQg a",oew BUbbl~ M~p and Frame()fReference.
Having shared their BUbbfeM~ps ..aboutgranite:with their classmates apcJbyusing the rock rubrit
as a guide,the,students made and recorded eve11 more,'observa.tions about!l1egneiss saOlples. As th~
students increased the numberOfc>bservations,they:beJlJ~r" to exp~nd theirm.~p,.addingmore "bubbles"
of.propertiesas needed.Nowth~istudentswerebeQinningto take greater,own~rship of thevisual tool,
using and adapting it tomeetth~irneeds.fQrthe'~tucients,the Bubble Map,was not astatic "fill-inthe-bubbl~s wgrksheet" Jnste~djt.Pecame a dynamic, versatile, open~endeetgra.phic with a certain
"elasticity".that.could,bestretthetti.l1tandem.Witlttbeirthinking.
Intheconcluding'. momE!ntsof~his lesson, laske~~f the students, "How are;~ranite- and gneiss allke
and different?". Each studentliter~lIyhad. both'samples. in.hand in order to cditmare and contrast these
two typ6Sofrocks,.butto faciHtateourdiscussion,thestudents alsohadtwo'BubbleMapsthat could
be merge~intoa third Thinking.Ma~;a [)oubleBu.Pl)leMap(seeFigLJre,~t1J.
(Continued)
"
~:
98
(Continued)
Figure 9.4 Comparing and Contrasting Gneiss and Granite Double Bubble Map
In the area of science, students are constantly comparing and contrasting objects, organisms,
phenomena, events, and ideas within and about thenatur~lworld. It has been my experience that
teachers often use Venn diagrams as "the" graphic organizer for comparing and contrasting. HoWever, I
have observed that certain graphic organizers-such' as Venn diagra,ms-ofteflcanbe problematic.
Children, particularly young children,as concrete learners can attirhes become fo~used on the seemingly
fixed format and nature of the graphic. For exa'rnple, ifthe Venn diagrartris drawn with a relatively narrow
area of intersection, does that imply a limited commonality between the objects being compared? If I had
asked the students to compare granite and gneiss by constructing and using aVenn diagram, how'would
they have determined'to what extent to overlap the circles? The Double Bubble Map .dearly was a more,
"user-friendly" tool for the students to manipulate as they cornparedgranite with gneiss; it developed
naturally from the separate Bubble Maps they had created and was more in keeping with a constructivist
approach to learning. Following this first lesson with rocks and minerals,the students had opportunities
to observe and describe the properties of 10 other types of rock including conglomerate, sandstone,
pumice, obsidian, slate, shale, limestone, marble, basalt, and granite schist These additional rock
explorations set the stage for the second lesson (a'week later);,wherlthestudents sortedand,c1assified'the
12 kinds of rock according to their own classification systems; I then introduced the Tree Map that'
supported students with another key scientific process, categorization, or the creation oftaxonomies.
As I reflect on my efforts at using these four visual tools, I find the insights gained and discoveries
made about the relationship between visual tools and teaching, learning, and assessment to be both
rewarding and challenging.
As this practical investigation shows, Bob and his students were able to fluidly move with
their thinking to the conceptual outcomes of this discovery process through the use of multiple
Thinking Maps. Even though Bob's lesson plan was linear, the kind of scientific thinking and
discovery required was not; students needed to flexibly pattern information in different
forms-as maps-to construct understandings. They could evolve ideas from brainstorming
to the development of a rubric and finally to the creation of a taxonomy: a Tree Map. During
this process, the students also used the Frame of Reference to reflect on the content and experiential background that influenced their perceptions.
MAPPING A BIOLOGYTEXTBOOK
Now let's shift from second graders who were novice users of Thinking Maps to an honors
biology student and expert in the tools who mapped out an entire biology textbook,
independently, over the course of a year. Some years ago, we received a document from a high
school biology teacher outside of Chicago who, along with her colleagues, had systematically
trained all of the students in the school to use Thinking Maps and Thinking Maps software
(Hyerle & Gray Matter Software, 1997, 2007) at a very high level (see Chapter 10, "Thinking
Technology"). The examples shown in Figures 9.5, 9.6, and 9.7 were excerpted from a much
larger document containing over 40 Thinking Maps that had been generated using the software
during the yearlong course. All eight maps were used at different times by the students and
teacher as formative assessments as the year progressed. With most chapters, the students
decided which maps best reflected the key information in the text and, with accuracy and great
clarity, displayed, for example, types of muscle cells and their properties using a Tree Map, the
cycle of cells using a Flow Map, and dozens of intricate interrelated parts of a muscle using a
Brace Map.
Figure.9;S Tree Map of Muscle Cell Types
Muscle Cell
Types
I
Smooth
==c=
Cardiac
Skeletal
long and
tapered at
each end
striated
long cells
single
nucleus
multinucleated
single
nucleus
involuntary
-walls of blood
vessels
-digestive
system
-walls of
hollow organs
branched,
forming a
netlike
structure
contain
intercalated
discs
involuntary
found in the
heart
voluntary
attach to
bones
99
o
o
cytokinesis
11----~
1 . -_ _...,-_ _---'
restriction
point
carries out
basic life
functions and
performs
specialized
activities (time
varies)
restricts the
cell to one of
three paths:
1. cell may
proceed to S
2. cell may stay
in G1
3. cell may die
G1 phase
S phase
I
M phase
prophase
metaphase
anaphase
telophase
mitotic spindle
aligns
chromosome
in the middle
chromosomes
pUll apart and
migrate to
opposite poles
1. mitotic
spindles
disassemble
2. nuclear
membrane and
nucleolus reform
3. DNA diffuses
I
G2 phase
synthesis of
more proteins;
membrane
meterial is also
synthesized
and stored in
vesicles
DNA replication
occurs, as does
synthesis of
microtubules that
will become
components of
mitotic spindles
(8-10 hours)
tendon
connective
tissue sheath
Muscle
muscle
fasciculi
axon of
motor
neuron
blood
vessels
sarcolemma
(cell
membrane)
nuclei
muscle
fiber
sarcoplasmic
reticulum
(folded to
store calcium)
mitochondria
T-tubules
myofibers
myosin (thick
myofilaments)
actin (thin
{troponin
myofilaments)
tropomyosin
In addition to the examples shown, this student was also able to show that she could map
out the feedback loops of different body systems using a Multi-Flow Map, comparisons of different processes using a Double Bubble Map, and properties of unique parts of the body using
a Bubble Map. By midterm. and at the end of the year, with her notes contained in maps reflecting the academic language and the conceptual content of the chapters, she was able to spread
her documents out for review for exams. Her teacher was also able to assess how this student
drew the information and scientific language in the chapters together conceptually as the year
progressed.
I0I
I 02
Maps software. We see this developmental aspect of the maps as first-grade students, college
students, and school administrators alike are able to use each map in novel applications.
Given a full view of the 40 pages of Thinking Maps developed by the high school student
over the course of the year, we also witness both the integrative and reflective dimensions of
the language. She was able to integrate multiple maps (e.g., a Tree Map on types of cells, a
Brace Map of the anatomy of a muscle, and a Flow Map of the cycle of a cell) and developed
a deeper understanding of how this information is interdependent. The 40-page document
also shows that through the rich mapping of content knowledge, this student was able to
work across multiple types of map representing different knowledge structures in the sciences as noted in Figure 9.1: properties (Bubble Maps), comparatives (Double Bubble Maps),
taxonomies (Tree Maps), anatomy (Brace Maps), sequences (Flow Maps), and physiology
(Flow and Multi-Flow Maps).
Ultimately, we want students to become self-assessing and develop the capacity for critical
examination of research, including being able to detect their own biases for how they are interpreting knowledge presented to them. The high school student, along with her teacher, could
use the maps for what Arthur Costa (personal communication) has called "displayed metacognition" and "bifocal" assessment (Chapter 3). This is an example of how students can actually
see the development of content/conceptual knowledge by focusing on the development of
thinking patterns. Most often in classrooms content knowledge held in the minds of students
is assessed using various methods-including linear written essays, isolated problem-solving
formats, projects, and multiple-choice items.
Yet this is not enough, because ultimately we envision students as citizens in the 21st century being able to grapple with real scientific issues and problems confronting our world-and
not just in classroom science labs but through inquiry processes and "the scientific method."
The work presented above-an elementary-level "rock rubric" and samples of high school
biology text "mapped out" from beginning to end-offer examples of foundational work for
"thinking like a scientist." Yet the essence of scientific thinking is inquiry, the capacity to independently and collaboratively engage in the nonlinear processes of following your thinking to
new discoveries. In the section that follows, Lou-Anne Conroy goes deeper into this process
with an analysis and reflections on the use of Thinking Maps.
While an educator who participated in a science inquiry course I taught was at home reviewing
a video of a high school chemistry class, her 10-year-old son remarked, "Who is teaching the
class?" This child's comment went straight to the heart of teaching science through the inquiry
process. Teachers become facilitators as they provide the scaffolding necessary to question,
explore, and guide. As I viewed the same video and watched the students make observations
about chemical reactions and then design investigations around their own questions, I found
myself applying the eight Thinking Maps to the process I saw unfolding and began to wonder
again how we can more deeply and directly facilitate students' thinking.
In the video, as students in this ninth-grade chemistry class designed and shared
their experiments, it was clear that they were implicitly applying the cognitive processes upon
which Thinking Maps are based: These processes included categorizing observations made
about an initial chemical reaction, sequencing the steps to their investigations, comparing and
103
104
Figure
9~8
Planning
River Unit
Explore concept
of watershed
Define "community"
Students
design a field
study to
determine the
health of the
local brook
natural
I
troubleshooting
data collection
I
peer review
of
procedure.
data
collection
U'I
II
human
field
investigation
prep-identify
metrics for
studying the
health of
the river
background
of structure
and function
of river
system
Report out
1/
adjust
methods.
equipment.
methods
peer review
of methods
and data
collection
Investigate
local, state,
and national
regulations
developed to ~ Meet with local
protect wetlands
legislatures to
I
propo~
changes to the
in groups,
regulations of
analyze
wetlands
effectiveness
in town
and propose
changes
identify
watershed
of a local
brook
Identify
new
questions
to explore
if time
Students
design a
controlled lab
experiment
to explore a
question
regarding
river ecology
Field
investigation
use
topographical
maps and
map software
to trace the
headwaters
to major river
Report out to
class meeting
experience
and follow-up
plans
design a way
to
communicate
results and
discuss
"findings" and
new questions
invite larger
community
to share
findings and
questions
students
design a
variety of
summative
assessment
options to
give peers
I-
106
the variety of macroinvertebrates and how they relate to other important feeding groups
within the river ecosystem. By identifying possible food sources for the relating factor,
students then make important connections to the human impact of clear-cutting around
headwaters, logging along first- and second-order streams, nutrient loading of wetlands associated with rivers, and using in logging operations such ubiquitous herbicides as what is commonly known as Roundup. If I ask students to help me map the relationships of food sources
to an organism, I can then pose questions regarding how and why they think the variety of
human impacts would affect the system. New questions are then sparked and lead to interest
and curiosity used in the design of their own field and lab investigations. Figure 9.11 is a
Bridge Map used in a similar way to continue the discussion of food chains in a variety of
wetland ecosystems that are interconnected from headwaters to the mouth of a river as it flows
into the sea. In the case of Figure 9.11, the students see the effect of climate change on Atlantic
salmon that reside part of the year near Long Island Sound as they migrate from breeding
grounds in the upper reaches of the Connecticut River and its tributaries to the feeding
grounds of the Atlantic.
I am convinced that sharing the natural world with students is a motivating hook to stirring a sense of awe and interest in the "wild" members of their communities. I can only hope
that a sense of responsibility for the stewardship of these wild places is also cultivated.
Within the river ecology unit, I bring my students out into the rivers as soon as possible; in
fact, my whole yearlong curriculum is determined by the seasons. After scaffolding a variety
of activities by bringing specimens from rivers and wetlands into the classroom in the form
as a local
developer
as a town
conservation
commission
member
as a farmer
as an
Abenaki
3,000 years
ago
as a fly
fisher
River
Functional
Feeding Groups
Figure 9.11
bacteria on leaf
floating
_ _li_tt_e_r_ . . . . J as '---_a_lg_ae_-J as ~
scrapers,
Ephemeroptera
(mayflies)
...J
Odonata
trout
How do members of
different aquatic
ecosystems function
In the food chains?
are critical
predators in the
food chains of
_---I
Relating Factor
vernal pools
third-order
streams
A~_---,A
marsh
estuaries
A"--__
Long Island
Sound, NY
of bubbling aquaria and kiddie pools filled with pond water and water striders, diving
beetles, and tadpoles, the students and I work toward planning a field investigation that
considers human impact. Over the years, these activities have included the impact on the
surrounding ecosystems from golf course maintenance, municipal sewage treatment, clearcutting, and agriculture.
Of course, a large part of fieldwork is the hands-on tools that students love to use for investigation, assessment, and collection of specimens. Figure 9.12 is a Brace Map that organizes all
the field equipment necessary to investigate the health of a river using macroinvertebrates as
an indicator. This map can be used as developed, or, better yet, student groups can create their
own maps and then show them to peers for criticism and ideas for additional equipment.
Again, the maps are easy to revise as students share in the seeing of the whole and parts of the
practical needs of implementing an ecosystem field investigation.
107
I 08
Figlire 9.12
probes
Groups 1. 2(
water
quality
test kits
laptop
flow meter
meter sticks
Groups 3. 4(
physical
metrics
tape
measure
stop
watches
GPS
River study
equipment/materials
river
for class
sampling
investigation: What
equipment
is the health of
Grant Brook in
Lyme, NH?
kick nets
forceps
Groups 5.6
lJmacroinve~ebrate
sampling
identification
keys
jars/labels/ethanol
viewing
trays
buckets
clipboards
pencils
Groups 7,
at
general
waders
Sharpies
camera
data sheets
Figure 9.13
detergents
farm
fertilizer
runoff
leach
field/septic
tank runoff
/
nitrogen
loading of
Grant
Brook
---+
lawn care
fertilizers
~
increase of
pollution
tolerant
species
increase
algae
blooms
-.
decrease of
pollutionintolerant
species
-.
depletion of
oxygen in
degradation
water column -----+
of trout
due to
habitat
decomposition
decrease in
trout food
I 09
Figure 9.14
Study the
biology of
Daphnia
Observe
:-----.
r----+ Daphnia
Establish
normal
reproductive
rate in
classroom
culture as a
control
r----+
Develop a
Develop an
Research
investigable
hypothesis:
background
At 0.1%
question:
information on
----+ nitrogen/fertilizer
-----+
At what dose of
Daphnia
solution,
nitrogen does the
magna biology
Daphnia will no
reproductive rate of
and ecology
Daphnia decrease?
longer reproduce
:-----.
Design
methods
I
Present to
class for
feedback
Design
data
Set up
-----+
r----+
experiment
collection
tables
Troubleshoot
1----+ problems/revise
methods
----+
Analyze
results
Design way to
r----+ communicate
results
Present to
class for
feedback
Mix
dilutions
Revise
data
tables
Seek peer
review of
ideas
Use t-test,
other
statistical
analysis
Connect
results to the
human impact
on local wetlands
Collect
data
Address
new
questions
with class
r----+
I
Include field study
of nitrogen loading
in local wetlands
----
REFERENCES
Clifford, ~, & Marinucci, S. J. (2008). Testing the water: Three elements of classroom inquiry. HaroQrd
Educational Review, 78, 675-688.
Hyerle, D., & Gray Matter Software. (1997). Thinking Maps (Version 1.0) [Computer software]. Raleigh,
NC: Innovative Sciences.
Hyerle, D., & Gray Matter Software. (2007). Thinking Maps (Version 2.0, Innovative Leaming Group)
[Computer software]. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
Ogle, D. (1988, December-1989, January). Implementing strategic teaching. Educational Leadership, (46),
47-48.
III
Thinking
Technology
Daniel Cherry, M.Ed.
KEY CONCEPTS
Uniting networking capacities in the brain, the mind, and machines
Making the explicit connection between higher-order thinking and technology applications
Using a common language of thinking patterns through software for mapping the standards
computer in public schools. I remember loading programs from the cassette drive on TRS-80s
and Commodore PET (Personal Electronic Transactor) machines. I was even impressed that I
could write a five-line program in BASIC (Beginner's All-purpose Symbolic Instruction Code)
and have my name show up all over the screen. From the time I was an elementary school
teacher beginning to use technology, to when I took a position as a district-wide technology
coordinator, to my present work as director of New Hampshire School Administrators Leading
with Technology (NHSALT, one of 50 state leadership programs funded by the Bill & Melinda
Gates Foundation), I have been part of and observed with a critical eye the slow and, more
recently, rapid progression of technology use in our classrooms.
The computer, in one of its earliest and simplest definitions, is an input, process, and output device. Many early computers were described as "thinking machines" that would ultimately mimic the sensory input, mental processing, and productive output of the human
mind. Artificial intelligence programs were being created to challenge chess champions before
the intelligence quotient was challenged and before a theory of multiple intelligences was
offered. At this time the brain was also described as a black box that could be simply broken
down into two separate hemispheres, but the new functional magnetic resonance imaging
(fMRI) brain scanning tools show that holistic is a more accurate description of the complex
circuitry of the human brain.
When a person works with computers, neurons accept visual input through the optic
nerve, and the brain processes all of the shapes, colors, and bits of information at lightning
speed. An interaction occurs between the user (a strange slang term often linked to people
112
THINKING TECHNOLOGY
struggling with addiction) and the machine: a transfer or an exchange of data. Amazement and
wonder take over. The wiring and firing of neural pathways in the brain are readied as the user
tries to relate to and make conscious sense of the data presented. What does this mean? Thousands
of calculations that would take weeks to accomplish by hand, the ability to accept variables
and build projections, and answers, answers, and more answers. Think of the possibilities,
think of the impact on education, think of ...
113
114
variety of environments. Thinking Maps software (Hyerle & Gray Matter Software, 2007),
having evolved out of the language of Thinking Maps, is one pathway toward this outcome.
When I started working with teachers and technology through the use of Thinking Maps
and the accompanying software, I was amazed that, given the same set of tools, first graders
and eighth graders were sharing ideas about writing styles of authors. When the work was
displayed in a hallway, third-grade students, not familiar with the sixth-grade content, could
name the cognitive process that was being used to communicate information through a common Thinking Map. Students were given tools that organized and allowed them to communicate their thinking, and were motivated by the ability to create graphic representations of their
thinking on the computer. We were creating a culture of thinking in our schools that integrated
technology into the center of the community, improved pedagogy, and promoted thinking.
As a technology coordinator, I saw new effective communication across content areas and
grade levels as parents, teachers, and students used a common visual language to teach and
share complex thoughts and ideas. We offered Thinking Maps software training to parents.
Some parents attended formal instruction in the evening at school, and many parents experienced informal sessions, with their children providing examples and teaching them how to use
the software in the labs at school. Not only were students sharing maps with parents, but
parents were sending maps to teachers! Administrators included maps in newsletters to
describe processes for student placement. They also used maps to explain the results of programs on high-stakes tests. At an open house, parents and children explored the various uses
of the maps on computers. We even had parents bring in examples of maps that they had created for use in their workplace. This seemed to be an integration point, a crossroads for best
practices focusing on higher-order thinking, a delivery system using the personal computer,
and a common visual language built on the cognitive processes embedded in Thinking Maps.
This also produced a systemic change across one of the schools, Hanover Street School, that
resulted in improved scores for students on the New Hampshire statewide test.
THINKING TECHNOLOGY
king
1<1111
I
other facts
AntarclJca
sauill
yevow
beal<
blue nns
secone
largest
black
I
lays eggs
PNer;
other
~
nuntee
fOr ItS
0"
I I5
116
the Standards (Curtis, 2004) was a pilot for the district, enabling it to continuously build an electronic database of successful learning experiences based on fundamental cognitive processes.
The database of selected, high-quality lessons is searchable based on the standard(s) being met,
grade, and curriculum area. Figure 10.1 is a partial example of how the three windows enable
teachers to create standards-based essential questions, based on thinking processes and leading
to the development of Thinking Maps, with a piece of writing as a final product.
The importance and implications of this project are multifold. As teachers experienced success, they were able to communicate the process they used to deliver the instruction, capture
evidence of student work, and provide reflections or ideas about the learning they experienced. Within a school, teachers could build a dynamic library of successful lessons and
activities. District 27 in fact began to share such lessons and maps with teachers throughout
the district, and teachers began to dialog and discuss student work and pedagogy. Lessons
could be opened up, adopted, modified, and exchanged, simply by using Thinking Maps software. This is not global "curriculum mapping" but detailed mapping of content-based thinking skills, units of study, and content standards.
EVOLUTION
Technology in the classroom is still in its infancy. For some teachers in District 27, this was the
first time they had used a software program directly related to teaching practices and based
on something that they were already using interactively in their classrooms. The software thus
became a technology for learning, connected to the classroom and teaching experience, and
not a disconnected process of learning a new technology.
Within our educational systems, advancements in the use of technology must combine
with the necessary advancements in school climate, instructional practices, and instructional
leadership. It will be in these high-functioning, well-coordinated environments that our students will have the greatest opportunity to succeed. Thinking Maps and Thinking Maps software compose a set of tools to integrate technology with pedagogy focused on higher-order
thinking with the potential to create positive, systemic change in education. The dynamic
visual circuitry of Thinking Maps creates an overlap between the human brain and the technology of the computer. These tools provide a crossroads-a nexus between brain, mind, and
machine-for efficiently and effectively organizing, understanding, and communicating
thinking within a classroom, across whole schools, and around the world.
REFERENCES
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (with Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R.). (1956). Taxonomy
of educational objectives: Handbook: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Curtis, S. (2004). Mapping the standards. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
Hyerle, D. (2000). A field guide to using visual tools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Hyerle, D. (2009). Visual tools for transforming il1formlltion into knowledge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Hyerle, D., & Gray Matter Software. (2007). Thinking Maps (Version 2.0, Innovative Learning Group)
[Computer software]. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
McKenzie, J. (n.d.). From now on: The educational tedl11ologtj journal. Retrieved October 20, 2010, from
w,...,w.fno.org
Moersch, C. (2002). Beyond hardware: Using existing technology to promote higher-level thinking. Danvers,
MA: International Society for Technology in Education.
Sec~ion
Uniting Whole
Learning
COll1l11unities
A First Language
for Thinking in a
Multilingual
School
Stefanie R. Holzman, Ed.D.
KEY CONCEPTS
Results from an inner-city school with students learning a second language while differentiating instruction with a common language
Moving expectations to a higher level across a low-performing school
Changing school climate and culture toward higher-order thinking and literacy
development
118
teachers in the context of the classroom. This is because the acquisition of a second language
obviously gets in the way of students' thinking and learning. The Thinking Maps become a
translator of language and thinking from one language-mind (Spanish) to another languagemind (English). Thinking Maps became our first language for thinking, thus supporting the
languages, content learning, and cognitive development of our multilingual population.
My experiences from seeing the maps in use in other schools in Long Beach Unified School
District made me believe that our students would learn the maps, and the result of all this
would be higher academic achievement. This did happen. The numbers are in from the standardized tests given in California. The state has a very complicated formula to determine
expected growth. Roosevelt Elementary School was expected to gain 11 points overall. We
exceeded that goal with a 60-point gain. Not only did the school as a single unit make growth,
but so did our significant subgroups: Hispanic students, English-language learners, and students of low socioeconomic status as determined by free lunches. In addition, with the implementation of the No Child Left Behind legislation, the expectation has been that 13.6% of the
students in our school should meet the standards in language arts (including reading, vocabulary, spelling, grammar, and punctuation) and that 16% should meet the standards in math
(including basic math facts and word problems). If a school does not meet the expectations,
then it is identified as a program-improvement school and must take a number of corrective
actions. As of this writing, and with two of our four tracks' test results in (including tracks with
literacy classes for retainees and for students who entered school in fourth and fifth grade with
no English skills), the results demonstrate that we are clearly not in program improvement.
