Reading Blog #2

I believe that "thinking critically" is when you search not only for the surface information but when you dig deeper and use the surface text to interpret what the writer is saying. When you think critically you also have to read the text and annotate it to get an interpretation. You have to go through multiple processes and read the text more than once. Once you do that you can see the whole picture and really understand the meaning the writer was trying to get across.

When I think of critical thinking in a traditional "banking" class I think of the students reading the text and then the teacher telling the students what the writer was trying to say. The student doesn't really come up with any opinions on the text on his or her own. When this happens there is only one interpretation getting across and may not be how or what every student thinks of the text. When this happens the level of critical thinking is shallow because the student is writing on someone elses opinion and can't add much depth to their response because they didn't come up with it on their own in the first place.

In a non-traditional classroom is think it is just the opposite. The students come up with their own ideas and opinions and elaborate on them. They use certain processes from any previous background information that they knew, to reading and analyzing the text, and then finally using their own perspective to understand the writer's standpoint. No one answer is the same, or right or wrong.

I think that teachers might be a little resistant to a more non-traditional classroom its harder to grade students on their opinions as opposed to one right answer or analysis. I think the student would be more resistant because it requires you to think a lot more in a non-traditional class. And because critical thinking involves different processes it also take more time and effort for the student to get their answer.