Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.

–Plank in 2012 Texas Republican Party Platform

Early one semester, a student began his comment concerning a piece I had written with, “I don’t mean to challenge you, but…” At that point, I cut him off and responded that I hoped he would challenge me. After all, I planned to challenge him and the other students in the class throughout the semester.

The day that I learned that the Texas Republican Party had adopted a platform that came out against critical thinking and challenging fixed beliefs was the last day of a history class I had been teaching during Spring semester. It was a small class and we were a wide range of individuals who brought a variety of fixed beliefs to the classroom: a active member of the Communist party, a devout Christian, a veteran, two athletes, a Buddhist, at least one homosexual, an atheist, liberals, and conservatives, and students from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds. The students—who were responsible for organizing most of the classes—took a variety of approaches to history. I tell students that if I am doing my job, they should feel uncomfortable during portions of the class. And if they are doing their jobs, I should feel uncomfortable as well.

During the semester, not only did I challenge the students’ fixed beliefs by providing information from a variety of perspectives, but the students also challenged each other—as well as me—during their presentations. For example, when the veteran gave his presentation on the Korean War or the communist explained the Bolshevik Revolution from the point of view of the proletariat it was not possible to sit dispassionately.

Throughout the semester, I also challenged students to develop critical thinking skills. We discussed the problem of ethnocentrism and made sure that we did not impose our 21^st century beliefs on the historical period we studied. We considered the issue of world view; both our own and that of the authors of the primary and secondary sources we consulted. We challenged our evidence to insure validity. We did broad based reading. We incorporated our research into the discussions of each others’ presentations.

Unfortunately, the Texas Republican Party and those who are afraid of critical thinking or having their beliefs challenged need to consider the foundation on which their beliefs have been built. A weak foundation cannot withstand scrutiny and is sure to crumble. But a belief structure built on solid ground will be strengthened when challenged. This is why Gautama Buddha, when he learned that people in a nearby town was speaking evil of him, told his followers that they should listen to the people in the town because those people may be correct.

There seems to be an assumption by the Texas Republicans that challenging information will always undermine fixed beliefs, but this is not the case. For example, one day I presented an ethical system that did not rely on a belief in God. In doing so, I was not arguing for the validity of such a non-theistic world view any more than I was arguing for the validity of the Christocentric analysis provided by The Birth of Freedom, a film we viewed and discussed. However, my presentation as well as the film rightly challenged us to reflect on our fixed beliefs. Yet, on the last day of class, I was not aware of anyone who changed his or her core beliefs as a result of having them challenged throughout the semester. That is not the point of education that incorporates critical thinking.

Watching the Communist and the veteran swapping e-mail addresses so that they could stay in touch confirmed that spending a semester challenging fixed beliefs and teaching critical thinking skills does not undermine society. Instead, it produces individuals who can be both firm in their world views while understanding and respecting the world views of others; individuals who can cooperate with each other to solve America’s problems.

–Steven L. Berg, PhD