Ironically, my intent as the instructional leader of Roosevelt Elementary School was initially isolated on these tools for a direct and immediate impact on student performance. What
I did not realize and could not foresee were the deeper effects on the development of teachers
across our year-round, multitrack school as a result of the use of Thinking Maps in their classrooms. I discovered that from an administrator's point of view, Thinking Maps did much more
than what I had understood from both practical and theoretical points of view. First, there are
changes in how teachers learn and teach and evaluate student work, especially with differentiated processes for our second-language learners. Second, there have been shifts in the culture
and climate of our school, most obviously in the quality of professional conversations that now
rise to the surface (see Chapter 17, "Mentoring Mathematics Teaching and Learning"). Third,
there is a new level of access and discourse in the areas of teacher evaluation and accountability, which has led to a higher quality of teacher decision making. All of these changes-often
referenced as keys to school change-will continue to have a long-term positive outcome on
the academic achievement of the students at my school beyond the direct application of these
tools by students to academic tasks and tests.
It is important for me to restate that I brought Thinking Maps into this school not for the
purpose of bringing about change in these three areas but for an immediate shift of student
performance that could cascade over time. Below are my discoveries about the interdependent
ripple effects that I found in these other areas of teacher learning (including higher-order
thinking for English-language learners), school culture, and accountability.
TEACHER LEARNING
The work of teaching is not only difficult, but it is also fast paced. It is the exceptional teacher
who is self-reflective and aware of metacognitive processes (see Chapter 16, "Inviting Explicit
Thinking"). Too often teachers are so focused on working with students that they rarely turn
inward to notice what and how they are thinking. Yet I believe our students should be learning
to do what we adults do as we internally process our experiences. Our internal dialogue and
thinking are often hidden away, as are our emotional states, but teachers need to let students
I 19
120
know what is happening in their heads; this can't happen if teachers are not aware of what
they are doing. Once my teachers began learning Thinking Maps, they suddenly realized the
types of thinking that were flowing through their minds and how the maps can show the
students their adult thinking strategies and processes.
When my teachers became aware of their own thinking processes and how the Thinking Maps can communicate these to their students, they were so surprised that they had
to check with someone to see if "they were doing it right." One very experienced teacher
had an insight during a lesson about "the city and the country" in her first-grade class of
English-language learners and came to me to check in. Lots of conversation had happened
during her lesson, but at the end of the lesson, she realized that she could have organized
this information into a Tree Map.
An example of this is the Tree Map created by a cooperative group about an emotion that
surfaced during the reading of a Junie B. Jones book (see Figure 11.1). These five students were
able to use the map to organize their thinking about anger: what it is, references to characters
in other books who show anger (text-ta-text connections), what it looks like, and, then, things
that one would say when angry. "Mr. Angry" is at the top of the tree. By visually modeling a
process for thinking through ideas, and even working through the content of emotions, a
teacher can let her students know how she had organized this information in her head. The
students see thinking evolve and then use the tools independently and in cooperative groups.
Language and cognitive development then go hand in hand.
-C'
."!.l=igq~:l:I:H
;".~'.,.:,._.,-
.. , .. ~.
,,--_.-
':'~J\ngry"Ttee~Map.':forWriting
~:,L,!~
:,';
",,',~.
T~u
/J7;
:Jve/
f\i/>7 berly
50 h;CJ,.
e).,o.ro..c.-ler s
whO feel
~
/J1iAd
ellrQ.jed
s..J.eQ.t>'!irj
c.rQ.llky
fVt>'!illj
frus-J.ro..-J.ed
-/-~is w~
ShOW
110'1'
-lell
yell
fQ.c.e
red
t>'lQ.d
fQ.<:.e
re. d
c.le/ld,ed
fis-/-
oVe
I l-o...J.e
yov
je-J.
Q.WQ.y
books
o.lld \J books
(HOvJ
@ books
Oil
Oil
Oil
Tvesdo.y,
W'edllesdo. y.
reo.d C:;:-;;;6?
121
122
one first-grade student selected the key information from the problem using a Circle Map and
then used the Flow Map to show the steps and the strategies involved in solving the problem
based on the information in the initial Circle Map. The change in students' ability to do these
problems made a significant difference between last year's and this year's school scores.
Each year in our district, students are also required to take a writing test that is scored on
a holistic scoring rubric. The task is response to literature, which parallels one of the state's
required tasks. Although primarily a reading task, students must read a passage and then
respond to a prompt. In Grade 1 at my school, students had to read a story and then demonstrate their understanding of the text by using a Thinking Map to demonstrate the sequence of
the story and then show how the characters changed over time. Most students used a Flow
Map and then a Bubble Map as their response to the task. This type of task gave us insight into
the students' comprehension both at a knowledge level (the sequence) and at deeper levels
(how the character changed over time), without burdening them with having to write a complex essay.
This was especially helpful for teachers in analyzing the understanding of the Englishlanguage learners. The use of the Thinking Maps for this task also enabled the students to read
more critically on the standardized test. Kristin Tucker, a first-grade teacher, reflected that "the
Thinking Maps took the English-language learner to the highest level of thinking ... in a very
simple way. I didn't have to explain in words what I was doing; instead I just exposed the
students to the maps, and the students just 'got' them very easily. It was so easy that students
quickly learned to combine maps by themselves." This facilitated student learning of content,
and the explicit transfer of thinking skills by students also provided her with additional time
to teach!
Other teachers commented on how they noticed that the type of thinking used in one curriculum could be used in another. Because the teachers were able to make these connections,
they were able to help students make the same connections. The results were that students
were able to more quickly learn the content once they understood the underlying types of
thinking they needed. Instead of teaching specialized skills and strategies particular to one
content area, teachers began to generalize these deeply within and across disciplines.
DIFFERENTIATION OF INSTRUCTION
AND ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE
Over 85% of the students who enter kindergarten in our school speak Spanish as their primary
language. By law, we are required to differentiate the instructional practices based on the level
of English-language proficiency of students. Theoretically, differentiation seems so simple:
Teach differently to different students based on their individual needs. Easier said than done.
However, one of the differences that Thinking Maps has made at my school is that teachers
teach the same content to various groups in their classroom, but they have begun to provide
alternative means for students to access the content and show what they know. For example,
some teachers expect students to use the Thinking Maps as processes to a final product, while
others expect students to use the tools as a final product to demonstrate their thinking and
comprehension of the content.
In one of the third-grade classes, the students were expected to understand the similarities
and differences between two planets. All students were required to complete a Double Bubble
Map comparing and contrasting the two planets, which was the stated outcome of the lesson.
However, to differentiate the lesson, students who were fluent in English were also expected to
write a report that contained this information. Students less fluent in English needed only to
create the Double Bubble Map. The teacher was able to evaluate the factual and conceptual
learning by every student using either strategy (the map alone or the map and writing). With
fluent English speakers, she was also able to evaluate their ability to communicate their learning in writing, something she already knew the less fluent English speakers would not yet be
able to do. Of course, it is also essential to have the students who are not fluent in English begin
to write from the Thinking Maps, as this provides the bridge from their primary language to
the mainstream spoken and written form. As a first language for thinking, the maps became
vocabulary builders, visible organizers, and starting points for writing in a second language.
The important point here is that the teachers are able to assess content learning and use
student maps as data points to see whether or not language is getting in the way of understanding or if there are content misconceptions that need reteaching. It is often difficult to
determine how much limited English-proficient students understand of what is taught. If a
teacher wants to know what a second-language learner has learned, does the teacher ask the
student to use the second language if the student does not have verbal or written fluency? If
assignments ask them to write what they know, these students often drown in the English
language. They have to figure out the vocabulary, the syntax, the spelling, and the punctuation
of English and at the same time remember the content they have learned. The results are that
teachers often evaluate the students' English skills and sentence construction and not their
content knowledge or their reasoning. However, when teachers ask students to use Thinking
Maps to demonstrate what they know, the students do not have to focus on English and can
use their mental energies to communicate what they know about the content. They do not even
have to use words to convey this information. In most cases, Thinking Maps lend themselves
to visuals (e.g., drawings or pictures from magazines) to communicate the content.
EVALUATION OF STUDENTWORK
One of the key components of the changes I focused on in my first year as principal was to
insist that teachers be able to evaluate the degree to which students learned what was taught.
In some cases, such as in mathematics, which has its own universal symbol system, this was
easy to do with a pre- and posttest. We did not wait until the results of the state's standardized
tests to determine if students achieved growth. Thinking Maps became a powerful strategy
that teachers used to evaluate student learning. The results provided teachers with information
that was used to monitor student growth and to adjust teaching.
Teachers used Thinking Maps in various ways to determine the quantity and quality of what
students learned. Some used Circle Maps as pre- and posttests to determine what they learned.
Other teachers gave students an assignment that required them to demonstrate their thinking.
For example, one first-grade teacher asked students to retell a story. She was able to evaluate the
students' comprehension based on the Flow Maps they created. A third-grade teacher asked
students to determine the causes and effects of pollution on the ocean. It was quite evident who
"got it" and who didn't. The teacher was able to quickly reteach those who needed it. In all these
cases, our English-language learners were able to participate fully in the core curriculum.
123
124
I realized that one of the unplanned benefits was that because Thinking Maps were so easy
to implement, they could easily become the topic of professional talk. This occurred not only
between pairs of teachers but between teachers who rarely had occasion to share ideas, such
as a kindergarten teacher and a third-grade teacher. Suddenly, teachers had a first language for
thinking in which to talk about student learning, one that was not dependent on grade level
or content area.
Another change that occurred was that the teachers realized that the culture of the school
was going to be one in which lifelong learning was not reserved just for students. The expectation was that teachers should be learning new strategies that help accelerate student achievement and that "doing things as we've always done them" was no longer acceptable. The difference between learning the maps and participating in other staff development was that these
tools emulated adult thinking and strategies. These were then shared with students. Thus, the
strategies were authentic. Rather than teachers learning a "canned program" that did not
reflect what they as adults did and did not give them what their students needed, teachers
were learning lifelong strategies for themselves and then teaching them to their students. As
teachers began to experiment with the Thinking Maps in their own lives-such as making Tree
Map shopping lists-they developed into the learning community that I was trying to foster
at my school but never expected to get from these tools.
Another benefit I was surprised and pleased to see was that new teachers could participate
in the discussions about high-quality tools as equals. The visual language and common vocabulary were not a mysteriously complex formula that created a wall between veteran teachers
who had internalized a thoroughly unique and idiosyncratic teaching style and the new teachers and instructional aides who were just learning the ropes. With a common language, veteran teachers could model expert applications along a continuum-one rope-that novice
teachers could easily grab onto and make their own (see Chapter 17).
REFERENCE
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (with Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R.). (1956). Taxonomy
ofeducational objectives: Handbook: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKa}T.
125
Feeder Pat:t:erns
and Feeding t:he
Flame at: Blalack
Middle School
Edward 'I: Cheval/ier, M.Ed.
KEY CONCEPTS
Uniting students from an elementary feeder pattern using a common language for
thinking and learning
Using Circle Maps and Frames of Reference for identifying author's tone, mood, and style
Note-taking and thinking skills development using multiple Thinking Maps
After 10 years as a classroom teacher, I was offered two wonderful and challenging experiences,
first as an elementary principal and then as a middle school principal. Through these positions
I deepened my understanding of the complexity of instruction. I watched teachers lay a foundation for learning for elementary students, and as I entered my present position, I also saw that
many of our middle school students needed a stronger foundation in skills to improve their
learning that would stay with them throughout their educational and work careers.
My awareness of this deeper need grew over time from my classroom visits, walkthroughs, and supervision processes. I frequently heard frustrated teachers directing students
to "take notes" as they were introduced to new information. I also heard my teachers lament
that students didn't know "how to think" when they were challenged with new information
and concepts. Over time I realized I couldn't recall any clear examples of explicit instruction
in those two important areas-note-taking skills and thinking skills-even though teachers
could well identify and articulate these problem areas.
It became clear that the very core of learning that I began to seek out was rarely found in
these classrooms. I came to believe that the issue was larger than the individual teachers: They
had never had a unified, consistent way of addressing thinking skills for learning that required
sustained, consistent, direct, and differentiated instruction in these skills for all students across
multiple years. The absent foundation was missing not because of isolated negligence, but
126
because of an institutional blind spot that so many schools inherit from a structural problem of
schooling. We have focused on content knowledge and content-specific processes in schools. The
missing piece is a quality mental resource for explicitly addressing transferable learning-processing
skills that transcend anyone teacher's curriculum or the set, vertical path in a content area.
Through an event that can best be described as good fate, at a time when I was seeking
solutions to these problems, I was introduced to Thinking Maps. This solution has been not a
quick fix, but a systematic implementation over the past six years that has brought a unified
language to this school. This is underscored by the successes I see on a daily basis and at the
end of each year in test scores. In advocating for the adoption of Thinking Maps, my goal was
to give individual students a set of tools they could learn as they came from different elementary school experiences and take with them as they continued their educational careers. What
I did not foresee was that over the long term our campus would experience a less obvious,
school-wide benefit: the development of a community language through which all of us could
mature as individuals into a learning organization.
Thinking Maps help students actively process information. The use of the maps creates immediate and specific questions. In a middle school classroom, the constant challenge is maximum
engagement. Used in even their most limited form, Thinking Maps ensure eight "ready"
questions-questions associated with each of the eight thinking skills. Thinking Maps build a
bridge from concrete knowledge to abstract concepts.
Thinking Maps bridge the divide between concrete facts and abstract thinking as a developmental
necessity for adolescents. Thinking Maps give students a flexible structure for creating their own
vision of knowledge as they create their own maps from blank paper. Because no map is ever
complete, this flexibility ensures that students at all levels of growth can be consistently challenged in their thinking, building from concrete information to concept formation.
127
128
Thinking Maps 'Work as teaching, learning, and assessment tools. The flexible configurations
of the maps allow all teachers to contribute to creating applications within and across content
areas. Students can successfully use maps as independent learners and thinkers to organize
their thoughts for note taking, on formative assessments, and on summative assessments.
Many of my teachers regularly ask students to create one or several Thinking Maps to show
what they know as they are developing ideas, structuring an essay, or responding to the typical questions that appear at the end of most chapters.
129
...-------------------------------------,i.
AIlIl
J'!1l
' .. ,
i
~~
~.
"
TOlly
~.
/YIo..-l-l
A/'!)(
S.
P.
Kil"l
Br'!ll-l R.
Br'!ll-l B.
Ko..r'!ll
f\loo..~
Abby
".'"
~.
TJ
El"lfYl(}.
:.
~.
Po..-lric.k
SJ,o..Il'!
Do..lli
K'!r.dro..
,_
JosJ,
CJ,ris-lifl'!
C~O'!
Afldy
Ko..r'!fl
{VI'!
C~O'!
Eric.
'Will
..." ..
,_~:~... ,.,.-~r.I'.,
~
~.
1:
t
~
~
I~
,.. " ..'!re
:14\1:
-r
Ar.r.
Eric.
Ko..r'!l1
Alldy
/YI'!
CJ,ris-lill'!
SJ,o..lle
Y'!s
K'!llclro..
TJ
Y'!s
Abby
Br'!fl-l
Ko..r'!ll
fJoo..~
Y'!s
Yes
'WisJ,
I could not have been more excited. I had been seeking an initiative through which adolescent
students could learn tools for independently organizing notes and applying thinking skills, and
I had found these tools.
130
------------1---------------,1
"'-1
Developed
Developing
Underdeveloped
Factories
abound
Some
factories
Few
factories
Some
commercial
farms
Subsistence
farming
More
electricity
and
electronic
technology
Tools for
farming,
man-made, not
much electronic
tools
Some
access to
school
No
access to
education
Huge,
commercial
farms
Technologyelectric,
modern
Education,
access to
education
able to categorize information and get a visual depiction (and understanding) of three stages
of economic development as they apply to countries. They were also able to clearly see specific
factors of production as they apply to these stages. Using Bloom's (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives as a guide, teachers were also able to identify the kind of thinking required
by students in test questions and the direct application of the maps by students to the curriculum indicators that must be mastered.
2. Be Consistent
While we encourage creative use and flexibility of the maps, we also ensure that the common visual language has the consistency that enables complex applications. For example,
when a question concerning sequencing is asked in a test situation-such as "What are the
steps in the process of a bill becoming a law?"-we want students to identify the Flow Map as
a common tool for understanding this process.
Brittnie Bragg, a language arts teacher, shared two examples that she regularly uses in her
classroom. As students come into her room each day, they are asked to complete a warm-up
Thinking Map on something they learned, read, or did in the previous class period. Over time,
the directions progress from her assigning a specific Thinking Map to her instructions to "use
any of the eight Thinking Maps to show me something you remember from the story we read
last class period." These warm-up activities provide opportunities for practicing the maps and
for practicing fluent, autonomous transfer of thought processes.
A second example stretches the students to even higher levels of thinking. In teaching
and reviewing the challenging concept of recognizing the author's style, tone, and mood,
Mrs. Bragg asks students to create a Circle Map divided into three parts as shown in Figure 12.3.
In the center circle, the students write the title of the story. One third of the circle is segmented
for style, one for tone, and one for mood. The students are directed to define each of the three
Quotes
from the
story to
support
definitions
of tone
Tone
Mood
Quotes
from the
story to
support
definitions
of style
Style
Quotes
from the
story to
support
definitions
of mood
13 1
132
components as they are used in the story and, in the Frame of Reference, prove their definitions
by identifying direct quotes or examples from the story to support their thoughts. Such an
example underscores the importance of developing a common and consistent vocabulary in a
middle school setting for foundational thinking skills and tools. Even with a common district
curriculum, the abstract concepts of author's tone, mood, and style lend themselves to a variety
of instructional interpretations across the four elementary schools that feed into our community.
3. Be Persistent
Persistence as a habit of mind (Costa & Kallick, 2000) for improved thinking and communication has been vital to the success of our campus implementation. Our efforts with Thinking Maps have been sustained over a period of six years, and to achieve this, several publicly
stated expectations are emphasized and acted upon each year.
First, implementation is school-wide. All students, Grades 6 through 8, are reintroduced to
the eight cognitive skills and maps during the first six weeks of every school year. Second, all
teachers new to the campus are required to complete the introductory "Day One" Thinking
Maps session conducted by a certified trainer. Third, the campus principal participates in all
training. As active participants in training, campus administrators are positioned to serve as
coaches in supporting teachers to sustain implementation.
4. Be Interactive in Implementation
The quality of implementation is sustained by interaction among all stakeholders in the
process. Over the past six years, discussions have occurred within departments, in leadership
teams, and in planning groups regarding the effectiveness of the maps. Teachers have assumed
ownership of the implementation as they have created activities for classroom instruction. A
yearly campus improvement plan, developed by a team of teachers and parents, includes specific references to the use of the maps throughout the instructional program.
In recent years, map activities have been used for our own leadership and professional
development tools. For example, we have used the tools for a study of current professional
literature, data disaggregation of state test scores, and school-wide goal setting. In the past few
years, an ongoing process of "plan, implement, study, and revise" resulted in the adoption of
the Thinking Maps language by the elementary campuses that feed into Blalack. Each year, a
transition meeting of elementary fifth-grade teachers and middle school sixth-grade teachers
is held, and Blalack sixth-grade teachers excitedly share the benefits of the Thinking Maps and
the contribution they make to helping students achieve at higher levels. As a result, all of the
feeder elementary campuses moved toward implementation, and now almost all students
entering Blalack as sixth graders are Thinking Maps veterans.
for a clarification of something that was discussed. During the conversation, she asked me if
her daughter would be able to tell her what Thinking Maps were. Being a proud principal, I
assured her that that would be the case. A few days later, I happened to see this parent again,
and she excitedly shared with me that her daughter could indeed identify the maps as well as
the thinking process for each map. My confidence in these maps as tools that would stay with
students beyond our school was cemented.
REFERENCES
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (with Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R.). (1956). Taxonomy
ofeducational objectives: Handbook: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (2000). Activating and engaging the Habits ofMind. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Hord, 5., Rutherford, W., Huling-Austin, L., & Hall, G. (1987). Taking charge of change. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Hyerle, D., & Gray Matter Software. (2007). Thinking Maps (Version 2.0, Innovative Learning Group)
[Computer software]. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
Tomlinson, C., & Allan, S. (2000). Leadership for differentiating schools and classrooms. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
133
Becoming a
Thinking School
Gill Hubble, M.A.
KEY CONCEPTS
The 10-year development of a whole-school, integrated thinking-skills approach in
New Zealand
Using multiple maps for scientific problem solving
How Thinking Maps changed collaboration, communication, and performance across
a K-12 single-sex girls' school
I have always thought that all schools could become "thinking schools"-schools that consciously and systematically focus on the development of cognitive and critical thinking for all
students-via various pathways. St. Cuthbert's College in Auckland, New Zealand, the girls'
school described in this chapter, piloted and evaluated a range of thinking strategies and
approaches as a first stage, before finally realizing that doing a thorough job of introducing,
training, and implementing Thinking Maps would actually provide a basis of understandings
about cognitive strategies in general. When I was the associate principal and later researcher and
consultant for the school, I became aware that this foundation allowed other strategies to be used
and in fact strengthened various combined approaches. Over time this allowed for autonomy for
both teachers and students as they selected the best strategies to fit particular purposes. Students
using Thinking Maps on their own is a start but is not the end point or long-term goal of becoming a thinking school. This has been witnessed over the past three years as Thinking Maps have
been integrated into dozens of schools in England (in coordination with the Cognitive Education
Centre at the University of Exeter) that are refining their own evolving definitions toward
schools in the 21st century focused on the wide-ranging processes of thinking.
St. Cuthbert's has developed many learning approaches, but a solid understanding of the
basic thought processes gained through Thinking Maps has been crucial. The other approaches
that have been complementary are Costa and Kallick's (2000) Habits of Mind in the behavioral
domain and a focus on Bloom's (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives to explain to students the steps that can be taken to think in more complex ways. In addition, this school has
a focus on philosophy. Originally this was developed through the Philosophy for Children
134
program developed by Dr. Mathew Lippman, but now questioning, building arguments, logical
and lateral thinking, making assumptions, generating concepts, and ethical thinking are all given
significant curriculum time. Tune is also deliberately given to the teaching of various skills using
mobile phones and Internet blogs, which allows students to use Thinking Maps and other strategies outside the classroom. This has resulted in a huge expansion of the information-technology
department, which services student responses and links both teachers and students together in
a sophisticated, flexible thinking community, responsive to and respectful of others' ideas.
The pathway this school has taken has resulted in learning and thinking being central to the
way everything is done. The school community sees itself as a thinking school because all the
opportunities provided by the school are in some way designed to extend students' thinking
outcomes.
a community of learners who could move beyond "'tacit use" of thinking skills. Through research,
practice, personal discoveries, and many rich conversations, we made a multiyear commitment to
integrating the Thinking Maps language into our communi~ Over the recent years, we believe
that our school has achieved "reflective use" of these tools-a sophisticated metacognitive use
involving reflection and evaluation (Swartz & Perkins, 1989). We have come to believe that if our
students functioned as reflective users of Thinking Maps, this would increase their thinking-skills
repertoire and encourage autonomy of thinking and collaboration, certainly important if not
essential outcomes for every school in a democratic society.
An assumption underlying the explicit teaching of thinking is that instruction in thinking
skills can enhance the development of a student's thinking-skills repertoire (e.g., you can identify and teach the skills required for conscious decision making). In a narrow sense, it is always
possible to teach thinking-skill strategies and tools and to test a student's cognitive comprehension of these skills or even his or her ability to apply these skills to a given problem. In a
broader sense, the vision of many educators and researchers of the thinking-skills movement
of the past few decades has been that the direct teaching of thinking is possible and is a necessary next step in the evolution of teaching and learning toward transfer of thinking skills
across-and deeply into-content areas, for interdisciplinary problem solving and lifelong
learning. Our story is of a school wanting it both ways: direct, formal teaching of thinking
skills and explicit transfer into content areas.
St. Cuthbert's College is a unique, single-sex, independent school spanning the K-12 grade
levels, with a student population of 1,500 girls aged 5-18. The college is expected to provide
an outstanding education that not only encompasses academic, sporting, and cultural excellence but also adds the dimensions of character and values education. Thus, the long-term
development of a systematic, fully integrated use of thinking skills, ultimately leading to our
use of Thinking Maps, took a continuous focus and persistent attention to the goal.
