You are here:   Home > Transforming Education

Maturing Outcomes

by Arthur L. Costa, Ed. D. and Robert J. Garmston, Ed. D.

 

. . . new frameworks are like climbing a mountain-- the larger view encompasses, rather than rejects the earlier more restricted view. -- Albert Einstein

 

Decisions made by policy makers, teachers, and curriculum workers about what should be taught in our schools will shape the minds of our children. The character of their minds, in turn, will help shape the culture in which we all live. Schools serve children best when they broaden the meanings children know how to pursue and capture (Eisner, 1997).

In this article we present a systematic map of educational outcomes, intended for use by educational leaders. The map represents increasingly broader levels o f curricular and instructional decision making. While we do not reject a more restricted view, we value, as Eisner does, that the broader the meanings which children know how to pursue shapes their minds and ultimately will create citizens who are better able to contribute uniquely to our democratic society and a global community.

Constraints which narrow educators' focus will be described and leadership strategies intended to expand and enlarge the thinking of staff, curriculum policy makers and the community will be suggested.

Our hope is to offer future citizens a curriculum, developed around broad outcomes and focused on enduring, essential, transdisciplinary learnings which are: as appropriate for adults as they are for students, and are congruent with the vision of continuous, lifelong learning and with the mission of a learning organization.

A MAP OF INCREASINGLY BROADER, MORE ENCOMPASSING EDUCATIONAL OUTCOMES

From examining the literature on instructional objectives, teacher's cognitive processes and exploring our own experiences, we surmise that there are a t least five nested levels of outcomes,' each one broader and more encompassing than the level within and each representing greater authenticity. They are summarized below (See Figure I adapted from Costa and Liebmann, 1997 b).

Fig. 1

1. Outcomes As Activities: Inexperienced teachers may exhibit episodic, teacher-centered thinking and simply be satisfied to accomplish activities. For beginning teachers, for whom everything is new, the cognitive demands of t h e classroom may be more than the working mind is designed to accommodate. Their own survival and keeping students engaged from period, to period and day to day, often dictate their instructional choices. Their decisions include: What do I want to accomplish in this lesson? What will I do to make it happen? What will my students be doing if they are accomplishing it? Teachers might describe an outcome as, "Today in social studies I'm going to show a video tape on Mexico." Success is measured in terms of: did I make it through the lesson, were students on task, and did they pay attention?

2. Outcomes As Content: As teachers increasingly gain familiarity with classroom procedures, their students and themselves, mental energy is freed t o consider the cumulative affects of these activities--what concepts and principles are students learning?" While teachers maintain interest in day-to-day activities, they are now employed as vehicles to learn content. Teachers ask: What concepts o r understandings do I want my students to know as a result of this activity? What will I do to help them understand? How will I know they understand the concepts? ~ In the Mexican history lesson, for example, the video tape is used as a means of helping students understand the principal causes for Mexico's struggle for independence from Spain. The teacher's focus is on what concepts and understandings students will know and how that knowledge will be recognized and assessed.

3. Outcomes As Processes: As teachers continue to mature, content begins to be selected for its generative qualities (Perrone and Kallick, 1997). Content becomes a vehicle for experiencing, practicing and applying the processes needed to think creatively and critically and are basic to lifelong problem solving: observing and collecting data, forming and testing hypothesizes, drawing conclusions, a n d posing questions.

   Process outcomes are of greater valance than the outcomes of subject specific content because to be literate in the content, students must know and practice the processes by which that content came into being. (Paul and Elder, 1991) (Tishman and Perkins, 1997). At this level, teachers decide: What processes do I want m y students to practice and develop? What will I do to help them develop those processes? How will I know if they are practicing and developing them? In extending t h e Mexican history example: students plan a research project to support their theories that the heroes of the Mexican Revolution were as courageous and brave as those of the American Revolution. Students present an exhibit demonstrating their understandings and develop rubrics for judging the exhibits and working together effectively. Additionally, they reflect on and evaluate themselves both individually and collectively as to how well they met the criteria of both the project's completion and for cooperative group work.