There is a high expectation of all involved that we must provide for individual needs and
produce graduates who can gain entry to the universities and courses of their choice
and approach tertiary studies, and life, with the attitudes and skills that encourage success and
personal fulfillment. Parents expect of the school that it retain its traditions and at the same
time be innovative. Through the process of our evolution, we have moved from being a highquality school with strong academic outcomes to being a true learning organization unified by
a focus on developing high-quality thinking. Along the wa~ our academic results have moved
us to the top rungs of the educational ladder in New Zealand, but this seems a sidebar to our
evolving capacities to seek deeper understandings of how our minds work and to treasure the
intrinsic rewards gained from becoming a school as a home for the mind.
135
136
I 37
138
sessions as they gained confidence. They began with a narrow view of what an isolated map
could do-and what the maps could do together-and we encouraged them to focus on students
gaining confidence and experience in use across the curriculum.
We also established a Department of Thinking and employed a thinking coordinator to
manage the program and write the lessons using a six-step methodology: Label the strategy
(the cognitive skills and map), explain the purpose, practice (provide practice experience and
feedback), transfer (put into different content contexts), evaluate, and reflect. Teacher attitude
was crucial, and where the teacher was confident and prepared, the lessons proved very successful in teaching the strategy.
While the primary school staff and students had a positive attitude toward the Thinking
Maps approach, some secondary staff expressed reservations. Secondary staff had concerns
about teaching skills in noncurricular contexts; they disliked the imposition of creating "artificial or forced" opportunities for conceptual transfer. In turn, some secondary students questioned the need to learn about the maps separately because "the teacher shows us how to do
them in class anyway." These older students said, "We already know how to think, and we
don't need you to tell us." Generally, this is a situation easily overcome by confident, persuasive teachers who believe that the processes they are teaching can make a difference, but it
is very difficult when the teachers themselves are unsure as they integrate the tools into
their repertoire.
Despite these difficulties, we achieved our goal of having every child in the school introduced to the maps in an explicit way. Students are able to use all the maps as required in a range
of situations and when use of the maps is genuinely integrated and flexible. Most staff members
model metacognitive processes by saying, "I need to analyze this information-which maps do
you think would be useful here?" Consequentl)T, we see much greater choice and flexibility of
use, including the use of a range of maps to reach a decision or to extend an idea.
We believe that our earlier work of encouraging teachers to get students to doubly process
notes also paid off: During some lessons, students were to take notes only in map form and
then for homework write up the information in linear form, and vice versa. We saw excellent
collaborative work develop, as some groups elected to take class notes in map form and work
as teams to develop the ideas as fully as possible. It is much easier to see ideas being extended
when they can be presented visually, and students enjoy adding to a collaborative map.
We also had considerable success in working meaningfully with departments to help them
create units and lessons that used the maps in subjects. These "transfer" lessons were almost
always valued highly by staff and students. The goal was to demonstrate how a thinking tool
could be used right across the curriculum-how it could be used for homework and study, in
assessments, and to help make real-life evaluations of problems in context and make decisions.
Teachers began to see how useful a map was in eliciting prior knowledge. Students are
now often asked to draw a map early in a lesson and then at the end of the lesson. By comparing the maps, students see and evaluate their own progress, thereby developing a sense of
personal efficacy of themselves as learners. Metacognition and evaluation! Students also feel
positive as they choose which maps to use when given a task. Secondary school staff members
who initially were not enthusiastic about the maps because they said they had their own
subject-specific processes became more positive when they saw that the maps could clearly
reveal where thinking had gone wrong. All students benefited from this opportunity to
analyze the merits of each other's thinking processes.
139
We wanted to know the extent to which students had moved from tacit use of Thinking Maps,
to aware use or even strategic use. Students could use the maps when asked, but we suspected
that they did it without clear intent. The challenge for the year 2000 was to gather evidence of
the existing students' independent use of the Thinking Maps.
To determine the extent to which a fluent and "reflective" student use of maps occurred in
problem-solving situations, we had students use their 20-minute thinking-skills time to collaboratively solve a long-term problem using Thinking Maps. For example, one teacher created a challenging activity on endangered animals playfully presented through a Gary Larson
cartoon:
Imagine you are a member of a team of researchers charged with reversing the
population decline of the endangered "balloon" animals that have a hard time
surviving in a harsh landscape. Use Thinking Maps as tools for generating, organizing,
and assessing factors that might affect the population size of the balloon animals (e.g.,
physical factors, catastrophic events, food supply, disease, competition, ecotourism).
Develop an action plan, based around your Thinking Maps, to help reverse the
population decline.
The students' efforts were assessed, and prizes for fluent and flexible use of Thinking Maps
were awarded. One group of four students created the example, shown in Figures 13.1-13.5,
of using multiple maps to analyze this problem.
I~.
,I
140
Figure
1:3~1
Possible
Reasons for
Population
Decline
~I--------=r==---.--,I
I
air
loss of food
supply
environment
thorns
air supply
-deflation
r-
I
water
disease
I
I
I
skin-thinning oversaturation
disease
loss of
food supply
diseases
environmental
factors
extinction
I---~
endangerment
affect
ecosystem
The purpose of the activity was to evaluate how students, working in cooperative
groups, could apply multiple thinking processes via Thinking Maps to gain a solution to the
scientific problem found in cartoons and nature. This sample of student work is representative of the quality of work received and reveals how these students could employ the tools
for multistep problem solving and decision making. Although some students showed strategic and even reflective use of maps, the majority still struggled to show the fluency we
expected in their map use.
.lI'
lead to a higher...
Relating Factor
..
."':
improving
latex
balloon
population
as
immunization
for
whooping
cough
preschool
population
.,......_~
141
142
students and some staff were not as confident or competent in the use of Thinking Maps as we
believed possible and necessary to reach the goal of being authentic, independent thinkers. We
needed to revisit individual maps for fluency.
Though there was a risk of repetition for both teachers and students-the risk that many
schools do not take for long-term change-we created a more authentic, thematic learning
experience for senior students based on their reflections on the "Big Day Out," a 12-hour music
festival that many students and their friends had attended. We also carried out in-school
research during the year using a questionnaire to ask students about the maps they had used,
about the subject areas in which they used different maps, if they had used maps to organize
their thoughts in situations outside of school, and whether they believed their thinking had
been developed through learning about Thinking Maps.
In the junior school, students were positive about Thinking Maps, had experienced their
use in many different settings, and almost uniformly enjoyed using them to enhance their
thinking both at school and at home. In the senior school, the results were predictable:
Students who had experienced staff who valued the maps and provided opportunities for
transfer into several different curriculum areas were positive about the usefulness of the maps
and optimistic about map-related improvements in the way they solved problems or sorted
issues. In contrast, students who had been provided with few opportunities to use the maps
in curriculum areas or who had had teachers who avowed "grudging compliance" saw the
maps, and the thinking-skills lessons, as "boring and a waste of my time." Without opportunities for transfer, senior students marginalized the maps and considered them pointless.
Once again, it was evident that teachers make the difference to the implementation and
effective use of a learning strategy. In 2001, in the senior school, we also moved toward more
departmental autonomy. Secondary departments were asked questions such as the following:
What kinds of thinking do you most value in your department? What are the most powerful
experiences to encourage this thinking for students? What Thinking Map activities will you
use to develop these skills? How might you show the effectiveness and value of your thinkingskills focus for students' learning?
Departments were required to add their "thinking focus" to their departmental plan, and
staff could choose to be apprised of this thinking focus. Individual departmental choice was
interesting. The technology department chose to improve its students' metacognitive thinking
through developing links between sequencing (Flow Maps) and the design process. The art
department wanted to use maps to strengthen problem finding and metaperception. In social
sciences, pattern finding was valued, with a focus on Flow Maps for sequencing and Double
Bubble Maps for comparing and contrasting, and in the music department, there was exploration of the use of Brace Maps to better teach musical notation and intervals.
Thinking Maps continued to be explicitly introduced in the junior school. However, after
three years' implementation, the map knowledge base in the senior school was considered
to be such that teaching of individual maps was only required for new students. Flexible
catch-up training for new students and new staff was provided each year, and ongoing
support from the thinking coordinators was provided on an individual and departmental
basis.
By 2003, we were able to recognize some significant advances in the way the maps were
being used, especially since St. Cuthbert's College had expanded its professional development time to one and a half hours a week. There was planned training for teachers in how
to link the maps to other thinking or learning strategies. This encouraged students to use a
wider range of strategies together to engage with the content knowledge. When several
approaches are used together-such as linking Costa's 16 Habits of Mind with Thinking
Maps-the emphasis on isolated tools lessens and changes to an emphasis on whole thinking and learning processes. It also extends the quality of the thinking involved. Here is a
sampling of some of the spin-off benefits of our evolution. Teachers have been experimenting with the following:
Developing a metacognitive lesson plan, where teachers identify a specific learning goal,
and the questions they can ask students that will allow them to identify for themselves
appropriate Thinking Maps to use.
Encouraging greater infusion by creating intranet-based learning activities. Students can
call up a page of lesson activities available for a task, click on a hyperlink, and be presented with a range of links to higher-order thinking, Thinking Maps, and multiple
intelligence-differentiation activities. They can then download these directly into their
responses.
Encouraging flexible use by having a school-wide focus on "applied thinking,"
where a philosophical real-life problem is analyzed using the maps and inquiry
techniques.
These examples reflect the inherent rigor and flexibility of Thinking Maps and the
empowering nature of the change process that was allowed to mature naturally over time.
The learning outcomes for our students based on fundamental thinking processes and
learning approaches have been remarkable. Academic results in New Zealand's national
league tables have risen consistently, with the college a national academic leader, placing 1st
or 2nd in New Zealand in every senior external examination category for the past five years,
up from 12th at the start of our evolutionary process. We have also seen improved results
on international tests and PATs (reading, listening, and comprehension tests), the high
level of acceptance and approval from students and parents, and the continued use of
double processing using the maps and linear writing from our students who now attend
universities.
Yet the most powerful outcome has been the move to collaborative and interactive classrooms where students-and teachers-are confident to discuss their learning and to learn
from each other. We now know that students are much more willing to share their work with
the class when it is developed visually, collaboratively, and through a flexible, common language for thinking that is the foundation for the evolution of our community. And, as teachers
and school leaders, we are able to work deeply in our own content areas, with focused collaboration in teams. After 10 years, we are still living the never-ending ebb and flow of change
and thriving as an evolving school as a home for the mind.
143
144
REFERENCES
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (with Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R.). (1956). Taxonomy
of educational objectives: Handbook: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Costa, A. L. (1991). The school as a home for the mind. Palatine, IL: lRI/Skylight.
Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (2000). Activating and engaging the Habits ofMind. Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Hyerle, D., & Gray Matter Software. (2007). Thinking Maps (Version 2.0, Innovative Leaming Group)
[Computer software]. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Teaching for transfer. Educational leadership, 46(1), 22-32.
Swartz, R. J., & Perkins, D. N. (1989). Teaching thinking: Issues and approaches. Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest.
Si:ories Froln
Mississippi
Results From College to Kindergarten
Marjann Kalehoff Ball, Ed.D.
KEY CONCEPTS
Research and significant reading test score results at the community college level
"Eureka" moments of students and teachers to empirical research and test results
Thinking Maps as a common language-from college to preschool throughout the state
The source of the mighty Mississippi River is Lake Itasca, a small glacial lake in Minnesota.
Upon exiting the lake, a shallow area of rapids approximately 2 feet deep allows individuals
to wade across the river using stepping-stones to guide and assist them. As the river continues
south, it picks up speed, running more quickly with less resistance, and becomes wider and
deeper. All along the way, the flow is fed by tributaries that make it an even more powerful
force to be reckoned with. Upon reaching New Orleans, the river is 200 feet deep and half a
mile wide. The river continues its journey into the Gulf of Mexico.
From the Mississippi Delta to the Gulf Coast and across the state, Thinking Maps have
been spreading wider and deeper from district to district, teacher to teacher, and student to
student. Over the years, as districts begin the implementation of the maps, they are, as we call
it, "wading in the water." If during that first year they stumble, there are stepping-stones
offered by educators from schools around the state upon which to rely and receive help. Using
Thinking Maps effectively and over multiple years, teachers begin to move with greater ease from
map to map, all the while adding depth to the content they are teaching to students. During this
journey, educators are given assistance in connecting maps with grade-level objectives, writing
processes, reading comprehension strategies, state standards, and a variety of creative ways to
use these valuable tools with their students. As teachers continue to use Thinking Maps, the
ownership transfers to students whose thinking becomes deep and expansive, enriched and
powerful.
The results offered here range from prekindergarten to college classrooms. At the end of this
chapter a story is told by middle school teacher Suzanne Ishee about an educational community,
145
146
the Pass Christian School District, physically wiped off the map by Hurricane Katrina on
August 29,2005, and then rebuilding, rising up again to the highest levels of success.
reading, study skills, and English instructor. I was faced with the challenge of how to address
the individual needs of students, transcending their differences while maintaining the
purported integrity of the college curriculum. The setting is a melting pot for ability levels, a
range of potential courses, and advanced educational plans. Because most community/junior
colleges are committed to the open-door policy of admitting students regardless of their
ability, age, experiential background, or career aspirations, they are faced with the profound
problem of how to treat such diversity. ACT composite scores may range from 8 to 32, while a
profile of personal characteristics of these students presents a new, less traditional type of
student clamoring to be taught. Supported by civil rights litigation and generous government
and scholarship aid and buttressed by a prevailing confidence in the efficacy of advanced
education as well as the demands of a complicated technological society, these students have
come in unprecedented numbers.
When I began teaching at Jones County Junior College, I was baffled by the apparent failure of the students to transfer thinking skills taught in my classes to other academic areas.
After nearly 10 years of frustrating efforts to find more effective strategies, I discovered Thinking Maps, which produced significant results. As I began using the maps, my colleagues from
other academic areas informed me, "Your students are doodling in my class. They are drawing
circles and squares while I am lecturing." "Oh no," I confidently replied. "They are not
doodling-they are thinking!" I realized that I had a set of visual tools for learning, a vehicle I
needed to help students develop and transfer critical thinking skills to various academic areas.
As the use of Thinking Maps continued, a change occurred in the way students approached
learning. They no longer looked at the magnitude of their textbooks, but instead they organized
and simplified the material by mapping assigned readings. They began to recognize patterns of
organization in paragraphs and passages by applying the appropriate Thinking Map to specific
reading selections. Making further connections of the thought process to Thinking Maps
enabled them to see the type of thinking required to complete a particular task. One of my college students had been diagnosed with attention deficit disorder as a young girl and had been
sent to numerous tutors who equipped her with a variety of study strategies that did not work.
Mter being taught Thinking Maps, she commented, "I like Thinking Maps because they are
how I think anyway; now I have ways to organize all that information." She proceeded to make
a perfect score on her first American History test after mapping the material.
(MANCOVA) using the Wilks's lambda criterion. Follow-up univariate analyses were used to
clarify any significant multivariate results.
Statistically significant main effects were found for the treatment of Thinking Maps on
reading comprehension. Significant differences at the .01 level were found for 5 out of 7 subtests of fast reading, comprehension, structure, vocabulary, and word parts, with the Thinking
Maps group outperforming the no-mapping group on each of the five variables. The findings
of the univariate treatment by status analysis of covariance were consistent with the results of
the multivariate analysis, which found that only the main effects of treatment were statistically
significant. The main finding reflected on what I saw happening in these college classes: Thinking Maps made a significant difference in reading test scores. Whether a person was characterized
by age, social roles assumed, or other criteria such as being traditional or nontraditional had
no significant impact on reading test scores.
These findings were published in my dissertation at the University of Southern Mississippi
(Ball, 1998). The research findings along with improved student performance and satisfaction
reinforced my confidence in Thinking Maps as an indispensable visual language for teaching
and for learning. Each semester I surveyed my students at the end of the term as to which
strategies used were most beneficial, and 900/0 of the students chose Thinking Maps as most
helpful in studying textbooks, organizing material, retrieving information, and taking tests.
Their responses included the following: "Why did I have to be in college before I learned about
Thinking Maps?" "Thinking Maps are really useful and have brought my grades up." IIThinking Maps move me right into what I am doing."
BEYOND EXPECTATIONS
I will always remember the day Diana entered my reading and study skills college class at
Jones County Junior College with all the reservations of an older, returning student. She
appeared bright but unsure of her ability to do well after being out of school for many years.
At 16 years of age she had been diagnosed with arthritis, and by her late 20s she had been
diagnosed with multiple sclerosis. Diana had been told she could never be an effective learner
because of her disabling conditions, but despite the time lapse since her previous formal
education, and her lack of confidence, she excelled in the activities in my class. Through the
use of Thinking Maps, she was able to organize content material for discussions and tests. As
time passed, Diana shared her joy from successes experienced as a result of using Thinking
Maps, not only in my class but also in other areas. She believed she had found a set of visual
tools by which her limitations and negative predictions could be overcome.
From her achievement in the basic classes, she set a goal of becoming a licensed practical
nurse and entered the nurse's aide program. However, after only two weeks into her new
endeavor, she sadly informed me that she was withdrawing from college. Surprised, I questioned why, and she answered, "I failed my first nurse's aide test. Now I realize the predictions
have come true-I am too limited to meet college requirements." I was not as convinced as she
for I had seen her potential. Answering my question about which technique she was using to
study, she said, liThe Notetaking System of Learning, SQ3R (Survey, Question, Read, Recite,
Review), and Thinking Maps." "How often have you used Thinking Maps?" I asked, to which
she replied, A little." My response was, IIDon't use them a little-use them a lot!" She left my
office that day with her spirits lifted and a promise to apply Thinking Maps to her studies.
After two weeks, she appeared with a smile on her face and the declaration that she had
decided to stay in college. When asked what had changed her mind (and hoping it was success), she replied, "I have been using Thinking Maps daily." As a result, she had made an A on
her last nurse's aide test. She was absolutely elated, and from that day on, she experienced
success on tests in that program, leading to her entry into the Licensed Practical Nursing
(LPN) program, where she excelled. As she progressed in her studies, she began assisting her
II
147
148
peers in learning how to organize their material. Not only did she win the gratitude of her fellow students, but the instructors were impressed with Diana's outstanding performance on
tests, class work, and state board examinations. Diana completed her LPN training as an outstanding student and quickly secured a position in a hospital as an LPN. As a result, the nursing staff proposed and established a pilot program in which all entering LPNs would learn
how to use Thinking Maps.
District, states, IIThinking Maps allow children when confronted with a problem to have a
process that they can use to organize their thoughts, enabling them to solve that problem. As
a result, the students in our district have excelled district-wide."
By the mid-1990s, as the successful use of Thinking Maps became better known, interest
grew. During the 1995-1996 school year, Dr. Susan Rucker, principal at Brandon Middle
School, implemented Thinking Maps in Grades 4-8 in her school. Dr. Rucker states, As former principal of Brandon Middle School, I saw the use of Thinking Maps as a way to help
students organize their thinking processes. The program proved to be a success for students
who had difficulty with performance-based thinking skills. Students of all ability levels
showed improvement."
Throughout Dr. Rucker's school, maps were evident everywhere: on the floor, on the ceiling, in display cabinets, in the hallways, in the classrooms, even in the cafeteria. After the
introductory Thinking Maps training, Dr. Rucker's expectations included having teachers
explain in their lesson plans how the maps would be used and show evidence of dialogue
between teacher and student, teacher and teacher, and student and student on Thinking
Maps as well as evidence of student and teacher utilization of the maps. When the statewide
performance-based scores were published that year, Brandon Middle School students had significantly increased their score by 10 performance-based points in all but one grade level, leading
Brandon Middle School to be named one of only five Blue Ribbon Schools in the state that year.
Dr. Penny Wallin, former superintendent of the Picayune School District, was one of the
first teachers to be certified by the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards in
Mississippi and in the nation and used Thinking Maps when she was a classroom teacher. She
states, "In my roles as National Board Certified Teacher and administrator, I understand the
importance of equipping learners with pathways to learning. Although all students do not
learn in the same way or at the same rate, they must think and process. Thinking Maps are
truly useful for a lifetime, providing consistent, common visual tools that support the eight
thinking processes as identified by research."
Pass Christian, a small school district (two elemental)T, one middle, and one high school)
located on the Mississippi Gulf Coast, began training its middle school teachers in the use of the
maps. After a year of Thinking Maps implementation, the writing scores of seventh-grade students on the state writing assessment increased from level 2.2 to level 3.0 (with 4.0 being the
highest level). Only 2 students received level 4 in 2002, while 40 students attained level 4 in 2003.
Upon investigation of what had made such a difference, it was noted that most of the students
achieving level 4 had been instructed in Thinking Maps and had been using them in their classrooms. As a result of these successes, additional training took place in both elementary schools
and the high school to ensure district-wide immersion in Thinking Maps for all levels. Later in
the chapter, the use of the maps in this district over a nine-year period will be reviewed.
The impact Thinking Maps have had on the education of Mississippi's students is impressive. To date, approximately 350 schools (234 elementary, 69 middle, and 47 high schools),
15,000 teachers, and 429,000 students have been exposed to the maps.
II
in Mississippi schools is the depth of training followed by the degree to which the maps are
implemented. After a school has used Thinking Maps for one year, teachers from each school
are selected to become expert trainers for their school. Criteria of selection include expertise in
the use of the maps, the employment of innovative methods, and the ability to communicate
and collaborate effectively with colleagues. A network of Thinking Maps trainers across the
state has been established, and meetings are conducted to keep these individuals updated and
to provide additional curriculum ideas for their schools.
149
150
..
Figure 14.1 b
c.or-lleQ.
['vpil
~
V'eillS
eyebo.ll
iris
I5I
optiC nerVe
. retina
{~
ConeS
vitreous
body
sclera
choroid
retina
fovea
centralis
optic disk
parts of
the eye
optic
nerve
conjunctival
sac
ciliary
muscle
lens
(crystalline
lens)
cornea
iris
suspensory
ligaments
;j
n
ij
,~
::C.,
__
These examples show how the same concept created at varying levels of vocabulary and
difficulty may be presented using Thinking Maps as a common visual language to enhance
depth of learning, bonding students from kindergarten, to fifth and eighth grade, to the college
levels.
As a professor and now as a change agent in schools, I am continually made aware of the
far-reaching implications and possibilities of the maps for students and teachers. Traveling to
152
numerous school districts across the state, I have seen Thinking Maps used in classrooms from
preschool to 12th grade. Not only do I share with these teachers what I have learned about
Thinking Maps, but I also take away many new and exciting ways to use maps in my college
classroom. Throughout my 25 years of teaching, I have tried many interventions to help students become more successful learners and have often changed strategies and texts. One thing,
however, has not been altered-use of Thinking Maps. When my students ask, "May I take
these home to my children?" or say, "I helped my child with his Bubble Map last night and he
helped me with mine," I am certain that Thinking Maps are the bridge not only from subject
to subject but also from generation to generation.
It is gratifying to know that Thinking Maps are credited with student successes and teacher
satisfaction throughout the state. Over the past year I have asked educators in several school
systems to give me feedback on what they have seen happen in their schools, and for their
analysis of the results on standardized tests. Of course, because schools and school systems are
complex and performance changes have many dimensions, it is difficult if not impossible to
demonstrate a direct correlation between the implementation of Thinking Maps and changes
in standardized test scores without a refined research design.
Given this frame of reference, it is still important for educators to discuss their observations from the field, as Thinking Maps are implemented across all grade levels in each school
over many years. Descriptions of how the maps have been implemented and the perceptions
of the effectiveness of Thinking Maps from educators in some of the districts that have implemented Thinking Maps over one to nine years are helpful for our understanding of the effectiveness of these tools over time. These educators give voice to what is a complex shift in
performance by teachers and students.
.,
In 2009, the Pascagoula School District implemented Thinking Maps in two of our elementary schools
and both of our sixth-grade schools. Each school has a trained trainer, and the four curriculum
specialists are trained as trainers as well. As the year progressed, we saw more and more evidence of
growth in teachers as they utilized the maps. Trainers presented staff development mini sessions in
after-school meetings,and we were able to give teachers suggestions as we observed lessons and
reviewed lesson plans. Thinking Maps are an excellent way for our students to organize their thoughts',
and facts for later applications. They are wonderful for teacher introduction of a new skill or concept "
and for extension and student applications by using multiple Thinking Maps. During the 2009-2010
school year we saw student work displayed in classrooms and hallways, as well as school displays, which
used Thinking Maps to share information for visitors, and we looked forward to starting the nextschool)
year with full implementation beginning on day one. We were so pleased with the first year of :;1
implementation thatWe decided to add four more schools for the second year. In a year of budget cuts,
this speaks volumes. Our goal is to eventually have total immersion in our district.
In July 2009, the Tupelo Public School District (TPSD) administrative team was trained in Thinking
Maps, while the district's 20 instructional coaches were trained as trainers for Thinking Maps. The
district plan had been f6rthe "administrators to use Thinking Maps during meetings and team planning
throughout the 2009-2010 school year, and at the same time the instructional coaches would
integrate Thinking Maps in their coaching sessions.
During the training of administrators and instructional coaches, a unanimous decision was made not
to wait but to begin training all teachers in the district in the fall of 2009. Collectively, they identified
aneed for a common language from prekindergartenthrough 12th grade .and did not want to wait a
year. The trainers worked with Dr. Ball to develop a plan for introducing and reinforcing the use of"
Thinking Maps in the classrooms. On the first day of school, Thinking Maps were displayed in the
hallways, and the excitement continued throughout the year. The TPSD lesson planning elements
include Thinking Maps as a requirement so that Thinking Maps are used in every subject. The district
scores on benchmark assessments improved throughoutthe year across the district.
MINDS OF MISSISSIPPI
It now has been over five years since Hurricane Katrina came ashore. The city of New Orleans,
Louisiana, was a tragic and unbearable center of destruction, with the winds and water
penetrating the city and destroying lives and neighborhoods. Little known to the outside
world, just up the Gulf Coast was where Katrina actually made landfall: along the stretch of
land of the small coastal towns of Pass Christian and Gulfport in Mississippi. For several years
before the devastation of Katrina, Pass Christian had brought Thinking Maps to its community
of learners with great success. As you will find out below in the personal and professional
reflections from Suzanne Ishee, facing the trauma and the challenge of rebuilding a community
and its schools from the ground up to becoming the top-performing school system in the state
was propelled by an enduring focus on student thinking.
In every teaching environment, educators look for the "magic bullet" that will open up their students'
abilities to access and process information in such a way as to invite application in all areas of life.
(Continued)
I;
153
I S4
(Continued)
Often overlooked is the innate ability that all learners have to think about and focus oninformation
presented to them on a daily basis. When given the opportunity, no matter what the cir~umstances are,
people ofaII ages and positions in life will grow and come together, as long asthereisa common
'anguage to link them to their experiences. This is a story that begins in a smaUtown in. southern
Mississippi along the Gulf of Mexico. It explores the abilityofa people to survive and thrive in spite of
the direst of circumstances--Hurricane Katrina. Thinkin!l Maps were introduced in the middle ~I00IofthePassChristiahSch\!pL.~i~(ictin 2002;
After data collection of student progress on standardized tests, .it was found that thedistrrd'was in the
middle of the continuum on statewide test scores prior to the implementation of the maps. After the
first year of applying the Thinking Maps tostudents'learnlng, the results were amazinglWhen the
seventh-grade writing assessment results were released, we were elated to see thatthestud~nts hijd
jumped from 3% to 30% achieving a perfect score of"4."The ,only variable in the-before arid after
scores was the use of Thinking Maps in the classrooms.
From 2002 to 2005, student achievement increased .dramatically in all areas of assessment From
kindergarten to high school, scores rose to the top levels across the state of Missi~sippi. Although the
demographics of the district did not fit the statistical data of how students shouldperfomi,student
achievement continued to climb. Over 600/0 of the students were on free or reduced lunch prior to
Hurricane Katrina. The high school was recognized as a national Blue Ribbon S(:hool,andth~ two
elementary schools and the middle school commanded great .respect for their achievements. Success
was expected and became a point of pride among theJearning community.
Asstuden15 traveled from classroom to dassroorn, teachertb. teacher,and school to school,theyWere able
to use a common langLJagefor learning as introduced by Thinking Maps. Learning <loqked the same and
sounded the same no matter where the studen15 found themselves. The Pass Christian School District
became the place to visit for other districts in the state and serVed as a model for continued excellence. Over
a few short years the district had reached the top level of achievementas measured by the state-a levelS.
?~
ij:
{
;
'
f'j,
t
i,;
1::
:;
~
f'
Everything Changed
On August 29, 2005, everything changed. The small town of Pass Christian, as well as many other
towns and cities along the northern Gulf of Mexico, was virtually wiped off the face of the map.
Hurricane Katrina roared ashore with an unprecedented tidal surge and changed the way the
community, as well as the school district, looked at the world. In a matter of 12 horrendous hours,
people, places, and thihgsdisappeared into the Gulf of Mexico. The Pass Christian School District staff
members, 85% of whom became homeless themselves, had to clear away the debris and discover what
wasJeft to re-create the learning environment for their students. Stripped of its el1tirephysical
community, the educational community came together with the sole purpose to-survive and thrive.
There were no books. There was no technology. Only one.' building remained, and even that structure
had been d~maged by4 'feet-of water thattr~veled. inlan~1. from the highest stormsllrg~ ,~ver. recorded.
Daily survival was uppermost in everyone's minds. Finding food and shelter for the homeless,
locating missing persons, and identifying the dead became the "new normal."$c:hool"nd learning
could have become mere distractions to the populace. However, the Pass Christian School District
became convinced that the loss of the learning community would mean the . loss of the entire
community. Recovery Was only possible if a common thread could be used to connect everyonestudents, staff, and parents. That common thread was the language of metacognition-the ability to
thinkand to evaluate those thoughts. Thinking Maps were there before the storm, and they were there
after the storm, providing continuity in the midst of chaos.
The Pass Christian School District was faced with what appeared to be the insurmountable task of
rebuilding a learning community when virtually all was lost Students and staff came together to
continue their pursuit of excellence by using the common language of Thinking Mapsl This common
t~
~
U
~
:;
f
~
::
:
I'
~
~:
-,
it
1;
ISS
language for learning, this metacognition, allowed the entire community to rise above circumstance
and to heal and prosper in the face of a national disaster. The district was able to derive meaning from
incredible loss.
Staff came together to begin rebuilding a school distrjct, piece by piece. In s.world thatwas out of
control, it became amatterofnecessltytQ give the students and Staff a means,ofgainingcontrol over
the overwhelming task set before them. One of the most critical factors in the district's survival was the
awareness of a common frame of reference-the use ofThinking Maps district-wide. This became the
starting point of the realization that although Pass. ~hristlan,Mississippi, was Jiterally removed from
the face' of the political map, 'studentsandsfaff stirlhad their "mental maps."ln,steadof dweJling on
what was not, ,individuals and groups couldfocu$ on what was.
For seven wee~,staff worked diligentiyto prepare a site for the district to 'return to the business of
educating its children. Trailerswere brought in to serve as classrooms. AS stud~nts and staff entered
their newenviron111ent, it became evidelitthat the definition of school had changed. It was no longer
the brick-and-mortar buildings with orderly hallways decorated with the work of diligel1tstudents.
School became "people" and shared memories of survival. It was a place to vent and deal with emotions
that would unexpectedly rise to the surfac~with very little provocation. Nothing looked the same. Even
the makeup of individual classes was a'ltered due tothelossofstu~ents andstaff,.many dfwhom had
moved to other states and schools asa result of losses nom Hurricane Katrina. Where and how could
the school district begin to putthe pieces together mensure that the students did not lose what they
had already acquired? The answer was apparentirlwhat was already there~the "comfortzone" of
Thinking M a p s . '
Beth John, director of curriculum and testing in the Pass Christian School District, said, "Thinking
Maps are not a school tool. They are a life toot" In this context, staff and students began the journey
back to a cohesive learning environment. They drew on what they 'knew about thinking and learning
and charted a course to achieve even greater things than had been accomplished prior ttlHurricane
Katrina. They were determined to not let the storm define who they were as acornmunity oflearners.
It was through this process that the real essence of learning stood out so dramatically. Learning became
the application ofthe processesthatwerednside the students and the staff. Although much.had been
lost in the physical realm, every individual still had all that was needed to<rT1ove forward. The Pass
Christian School District quickly identified Thinking Maps as a key component to recovery.
The commitment to excel and thrive was not limited to the classroom. Each staff member of the
district bought into the premise that itwould takeevE!ryone to re-create a community. Thinking Maps
played a strategic role in daily planning and assessment and in establishing long-range goals.
Individuals and groups were on the same page because of a common language established before the
storm. This commonality extended into the community as a whole. Things began to come together. As
the debris from the storm was slowly removed from the streets and areas where buildings and homes
once stood, the emotional clutter was peeled away by the thought processes ofindividuals and groups.
Continuity provided control. Control brought peace of mind. The impossible became the improbable.
Today, four and a half years after Hurricane Katrina forever changed the community's perspective,
the Pass Christian School District has made tremendous strides in rebuilding all that was lost By
entering the post-Katrina wortdand surviving and thriving, the Pass Christian School District's story
became "everyman's" story. Returning to learning was the one component ofnormalcy that reflected
what was before the storm and helped bridge the gap to the future. In time it became apparent that
the Pass Christian School District story, was aneta be Shared with the world. The Pass Christian School
District decided to document its journey through video.
The Pass Christian system applied for a grant from the Thinking Foundation to tell this story and
was awarded the grant in 2009. Interviews with administrators, teachers, and students became the oral
history of how Thinking Maps provided the impetu~for recovery. Students Were filmed in their
(Continued)
Ir
~
~
:1
,
fi
i
,
156
(Continued)
classrooms using the maps for continued success. Dr. David Hyerle conducted question-and-answer
sessions with staff. Out of the many hours of footage the concept became reality, and The Minds of
Mississippi: The Pass Christian School District Story was born as a film documentary and was released
i,n January 20", more than five years after Katrina made landfall. Through the process of documenting
where the district had been and where it was going, the documentary became more than a story. It
became affirmation and absolution for all involved in the production.
As one member of the Pass Christian School District said, "For the rest of the world Hurricane Katrina
is over. For the staff, students, and community of Pass Christian, Katrina will forever remain a part of
our hearts and a part of our past. Thinking Maps continue to playa huge role in continued excellence
in the Pass Christian School District. In the yearly evaluation of school districts ,in the state of
Mississippi, the Pass Christian School District is ranked number one in the state based on empirical
evidence referenced to national norms as reported in November 2009.
If:
The state of Mississippi has adopted a much more stringent testing model designed to rank students
I'
with the rest of the United States ofAmerica. The QDI (Quality of Distribution Index) is a representation
I';
1I
ofthe distribution of student test scores across the various statewide assessment instruments. The scale
of 0-300 {300 being the highest ranking} indicates where a school district performs against other
districts in the state as well as on a national level. For the 2008-2009 yearly assessments the Pass
Christian School District achieved a score of 203 as opposed to the state average of 149. As illustrated
by the figure below, the Pass Christian School District performed far above the average school district
in the state.
. ~,;;('-;;,'--:,:i\T:8,:';:_ _ -_-?~~'~
o
:;'i
:---'-~-:Jf4~'~~~] _ ~:~tt~.'<~m-I:~).~~~~}Jlr'~':
"-'.co
"~h";._.~~~~,-i:~;:!':)~~-_~.,:r;~s~
300;~
This evidence is a strong indicator of the effectiveness of the Thinking Maps in maintaining the
recovery from loss to acceptance to progress as a district and as a community. A walk through
classroomstoday reveals students and teachers actively engaging in the learning process and dialogue
through the use of Thinking Maps.
The Thinking Maps also are used to plan student interventions in the tier process to help students
overcome deficits and to promote an across-the-board approach to intervention. Dr. Peggy McCullough,
intervention strategist at Pass Christian Elementary School, created a Thinking Map to ensure that all
students are correctly placed in the tier process and to guide the teaching staff throughout the process.
The Pass Christian School District is looking forward to the release of the documentary The Minds
ofMississippi: The Pass Christian School District Story, asa way to share with the world its success and
struggle to keep a community together during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. The experience of
this district can be applied universally to any community, culture, or people trying to survive crises
of any magnitude. If a system of order and familiarity can be established to bring a. common way of
evaluating and planning in any difficulty, then survivability becomes a realistic goal. Thinking Maps
provide a common language to break down barriers and give continuity to process. Through process,
order is established, and common goals are achieved.
The common language for learning introduced to the Pass Christian School District almost eight
years ago has proven to be one of the threads that held the community together under the direst of
circumstances. Thinking Maps helped the Pass Christian School District in its journey to recover, revive,
and rebound after almost total destruction. The journey continues today.
l~
I)
throughout the state is thriving with improvement of student performance and positive
feedback from teachers and administrators. It should not take a catastrophic event to sharpen
our view about what is important for students living in the 21st century. Thinking Maps, by
providing a common language in a variety of settings from the delta to the coast, keep
Mississippi moving forward. Thinking Maps are woven throughout the educational community
much as the Mississippi River winds its way through the geographical landscape. The stories
of Mississippi, like the river, do not stop here. They continue to flow into the what-ifs and
possibilities of the vastness of the mind.
REFERENCES
Ball, M. K. (1998). The effects of Thinking Maps on reading scores of traditional and nontraditional college
students. Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg.
Buckner, J. (2000). Write . .. from the beginning. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
I57
The Singapore
Experience
Student-Centered Fluency
Ho Po Chun, M.Ed.
KEY CONCEPTS
Thinking Maps in a multilingual country focused on thinking processes and information literacy
Using Chinese language characters within a Multi-Flow Map for facilitating cause-andeffect reasoning
Bringing students to fluency through direct instruction in Thinking Maps and software
Singapore is a small city-state nation with a rich, diverse history as a major trading center in
the heart of the Asian oceans. As a crossroads island for commerce, it has been conquered and
colonized many times over hundreds of years, with the British relinquishing authority to
Singaporeans just a few decades ago. Understandably, it has a diverse population with many
cultures and languages, from Chinese, Indian, and Malaysian to British influences. Singapore
is just four times the size of Washington, DC, with a population of approximately 4 million.
Our main language is English. Our country has also become one of the Asian economic powers
in the past decade, mostly through finance and technology, not through its natural resources.
Unlike its Asian neighbors, Singapore has no significant stores of natural resources from which
an industrial, manufacturing economy can thrive, even needing to import fresh drinking water
from Malaysia. It is understandable, then, that in the 21st century, our only true natural
resources are the minds of our citizens. Singapore is quickly becoming an information nation.
With this background, it makes sense that the Singapore government hosted the fourth International Thinking Conference in 1997. 'This conference is convened every two years in locales from
MIT in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to Auckland, New Zealand, and has been coordinated by leaders in the field of thinking-skills development. The theme of the Singapore conference was appropriately "Thinking Schools, Learning Nation." This event has been used as one leverage point for
shifting the mind-set of our educational system-and country-from a more traditional focus on
rote learning to including the facilitation of thinking as an integral part of learning.
158
At the opening ceremonies of the conference, the president of Singapore spoke eloquently
about the need-the necessity-for Singaporeans to reinvent themselves in pursuit of the
highest-quality education based on consciously and systematically developing the creative
and analytical thinking of Singapore's people. While the conference participants from allover
the world, including over 400 Singaporean principals, listened, it became clear that the speaker
could have been any president of any country in the world, as the world now turns on the
capacities of its citizenry to think, problem-solve, use technology, and collaborate effectively
across the globe.
Aziz Tyebally, a teacher and head of the Department for Humanities at Chung Cheng High
School, a school that has successfully implemented Thinking Maps, recently delivered a
research paper at a nationwide symposium that revealed this need: /lIn a knowledge-based
economy, information is abundant. What made one person more successful than the other was
not the information alone, but rather how effectively he made use of the information. Therefore, our program is designed to prepare the pupils for the economy of the future."
Both the president and this teacher made the point that all Singaporeans, including parents of
the future workers and citizens of the country, need to improve their thinking. This focus became
our entry point into directly training students to become fluent in the use of Thinking Maps.
159
160
may use for enrichment courses for students. However, a school has to seek the approval of
the parents before signing a student up for a course. Each school is also allotted $80 for each
student. This money is to be used solely to meet students' particular learning needs. The funding was available, and many parents enrolled their students in our Thinking Maps courses.
Through our targeted training courses, students become fluent with the maps much more
quickly than if teachers had to integrate the approach into their day-to-day lessons. This is
much like the use of computers: Often students may be more open to new technologies, as they
don't have to consider what they need to change or replace in a complex and content-laden
curriculum. In addition-and this may seem odd to an outsider-unlike teachers in other
countries, where the students move from classroom to classroom at the secondary level, here,
the teachers are the "rovers" and the students stay in the home base for most of their lessons,
except perhaps for Mother Tongue (Chinese, Malay, or Tamil), Music, Art, Computer, and
Physical Education. This means that a teacher does not have the exclusive use of a particular
classroom and the students remain the center of attention.
At this point, 11,594 primary school students and 1,629 secondary school students have
gone through direct training by our consultants, and a total of 730 teachers have gone through
an intensive course of 12 hours over 3 days to become experts for their schools. Through this
whole process, we have learned that the ultimate power of these tools lies in the hands and
minds of the learner.
STUDENT WORKSHOPS
The student workshop model turned out to be every bit as successful as we had envisioned.
After every course, we would ask students to fill out an evaluation. Below are the comments
of some Primary 6 students who have attended our workshops:
"Thinking Maps help me in my Reading Comprehension. I'm able to sequence ideas in
a passage."
"In Composition, using the Multi-Flow Map helps me look at the bigger picture."
Figure 15.1
Lesson Planning
Session 10
Theme: A Burglary
Primary 4 Lesson Plan
Picture Composition
Objective: To revise the use of Circle, Bubble. and Flow Maps
1. Pupils to study the pictures and come up with different scenarios. (5 Mins) (Robbers are not necessarily
strangers. May be an inside job)
2. Pupils brainstorm for ideas and write in Circle Map. (5 Mins) (broke into the house, wore black outfits.
would not be seen in the dark, ransacked the house. sound of the breaking vase woke the family, armed with
baseball bats and brooms)
3. Pupils use Bubble Map to describe the scene and feelings of the characters. (5 Mins) (Remember to
use the Frame of Reference)
Example
Scene-late night. quiet house, messy, broken vase, loud crash, thorough search
Feelings-burglars: nervous, disappointed, scared, panic, alarmed, frantic, daring, physical appearance: black
outfits, suspicious-looking; family: shocked, pUZZled, angry, suspicious, nervous, scared, worried
4. Pupils sequence the story using the Flow Map. (5 Mins)
5. The conclusion can be a surprise ending. (5 Mins)
Something left by the robbers, whom they knew
Discovered that she had found something in the vase that she had forgotten
Invaluable vase
Found long-lost heirloom
(35 Mins)
Pupils write out the maps on their own.
Pupils write draft 2. To be handed in next session.
1-'
161
162
This lesson was followed in Session 11 by a creative writing assignment using the setting
of a conflict in which students are involved. The students were told that they did not have to
replicate the use of three maps from the three lessons, nor were they expected to use the maps
in the same way. Figure 15.2b shows a piece of writing about an imaginary situation in
which a boy is with his brother, who decides to tear up a neighbor's garden. The page of prewriting using five different maps in very unique ways is an exemplary use of the tools (see
Figure 15.2a). As you can see, information is actually scaffolded in the maps, moving from a
general Circle Map on "vandalism" to focusing in on the crime "scene." The emotional state
of having a brother involved in such an escapade is described in a Bubble Map, using revealing
adjectives such as afraid, worried, and unhappy. The next shift is to a Tree Map for organizing
the details of each paragraph. The prewriting process is completed by using a Multi-Flow Map
to think about the causes and effects of this event. The final essay directly reflects the culminating Tree Map, where everything is put together in detail and information is grouped by
paragraphs.
If you look closely at the prewriting and the product (see Figure 15.2b) it is easy to see that
not all of the information in the maps makes it into this story. This is because we trained students not to merely replicate the information from their prewriting maps in a formal way, but
to use the maps as a grounding for the essay. Often when students use static graphic organizers for writing, the writing becomes static. In this case, the writing flows nicel~ even without
a Flow Map, because the author has generated the rich, holistic ideas and vocabulary that
enable flexible and creative writing.
TEACHER TRAINING
Of course, to give this attention to student fluency and transfer in the classroom, we knew that
our model had to target teachers as well as students. While our initial focus was on the
students, we did not neglect the training needs of the teachers. As mentioned above, many
teachers went through 12 hours of professional development, but often class teachers would
be observing and learning along with the students during our student workshops. This
supported teachers' understanding of the tools in real time, using the deep examples and
modeling shown above, rather than sitting through long hours of workshop trainings. The
teachers are happy that they are able to teach with the Thinking Maps as soon as they are
trained because their students already know the maps. Many teachers initially believed that
there was no need to take the extra time in teaching the maps to their students, so our work
offered them dual support. By taking over one of their classes, we not only taught the maps to
the students, but the teachers were able to learn the maps at the same time.
Our consultants also conducted follow-up visits to the school to offer advice and support
in the school's implementation efforts in integrating Thinking Maps into the curriculum. The
number of visits and the kind of help offered depend on the needs of the school. This ensures
that the school is continually supported in its implementation process. During these visits,
issues such as monitoring of student work, provision of assistance to the heads of departments, and any other matters related to learning and teaching with the maps are addressed.
Below are comments by teachers who have used Thinking Maps in their lessons:
"My pupils are better at organizing their writing. I see more descriptive words used in
their writing."
"Excellent! They can control their time better in the sense that they can complete a story
within the composition time limit. This must be due to their efficiency in their
organization skills."
Bored
Nothing
to do
Street
Me
Jimmy
Nobody
Jimmy does
not like
Mr. Tucker
elsearoune
School
is out
Quiet
Scene
Garden
Jimmy thinks
it is fun
I tell Dad
Jimmy is
mad
Flowers
gate
I'm afraid
Vandalism
I
1st para
----r-
-Jimmy
- me
- neighbor's
yard
- flowers
- Mr. Tucker
Walking where,
who, why
2nd para
I
- Jimmy goes in
yard
-I go too
- Jimmy pulls up
plants
- I try to stop him
- He won't stop
4th para
-I go tell Dad
- Dad stops him
- Dad makes him
apologize &
clean up
- Jimmy is mad
at me
-Ifeelbad
-r-
- Jimmy admits he
was wrong
- We are friends
again
Nothing to do
Confront him
School is out
Caught and
punished
163
164
Figure IS.2b
Vandalism
School was over for the day. Jimmy, my brother, and I were bored. We wandered down the street looking for
something to do. We were the best of friends and always did things together, sometimes with some other kids,
too, but today nobody else was around.
"Hey, look! There's Old Man Tucker's garden. Looks like he's not home. Let's go see it." Jimmy pointed down
the street. Mr. Tucker was very old and lived alone. He loved working in his garden and had a lot of flowers
and potted plants.
Jimmy ran through the open gate and I followed, hesitantly. Our parents always told us not to go on other
people's property without being invited. Jimmy went over to a large bush with bright red flowers. With a sly
grin, he pulled off a handful of flowers and threw them over his head, laughing.
"Jimmy! Don't do thatl You know not to do things like that!"
"So? I'm just having fun. The flowers will die and fall off anyway."
"But you shouldn't tear them up. Mr. Tucker will be mad with you."
"Yeah? Well he won't know who did it. Unless somebody tells him. And nobody knows except you, and you
never tell on me for anything."
He was right. I had never told on him before, since most of the stuff we did together wasn't bad. Maybe
annoying, but nothing like stealing or wrecking somebody's else's property. I watched him for a minute as he
pulled up some green leafy plants and tossed them around. I just couldn't let him continue.
"Jimmy! Stop it!"
"You gonna make me?" he said.
I turned and ran home. Dad was in his study reading the newspaper. "Dad, you better come see what
Jimmy's doing." I felt bad by telling on him, and was worried that he would be mad and not be my best friend
anymore. But I just couldn't let him get away with it. If he got caught, Old Mr. Tucker might call the police, and
that would be worse than telling Dad.
Dad brought Jimmy home and told him that when Mr. Tucker came home they would both go over and
Jimmy would apologize and clean up what he had done, and then he would work for Mr. Tucker helping him
in his garden for two weeks after school to pay for his mischief.
Jimmy scowled at me angrily. I wanted to sink through the floor. But the next day he admitted that I had
done the right thing, and he felt bad about what he had done. We were pals again.
"The pupils are more confident and are able to use the Thinking Maps to generate ideas
in some activities. In Comprehension, pupils are able to pick out/highlight important
ideas and not lift out sentences from the passage."