4. Outcomes As Dispositions: With increased maturity, systems thinking emerges about outcomes. When a vision is shared, an entire staff transcends grade levels and subject areas. Panoramic outcomes are more likely to be achieved because they are reinforced, transferred and revisited throughout the school, at home and in the community.

   The transcendent qualities of systems thinking about outcomes may be found in dispositions or habits of mind: enhancing ones' capacities to direct and control persistence, managing impulsivity, creativity, metacognition, striving for precision and accuracy, listening with empathy, risk-taking and wonderment (Costa, 1991), (Tishman and Perkins, 1997). All teachers, regardless of subject area or grade level, can agree on these desirable qualities. Persistence is as valued in social sciences as it is in music, math and physical education. Creative thinking is as important to science as it is in the auto-shop and the arts.

   With a focus on dispositions, the historical isolation, disparity and episodic nature of curricular outcomes are minimized. Furthermore, the dispositions are as applicable to developing adult capacities for effective problem solvers and continuous learners as they are to students. All members of the learning organization continue to become more thoughtful. The outcomes for students and the work culture of the school become congruent and synonymous.

   Activities are still taught. Content is selected for its generative nature, processes are practiced, but they now accumulate into grander, more long range outcomes. Instructional teams decide: What dispositions do we want students to develop and employ? What will we do to assist their development? How might we work collaboratively to determine if students are developing such dispositions over time? What will we see or hear in student behaviors as evidence of their growth? How might we practice and assess our own growth toward these habits of mind through our work together?

   In the Mexican History lesson, the teacher builds metacognitive capabilities by having students consciously discuss and employ the skills of listening with understanding and empathy. Operational definitions of these dispositions are generated and observers collect evidence of the group's performance of these skills. Upon completion of the project, students evaluate their own performance using feedback from the observers. Students draw causal relationships not only among the effects of their collaborative skills and task achievement but also between empathy and the sources of revolutionary movements. Questions are asked such as: What metacognitive strategies did you employ to manage and monitor your listening skills during your work in teams? The emphasis is on internalizing these dispositions as individual and community-wide norms and all staff members plan for s u c h dispositions to be encountered and transferred across various disciplines an d learning situations.

5. Outcomes As Mind States: We consider five human capacities, or mind states, as catalysts; energy sources fueling human thinking, learning and behaviors as the next level of outcomes. They are the wellsprings nurturing all high performing individuals, groups and organizations (Costa and Garmston, 1994). They are the beacons toward increasingly authentic, congruent, and ethical behavior.

As educational outcomes, we want not only our students and our colleagues but also ourselves to amplify the resources of:

1. Efficacy: the human quest for continuous, lifelong learning, self-empowerment, mastery and control. We have the capacity to make a difference through our work, and we are willing to take the responsibility to do so.

2. Flexibility: the human capacity to perceive from multiple perspectives, and endeavor to change, adapt and expand their repertoire of response patterns. We have and can develop options to consider about our work and we are willing to acknowledge and demonstrate respect and empathy for diverse perspectives.

3. Craftsmanship: the human yearning to become clearer, more elegant, precise, congruent and integrated. We can continually strive for excellence, and are willing to work to attain our own high standards, and pursue ongoing learning.

4. Consciousness: the unique human capacity to monitor and reflect on their own thoughts and actions. We monitor what and how we are thinking about our work in the moment, and are willing to be aware of our actions and their effects on others and the environment.

5. Interdependence: the human need for reciprocity, belonging and connectedness and to become one with the larger system and community o f which they are a part. We will all benefit from our participating in, contributing to, and receiving from learning relationships; and are willing to create and change relationships to benefit our work.

Teachers might facilitate learning and drawing upon the mindstates by having students analyze functional and dysfunctional groups: what are t h e resources they can draw upon to become more flexible, efficacious, conscious, craftsmanlike and interdependent. Students are invited to display the behavior patterns of each and then inquire as to the probable mind states from which such behaviors evolve. From these [earnings students draw implications a n d generalizations about the effects of cooperation and listening in life situations and the mind states necessary to achieve highly effective group work in organizations and in society. They revisit the Mexican history lesson analyzing the mind-states of major leaders and groups.