"Thinking Maps helped students to focus better."
"Pupils are more aware of flow of ideas."
"Pupils have improved in ideas and vocabulary. Pupils are attempting to use newly
acquired vocabulary."
"They are more confident in the use of it as a thinking tool, and showed better
organization of ideas as they have a standard framework to work on."
them to develop their students' thinking processes. Aziz Tyebally, quoted earlier, describes
how his department used the high level of student fluency with the maps to engender a new
way to assess students:
The pupils are required to use Thinking Maps to represent the development of their
group discussions as well as their individual thought process. The Thinking Maps
are dynamic, as they can be constantly built upon over a period of time; hence, a
measure of their development of thought could be seen. The school has also
incorporated a write-up on Thinking Maps in its Humanities Handbook and uses it
as a means of assessment. The maps were simple enough to learn, so the opportunities
for use in complex situations were immense. This was further supported by userfriendly software, which the students could use to enhance their projects. The
feedback from students, using a feedback form, was highly positive from the first
course conducted. We noted that the number of times per week students say they use
Thinking Maps in class and on their own has increased over the years. This seems to
indicate that Thinking Maps are becoming more extensively used as a common
visual language.
The ease of use, the fluid quality of students' use of the tools, and the flexible structure
leading to a new way of assessing thinking and learning have all been essential to the use of
Thinking Maps across subject areas and grade levels. The metacognitive skills of the students
in these schools are also more evident when the teachers are more fluent in each of the maps,
and in particular the Frame of Reference. When teachers systematically keep a portfolio of
their students' work using the maps, they are better able to track the development of their
students' thinking processes.
There is something powerful as well as subtle about this common visual language for
learning that transcends other models of thinking and best practices. We have found that
these tools are not bound by language or culture. There were some initial concerns voiced
by some principals that the Mother Tongue (Chinese, Tamil, Malay) teachers would not
adapt to the use of Thinking Maps as well as the other subject teachers. Just the opposite
transpired. We see examples all the time of Chinese characters and other languages embedded naturally within the patterns of thinking represented in the maps. For example, a student has created a Multi-Flow Map showing the causes and effects of throwing things from
tall buildings (see Figure 15.3), a real concern in Singapore since many families live in highrise apartment buildings. These second-language, Mother Tongue teachers have surpassed
all expectations by demonstrating how innovative and creative they are in integrating the
maps into their lessons.
We believe that this is because the cognitive patterns such as sequencing, categorization, and analogies are universal processes of humankind and of the human mind. The
visual maps become a common reference point for communicating, expressing, and uniting thought and language. In a country such as Singapore, where East has met West, our
island culture may be best understood as an embodiment of layers of languages and cultures from generations. We need common tools such as Thinking Maps that help us communicate through the often impenetrable barriers of language and culture that have the
potential of separating us. There may be a lesson here for every country at the beginning
of the 21st century. We, as global citizens, are increasingly in need of common ways of
communicating as our world becomes ever more connected and globalized, as technologies web us together, and as we seek to find common ground through understanding
about how different people think around the world. As many have said, we may have
much more in common than we think.
165
166
Figure 15.3
REFERENCE
Hyerle, D., & Gray Matter Software. (2007). Thinking Maps (Version 2.0, Innovative Learning Group)
[Computer software]. Raleigh, NC: Innovative Sciences.
Sect:ion 4
Transforming
Professional
Development:
Invit:ing Explicit:
Thinking
Sarah Curtis, M.Ed.
KEY CONCEPTS
Facilitating reflective practice by teachers through a Training of Trainers model
Using student-centered work to heighten teachers' understandings of teaching, learning, and assessment
Flexibility with Thinking Maps for planning and in-the-moment teaching
168
My unsettling experience with fragmentation was transformed as I began to apply Thinking Maps as learning and thinking tools for myself and for my students. While constructing a
whole from the pieces, it became apparent to me that educators need tools and processes to
meaningfully translate these initiatives into practice and to support and engage teacher thinking through the implementation process. As a result of my experiences with Thinking Maps,
engaging educators in reflective thinking about teaching and learning through the use of this
language became the focus of my professional inquiry and practice.
With the goal to improve teaching for student improvement, educators are now seeing that
there must be a systemic plan in place for school improvement. Schools need to engage in
professional development that really develops the professional so that teachers, just as students, have time to reflect on their own learning processes. Donald Schon (1983), a leading
author on reflective practice, describes expert practice as "an artful inquiry into situations
of uncertainty." Reflective practitioners ask themselves, "What am I doing and why? What
worked and what didn't and why?" Providing occasions for teachers "to reflect critically on
their practice and to fashion new knowledge and beliefs about content, pedagogy, and learners" is a key component of a new vision for staff development (Sparks, 1997). In its standards,
the National Staff Development Council recommends "organizing adults into learning communities," "guiding continuous instructional improvement," and emphasizing collaboration
with colleagues to engage the entire school culture in reflections about teaching and learning.
Defining the broad goals of professional development is one component of this new vision, but
we also need to identify best models, not merely a laundry list of best practices, that will
explicitly integrate theory, practice, and reflection and directly impact student learning.
169
170
experiences were exclusively in rural settings in New England, so I also became interested in
how this model would work in inner-city classrooms with teachers who worked with diverse
populations, in low socioeconomic neighborhoods, and in schools with historically low
achievement. I conducted action research as part of a master's project during the 2000-2001
school year, working with two groups of 15 educators: one group from the Syracuse City
School District in Syracuse, New York, and another in Community School District 27 in
Queens, New York.
What I found mirrored my experiences; not only did the Thinking Maps improve teaching
and student performance, but the model itself deepened teachers' reflection on their own
teaching and instruction and produced richer reflections about their students' thinking. For
one fifth-grade teacher of particularly challenging students in Syracuse, Thinking Maps were
tools that linked together student and teacher success: "I was teaching a lesson in social studies, and I must have asked a question every conceivable way I could think of. Nobody participated. So I drew a Multi-Flow Map on the board and got where I wanted to go! Thinking
Maps not only seized the teachable moment; they created the teachable moment." Ultimately,
I came to see that these deeper levels of reflection and performance changes developed because
the Thinking Maps invite explicit thinking and thus reflection, bringing a clarity that inspires
confidence and competence.
Figure 16.1
TeacherReported Results
of Thinking Maps
Implementation
student
impact
teacher
impact
,.....---==r==
thinking
writing
==r==------,
behavior
instruction
planning
assessment
~~~~~~
better
organization
have a
starting point
understand
the thought
process
can explain
their thinking
stay on
topic
see
relationships
deeper
thinking
better
products
more
elaboration
understand
how to use
words in a
meaningful
way
improvement
in retelling
and
summarizing
increase in
participation
and
motivation
students do
not feel
threatened
less stress
about
assignments
more followthrough
better focus
increased
chance of
goals
actualized
confident
about my
teaching
know I am
challenging
kids at higher
levels
studentcentered
learning
increased
clarity
increased
purpose
see the flow
of the lesson
awareness
of thought
process
focus on key
points
monitor by a
glance
gauge
student
readiness
check map
against
writing
know when
to move on
system for knowledge created confidence and competence for the learner (see Chapter 5,
"Closing the Gap by Connecting Culture, Language, and Cognition"), whether that person
was a student or a teacher. A third-grade teacher from Syracuse shared a story involving a
child who frequently misbehaved in class, didn't finish his assignments, and totally avoided
writing. He loved Tuesdays because the school counselor visited with him during the writing
period on that day. Every Tuesday, the child glanced at the door, eagerly anticipating the
counselor's arrival and his free ticket out of the writing assignment. However, one particular
Tuesday, following a Thinking Maps training session, his teacher used a Circle and Flow Map
to explain the assignment to the class and to demonstrate how to organize ideas on the way to
a piece of writing. Focusing intently on the lesson and adding his ideas to the class map, the
boy hadn't noticed the counselor entering the room. The student explained that he was busy
working on something and couldn't leave right then.
Observing the student's level of engagement encouraged the teacher to examine why this
lesson was effective and what caused inattention with this student and others in the classroom.
The teacher thought the lesson was successful because using the maps in her lesson gave students a cognitive and visual cue to follow the process of writing. As the teacher used the Flow
Map to organize and sequence the ideas in the story, her verbal explanations of processes were
171
172
supported by the visual representation of the map, thus making the thinking processes explicit
to the students. Students could follow not only the steps but also the mental dynamics of idea
formation. Teacher clarity and a concrete model of the abstract thinking processes invited this
student's participation and understanding.
What does an improvement in motivation and the level of engagement tell us about learning? One Training of Trainers cohort group noted how often negative behavior is a defense mechanism for confusion or fear, or the result of frustration with traditional models of instruction and
production of work. Perhaps, group members posited, this student wanted to participate in
writing but couldn't organize his ideas or sequence his thoughts. These improvements in
behavior might indicate that students have the ability but not the means to represent ideas
clearly and proceed to writing.
During one training session, in the middle of a discussion of the success stories about students with behavioral issues and attention problems, one participant exclaimed, "Thinking
Maps can replace Ritalin!" (see Chapter 3, "Leveling the Playing Field for All Students"). After
the initial laughter died down, the teachers began to seriously explore the plausibility of this
exclamation. One teacher stated that Thinking Maps would be a viable alternative therapy:
Thinking Maps work for these kids because they are consistent when nothing else in
their life is. They go horne to a place without rules, responsibility, and consequences.
Their home life is chaotic. No routine, no schedule. Sometimes Morn is horne,
sometimes not. No one is looking out for them. They can do whatever they want,
whenever they want. Although they might like the freedom, they don't have a sense of
order or control. They come to school wanting that power and sense of control. The
consistency of Thinking Maps can give them a sense of ownership. /II can do this. I
know how to do this." They feel like they are good at something.
In her reflections, this teacher considered from within her own cultural experiences and
assumptions aspects of how the familial and socioeconomic context of the students might
surface within this learning community: consistency, control, and ownership. She was sensitive
to the underlying emotional currents in the classroom and understood how Thinking Maps
could alleviate the tension. As she examined the effectiveness of Thinking Maps, she identified
permeating, perhaps universal, needs.
Other teachers remarked how Thinking Maps had supported the emotional as well as the
cognitive development of students by appealing to students' sense of safety. /lThey [students]
feel comfortable, not confined to a certain number of responses ... add to them as lessons
progress ... and use them on their own as well as in a group." Another teacher noted, /lIf I
reflect for a minute, I think it [using the Thinking Maps] has widened our horizons because
kids are empowered over their learning. They are more willing to take risks because with a
map nothing is wrong. You can show your thinking how you want. It doesn't have to be the
same as the next person's."
Listening to these observations, there was a common recognition that one's knowledge
and its expression don't necessarily coexist. Just because students knew information didn't
mean they would share it. In the complex climate of preadolescent, urban classroomswhere the culture of the students does not necessarily match the cultural background of
the teacher-the expression of knowledge by students may be double-edged, as their ideas
are subject to outside expectations and scrutiny. The Thinking Maps, a flexible, consistent,
common visual language, supporting both the process and the product of thinking, were
understood by these teachers as a safe venue for students to show what they know (see
Chapter 5).
In-the-Moment Instruction
At the third Training of Trainers session, a kindergarten teacher couldn't wait to share what
she had learned with the group. In preparation for a lesson comparing and contrasting two
books about George Washington, she had drawn a Double Bubble Map with four bubbles for
the similarities and three bubbles on each side for the differences. During the lesson, she
recorded the children's responses, but within moments, they had exhausted her template.
"You need more bubbles!" they chorused. Their powers of observation and attention to detail
astounded her. She learned how attentive her students were and planned to use those
responses as a rubric by which to judge their future work. The map was an unexpected assessment tool. Moreover, her students reminded her not to predetermine their capacity for information. "My thinking could have limited their thinking!" she realized. Reflecting about this
experience led her to question her expectations of her students and their proficiency with
observation and comprehension skills.
Whereas the kindergarten teacher used the Double Bubble Map to facilitate comprehension after reading, a second-grade teacher applied the Thinking Maps to support students'
thinking during math computation. Working at a low-performing elementary school, this
teacher found herself in an anxiety-producing situation when an outside group of consultants
selected her for observation. The school had purchased a very specific program aimed to
improve mathematical computation skills and hopefully release the school from the state's
probationary status. To guarantee results, the company structured quality checks at participating sites. This teacher was slated to teach a lesson on subtraction and feared the consultants'
presence because the children were having a difficult time with subtracting two-digit whole
numbers. "I was thinking what the kids had problems with," she says. "In the middle of the
problem, they seemed to forget the next step."
She decided to use a Flow Map to show the sequence of steps in subtraction. The next day,
the students accurately completed the problems using the Flow Maps at their desks. The
observer thought the lesson was sensational and asked if she could keep a copy of the Flow
Map. "The Thinking Map helped me get my ideas in order and really think about subtraction,"
the teacher says. The Flow Map clarified her own thinking as well as that of the students.
Relating to the sharing of this example at the training session, another teacher later reported
in the postsession survey nearly exactly the same sentiment: "They [Thinking Maps] help me
organize, and lessons involving the use of Thinking Maps have a far greater chance of reaching
their objective."
Planning
Reaching her objective, rather than repeating last year's abysmal performance, was exactly
what a sixth-grade teacher was determined to do with her unit on fairy tales (see Figure 16.2).
Unlike the previously mentioned situations, this teacher used the Circle Map during the initial
planning stages as a reflective tool to help her analyze the unit and plan for success. First she
173
174
brainstormed all the tasks, materials, and understandings necessary for students to be able to
write the final product, an original version of "Cinderella." Looking at the Circle Map while
simultaneously recalling the problems from last year's narratives, she anticipated some obstacles and consequently selected the most important ideas, including defining elements of a fairy
tale that would support students in the development of their final piece. She asked herself,
"What do I want them to learn? Which Thinking Maps would help them notice the patterns in
various versions of 'Cinderella'?" She selected the multitiered Bridge Map (see Figure 16.3) as
the tool to isolate the elements of a fairy tale and help students see the pattern of elements
across many versions.
She then used a Flow Map (see Figure 16.4) to sequence the progression of tasks to ensure
that students actively processed the materiaL She decided to have students apply specific
Thinking Maps at different times during the reading process to scaffold their comprehension.
In her planning, she became very animated, discussing how she could incorporate cooperative
learning and sharing among groups. Her work demonstrates her understanding of the learning process of her students and the need for students to first deconstruct fairy tales during
reading and later reconstruct the elements in their own fashion while writing their own
original Cinderella story. With the maps, she had a built-in, ongoing assessment of their comprehension and could adjust her instruction accordingly. As she decided about both the progression and the nature of instruction for this unit, she had to adopt the learner's perspective
. Ci1\.l4.ft\\o...
\f 1~<.o'5
rtrs/rtj
-IJ~-ht1"" -RatA)
(.a.S<-
h-Af?
+or
I 75
li
{:
"
~1
/\------
}to..~ ~e.
Dls.D.l;+1
Ls
o~
\'1\
c..OI\"~\;C.+
w(
~eso~u.. -\.~oV\
.k(l\cl'l\~::'
--5\-e.p
.)
~,\'1
A- .
1\
Il-
/t_
l!-
--~
i f\.ul-l:\ t"ot.\
i t,:~~.(
176
and anticipate where her students might have difficulty. Applying the maps as bo~ a lessondesign technique and a student tool, this teacher was deeply reflective, shifting her perspective
from the end product to the processes required in her students' minds. As she left the training
session that day, she felt very confident in her ability and in her students' abilities to find the
essentials within a Cinderella story.
This teacher's mapping of her Cinderella unit exemplifies how Thinking Maps aid teachers' understandings of the topics they teach and how using the maps promotes reflection about
instruction. To effectively plan a unit, teachers need to clearly articulate their outcome and
decide on an effective course of instruction. For example, they need to anticipate how students
would know what the elements of a fairy tale are and identify the variations in elements due
to the geographical and cultural background of particular tales. Thinking Maps thus provide
teachers with a means of questioning themselves to look for certain patterns of knowledge.
REFERENCES
Curtis, S. (2001). Inviting explicit thinking: Thinking Maps professional development: Tools to develop reflection
and cognition. Unpublished master's thesis, Antioch New England Graduate School, Keene, NH.
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Sparks, D. (1997). Reforming teaching and reforming staff development: An interview with Susan
"..Loucks-Horsley. Journal of Staff Development, 18(4), 20-23.
I 77
Coaching and
Supervising
Reflect:ive
Pract:ice
Kathy Ernst, M.S.Ed.
KEY CONCEPTS
Using Thinking Maps to improve supervision, coaching, and teaching
Using Thinking Maps for lesson observation and collaborative reflection
Using Thinking Maps to facilitate lesson study in mathematics
Milo Novelo and I walked briskly through the corridors of the New York City public school.
Milo was one of my advisees in the Leadership in Mathematics Education program at Bank
Street College of Education, and the purpose of my visit on this blustery November day was
to supervise him in his role as mathematics coach. He looked forward to these site visits
because they enabled him to do what an effective, skillful educator must do but is rarely
supported in doing: reflect on, question, analyze, and improve his practice. As Milo put it,
"When you spend a day walking in my shoes, you put a mirror to my work so I can stand back
and look at it. You challenge me to examine what I'm doing and to question why I do what I
do." I looked forward to these visits because they gave me an opportunity to learn-to deepen
my own understanding of mathematics teaching and learning and to reflect on and improve
my skills as coach and supervisor.
On the day of the visit, Milo informed me that our destination was a fourth-grade class,
taught by Anna, a novice and struggling teacher. Unfortunately, given the constraints of the
school schedule, he was unable to have a planning meeting with Anna. This is often the case
in schools around the country as time is one of the most significant barriers to the improvement
of teacher quality through the completion of the full cycle of supervision or coaching. It was
only this morning that he had touched base with her, introduced himself, and arranged for us
to come into her class during the math lesson. Observations and consultations by several Curriculum "experts" with disparate directives had failed to yield improvement in her ability to
178
manage and teach her students. The little self-confidence and joy she once had about teaching
was rapidly eroding. As we entered her room, Milo tried to put Anna at ease by introducing
me with his usual line: "Kathy's my advisor from Bank Street. She's here for the day to observe
me and to help me do a better job as math coach."
Until that day, I had been dissatisfied with my techniques of scripting observations and my
process of analyzing the observation data with teachers. At the beginning of each postconference, typically I would ask the teacher for his or her input: "What stood out for you regarding
the children's work and thinking? What aspects of the lesson were you pleased with?"
Although I was often successful at building upon and deepening the discussion with references to the teacher's observations and samples of children's work, there existed an uncomfortable disconnect between my observations, written in the moment, and those of the teacher,
recalled after the fact. Upon further reflection, I discovered some unsettling patterns in my
work.
In spite of the fact that my classroom observations often yielded pages of descriptive and
accurate accounts of meaningful dialogue and action, they were not readily accessible to me,
or to those I was coaching or supervising. There was little transparency or visible access by
teachers to my notes, which, in turn, often led to a subtle loss of trust. Professional trust in the
context of coaching and supervision is essential to the development of teacher improvement.
Pragmatically, whenever I needed to retrieve an anecdote that was relevant to my debriefing
conversation with a teacher, the flow of our discussion was usually interrupted while I hurriedly scanned pages of my notes, searching for the "gem" I knew was buried somewhere
between the mountains of lines. There sat the teacher, passively, while I sat in control of the
data (after all, they were written in my own "chicken scratch"-who else could make sense of
them?). All too often these awkward interruptions gave rise to a cloud of tension that threatened to inhibit our conversation. I'd occasionally notice the teacher glancing uneasily at my
notes, trying to decipher what I'd written. In these situations I tried to reassure the teacher that
my purpose was not to evaluate his or her performance but to facilitate reflection and improvement in his or her practice. It was evident that my practice needed to improve. How could I
more clearly and efficiently document events that I observed in the classroom? How could the
retrieval of observation data and conversations about them be more inclusive and democratic
for teachers? And how could my use of the lesson data facilitate inquiry and analysis focused
on student learning and the teaching-not on the teacher?
179
180
ways to map a lesson, I cast aside my uncertainty and dove in. My pen flew across the paper
as my questions guided me to make split-second decisions about what and how to document.
Curiously, I discovered that the simple act of drawing rectangles around events as they
unfolded brought visual clarity to my thinking, which, in turn, enabled me to focus on the
essence of the teaching and learning. As the lesson ended and Milo arranged to meet with
Anna at a time later in the day, I looked over my Flow Map. In spite of my chicken scratch,"
the representation of my observation was so visually clear that the classroom dialogue and
action nearly jumped off the page. At long last I had data that were readily accessible!
Milo's eyes widened as I laid out the Flow Map of the lesson on the table in front of us (see
Figure 17.1). He and I sat side by side as I began to retell the story, pointing to each event as
we went along. At times, it was Milo who deciphered my writing and joined in the storytelling. What amazed both of us was the ease with which we could retrieve events of the lesson
and the comfortable, collaborative nature of this process. There was none of the anxiety or
defensiveness characteristic of some debriefing conversations I facilitated in the past. Instead,
our focus was on the map in front of us, with its clear, descriptive evidence of the teaching,
coaching, and student learning.
We read the Flow Map of the lesson and discussed how Milo could rephrase some of the
questions he had posed to students and the modeling he had done for Anna when he stepped
in to give specific directions to the students. Then we examined the Flow Map through a different lens: We looked at how he could support Anna in her mathematics teaching. Anna had
gotten off to a rocky start, failing to engage her students in the launch of the lesson, so we
examined Event #1: Anna in front ofclass using pocket 100 chart to help students find multiples of 8
and Event #2: Students are inattentive. I asked Milo, "What do you think caused the kids to be
inattentive?" As Milo talked, I realized the type of thinking that we were both doing: cause and
effect reasoning. I simply shifted to the use of the Multi-Flow Map and began recording his
responses in a form. that first showed the possible causes of the difficulties (see Figure 17.2).
Milo proceeded to reflect on the possible reasons: Anna had not given the students a clear
sense of the purpose of the lesson; as Anna highlighted multiples of 8 on the hundred chart,
she used a yellow marker, which made the resulting pattern difficult for students to see; it was
apparent that many of the students lacked prior experience in exploring patterns of multiples
on the hundred chart-perhaps they should have begun with multiples of a number smaller
than 8, such as 2 or 3.
Later in the day, Milo and I met with Anna to talk about the lesson. Knowing how disheartened and overwhelmed she was feeling in her role as a new teacher with no prior training in
this mathematics curriculum, we decided to focus only on the beginning of the lesson. Milo
opened the conversation by asking, "How do you think things went?" Anna responded, "I
don't really get the point of this lesson.... The kids had a hard time getting started, and when
I gave them the activity sheet, they were confused. It helped when you stepped in and gave
them directions."
Moving his chair next to Anna, Milo said reassuringly, "We noticed some of the same
things you did." At this point, Milo re-created the partial Multi-Flow Map he and I had constructed earlier in the da)!, starting only with Event #2: Students are inattentive. He reiterated a
cause that Anna herself had just identified-purpose of lesson not clearly articulated-and added
it to the map. Milo then explained to Anna how an exploration of multiples on the hundred
chart enables students to see visual and numerical patterns, which are essential to building a
deeper understanding of multiplication and division. He suggested a way to introduce the
activity to students. As Anna seemed to grasp the purpose of the lesson, Milo continued.
"Something else we noticed was that the kids couldn't really see the highlighting of the multiples of 8, so it was hard for them to find other multiples of 8." Milo added another cause of
students' inattentiveness to the map: patterns on the hundred chart not visually clear. As he elaborated, Anna nodded in agreement, offering suggestions about how she could use colored
II
Figure 1-7.'
Flow Map: What' was the sequence of events observed and documented inthe lesson?
:;'
~'
Anna in front
of class using
pocket 100 chart
to help find
multiples of 8
Students
are
inattentive
:...--.
'-----+
Anna gives
students own
worksheets
I
UI don't
get this"
...
3 minutes
later, teacher
shouts, "Quiet,
get started"
.....
Anna explains
directions
to student #1
sitting in front row
-+
Anna explains
directions
to student #2
sitting in front row
-+
Milo
quietly talks
to teacher
l~
Students
confused/acting
out
'--+
WWhat
do we
have
to do?"
Students
talking to
each other,
not about
math
Students
intentionally
making loud
noises.
Anna
introduces
Milo to the class
f-+
-+
I
&
i;I'
,.
~~
~i
If
Milo gets
order
~-
-~
f-+
ulet's quickly
go over this.
What are you
supposed to do?"
r-+
Student #3:
"I'm completing
multiples of 8"
-+
f-+
Milo calls
student #4
to attention
-+
....
Students
-+
engage in work
Milo talks to
teacher
r-+
Teacher
gets
students'
attention
~'
r:
~.
K
~~
~.
f---+
Milo: "Who
can describe
the pattern?"
Milo:UWhat
more can you ~
~
say about that?"
Student #6 says,
Wit went in 2 lines."
Student #5
answers
Milo suggests to
student #4 that she
talk to someone else
Milo writes:
5 10
10 20
15 30
2040
2550
f---+
I
Student #6
pauses
r---+
Students
respond
f---+
Milo sees
student #4
has trouble
understanding
~,
r:
f-
i
.1
Students
go back to
work
~~
[;
ri
f---+
182
"Figure 17.2
purpose of
lesson not
clearly
articulated
patterns on
100 chart
not visually
clear
Students
are
inattentive
8 is too
big
acetate squares to more effectively highlight the multiples. Finally, Milo shared his assessment
of the students' relative lack of experience with the activity, and the ensuing difficulty they had
with identifying patterns for such a large number. After adding this third cause (8 is too big) to
the map, Milo engaged Anna in an exploration of multiples of 2 and 3 on the hundred chart,
modeling the kinds of questions she could later pose to her students. At the end of our conversation, Anna looked at the partial Multi-Flow Map Milo had constructed and said, "So many
people have come into my classroom with vague advice and comments that have just made
things worse. This is the first time anyone's given me concrete suggestions about what I can
do. This has been really helpful-thank you." The map in front of us, elegant in its simplicity,
had not only facilitated clear thinking in our process of reflection, dialogue, and inquiry, but it
was an immediate document of our conversation and a springboard for further action.
I had experienced something very powerful that day-the discovery that the use of Thinking Maps could so efficiently and effectively cause a qualitative shift in my postobservation
conversations with teachers about their instruction and student learning. The visual representation offered a coherent cognitive map from which verbal inquiry could emerge. The Flow Map
of the lesson had given Milo and me an explicit and immediate record of the class dialogue and
actions that we could readily access and discuss together. The Multi-Flow Map had enabled us
to analyze, together and later with Anna, the causes of student inattentiveness, which led to
deep conversations about the mathematics, the mathematical thinking of the students, and
ways in which Anna could engage her students and support their learning. Most important, the
maps served as a third point-visual patterns of thinking before us-so that we could focus our
attention on the teaching, not on the teacher, This shift, so difficult to attain in debriefing conversations, was naturally mediated by the visible representation of the lesson flow and the collaborative inquiry invited by the use of the Multi-Flow Map in the lesson analysis. The use of the
maps had enabled Milo and me to do our best thinking, and as a result, the time we spent
together was the most productive it had ever been. We also had an explicit, visual document of
our work and thinking during the supervision process, which could be readily accessed
and reflected on in the future. As I left Milo's school that day, I was struck by the realization
that I could use Thinking Maps to significantly advance another aspect of my work-schoolembedded professional development incorporating an adaptation of lesson study.
183
184
Giti
Should we teach
key words in story
problems to help
ELLs, beginning
readers, etc.,
understand and
solve problems?
Derek
How can we
support ELLs,
beginning readers,
and struggling
readers in
understanding
story problems?
Alana
How do we
connect the use
of the number
line to different
subtraction
strategies?
What
strategies and
how many are
appropriate for
first graders
to represent?
I 85
subtraetionre,moval- prbblems?
t
Removal
Subtraction
I
Tools
(I Used)
cubes
fingers
100
chart
number
line
calendar
Strategies
(I Did)
-r
triple
count
count
back
5l'
ri:
I
Representations
(I Showed)
~.
i,
;~
jj
,.
drawing
number
line
words
use number
combination
numbers
count on
number
sentences
~p
k-r,
i~
drawing
f'
I
~
j
number
combination
f:
:f;
We then discussed a problem context that would engage students and developed a problem for students to solve and represent during the math workshop (student work time). Using
a Flow Map, we sequenced the questions and prompts I would use in the lesson launch (introduction; see Figure 17.6). We also discussed what would be important for teachers to observe
during this part of the lesson; observation prompts were embedded as substages so teachers
would remember to record what they saw and heard.
What was important for teachers to observe as children worked independently on the
problem? How could teachers support children who were struggling or in need of a challenge?
We examined the Tree Map (see Figure 17.4) to anticipate the range of tools, strategies, and
representations the children might use and then scanned the Circle Map defining the learning
goals (see Figure 17.5) to determine the levels of support students might need. This information, so visually explicit and accessible, enabled us to efficiently construct, in a relatively short
time, a Tree Map (see Figure 17.7) as a tool to categorize and focus our lesson observations.
~4
Figure 17.5 Circle Map: What mathwiU stUdents learn in this lesson, and what knowledge and information influences our lesson planningl
1. CM.3: Share
mathematical Ideas
through the manipulation
ofobjects, drawings,
pictures, andsymbols
In both written and
verbal explanations
1.eM.f:
Understand
how to organize
their thought
processes with
teacher
guidance
f.PS.B:Use
manipulatlves
to model
action in problems
1.N.24: Develop
and use strategies to
solve...subtraction
wordproblems
1.CM.4:
Listen to solutions
shared by other
students
21
children
one child
doesn't read
or recognize
numbers yet
(will need support)
almost all
children use
drawings-not
counters
some children
count back;
most triple count
visualize and
retell the action
in a subtraction
removal story
problem
model the
action of a
subtraction
removal problem
with drawings
or counters
develop
methods for
representing
a subtraction
removal problem
develop
strategies
for solving
a subtraction
removal problem
most children
know their
combinations
of 10
children have
solved and
repesented
subtraction
removal problems
1.PS.6:
Experience
teacher-dIrected
questioning
process to
understand
problems
1.R.3: Use
standardand
nonstandard
representations
1.PS.9:Use
drawings/pictures
to model the action in
problems
Figure 17.6
Flow Map of Lesson Launch:WhatwUl the teacher do and say to engage students in the lessonl
Mrs. G told me
you're learning
about winter and
snow. What do
you know
about snowballs?
I'm going to
tell you a
----+ story problem
about
snowballs.
--.
What happened in
the story? Don't
solve the
problem-just
tell me what
happened.
Let's read
the problem...
(Kathy shows and
reads the problem
aloud.)
Whathapppened
first?
I
KIDS DO:
KIDS SAY:
KIDS SAY:
I.;
.....
What happened
next?
What is this?
What is the
problem asking you
(Kathy points
to the question
to find out? Don't
---+
~
mark.)
tell the answer-just
What does it
tell what you
tell us?
have to solve.
You're going to
solve this problem
Think: Will there be
and then show
more than 10
your work on this
snowballs or fewer ----+
paper. (Kathy
than 10 snowballs?
shows the children
Why?
the worksheet
and they read it
aloud together.)
KIDS SAY:
On this paper,
show how you
solved the problem.
What are some
We're interested
of the tools that
----+
in knowing how
~
might help you
you're thinking, so
solve this problem?
we'll ask you
questions about
how you solved it.
KIDS SAY
(Kathy records):
i,
."'%"l',..
~'\' '.' '.4',' Y~ .'"' :\;' 7:,>~WY'l'.' "'Y"' 1'"' "' ' " ' 'W' ' ' ': ':. " '"' ' ' ' ' Wl:' ~,~j;o;'_' ' : '"' ' ' ' ' J' ~I' ' !\4\'~"' 'i'~' ' ' ", ~,~',," '~\;Cj;' ' ~.~ ' ' ' J,' ':~'l' '"' ' 'W' l' 'j;M.;' ' ' ' ' "' ' ' ~b ' ' '\' ' ' ' ~' ' ' '~' ' ' ' '~' ~ ':' I'"(1' Wl' ' ' !:' ' ' '' ' ' 1' ~Y!,",;'_T~' ' ' >' ' ' ."f"J:;"': ,,~ "~"'$C'''''''''''~~~'~~'''''''~'~rw,,''''';:<P~''''''''' ,.~
188
FigQ~
17.7 Tree Map: What is important to observe as children work on a removal subtraction
story probleml
WHAT to OBSERVE
as CHILDREN WORK on a
REMOVAL SUBTRACTION
STORY PROBLEM
I
DOES the
CHILD
UNDERSTAND
the
PROBLEM?
I
HOW DOES
the CHILD
APPROACH,
MODEL,
and SOLVE
the PROBLEM?
I
What
manipulatives
does the
child use (CUbes,
fingers, etc.)?
What
sketches?
What
other tools
(100 chart,
number
line, etc.)?
With mental
calculations?
WHAT
SUBTRACTION
STRATEGY
DOES the
CHILD USE?
TRIPLE COUNT:
1.Counting all;
2. Counting
amount to be
removed;
3. Counting
what's left
COUNTING
BACK
I
HOW DOES
the CHILD
RECORD
HIS/HER
SOLUTION?
I
HOW DOES the
CHILD
COMMUNICATE
HISIHER
SOLUTION?
Independently, in
sketches? Words?
Numbers?
What math
language
does the
child use?
---r
-rWith support, in
sketches, words,
and numbers?
If so, what
support?
Does the
child need
support?
If so, what
support?
COUNTING
ON
Using a
NUMBER
FACT they
know (If so,
what number
fact?)
I
EXTENSION
PROBLEM:
---r
OTHER
Figure 17.8 Tree Map: What is important to reflect on in our lesson debrieR
LESSON
DEBRIEF with
FIRST-GRADE
TEACHERS
I
HOW CAN
the
LESSON
BE
IMPROVED?
WHAT DID
WE
OBSERVE
DURING the
LESSON?
-----=r=-----., - r
1"'"1
LAUNCH
-r
WORKSHOP
"What do you
know about
snowballs?"
helped kids
engage and
understand
the problem
11 kids triple
counted; 6
counted
back; 1
counted on;
1 just knew it
Most kids
ELls
understand
th e probl em
right away.
Kids closed
their eyes as
they listened
to the story
used pictures
to represent
1/4 of kids
counted on
fingers as
Kathy told
the story
Kids told what
happened first,
next without an
explicit prompt
Some kids retold
the story with
inaccurate numbers
but with accurate
story action
For last event in
story flow, kids
added "How many
NOW."
Kathy drew
attention to a
"story problem"
Mapping the
sequence and
then choral
reading of the
map
reinforced the
story action
Some used
number
lines
Most solved
with fingers
Kids used
pictures, words,
numbers, and
number lines
to represent
their thinking
Almost all
used a number
sentence
Kids struggle
to represent
their
strategies
and
approaches
LESSON
SUMMARY
Kids seemed to
connect writing
the number
sentence to
corresponding
events in the
Flow Map
Kids were
familiar with
the minus
sign
Kids
brainstormed
many tools
(fingers,
cubes, # line,
100 chart,
calendar, etc.)
Provide a
different
challenge
problem
(still under
discussion)
I
WHAT ARE
NEXT
INSTRUCTIONAL
STEPS?
-1Using
children's
work,
surface and
name the
strategies
Present a
subtraction
story problem
and model the
solution with
cubes. Ask:
"What strategy
did I use?"
Model for kids
efficient ways
to represent
different
approaches
and strategies
WHAT ARE
SOME
TEACHING
TAKEAWAYS?
I liked the
use of the
Flow Map
in story
problems
I have an
awareness of
the differences
between tools,
strategies, and
representations
I can use the
distinctions
above to
know where
and how to
push kids
189
190
and the collaborative sequencing of events, charted in a visually clear Flow Map, enabled them
to understand the problem. As teachers shared other observations about the launch, I added
them to our Tree Map.
We then discussed our observations of children at work and sorted children's work samples according to the strategies they used. This process enabled us to readily identify, later in
the lesson debrief, the next instructional interventions that were needed to support and
advance the children's learning. Again, these observations were recorded in our Lesson Debrief
Tree Map (see Figure 17.8).
Typically, by the time the teachers talk about what they noticed in the lesson summary,
they have already surfaced aspects of the lesson that could be improved. This was the case
with the team of first-grade teachers. They quickly identified the need to provide different
challenge problems that would engage students in need of extensions. Although they had not
yet decided on what problems would be more appropriate, they had a record of the problems
that didn't advance student learning, so they were less likely to use them in this lesson in the
future.
At the end of the lesson debrief, I asked teachers to reflect on what they took away from
the lesson study process. There was general agreement that using a Tree Map to clarify the
distinction among tools, strategies, and representations led to a deeper understanding of how
they could improve the quality of their instruction to more effectively teach their students how
to solve subtraction removal problems with understanding and how to represent their solutions
clearly and accurately. In fact, the Tree Map had provided such visual clarity about these big
ideas that the teachers constructed similar Tree Maps with their students, renaming the categories with kid-friendly language: "I used," "I did," and "I showed." The Tree Map provided
students with a visual, metacognitive tool that enabled them to think about and access
approaches, strategies, and representations in their problem-solving process.
CONCLUSION
Thinking Maps are essential tools for bringing explicitness, efficiency, and effectiveness to my
work in supervising teachers and facilitating lesson study. As I discovered in my work with
Milo, my use of the maps enabled me to facilitate a process in which the focus of the supervision
postconference was on the teaching-not on the teacher. By providing a third point, the maps
kept our eyes, questions, and analysis on the lesson data, shifting the power from me as
supervisor to us as a collaborative team. This nonthreatening dynamic, essential to inquiry and
learning, was also present in my work with the first-grade team of teachers throughout the
lesson study process. Although I taught the lesson, we all were responsible for planning the
lesson, writing our observations of the lesson experience, and analyzing and learning
from the experience. The maps not only facilitated explicit thinking and learning throughout
the process of our planning, observation, and debrief, but they served as visual imprints of the
Habits of Mind that are inherent to what Linda Lambert (1998) asserts is the daily work of
highly qualified teachers: reflection, dialogue, inquiry, and action. One quick glance at the
maps constructed with the team of first-grade teachers gives the reader an explicit picture
of the thinking and work throughout the lesson study process. This readily accessible
documentation enables teachers to reflect on this work in the future.
As I continue to work with the team of first-grade teachers in lesson study, I will no longer
teach the lessons-they will. They now have the tools and a process that enable them to establish the emotional safety essential to their collaborative inquiry and learning. I look forward to
coaching them through a process in which they develop and sustain the capacity to keep the
focus on the teaching and learning throughout their lesson studies-and to identify and implement actions that improve their teaching to meet the learning needs of their students.
REFERENCES
Fernandez, C., & Yoshida, M. (2004). Lesson study: A Japanese approach to improving mathematics teaching
and learning. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Jalongo, M. R., Rieg, S., & Helterbran, V. (2007). Planning for learning: Collaborative approaches to lesson
design and review. New York: Teachers College Press.
Lambert, L. (1998). Building leadership capacity in schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Lewis, C., Perry, R., & Hurd, J. (2004). A deeper look at lesson study. Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development, 61(5), 18-22.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics.
Reston, VA: Author.
Stigler, J., & Hiebert, J. (1999). The teaching gap: Best ideas from the world's teachers for improving education
in the classroom. New York: Free Press.
Watanabe, T. (2002). Learning from Japanese lesson study. Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, 59(6), 36-39.
West, L., Hanlon, G., Tam, P., & Novelo, M. (2005). Building coaching capacity through lesson study. NCSM
monographs.
Willis, S. (2002). Creating a knowledge base for teaching: A conversation with James Stigler. Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 59(6),6-11.
191
Thinking Maps
A Language for Leading and Learning
Larry A/per, M.S.Ed.
KEY CONCEPTS
Facilitating constructivist conversations and engagement across a whole school
A Circle Map and Tree Map for creating a unified understanding and deeper communications within a faculty
Linking leadership and learning using Thinking Maps for school-wide transformation
And, we have an improving image of what sustainnble schools look like, but ho'W do 'We get there
from here? How do we find our way to the sustainnbility we yearn for?"
-Linda Lambert (2007)
Finding our way. In New England it's not uncommon when asking for directions from one
place to another to be answered matter-of-factly with the reply, "You can't get there from
here." Indeed, there is rarely a straight path from here to there, and this is certainly true in our
field of education, as well. The journey to a solution or decision can be quite complex and
circuitous, with unexpected twists and turns. In fact, there may be multiple pathways and
parallel processes at anyone time, whose selection will be inspired as much by the multiple
perspectives involved as by the nature of the challenges themselves. A central task of school
leadership, then, is to enable educators to collectively and individually navigate these challenges and opportunities and develop a sustainable approach to engaging students in the
learning process.
So, how do we "find our way," as Lambert (2007) wonders, through this complex landscape and not simply get there" but do so in a manner that embraces the uncertainty of the
journey and is inspired by the possibilities of the outcomes? How do we accomplish this in a
II
192
THINKING MAPS
way that is also sustaining of the organization, where, as East Syracuse-Minoa Superintendent
of Schools Donna DeSiato says, it's not about power or position, but about understanding and
being understood? As David Hyerle (2009) wrote, "Consider the impact on your school or
system if everyone could navigate information, communicate options, and see solutions as
fluidly as they can read a GPS [global positioning system] in their cars." What internal and
collective compass can be used, then, to help people chart a course through this constantly
changing and emerging educational environment? And how can such a tool, if it exists, be
used to design pathways that engage all members of the school community deeply in the processes of discovery, learning, and actionable decision making along the way? These were
among the essential challenges we sought to address as we transferred the work with Thinking
Maps from the classroom to the context of the entire school community.
Over the past eight years we have been introducing school leaders-superintendents, principals, curriculum directors, teacher leaders, and so forth-to the use of Thinking Maps for the
full range of leadership practices. Thinking Maps have been used for coaching professional
practice (see Chapter 17, "Mentoring Mathematics Teaching and Leaming"), facilitating
school-wide investigations into changing instructional practices (see Chapter 16, "Inviting
Explicit Thinking"), analyzing and applying data, engaging diverse stakeholders in essential
conversations at the school and community level, and more. They have been used by teacher
leaders and administrators to actualize the potential of professional learning communities by
enabling all members of the school community to skillfully participate in and contribute to the
processes associated with professional learning communities. We have been collecting data
from these experiences and the subsequent work done with the maps in the field by a variety
of practitioners. The research has primarily been in the form of surveys, site visits, and interviews. We have used these methods to uncover and articulate the degree to which this particular work with Thinking Maps, as a navigational tool for leading, has had an impact on the
learning and decision making throughout the community of the school and system and, ultimately, on student achievement. Our findings, to be more fully documented in an upcoming
publication (Alper & Hyerle, in press), have been compelling.
Several major themes have emerged from our research. Leaders consistently expressed
enthusiasm for the degree of clarity their own use of Thinking Maps provided them with
related to the complex issues they were addressing with their colleagues. Many described this
notion as things "becoming clearer." And, as the issues came more into focus, leaders felt they
had a deeper understanding and could work more effectively with others to improve the circumstances. Notice that the emphasis here was on clarity, the ability to see deeply and communicate precisely what they were thinking. The leaders did not mention finding or having
the right answers themselves as a primary benefit of their work with the Thinking Maps.
Instead, they focused on the clarity of thought they achieved through the use of the maps. This,
they noted, enabled them to engage their colleagues in meaningful and productive processes
through which they could collectively arrive at decisions. Veronica McDermott, a former
superintendent of schools in New York, expressed this very point when she wrote in a reflection, "For me, the Thinking Maps have become my wonder tool of choice as I exercise my role
as a leader. They have opened up the white space that I believe is needed in an organization
for real dialogue to occur. I know they enable me to slowly shift from the go-to guy with the
answers to the let's-explore-this-together instigator. Soon, I found myself more interested in
finding ways to elicit deep questions and to provoke discussions than I was in providing
answers neatly packaged and ready for adoption."
To effectively address the rich complexity and profound implications of our work, we need
to have what Maxine Greene (1995) refers to as the "conversations that echo from somewhere
else, some deep place." We need conversations that are rich in ideas, alive with uncertainty,
and propelled by the anticipation of new learning and possibilities. With time and deliberate
193
194
attention provided to open the space-the "white space," as McDermott described it-between
and among people and the use of a common language for communicating ideas across multiple perspectives, these conversations can give full expression to people's thoughts and imaginings. As another superintendent expressed after having used the maps extensively with his
leadership team and school board, "There is no topic I feel that I can't [use Thinking Maps to]
lead a group through a constructive process in order to generate a sound decision. Regardless
of the difficulty or sensitivity of the issue, I know my use of the maps will guide us successfully
to a meaningful resolution." Courageous leadership, necessary to the individual and collective
confidence of the organization, is achievable when supported by tools that are genuinely
empowering.
In an unpublished reflective essay titled "Leadership Journey," Ken McGuire (2009), former principal of Bluebonnet Elementary School in Fort Worth, Texas, wrote about the effect his
use of Thinking Maps had on his instructional program and on himself as a leader. In his
reflection, McGuire described a process he guided his colleagues through using Thinking
Maps to examine the topic of large group instruction. Using several different Thinking Maps,
the faculty members surfaced their ideas about the topic. Some used a Circle Map to brainstorm all the possible settings where large group instruction would be the most appropriate
choice, and others used a Tree Map to categorize other instructional strategies by content and
setting. Commenting on the ensuing discussion after the groups shared their maps, McGuire
observed, "The reflective dialogue about powerful instructional practices was one of the most
insightful and passionate discussions we had experienced to that time." McGuire's use of
questions and the visual representation of the thinking through the use of the maps totally
engaged the faculty members and immersed them in the investigation and the conversation
that followed. Commenting on the larger implications of this and subsequent experiences, he
shared with the faculty members where Thinking Maps were used for their professional learning and decision making. McGuire wrote,
Reflecting on our campus today, I would have to say that both Bluebonnet and I have
been transformed. As far as my leadership, I continue to work to create effective
communication and collaboration, help generate shared mission and vision, conduct
meaningful and purposeful professional growth, direct problem-solving strategies,
collect and analyze information, and manage the business of the campus. Thinking
Maps have made me much more effective in each of these areas. I now have a set of
tools that establish a common language and help the staff recognize the kind of
thinking we are doing. The maps provide process and help define purpose in the work
of our teams and committees. As an entire school community, we are learning to think!
The quality of engagement and the meaningfulness and relevance that McGuire (2009) and
his colleagues achieved through their skillful application of Thinking Maps and, consequently,
their thinking processes in these experiences have been supported by comments from other
leaders we have interviewed and surveyed. In addition, they have described the cohesion and
other significant benefits that sharing a common language brings to their interactions around
matters of deep importance. Too often, meetings devolve into a competition of ideas, a closing
of doors, rather than the creation of possibilities. People are sometimes quick to adopt and
defend positions. They argue, debate, and ultimately defeat or are defeated by the ideas of
others in the group. At best, under these conditions, outcomes are negotiated, and the results
are more like settlements. In the end, there is very little enthusiasm for the results, and the
process is simply done and the task completed.
Positional discussions are clearly inadequate for promoting the depth of thinking necessary to address the complex pedagogical, moral, and ethical dimensions of the decisions teachers and administrators must make in their work. Alternatively, propositional conversations
THINKING MAPS
invite people to offer their ideas for consideration, to open up thinking to be examined and
enlarged upon. Such conversations demonstrate that ideas can be starting places for inquiry as
opposed to end points for debate, defining school as a "home for the mind for all who dwell
there" (Costa, 1991).
Our findings suggest that there is another path. The use of Thinking Maps has enabled
rich, constructivist conversations to unfold in a variety of school settings. The collective and
skillful use of the maps has enabled people to move beyond the borders of their individual
ideas, beyond the centrality and certainty of their thinking and motivations. Multiple ways of
knowing and seeing have been encouraged, and positions have given way to possibilities.
"Conversation," wrote Donald Schon (1987), "is collective improvisation." Like musicians,
highly attuned to the sound and emotion coming from each other's instruments, people in
constructivist conversations create ideas rich in texture, depth, and dimension. Collective
improvisation or skillful participation, as Lambert (2007) might refer to it, is one of the hallmarks of sustainable schools. Empowering others through the use of Thinking Maps was
another of the central themes to emerge from our research. As McDermott concluded, "What
I discovered in the process was the latent strengths of the individuals I worked with and the
combined power of the group." In essence, she found a way to get there.