At this level, outcomes are drawn not only from the mind states o f consciousness, flexibility, interdependence, craftsmanship and efficacy, but also from the ways these interact with the school's expressed values, culture and mission. The staff decides: In which mind states do we wish students and colleagues to become more resourceful? What will we do to capacitate their development? How will we know when the mind states are amplified? How does what we are doing today compare with our vision of what could be?

Staff and students learn to draw upon the five mind states to organize and direct their resources as they resolve problems, diagnose human frailty in themselves and others, plan for the most productive interventions in groups, and search out the motivations of their own and other's actions. They become the desirable meta-outcomes not only for staff, students and community but for each o f us as well. The desired outcomes for us and those we hold for others become as one.

WHAT KEEPS PERSPECTIVES NARROW

Educational leaders are presented with a dilemma: how to think big when so many forces influence us to think small; how to establish powerful, authentic outcomes of this magnitude when well meaning policy makers, zealous parents and community leaders encourage schools to narrow the focus of their educational outcomes. Several examples of limiting signals include:

• National goals and assessments resulting from political expediency instead of reasoned values.
  Making a national goal of and assessing students' reading and math at fourth and eighth grade levels to compare scores with other nations makes a public statement that quality education means improving scores on tests of reading and math skills (Kamii, Clark and Dominick, 1994). (Increasing numbers of research studies, however, indicate that higher test scores result from using process-oriented, conceptually based instruction).
• Mandated curriculums and traditional assessments of student's discreet. microperformances based on reductionist theory.
  Decades of Newtonian-oriented, behavioristic principles of learning focus us on student's performance of minute skills and low level knowledge rather than broader, more essential outcomes.
• The self-sealing logic of past and current systems of outcomes.
  Much like a dog chasing its tail, the level of adopted outcomes sets the intent and instrumentation of assessments. This cycle seals systems into a mindset that outcomes are significant because they are easily and immediately measured, barring consideration of working for more enduring, long-range outcomes.
• Our historical obsession with the disciplines as separate stores of knowledge to be acquired which places boundaries on content and keeps school staffs divided.
  The organization of curriculum into static compartments, may be a helpful classification system for allocating time, writing textbooks, hiring and training teachers, or organizing university departments. This archaic conception of the disciplines, however, conveys an obsolescent and myopic view of what constitutes knowledge (Costa and Liebmann, 1997a).
• School and district change efforts using an episodic, activity-based approach.
  Proudly striving to keep abreast of educational improvement practices, some schools adopt an array of innovations (block scheduling, inclusion, cross grade groupings, interdisciplinary instruction, technology, mentoring, whole language, etc., etc.). Teachers and administrators soon become overwhelmed integrating all the disparate pieces. Knowledge-vigilant organizations, however, view school change from a broader perspective as a process of revealing and emancipating human and organizational resourcefulness.
• Cognitive immaturity.
  Another, and most elusive proposition, relates to the cognitive capacity required to comprehend, value and simultaneously hold and work for educational outcomes that meet the test of authenticity described above. Such cognitive complexity may be attainable only by persons in later developmental stages of cognitive growth (Kegan, 1994).

HOW LEADERS SUPPORT MATURING OUTCOMES

How can educational communities, constrained and limited by existing mindsets, curriculum and mandated: assessments, mature in their capacity to think about more potent, multiple, simultaneous and complex outcomes? Educational leaders, maintaining their focus on the bigger picture, organization, staff and community to think in broader terms.

Developing Cognitive Complexity

The pathway from novice to expert educator is an evolving journey towards the peak of one's capacity -- a highly evolved human, capable of operating interdependently, while maintaining and remaining true to a clear sense of personal identity; growing toward greater mental complexity and away from perceiving the self as separate from others and at the center of the universe. As adults in this culture evolve through the systems by which meaning is made, they progress from the interpersonal -- in which they internalize uncritically the values and beliefs of others. They seek validation from external criteria and their personal identity is defined by relationships to people and ideas.

A beginning teacher's focus on activities may be representative of this initial stage of meaning making. In time, and with mediation, humans evolve into the institutional stage -- they have relationships but are not defined by them. Now they become self-authoring, self-standard setting and are validated by internal criteria. They develop their own psychic --institution, and, like all institutions, they expend energy trying to protect their boundaries resulting in self-sealing logic and limited flexibility (Kegan, 1994). Still other teachers--but not all adults, Kagen cautions, achieve this transition to the next stage--the post institutional (and rarely before age forty)

In this most advanced stage of human development, teachers are committed to continual inquiry and occupy a consciously interdependent relationship with their environment. They are open to questions, possibilities, conflict and reconstruction of their own assumptions, practices and ways of being. Gifted and burdened with these complexities and perspectives, teachers work to develop students in similar directions of self-assertiveness and integration (Garmston and Lipton, 1996).

Maturing teachers, who live in a rich school culture of complexity, creativity and collaboration, operate at multiple levels of authentic outcomes simultaneously as lessons are planned, as students needs are considered, as the immediate and l o n g range goals of the curriculum are assessed, and as the environment of the school a n d classroom are arranged. Educators who function at broader, more complex levels of personal development think beyond the immediate purposes of a lesson and envision the potential of fully-functioning human beings. These attributes become integrated into outcomes for themselves, students, colleagues, their organization and t h e community.

The Maturing Outcomes Map (See figure 1)

Anthropologist Gregory Bateson (1972) formulated an early notion of relating systems of learning to human growth. Dilts (1994) then applied this form of systems thinking to education. The major concepts are:

1. Any system of activity is a subsystem embedded inside of another system. This system is also embedded in an even larger system and so on.

2. Learning in one subsystem produces a type of learning relative to the system in which one is operating.

3. The effect of each level of learning is to organize and control the information on the level below it.
4. Learning something on an upper level will change things on lower levels but learning something on a lower level may or may not inform and influence levels above it.

Staffs begin to realize that authentic outcomes are subsystems embedded inside other subsystems. In such arrangements, different types and magnitudes of learning occur relative to the system in which one is operating. Each more overarching, complex and abstract level has a greater impact upon the learning of the level within it. Since each level affects the interpretation of the levels below, changing meaning on an upper level changes decisions and actions at lower levels; changing something at a lower level, however, does not necessarily, affect the upper levels.

When teachers deliberately adopt and assesses dispositions as outcomes, for example, it changes the design of their activities, determines their selection o f content and enlarges their assessments. The bigger the circle in which the outcomes live, the more influence they exert on the values of each learning.

If we wish to influence an element deeper within the system, each tiny adjustment in the environment surrounding it produces profound effects on t h e entire system. This realization allows us to search beyond the dispositions for systems to which humans naturally aspire in their journey of human development, which, if affected, would also influence one's capacity to learn (Garmston, 1997).

Using the maturing outcomes as a strategic, metacognitive map, leaders can identify the current level of thinking about outcomes in a discussion or in a product. Leaders can choose to work within the existing level of thought or to mediate a group's or individuals' thinking towards a broader, more encompassing level.

Strategies for Generating More Complex, Encompassing Thought

Examples within four leadership interventions are explored: managing, modeling, monitoring and mediating.

Managing

Leaders who have the capacity to manage resources can make deliberate decisions about the use of those resources to broaden, heighten and enhance outcomes. Leaders will be alert for opportunities to intervene in such a way as to broaden groups or individual's outcomes by:

• Clarifying core values. Leaders can articulate beliefs about how students learn in documents that drive conversations, decisions, assessments and reporting in all curriculum and instructional practices. They will activate committees to stay current with emerging literature and findings in order to contrast and align present practices with most recent findings. Agreements about student expectations can be derived from thoughtfully facilitated school-community conversations linking what is known about learning.