195
196
them to navigate the unknown with greater excitement for the possibilities that learning represented and more certainty in their ability to succeed. Having read and discussed excerpts
from Visual Tools for Constructing Knowledge (Hyerle, 1996), regular and special education
teachers expressed equal enthusiasm for the work. It was obvious that all our students would
benefit from access to these tools and the opportunity to enhance, extend, and apply their
fundamental thinking processes to learning.
Our work with Thinking Maps began with a full day of training for the entire faculty. It
was evident from the beginning that the impact was going to be not only on the students but
on the staff as well. Not unlike our students, we also learn by patterning information and linking ideas. We are not always confident when facing ambiguity or comfortable expressing our
thoughts or considering the ideas of others. As we worked to develop our facility with Thinking Maps during that first day and in subsequent training opportunities, we became fully
engaged with each other's ideas and discoveries. The visual nature of the maps allowed us to
externalize our thoughts, making it easier for us to be curious about each other's points of
view, identify patterns, and discover and create structures from our thinking that would otherwise not have existed. Assuming the role of learners, we experienced the maps as we hoped
our students would. Time was suspended as we were inspired by the activity of generating
ideas together. Diane Zimmerman (1995) describes this infusion of energy into group dynamics in this way: "When group members become excited about the emerging relevance of the
conversation, the group self-organizes around the emerging concepts." Clearly, Thinking
Maps were facilitating this rich communication among us by creating a safe, noncombative
way to build meaning together. Our connectedness was strengthened by the thinking we were
doing in concert, as insights were made and as we moved beyond the boundaries of our initial
ideas. Not surprisingly, we recognized the value of the maps to our work with each other and
sought to apply them more deliberately to our own interactive processes.
THINKING MAPS
were writers themselves, adding another dimension to the reasons for their thinking. This
aspect of the maps, the surfacing of multiple frames of reference, would continue to evolve for
us as an important tool for looking beyond the surface of things to appreciate their full meaning and significance.
Figure 18.1 . QuaiityWriting Program 'Circle' Map .
-
'.
".
.'
guided
practice/mini-lessons
learning to edit
and revise
independently
and with peers
sharing
and
publishing
writing
mastery of
language,
mechanics,
and
conventions
writing
every day
cultivates
selfassurance
teaching
organization
organizational
tools and
strategies
safety
interactions
with good
writers
storytelling
direct
instruction
modeling
benchmarks:
knowing
what a good
piece looks
like
accommodates
different
learning
styles
and needs
reading
quality
literature
out loud
vocabulary
enrichment
dialogue
and
discussion
of writing
ongoing
feedback
with clear
criteria
practice,
practice,
practice
encouragement
of creativity
different
genres
I
.~.A~""d~l:hl~~~.~~~Vl'!f. ,,!';:~~~':""l~'~1J;;.~_ ..~,.'~ ....; ..,.,;,~..:t'i~'~~~r,~ ~~~""''''-~_ .. ~~~~"t.~~:ll1l~w.'.\":~Y'I"~.I~~~~~'J::::~~~_I~~~.J!'Sl'~~~~'~~~~~~~lllo".l"~~l~r
The next step in this process was to see the connections between and among the ideas we
generated. We used a Tree Map to categorize and group the information and did so, again,
initially without conversation. People were invited to move the papers on which individual
ideas were written into clusters of related content. As they were formed, these dusters could
be added to or changed as people made new connections and certain groupings became apparent.
The discussion that followed gave us another opportunity to consider the information, this
time in categories, to identify connections and add what might be missing. The Tree Map
included items related to content and pedagogy, desired student performance outcomes, and
qualities associated with being a writer. What we had created in this process was an agreedupon set of criteria that we would use to evaluate various approaches to teaching writing.
t
l
197
198
Using the maps as a tool for how to think about this task gave us a way to see, understand,
and value each other's ideas. From the beginning, the focus was as much on how we wanted
to think about this topic as it was on what we thought about the topic. Consequentl~ people
could remain comfortable with the formative nature of the conversation, knowing that we
were building toward a common understanding and shared set of guiding principles for
designing our school's approach to teaching writing.
Our use of the maps began to extend into other aspects of our work together and not
always in response to major undertakings. They were useful in grade-level meetings, committee work, and, in general, any context where the facilitation of thinking could lead to richer,
more meaningful, and productive interactions between and among the people in our school
community. "How do we want to think about this?" became the leading question for many of
the conversations we were having. In response, one or several of the maps would be identified
as the appropriate tool to assist us in these conversations. Our library-media specialist, Andra
Horton, observed, "Thinking Maps help us to harness ideas and put them together in powerful ways." As a result, we were able to enter these conversations knowing there was a way to
get to the final destination without needing to know what that was from the start. "It's the
difference," said Horton, "between seeing a pyramid and knowing how to build it."
Our school's capacity to respond to serious challenges was strengthened by our ability to
effectively engage with each other in the face of difficult issues. No community is entirely free
of problems or conflict, and this was true for our school as well. The character and, ultimately,
the success of a community are often defined not by the issues themselves but by how the
people within it, individually and collectively, respond to the challenges. As a group, our staff
had always been inclined to confront our issues. We tried to view challenges as opportunities
to strengthen our school and do better work with children. We also felt an obligation to model
for our students the same personal and collective efficacy we wanted them to develop. "Freedom," wrote Greene (1978), "involves the capacity to assess situations in such a way that lacks
can be defined, openings identified, and possibilities revealed." Taking constructive action
requires having the tools to do so. We began to see Thinking Maps as an essential tool to draw
upon in response to the complex and sometimes confounding issues we typically faced. Not
only did we have the desire to respond, but now we had, in the maps, additional resources to
help us do so more effectively.
199
THINKING MAPS
expressed, "Thinking Maps enable us to make the transition from the place we started to what we
don't yet know." The ability of the maps to give people the confidence to go forward would prove
to be especially important as we worked on an issue with such a high level of risk inherent in it.
We began the process with a question, as we try to do before entering any discussion or
line of inquiry. "What are the land mines in the landscape of your professional work?" we
asked. The imagery was purposely chosen to affirm the powerful component of people's feelings and to acknowledge the seriousness of the issue. After doing an individual Circle Map to
define this for themselves and frame it within the context of their own experiences, people
then joined small groups to share and combine their thoughts into a common Circle Map as
shown in Figure 18.2. As these initial conversations unfolded, people became less guarded
while giving each other support and recognizing similarities in their experiences. What
evolved was a shared reality, a group narrative woven together from the feelings, thoughts,
and events from each person's life. We had good reason to be hopeful that we could repair
what had been damaged and, in Greene's (1978) words, "move through the openings, to try to
pursue real possibilities." The maps effectively opened space between and among us, allowing
us to see what was there and to imagine how it could be different.
Figure T~~2
L.a.nds~e
the lack of
adequate support
for systems for
students-academic
and emotional
blaming the
people before
you for the
needs that
students bring
to your class
the constant
raising of the
bar-standards
social,
emotional
issues of
students and
families
no time to
process with
others-isolation
misinterpretation or
different
interpretationsmiscommunication
differences
in
philosophy
and values
narcissism
of minor
differences
personal,
non-schoolrelated stress
effects of
testing on
students,
families, and
teachers
changing
populationhigh turnover
of students
and staff
I:
\
t'
"""""=~=.=_:~=~=,,=:.,,,.~=~=
. =. =~: : :. .J~=
. . ~. =='.='7'~=~p:,~=",'. :; :; ,~':C; '.~ :f.l~=.~;: ;: ;~. ;O ;: U!:"':C ;:I. '.~(.: ;j~ :0.:; _-"_~:; :~ ; ;: ~} '~\l'~: ;: ;':~;r.; :;,<.~; ;:'.,Y;: ;: l' ~: Z;~:; :F~:; : ;:.r_~; :;,. , :, ~1N.~l: ;:_:-W";: ;:"i !":C; .r: ~;r. ~:.~<r:" $~ ;,;:.~ :; :~, : ;r.1-f.~;: ;.:";,: ;: ~lI~:; :;~ : ; U; -;.'Xi}S;=.'J!lI '-,:%iy~;: ji'; ", ,-~; :;_:.~ ;: ";:,.: ~:;;.
; ~ =:;:.,.,~.~:;;;J;
.~ ~:. J.
L""""""=,,,:
=.
=.
_....
=,
=.:
R ';;:;,
..
..
...
, ')',r,;;!,
200
With the different Circle Maps displayed on the walls of the room, we talked about what
we noticed and the ways in which our assumptions were being challenged. During the process
our thinking about the problem changed, and our appreciation for each other deepened. Next,
the Coordinating Committee took the Circle Maps and used a Tree Map (see Figure 18.3) to
group the information into categories. The committee chose titles for the categories that represented the individual items and gave the staff a way to think about the actions people could
take, individually and collectively, to strengthen our school community. In preparation for the
next meeting, the committee sent a memo to staff members with the Tree Map attached. The
memo concluded by saying,
In preparation for our next combined staff meeting on Thursday, we ask that you
give thought to the following two questions: In what way might I act, particularly in
the Personal and Interpersonal categories, that can contribute to the strengthening of
our school community? What concrete steps can we take to "repair" the lacks,
particularly in the areas where we have the greatest degree of control-Personal,
Interpersonal, and Systems? While we ask that you give equal weight to each of these
questions, it is only the second that we will discuss at the meeting. It is our hope and
expectation that your consideration of the first will be ongoing and that in doing so,
each of us will be mindful of the impact our actions have on our collective ability to
make real the possibilities we identify and the vision we have for our school
community.
At the next meeting, we asked staff to respond to the Tree Map and tell us whether it accurately reflected the conversation we had at the previous meeting. We were then able to generate possible action steps and give further direction to the Coordinating Committee to develop
a comprehensive plan for the staff to consider and, ultimately, to implement. It seemed that we
had successfully taken charge of a difficult situation and could move ahead with a shared
sense of purpose and a demonstrated commitment to the well-being of our school.
Having Thinking Maps as a tool to conduct these difficult conversations was reassuring
and empowering to people. Deb Abbott, a third-grade teacher in our school, said, "By seeing
your thinking, you can examine it, and you don't have to stop there." The reassurance comes,
in part, from the maps' ability to help us formulate and capture our thinking and pursue the
next level of thought beyond the familiar. "You're not going to forget it [your thoughts]," said
Abbott. "You can reflect on it and build on it." When done collaboratively, the use of the maps
can enable a group to build and strengthen its connections, even when confronted with issues
that could easily pull it apart.
CONSTRUCTIVIST CONVERSATIONS
The ability of people to make meaning together, visualize the unknown, and formulate
effective action is vital to the success of any organization. In today's school environment,
where change is not an event but an ever-present reality, it is imperative that people develop
the individual and collective capacity to process information, transform it into new
understandings, and shape their futures. Constructivist conversations awaken people to
possibilities and help them give shape to ideas not yet fully formed. The collaborative nature
of these conversations helps organizations build an identity around a common purpose.
Constructivist conversations provide a way for members of the learning community to share
their individual frames of reference and develop trust and confidence in themselves and each
other. The construction of knowledge and meaning is not solely an individual activity but is,
more powerfull~ a social one. In this wa~ groups of people interact to interpret, reflect upon,
Landscape of
Professional
Stress
External
Forces
Personal
Interpersonal
Systems
Resources
Student/Family
Characteristics
family issues
testing/reporting
to public
effects of
testing on
students and
families
limited
rewards and
recognition
for teachers
unrealistic
expectations
for students
and teachers
compensation
doesn't match
real work year
work
overload
constant
raising of the
bar
standards
testing
pulled in too
many
directions
excessive
curricular
demands
lack of
energy/fatiguel
exhaustion
isolation
aging
outside
stress
home
environments
(student and
staff)
health issues
not enough
chocolate
lack of
respect
Organizational
Special
Needs
resentment
schedulingl
logistics
no time
classroom
interruptions
professional
development
isolation
personal
animosities
narcissism of
minor
differences
blaming
others
individual
agendas
lack of
acceptance
feeling
others not
doing their
share
impatience with
perceived
incompetence
philosophical
differences
different
values
miscommunication
lack of
communication
different
expectations
~
lack of
alternative
programs
lack of
understanding
of others' roles
lack of
tolerance for
special
needs
paper
avalanche
lack of
services
contradictory
input about
correct
support
conflicting
schedules
students
"mainstreamed"
too quickly
I
limited
time, money, resources
in general
not enough
support
systems
too much
begging
lack of parent
understanding
about today's
curriculum and
classrooms
changing
role of
teachers in
relation to
families
student not
available to
learn due to
outside
forces
diverse
needs of
students
emotionally
distressed
students
and
families
explosive
parents
high turnover of
stUdents-transiency
student
behavior
202
and examine each other's ideas and experiences. As people experience uncertainty together in
this context, ambiguity is embraced as the realm of possibility. Trust, respect, and colleagueship
develop through collective engagement with compelling ideas and the collaborative meaningmaking process.
Constructivist conversations, according to Lambert (1995), IIserve as the medium for the
reciprocal processes that enable participants in a school community to construct meaning
toward a common purpose about teaching and learning." As a consequence of such a dynamic,
members are more likely to feel proud of their association with the organization, be committed
to its work, and become inspired to think beyond the familiar. In this way, the organization is
transformed into a generative community, one in which new ways of thinking are encouraged
and novel ideas are formed.
During the past year, well over 200 school leaders have participated in a two-day seminar
using the text Thinking Maps: Leading With a New Language (Alper & Hyerle, in press). This
seminar guides participants in the understanding and application of Thinking Maps as a 21stcentury language for surfacing and communicating the breadth and depth of people's ideas
and for building meaningful and sustainable solutions together. The story of one of these
school leaders captures the transformational potential of Thinking Maps as she reflects, in an
e-mail, on the impact that this work had on her leadership and the implications for the entire
school community and, in particular, for the students:
Well, I did it! Today was the test of using my plan to address issues around Professional
Climate in our school! No, to be honest ... I almost chickened out last night and then
again this morning. In the end, though, I stuck with the original plan and I can't begin
to tell you how powerful the experience was! My staff approached the tasks with
honesty and openness. Using Thinking Maps we were able to get all the issues out on
the table in a respectful manner. Some of the stuff was painful. I just kept going. By the
end of the morning we had developed ideas and plans, people were sharing and
working together, there were even tears! For the remainder of the day I have received
positive feedback, praise, and thanks for my work. Even one person who came in
unwilling to join our circled tables and sat isolated from the group ultimately pulled
her chair in and ate lunch with us, worked with a team to solve a scheduling issue, and
thanked me! ... We are approaching our school year in a positive, can-do abnosphere
and our students will only benefit.
This experience shows that constructivist conversations require leaders who have the tools
to enlist people's participation. "Good leaders," said Horton, "are in control of keeping a
constructive focus while keeping people engaged."
David Hawkins (1973) describes the importance of having "some third thing ... in which
they can join in outward projection" to move people beyond self-consciousness and the conventions of their thinking. This third thing can open the space for possibilities to exist and
be jointly constructed. Thinking Maps become the third corner of Hawkins's III-Thou-It"
triangle and provide us with the IIcommon engrossment for discussion." The use of Thinking Maps promotes curiosity, thinking in action, and collaboration. They give us the
confidence to embrace complexity and deepen our appreciation for each other's ideas and
experiences.
On the most fundamental level, Thinking Maps help us to have the conversations that
truly make a difference in how we think and in what we are able to do with our ideas. In the
context of the profusion of challenges we face as educators, these tools are essential to the
pursuit of our collective ideals and aspirations. "All we can do," wrote Greene (1995), "is cultivate multiple ways of seeing and multiple dialogues in a world where nothing stays the
same."
THINKING MAPS
REFERENCES
Alper, L., & Hyerle, D. (in press). Thinking Maps: Leading with a new language. Raleigh, NC: Innovative
Sciences.
Costa, A. L. (1991). The school as a 1lOme for the mind. Palatine, IL: IRI/SkyLight.
Greene, M. (1978). Landscapes of learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts, and social change. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Hawkins, D. (1973). The triangular relationship of teacher, student, and materials. In C. E. Silberman
(Ed.), The open classroom reader. New York: Vintage.
Hyerle, D. (1996). Visual tools for constructing knowledge. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Hyerle, D. (2009). Visual tools for transforming infonnation into knowledge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Lambert, L. (1995). Toward a theory of constructivist leadership: Constructing school change: Leading
the conversations. In L. Lambert, D. Walker, D. P. Zimmerman, J. E. Cooper, M. D. Lambert, M. E.
Gardner, et al. (Eds.), The constructivist leader (pp. 28-103). New York: Teachers College Press.
Lambert, L. (2007). Lasting leadership: Toward sustainable school improvement. Journal of Educational
Change, 8, 311-322.
McGuire, K. (2009). Leadership journetj. UnpUblished manuscript.
Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline. New York: Currency Doubleday.
Zimmerman, D. (1995). The linguistics of leadership. In L. Lambert, D. Walker, D. P. Zimmerman, J. E.
Cooper, M. D. Lambert, M. E. Gardner, et a1. (Eds.), The constructivist leader (pp. 104-120). New York:
Teachers College Press.
203
Bifocal
Assessnlent:
in t:he
Cognit:ive Age
Thinking Maps for Assessing Content
Learning and Cognitive Processes
David Hyerle, Ed.D., and Kimberly M. Williams, Ph.D.
KEY CONCEPTS
Bifocal assessment = assessment of content and cognition
Reflective assessment
Transfer
204
independently created cognitive patterns. Thinking Maps offer visual representations of the
"form" of thinking and thus a third way that bridges and breaks the traditional dichotomy of
the contents" and IIprocesses" of learning.
The landscape of 21st-century learning is grounded in the focus on the direct facilitation of
students' thinking and their capacities to transfer these cognitive processes into a wide variety
of contexts. Our present "cognitive age" requires that our assessment tools keep pace with our
new understanding about how the human brain learns (receives, stores, deletes, and accesses
content) and how the mind processes information (see Chapter 2, "Why and How Thinking
Maps Work"). As is often said, we teach what we assess. This means that until we tackle the complex and important area of actually assessing thinking processes as directly related to content
learning, we may always step back into the comfortable silos of teaching and testing for content facts, "academic language" use.
This chapter will proceed from the IIbig picture" framework of Bloom's (1956) taxonomy and a short history of the use of visual tools for assessment to a refined look at how
the development of students' novice to expert use of Thinking Maps is crucial for assessing
learning and improving students' thinking abilities. Ultimately, Thinking Maps offer a
language through which teachers and students determine not only what is learned but also
how it is learned, so every student becomes a creative, analytic, metacognitive, self-assessing,
lifelong learner.
II
205
206
Figure 19.1
~
The Knowledge
Dimension
--r
1. Remember
T_h_e_C_0"'Tg_n_iti_v_e_p_ro_c.....,er-S_S_D_lm_e_n_s_io_n.-2. Understand
3. Apply
4. Analyze
5. Evaluate
.--_ _-1~
r~
ti
6 Create
11
A. Factual
Knowledge
I--------+------+-------+-----+----~----~------lf
B. Conceptual
Knowledge
I--------+------+-------+-----+----~------;------tf-
C. Procedural
Knowledge
I--------+------+-------+-----+----~------;I-------tf
D. Metacognitive
Knowledge
!-
li<
r;
~
~
t:
l-
dichotomy between "content" and "process." We need to seek a theory and practice based
on a synthesis of the two.
NONLINGUISTIC REPRESENTATIONS,
VISUAL TOOLS,AND ASSESSMENT
How can teachers-and students as self-directed, self-assessing learners-look through a
bifocal lens to determine what factual and conceptual content knowledge students have
gained while simultaneously looking deeper at the thinking processes that are the drivers of
higher-order learning? As we explore below, we may seek a unifying lens that draws together
content and process through a third dimension: the "form" of knowledge represented using
Thinking Maps. In Concept-Based Curriculum and Instruction, Lynn Erickson (2002) visually
shows that many concepts are structured in the form of a hierarchical tree, with the guiding
theory at the top of the tree, supported by generalizations, concepts, topics, and facts cascading
down like branches to an isolated knowledge base. This reflects what actually happens when
students draw out a Tree Map, one of the eight Thinking Maps: They simultaneously show
their factual content knowledge, their process of either inductive or deductive categorization
and conceptualizing, while also representing the visual form of the synthesis of contents and
processes. As discussed in Chapter 2, an essential processing structure of the brain is
hierarchical. Students are building content knowledge as conceptual understandings in these
cascading general to specific categories, and are actively forming complex mental models
grounded in complex visual patterns of thinking. When students create such visual models,
teachers and students alike can scan quickly and see deeply, thus providing what all effective
teachers need-an efficient, useful assessment tool that allows us to see both the content and
the process through the same unified lens.
As noted in Chapter 1 ("Thinking Maps as a Transformational Language for Learning"),
different types of visual tools-from brainstorming webs for creative thinking, to graphic
organizers for analytical thinking, to thinking process maps for conceptual thinking-have
been used extensively across classrooms over the past 30 years and are comprehensively
documented in Visual Tools for Transforming Information Into Knowledge (Hyerle, 2009). In recent
years comprehensive research has shown that "nonlinguistic representations" (Marzano &
Pickering, 2005) are highly effective for improving instruction and learning, directly impacting
comprehension and writing across all disciplines. Cognitive scientists, brain researchers, and
learning theorists are now working off the same page: The brain networks and maps information, the unconscious mind builds schemata or linked associations about ideas and concepts,
and fundamental cognitive processes enable all learners to transform static information into
active, useful knowledge.
A rich history of "theory into practice" shows us how to use visual tools for learning,
but applications for this wide range of tools for assessment purposes are scant. Attempts
have been made to integrate simple graphic organizers into standardized tests and as scaffolds that students may use to respond to formal writing prompts. Some teachers now use
ubiquitous graphic organizer templates and those included in structured reading programs
and content area textbooks as handouts. But students don't need more handouts. They need
tools they can use on their own when the teacher isn't there. Despite many of the hundreds
of graphic organizers that may be helpful as tools for certain tasks of teaching, learning,
and assessment, many of the prestructured boxes and ovals are merely replicating
standardized worksheets that students "fill in" rather than allowing individual students to create their own maps of learning by hand and mind. Most of these graphic organizers have a glass ceiling, preventing students from independently going outside the box
207
208
beyond preordained structures. This glass ceiling is also not clear enough to allow us as
teachers to see the students' actual thinking at a higher level.
One of the most significant and well-researched mapping approaches, "concept mapping,"
was developed for integrating teaching, learning, and assessment and is detailed in a groundbreaking book, Learning How to Learn (Novak & Gowin, 1984). Teachers and students learn how to create
hierarchical maps on a whiteboard and/or blank paper. Using simple ovals and curved lines for
showing interrelated links between different levels of the maps, all students are trained in this
model until they fluently create evolving visual representations of what and how they are forming
their thinking about a concept. This is the heart of formative assessment: The teacher can walk
around the room and look down at each student's map and, in the moment, question students
based on three criteria: how they are expanding, clarifying, and assimilating new information and
concepts into their new understandings. These independently created student maps are thus used
as formative assessments as teachers check for any factual concerns and misconceptions. Early studies demonstrated how, at the end of a term, teachers and students score maps as summative assessments using the same criteria. The significance of this approach is that each student creates his or
her own maps-there is no one correct map for any given concept-and the focus is on developing
content knowledge, thinking processes, and ultimately the differentiated forms of unique concepts.
Though well researched, dynamic, and highly effective, concept mapping may have theoretical
and practical limitations preventing extensive use in classrooms. The model is based on a view that
all knowledge is hierarchical, so all factual information and cognitive and metacognitive knowledge are subsumed within a highly complex, single map form. Again, as Kim Williams asserts in
Chapter 2, the brain is much more than a hierarchical and sequential processor: Our brains are
driven by a range of patterning sbuctures, or what we could call cognitive structures.
!YIo. p
209
21 0
(Continued)
e..
-----&
f
Marcus and I became best friends when I helped him with a big problem. He is not very good at sports, but
his dad is always watching sports on TV. Not Marcus. One day our teacher told us that the soccer team tryouts
were coming up. At recess, two boys started teasing Marcus saying, l'Hey, Marcus, why don't you try out for
the team? Ha! You couldn't make it as the water boy!" Marcus was mad! After school he told the soccer coach,
Ilput my name on the list for the tryouts." I saw Marcus the next day and he looked very upset! He told me he
was thinking about what made him sign up and about what might happen at the tryouts. I asked, "Do you really
want to be on the soccer team?" After a few days he returned to the coach saying, "Please take my name off
of the list. I was going to try out for the team for other people, like my dad, and not for myself."