• Assessing at higher levels. Since what is inspected communicates what is expected, thoughtful leaders can design and report assessments at the level above where a group or individual is operating. Teachers naturally assess achievement at the same level as their outcomes. Content level assessment, for example, measures skills and knowledge achievement. Processes, dispositions and mindstates, however, require multiple assessments: portfolios, interviews, performances and direct observation. To monitor and assess student's development of dispositions requires data to be accumulated systematically, over time and from multiple perspectives (Marzano, Pickering and McTighe, 1993). Development of mind-state resourcefulness requires assessments of characterization (Krathwohl, Bloom and Masia, 1964) and self-evaluation under conditions of duress and conflict (Bloom, et al, 1956).

• Directly instructing. Leaders can teach about nested levels of increasingly complex outcomes through staff development programs, as a prelude to the work of any curriculum group, as a framing device in deliberations about instruction and assessment practices, as a communication to parents about school goals, and in orientations for new faculty (Saphir and Gower, 1988).

• Deliberately structuring. The confluence of multiple perspectives enriches the thought within groups. Leaders can, therefore, design group assignments and composition by timing and defining tasks so that stakeholders from diverse levels of maturity, beliefs and styles must collaborate. Teachers from different disciplines might be paired in peer coaching and other collaborative arrangements. A diffusion of knowledge and assumptions about learning occurs when teachers from different disciplines plan together, observe in each other's classroom, share responsibilities for student [earnings or are assigned the same students for multi-year periods.

  School leaders can structure environments to maximize certain forms o f interactions. Multiple classrooms intentionally designed around a common teacher workroom enhances interdependence. A single lab, shared by all science teachers and students, increases connection-making among all the sciences. Schools can be designed so as to build flexibility into the very walls and passages of the edifice making it necessary for the staff, students and community to function in interdependent ways (Saban, 1997).

  Modeling

  Leaders must walk the talk. Probably the most powerful intervention is for leaders to behave in a manner consistent with their beliefs and values. Staff, students and community members are constantly alert to cues which signal congruence between the stated beliefs and values and the overt behavior of the leader.

  Leaders model by publicly stating their outcomes in the broadest terms and explain their actions in relation to the five mind states. They specify the behaviors on which they are working, make public the rationale for choosing them, and ask others to monitor and provide feedback about their skills, effectiveness and congruence with stated values (Hayes, 1995). Such leadership is invested in people at all levels of the organization as they perform their multiple functions o f planning, coordinating, communicating, influencing, coaching, consulting a n d assessing (Garmston and Wellman, 1995).

  Monitoring

  Leaders constantly monitor themselves, their interactions with others, t h e allocation of available resources and the environment for indicators of the level of outcomes being described, cited, reinforced or valued.

  • Self-monitoring implies asking one's self, what are my intentions and motives at this moment? It means keeping in mind the map of the interaction (See Figure l). Self-monitoring implies being aware of one's own words, values and actions.

  • Monitoring metaphors means listening to other's words and implicit thoughts about lesson design or staff development plans as indicators of the level at which they are currently operating. Developing banks of synonyms a n d related words and phrases for each level of the map helps groups remain alert for indicators of the levels of thinking (Zimmerman, 1997). For example:

  Level of Thought	About:	Words and Metaphors as Indicators
  Activities	Objectives: Assessments:	To: "Pay attention, participate, complete, on task, take notes...." Teacher observation, counting, recording
  Content	Objectives: Assessments:	To: "Know about, understand, comprehend grasp, remember...." Quizzes, tests of knowledge
  Processes	Objectives: Assessments:	To: "Infer, conclude, criticize, to explain, to interpret, hypothesize, to reason, to analyze, to support with evidence " Performances, applications, exhibitions
  Dispositions/ Habits of Mind	Objectives: Assessments:	To: "Develop perseverance, to manage impulsivity, to be reflective, to become more intellectually strategic..." Demonstrations over time, anecdotals, rubrics, portfolios, checklists, self-assessments, self descriptions the using meta-cognitive maps.
  Mindstates	Objectives: Assessments:	To: "Draw upon resources; to employ capabilities and maps, to demonstrate beliefs and values; to act in accordance with..." Characterization self-assessment of own performance under duress, self evaluation using an internal set of criteria, seeking feedback from others.

  • Monitoring the allocation of resources means being alert to where money and time is being invested By paying attention to the level of outcomes and intentions of published materials, computer programs, curriculum guides, descriptions of staff development opportunities, etc., leaders can select those which will raise and broaden the level of thinking by staff and community.
  Mediating

  To mediate is to interpose oneself between a set of learners and the environment and, through nonjudgmental questioning, paraphrasing and clarifying, draw attention to data, the consideration of which, engages an d transforms thinking and meaning (Feuerstein, Feuerstein and Schur, 1997). From such transformed meaning comes a reexamination of practices and their congruence with values.

  This arrangement of systems and subsystems of maturing outcomes provides a map around which leaders can strategically design linguistic interventions intended to mediate others' progressively more psychologically encompassing and impactful levels of abstraction than the level currently being addressed.

  Questions Intended to Raise Consciousness About Levels of Outcomes

  When you hear the level of the lesson to be:	And you want to raise it to:	Leaders mediate by asking such questions as:
  Activity	Content	How will students benefit from engaging in this activity? What concepts (big ideas) (principles) do you want students to learn as a result of these activities?
  Content	Processes	How will students demonstrate their understanding of these concepts? How will students apply these concepts in future lessons? In what cognitive processes will students engage during these learnings?
  Processes	Dispositions	What habits do you want students to form as a result of engaging in these processes? What enduring learnings will students gain from engaging in these processes?
  Dispositions	Mindstates	What do you want students to carry forth to future life situations? How will students feel more resourceful (empowered) as a result of this learning?
  Mindstates	Ideals	What personal values are students forming as a result of these learnings? How will this help your students become better human beings?

  BEYOND CURRENT THINKING

  In our journey we've described five transcendent levels of maturing outcomes from activity to content and processes through dispositions and states of mind. We hold each level not only as outcomes in and of themselves but as vehicles and enablers of more transcendent virtues as well. As the instructional focus is enlarged, the outcomes for students and the work culture of the school become congruent and synonymous; the staff employs these same mind states as decisions are made, meetings conducted, parent conferences held, and instruction planned. Staff members monitor their own mindstates as they gather feedback about their achievements, their effects on others and set continually higher standards for themselves.

  We believe there are additional levels beyond. Biographies of remarkable and virtuous people from the sciences, the arts, politics and social services, whose personal development seemed to move beyond the mind states, further enlarges our vision. They display a personal set of virtues -- a spiritual quality. We call this sixth level "ideals" -- encompassing not only the mastery of processes, dispositions an d mind states, but transcending these in pursuit of universal goals. The real challenge to the maturing organization, is to be faithful not only to the external goals but to measure up to the interior goals. To reach for what is beautiful, what is good, what is true; what unites and does not divide. We believe the ideals for which humans at the highest stages of development strive, is the integration of external outcomes and those outcomes within ourselves. Trying to make ourselves better, purer, more beautiful and more loving persons; concerned with uniting and not dividing (Gifts from the Fire, 1991).

  ---

  References

  Bateson, G. (1972) Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York, NY. Chandler.

  Bloom, B. (Ed), Englehart, M., Furst, E., Hill, W. and Krathwohl, D. (1956) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay, Co. Inc.

  Costa, A. (1991). "The Search for Intelligent Life." in Costa, A. (Ed.) The School as a Home for the Mind. Palatine, III: Skylight.

  Costa, A. and Garmston, R. (1994). Cognitive Coaching: A Foundation for Renaissance Schools. Norwood, MA: Christopher Gordon Pubs.