~hatTh~~ngMap?~~~v~/4~i_-~r_,o~w~_~~~~p~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_ _ _ _ _ _- 1
o..J.~er
people
I think Marcus is very creative. He went on a field trip to the zoo last week and just loved the lions. All he could
talk about was how lions remind him of how he roams around his own house. He told me that lions live in
dens, just as people live in houses. And then he said, "Ants live in ant hills, monkeys live in trees, bees live in
hives, and ideas live in my mind'" How do ideas live in minds?
What Thinking Map? =B~r~,dj.;.;.~;......;..{Vl....;;o.;.;,I;P~
What thinking skill?
k,V5~
d~l1s
_0ol-p,,-po~S;.;..;i-t~~
A,-__A_I1-1-_s_--JA,-__1'1_0!'<_.k_~_YS_-J~~
__---,!A~\ __ "_
b~_~_S_--,A~
__
Hills
to abstract an obvious cognitive pattern from the text, identify the thinking processes, and draw
the map starting with the common graphic primitive for each map. This assessment has been
piloted in schools and districts and has enabled teachers-across grade levels and disciplines-to
make the concrete link between reading comprehension and cognitive patterns.
DEVELOPING TRANSFER OF
THINKING FOR CONTENT LEARNING
While the fluency activity is focused on assessing basic use with each Thinking Map, the next step
in the process is the use of the maps for learning and formative assessment. This is analogous to the
way educators define the transition from JJlearning to read" to "reading to learn." Once students
have learned to use Thinking Maps, they use the tools to think and learn and thus are able to see
their own thinking patterns for self-assessment. They can also share their maps in paired discussion
and combine them with peers in cooperative groups, while also offering an effective way for
teachers to effectively assess individual and collaborative content knowledge learning and concepts.
Teachers may ask students to use the map before, during, and after a lesson or unit of stud)!.
For example, one student was asked to "think about" what she knows about the United
Nations using a Circle Map (see Figure 19.3). From a blank page, the student created the concentric circles and defined the UN in the outside circle with what she considers to be important
ideas (help nations, bring harmony, stick together, democracy, etc.).
The rectangle around the Circle Map is the "Frame of Reference," and it may be used
around any of the eight maps to guide learners in critical reflection. This is an essential part of
the Thinking Maps language. While each of the cognitive processes and respective visual
patterns supports students as they draw out descriptions, comparisons, causes and effects,
sequences, and so forth, a key dimension of thinking-as identified in the new Bloom's
taxonomy (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001)-goes beyond these cognitive processes toward a
metacognitive perspective on what and how we all gather, organize, process, and reflect on
the content we are learning. This is yet another level of Art Costa's concept of displayed
metacognition": As students look down at their maps, they see a snapshot reflection of their
thinking, and with the Frame of Reference added to each cognitive map, students are
II
2I I
212
THINKING ABOUT:
Map
Name:
The Ul1i-fed
Teacher:
NATIoNs
t
~
Date:
I---------.:::::==::::::::::=:========.----------ll~
~.
In the space below, use one or more of the thinking maps to think about what you know about the
topic you will be studying:
i,
i.
f~
!"
~
i~
t:
~'
C.hi/d
f ",,".ly
S-+Vde~-+
rv-lvre
- Helf ro.-l,ollS
'of'
--10
-ll,is
c.ovr.-+ry
.-----------------------~
r1
-l,el f
feo fl e
~.
c.j-+ic.ell
ir. Ileeds
--10 k p
'\
el ec.-lior.s
"
K
J.,el f
Ilo. -liolls
-Beillj f o.re
o-lher
/'
'~
~.
-vr.i-led
feo.c.e
re~
be-lweer. -lJ..e
/ Af"leric.o.ll
-Brillj
l-o..rf"lOlly
-s-+o.yirj
-s-lic.k-
ill C.011-10.C.-I
ro.-liolls
t,
l'
!
~:
I,
belieVer
concretely engaged in explicit metacognition. In this case, the student noted in the outside
frame that there are many different frames influencing her knowledge base: that she is a child,
the future of this country, freedom, being an American, and so forth. These are Frames of Reference that she identified as possible influences on her thinking and that directly affect her opinions and point of view about the United Nations.
This example shows the use of a single Thinking Map, which is often only a starting point
for using multiple maps that reflect the pattern of content being taught through text or teacher.
No single cognitive map can hold the richness of any concept. In Figure 19.4, after a short unit on
"matter," a science teacher asked students to show what and how they know about this topic on
one page. The student used four maps: the Brace Map for analyzing the physical parts of the
whole atom, the Bubble Map for describing the properties of gold, the Double Bubble Map for comparing hydrogen and oxygen, and the Circle Map for generating examples of matter. This evidence shows that this student has moved beyond basic fluency with each map to a new level of
being able to independently apply and transfer multiple Thinking Maps to show factual knowledge networked within conceptual displays. Importantly, all of the other students in the classroom are also able to select which Thinking Map(s) they wish to use for the content and processes embedded in the text, much like carpenters selecting multiple tools out of their toolbox
according to the task at hand. To extend this analogy, a foreman on a construction job tells the
master carpenters what they are supposed to build, but cannot be responsible for telling each
worker which tools to use for the actual building of the final product. Once students gain basic
mastery over Thinking Maps, the teacher can observe which kind of thinking the students
choose to do, the tools they use, and the conceptual products they construct. The teacher, like the
foreman, can thus see the products of work, observe student choices of tools, and assess the outcomes while looking at the formative development of thinking.
a progression from fluency to transfer. This happens over time, often over multiple years, and
always within an understanding of the full variances of cognitive development in our student
population from school age to graduation. When you walk into a school that has used the
maps year after year, you see on the walls in hallways, in the classroom, in the teachers' planning books, and in student notebooks a wide array of applications that reveal that students are
receiving an integrated approach to thinking and learning reflecting different learning styles.
In the examples above, we mostly looked at how teachers may use Thinking Maps for formative assessment on a daily basis. Once students are fluent with and can transfer the maps
within and across disciplines (which can easily happen with 8-year-old students), teachers have
an alternative way of structuring formative assessments. At the end of a unit of study, teachers
may create assessments that ask students to draw comprehensive maps of the content they have
learned. Often, content concepts are assessed by asking students to write down their answers
in the form of multiple-choice questions, short-answer questions, essays, and reports. These
traditional assessment formats are linear representations (our written code) of what are mostly
nonlinear concepts, thus lacking congruency of form. What happens if a student is a very good
thinker and a very poor writer? As noted by Stefanie Holzman (see Chapter 11, "First Language
for Thinking in a Multilingual School"), Thinking Maps become a powerful set of tools for
assessment of English language learners who do high-quality thinking while not fully fluent in
a second language. How do we find out what they know? The outcome is exasperation by all:
The teacher often knows that the student can do the conceptual work but cannot deliver on a
test that requires the student to choose from multiple-choice options, fill in a word, or write out
nonlinear concepts in the linear form of an essay. The student is frustrated as well.
value, or a grade, to the Thinking Maps created by students? Returning to Novak and Gowin's
(1984) research on concepts and concept mapping, they defined three criteria for assessing and
grading the student-generated maps: expanding, clarifying, and assimilating. As shown in
Figure 19.5, the 5-point MAPPER rubric (Hyerle, 1996) offers a holistic framework for assessing
Thinking Maps developed by students. The five dimensions across the top reflect the cognitive
21 3
214
Name:
Teacher:
Date:
In the space below, use thinking maps to show what you have learned about the topic have
been studying:
e/ec.-+rOIl5
pro.JOIl5
r.ev-+roll5
G
I
---,-
---,-
c.h(}.jr
\,
\
per-c.,1
engagement of the student with content knowledge leading toward final products and a
metacognitive, reflective stance. The three dimensions down the left side reflect the dynamic
criteria for transforming information into useful knowledge established by Novak and Gowin.
Note that the first cell at the top left of the three-by-five matrix is the minimum level: a student
using only one map with very few connections. As you view this matrix, read across the cells
and notice that as students are expanding the amount of information in the map, they must also
work to synthesize the maps they create, as well as clarifying ideas by supporting general
concepts with relevant details (see the center cell at clarify and participating). As an example of
Figure 19.5
MAPPER Rubric
Minimum
EXPAND
Very few
connections
Use of only one
map
Attending
Participating
Effective
Reflective
Thematic and
interdisciplinary
connections are
shown
Connections are
shown between
multiple maps
Central ideas are
highlighted for
application
MUltiple connections
Few supporting details
are shown
I
1
Personal, interpersonal, !
p
I'
I.
~
,-
CLARIFY
ASSIMILATE
Bits of information
are isolated,
unorganized
Irrelevant
information is
included
One perspective or
solution is shown
Rote repetition of
information is
presented
Different kinds of
information are
provided
Details are shown in
relation to general
concepts
Alternative way of
presenting information
is initiated
Points of confusion are
highlighted
Frame is used to
establish point of view
and value of map
Hypotheses are
generated
f'
i
t;
f
c.
\~
Multiple perspectives
are shown
Limitations of map(s)
are suggested
Self-assessment is
initiated
"'"
,.
.:.~
hi
!
(.
I,i
'!
DESCRIPTION
I
......"
,.
~I"
~.,
The student is
demonstrating a
simplistic level of
understanding of
content and/or limited
effort.
3
h'Y..
'.'"
.............. &,-'.
_.
4
"
". r
-,
.. ,'
,v .....
~.
.,
The student is
strategically
synthesizing information
with a focus on
organizing central ideas
and details for
meaningful applications.
"~
~
,
"
~
"'"'.-
.~
',.
"':'"
216
scoring, return to the " matter" example in Figure 19.4. Let's say that this student created only
one map, a Circle Map, showing basic factual knowledge about matter. This student would
probably receive a score of 1 as shown in the simple 5-point scale for holistic scoring. If the
student completed the four maps as shown in Figure 19.4, then the score may rise to a level 2
or 3 as he has shown a basic grasp of knowledge and is actively integrating ideas together. This
rubric is at this time a tool that may be used by teachers and students alike to reflect on and
discuss the growing sophistication of not only their content knowledge but also their own
growth as autonomous thinkers within and across disciplines.
REFERENCES
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for teaching, learning, and assessing. New
York: Addison Wesley Longman.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.) (with Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W. H., & Krathwohl, D. R.). (1956). Taxonomy
of educational objectives: Handbook: Cognitive domain. New York: David McKay.
Costa, A., & Kallick, B. (2008). Learning and leading with Habits of Mind: 16 essential characteristics for
success. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Dweck, C. S. (2005). Competence and motivation: Competence as the core ofachievement motivation. New York:
Guilford Press.
Erickson, L. H. (2002). Concept-based curriculum and instruction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Hyerle, D. (1996). Visual tools for constructing knowledge. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development.
Hyerle, D. (2009). Visual tools for transfomling information into knowledge. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Marzano, R. J., & Pickering, D. (2005). Building academic vocabulanJ: Teacher's manual. Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Leanling !lOW to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Index
Achievement gap:
learning disabilities, 40-41
urban literacy, 52,59-60
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), 71, 205
African Americans, 59, 86
Allan,S., 127, 130
Alper, L., 202
Amygdala, 21-22, 23,26
Analogies, 4 (figure), 27, 28 (figure),
67 (figure)
See also Bridge Map
Analvtic learner:
differentiated instruction, 45, 47-48, 49
Double Bubble Map, 47 (figure)
Analytic scoring, 81-82
Armbruster, B., 68
Artificial intelligence, 112
Assessment
analytic scoring, 81-82
English-language learners (ELls), 123
holistic scoring, 81
mathematics, 83-84, 86-88, 92
reading comprehension, 68, 69,70-71
writing proficiency, 72-73, 74-75,
81-82, 122
See also Bifocal assessment
Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder
(ADHD), 35, 37-38
Ayala, Monica Ibarra, 75
Basal ganglia, 23, 26
Bifocal assessment:
bifocal lens, 204-205,215
Brace Map, 213
brain research, 205, 207, 208
Bridge Map, 209, 211 (figure)
Bubble Map, 213
Circle Map, 211,213
cognitive age, 205
cognitive processes, 204-211, 213
content learning, 204-205, 206, 211-213
Double Bubble Map, 209-210 (figure), 213
Frame of Reference, 211-213
higher-order thinking skills, 205-207
key concepts, 204
learning transfer, 209, 211-213
MAPPER scoring rubric, 213-214,
215 (figure), 216
metacognition, 205-206, 208, 211-213
Multi-Flow Map, 209, 210 (figure)
nonJinguistic representations, 207
reflective assessment, 213
scientific inquiry, 102
Thinking Maps fluency, 209-211
Thinking Maps utilization, 204-216
visual learning tools, 207-208
Blalack Middle School (Texas), 126-133
Bloom, B. S., 32, 113, 121, 134, 205-207
Bluebonnet Elementary School (Fort Worth,
Texas), 75, 194
Brace Map:
bifocal assessment,213
brain research, 16 (figure), 19, 20 (figure)
cognitive processes, 4 (figure)
217
218
Displayed metacognition:
scientific inquiry, 102
Thinking Maps language, xx, xxi (figure),
xxii, 208, 211-213
Double Bubble Map:
analytic learner, 47 (figure)
bifocal assessment, 209-210 (figure), 213
brain research, 15, 16 (figure), 22-23,
24-25 (figure), 32
cognitive processes, 4 (figure)
English-language learners (ELLs),
122-123
global learner, 47 (figure)
graphic primitive, 4 (figure)
illustrated expanded map, 4 (figure)
learning disabilities, 39, 40 (figure)
learning style, 47 (figure)
Native American assignment, 6
new-information processing, 22-23,
24-25 (figure)
reading comprehension, 64 (figure), 65,
67 (figure), 68
scientific inquiry, 94 (figure), 95,
98 (figure), 101, 102, 104, 122-123
Thinking Maps Training of Trainers, 173
thinking schools, 141 (figure)
Emotional intelligence, 46
Emotions:
brain research, 23, 26,31
cooperative learning, 31
English-language learners (ELls):
Bubble Map, 122
case study, 118-119
Circle Map, 121-122, 123
developmental growth, 119, 121-122,
123, 124
differentiated instruction, 122-123
Double Bubble Map, 122-123
Flow Map, 121 (figure), 122, 123
higher-order thinking skills, 121-122
key concepts, 118
learning assessment, 123
lifelong learners, 124
mathematics, 121-122
reading comprehension, 121-122
Roosevelt Elementary School
(California), 118-125
school culture changes, 118-119, 123-124
scientific inquiry, 122-123
teacher evaluation, 124
teacher learning, no-120, 124
Thinking Maps utilization, 118-125
Tree Map, 120 (figure)
writing process, 120, 124
Equitable education, xxi (figure), xxii
Erickson, L., 207
Euclid Elementary School (Ontario,
California), 75
Evers, Carla J., 153
Executive functions, 37-38, 39,40-41
Explicit thinking, 177
Ezell, Diana, 152-153
Fardy, Bob, 95-98
Feeder patterns:
Blalack Middle School (Texas), 126-133
Circle Map, 128 (figure), 131 (figure)
communication strategies, 130-133
concerns-based adoption model
(CBAM),128
key concepts, 126
language arts, 131-132
school setting, 127-128
INDEX
Hierarchical structures, 18 (figure), 19,208
Higher-order thinking skills:
bifocal assessment, 205-207
English-language learners
(ELls), 121-122
thinking assessment, 32
Hippocampus, 23, 26
Holistic scoring, 81
Holistic thinking, 28-29
Hord, 5., 128
Huling-Austin, L., 128
Hurricane Katrina (2005), xvi, 145-146,
153, 154-155
Hyerle, D., 10, 196, 202, 207
Inquiry-based learning, 102-103, 109
Inquiry space, 104-108
Inspiration, 113
Instructional practices:
case study, 6-7, 8-9
strategy categories, 6 (figure)
Thinking Maps language, 5-9
Thinking Maps Training of
Trainers, 173-176
Integrative education, xx, xxi (figure)
Intelligence:
artificial intelligence, 112
brain research, 17-18, 27
emotional intelligence, 46
interpersonal intelligence, 46, 48
intrapersonal intelligence, 46, 48
learning disabilities, 35, 36, 37 (figure)
metacognition, 46
multiple intelligences, 46, 48
International Thinking Conference
(Singapore, 1977),158-159
Interpersonal intelligence, 46, 48
In-the-moment instruction, 173
Intrapersonal intelligence, 46, 48
Ishee, Suzanne, 153-156
Japan, 183
Jensen, E., 7
Johnson, M., 73
Johnson, Melba, 75
Jones County Junior College (Ellisville,
Mississippi), 146-148,150
Jones County School District (Mississippi),
148-152
Jukes, I., xvii
Kanter, Lynn, 115
Kellv, F. 5., xvii
Kno~vledge construction:
declarative knowledge, 91
procedural knowledge, 91, 92
scientific inquiry, 101-102
Thinking Maps language, xxi (figure),
xxiii
KWL strategy, 95
Language, 53, 54
See also Communication skills; Englishlanguage learners (ELLs); Thinking
Maps language
Language arts, 131-132
219
metacognition, 86, 92
procedural knowledge, 91, 92
proficiency assessment, 83-84, 86-88, 92
student self-worth, 92
Thinking Maps utilization, 84-92
Tree Map, 88-89 (figure), 90 (figure)
McCain, T., xvii
McGuire, Ken, 75
Memory development, 58-59
Metacognition:
bifocal assessment, 205-206, 208, 211-213
differentiated instruction, 46, 48
displayed metacognition, xx, xxi (figure),
xxii, 102, 208, 211-213
explicit, 211-213
Habits of Mind, 48
intelligence, 46
learning disabilities, 37, 38
mathematics, 86, 92
reading comprehension, 65-66, 69-70
scientific inquiry, 95, 96, 102
student-eentered fluency, 159, 165
Thinking Maps Training of Trainers, 169
thinking schools, 135, 137
See also Frame of Reference
Miller Analogies Test, 27
Mind mapping, 9, 10
Minds ofMississippi, The (2011), xvi, 156
Mississippi:
Brace Map, 150 (figures), 151 (figures)
college level implementation, 146-148
Gulfport School District, 153
Jones County Junior College, 146-148, 150
Jones County School District, 148-152
key concepts, 145
Licensed Practical Nursing (LPN)
program, 147-148
Pascagoula School District, 152
Pass Christian School District,
xvi, 149, 153-156
professional development, 149-150,
152-153
reading comprehension, 146-147
river analogy, 145, 157
Thinking Maps utilization, 145-157
Tupelo City Schools, 152-153
Motivation, 53
Mt. Airy Elementary School (Maryland),
62-66, 70-71
Multi-Flow Map:
bifocal assessment, 209, 210 (figure)
brain research, 15, 16 (figure), 21,
22 (figure)
causal reasoning, 21-22
coaching lesson plans, 180, 182 (figure)
cognitive processes, 4 (figure)
graphic primitive, 4 (figure)
illustrated expanded map, 4 (figure)
Native American assignment, 6
neurology of causal reasoning,
22 (figure)
reading comprehension, 64 (figure),
65, 67 (figure)
scientific inquiry, 94 (figure), 95, 101, 102,
109 (figure)
student-eentered fluency,
162, 163 (figure), 165, 166 (figure)
Thinking Maps Training of Trainers, 170
thinking schools, 140 (figure)
urban literacy, 54, 55 (figure)
writing process, 77 (figure), 79 (figure)
Multilingual schools. See English-language
learners (ELLs)
Multiple intelligences, 46, 48
220
Semantic maps, 66
Sensory connections, 23, 26
Sequential processing, 15, 17-19,208
Singapore, 158-166
Slam Book example, 128-129
Social studies, 130-131
Sofh...are program, 113-116, 159-160
Southern Nash Middle School (North
Carolina), 87, 88
St. Cuthbert's College (Auckland,
New Zealand), 134-143
St. George's School (New Zealand),
43-44
Stress, 198-200, 201 (figure)
INDEX
common visual language, 2 (figure), 3, 5
concept development, 9-tO
displayed metacognition, xx, xxi (figure),
xxii, 208, 211-213
equity in education, xxi (figure), xxii
graphic primitives, 1-2,3,4 (figure)
integrative education, xx, xxi (figure)
key concepts, 1
knowledge construction, xxi (figure), xxiii
learning communities, xxi (figure), xxiii
metacognition, 1
pattern thinking, 1-3, 5,8-9
research overview, xviii, xx, xxi (figure),
xxii-xxiii
Tree Map, xx, xxi (figure)
visible learning, 5-9
whole-school growth, xxi (figure), xxii, 3
Thinking Maps software, 113-116, 159-160
Thinking Maps training:
student training, 159-160
student workshops, 160-162, 163 (figure),
164 (figure)
teachers, 86, 149-150, 152-153, 162, 164
See also Student-centered fluencv
(Singapore)
Thinking Maps Training of Trainers:
Bridge Map, 175 (figure)
Circle Map, 171, 173-174
Double Bubble Map, 173
educational environment, 176
educational fragmentation, 168-169
explicit thinking, 177
Flow Map, 171, 173, 174, 175
instructional strategies, 173-176
in-the-moment instruction, 173
key concepts, 168
lesson planning, 173-176
metacognition,169
Multi-Flow Map, 170
reflective practice, 169-177
student-learning reflections, 170-172
teacher-reported reflections, 170-172
Tree Map, 171 (figure)
Thinking-process maps, 10
Thinking schools:
Bridge Map, 141 (figure)
Circle Map, 139 (figure)
common language achievement, 142-143
common language phase, 137
defined, 134
discovery phase, 136
Double Bubble Map, 141 (figure)
double processing phase, 137
evaluation period, 141-142
evolutionary process, 135-137
Frame of Reference, 137
introductory period, 137-138
key concepts, 134
metacognition, 135, 137
Multi-Flow Map, 140 (figure)
school setting, 135
J
221
Venn diagram, 98
Visible learning, 5-9
Visible Leaming (Hattie), 5, 7
Visual Tools for Constructing Knowledge
(Hyerle),196
Visual Tools for Transforming Information Into
Knowledge (Hyede), to, 207
Vocabulary instruction, 69
Wallin, Penny, 149
Washington Assessment of Student
Learning (WASL), 59
Websites, xvi
Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children
(WISC-III), 35, 36,37 (figure)
Whole-school growth, xxi (figure), xxii, 3
Write . .. for the Future (Buckner and
Johnson), 73
Write . .. from the Beginning (Buckner), 73, 75
Writing process:
analogies, 67 (figure)
Bubble Map, 58 (figure), 81
case studies, 74-75
causal reasoning, 66, 67 (figure)
Circle Map, 77
comparison essay, 67 (figure)
cross-eurriculum proficiency, 82
descriptive writing, 67 (figure)
developmental stages, 73-74
English-language learners (ELLs),
120, 124
explanatory writing, 77 (figure)
expository writing, 79 (figure), 82
Flow Map, 74, 76 (figure), 77, 78 (figure),
79 (figure)
global leamer, 78, 80
Habits of Mind, 81
key concepts, 72
Multi-Flow Map, 77 (figure), 79 (figure)
narrative writing, 67 (figure), 76 (figure),
77, 78 (figure)
organizational structures, 75-80
persuasive writing essay, 67 (figure)
point-of-view essay, 67 (figure)
precise language, 81
proficiency assessment, 72-73, 74-75,
81-82, 122
reading comprehension, 66,67 (figure)
report-writing, 76 (figure)
reverse mapping procedure, 78, 80
student-centered fluency, 161, 162,
163 (figure), 164 (figure)
technical writing, 67 (figure)
Thinking Maps utilizations, 74-82
Tree Map, 75, 76 (figure), 77, 78 (figure),
79 (figure), 120 (figure)
urban literacy, 57-58
writing as thinking, 74-75
Writing program development, 196-198
Zone of proximal development, 70
CORWIN
A SAGE Company
The Corwin logo-a raven striding across an open book-represents the union of courage
and learning. Corwin is committed to improving education for all learners by publishing
books and other professional development resources for those serving the field of
PreK-12 education. By providing practical, hands-on materials, Corwin continues to
carry out the promise of its motto: "Helping Educators Do Their Work Better."