  Costa A. and Liebmann, R. (1997 a. ) "Difficulties with the Disciplines". in Costa, A. and Liebmann, R. (Eds.) Envisioning Process as Content: Towards Renaissance Curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

  Costa, A and Liebmann, R. (1997 b.) "Towards Renaissance Curriculum: An Idea Whose Time Has Come" in Costa, A and Liebmann, R. (Eds.) Envisioning Process as Content: Towards Renaissance Curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

  Dilts, R. (1994) Effective Presentation Skills. Meta Publications, Capitola CA. pp. 3642.

  Eisner, E. (1997) "Cognition and Representation: A Way to Pursue the American Dream?" Phi Delta Kappan Vol. 78, No. 5. January pp. 348-353

  Feuerstein, R., Feuerstein, R., and Schur, Y. (1997) "Process As Content In Education Particularly For Retarded Performers". in Costa, A. and Liebmann, R. (Eds.) Supporting the Spirit of Learning: When Process is Content. Thousand Oaks, CA. Corwin Press.

  Garmston, R. (1997-Spring) "Nested Levels of Learning". Journal of Staff Development Vol. 18, No. 2.

  Garmston, R and Lipton, L .with Kaiser, K. (1996 In Press). "The Psychology of Supervision: From Behaviorism to Constructivism". in Handbook of Research on School Supervision. New York: Macmillan.

  Garmston, R. and Wellman, B. (1995-April). "Adaptive Schools in a Quantum Universe". Educational Leadership, Vol. 52, No. 7, pp. 6-12.

  "Gifts from the Fire: The Ceramic Art of Brother Thomas". (1991). Video production on the life of Brother Thomas. Boston, MA: Pucker Gallery.

  Hayes, C. (1995-Spring). "Public Coaching As a Tool for Organization Development. " Journal of Staff Development. National Staff Development Council. Vol. 16, No. 2 pp. 4449.

  Kamii, C., Clark, F. and Dominick, A. (1994) "The Six National Goals: A Road to Disappointment". Phi Delta Kappan. May, 1994 pp. 672-677

  Kegan, R. (1994). In Over Our Heads: The Mental Demands Of Modern Life. Cambridge, MA. Harvard University Press.

  Krathwohl, D. Bloom, B., and Masia, B. (1964) Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York: David McKay Co.

  Marzano, R, Pickering, D. and McTighe, J.( 1993) Assessing Student Outcomes: Performance Assessment Using the Dimensions of Learning Model. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

  Paul, R. and Elder, L. "All content has a logic: that logic is given by a disciplined mode of thinking". Part 1. Teaching Thinking and Problem Solving. Newsletter of the Research for Better Schools. Philadelphia, PA. Vol. 16, Issue 5, 1994

  Perrone, V. and Kallick B. (1997) "Generative Topics For Process Curriculum". in Costa, A. and Liebmann, R. (Eds.) Supporting the Spirit of Learning: When Process is Content. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

  Saban, J. (1997). "Process Pervades the Organization: Capturing the Spirit", in Costa, A. and Liebmann, R. (Eds.) The Process Centered School: Sustaining a Renaissance Community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

  Saphir, J. & Gower, R. (1988). The Skillful Teacher. Research for Better Teaching. Carlisle, MA. p 364.

  Tishman, S. and Perkins, D. (1997) "The Language of Thinking". Phi Delta Kappan .Vol. 78. No 5. January pp. 368-374.

  Zimmerman, D. (1977) "Constructing the Metaphors for Process". in Costa, A. and Liebmann, R. (Eds.) The Process Centered School: Sustaining a Renaissance Community. Thousand Oaks, CA. Corwin Press.

  ---

  About the Authors

  Arthur L. Costa, Ed. D. and Robert J. Garmston, Ed. D. are Professors Emeritii at California State University, Sacramento and Co-Directors Institute for Intelligent Behavior Berkeley, California

  ---

  Copyright © January 1998 New Horizons for Learning, all rights reserved.
  http://www.newhorizons.org
  E-mail: info@newhorizons.org

  For permission to redistribute, please go to:
  New Horizons for Learning Copyright and Permission Information