In an era when artificial intelligence is sparking critical conversations about the values of literacy learning, skills like higher-order thinking, executive functioning, inquiry, critical thinking, and analysis are front and center.
Recent research illuminates that emerging AI tools can perhaps strengthen or augment students’ acquisition of these skills in the classroom—Write the World has compiled a library of resources and activities that invite teachers to leverage AI and to do so in productive, responsible ways.
But first, it’s critical to gain clarity on what, exactly, these terms entail. What do we mean when we say “critical thinking”? What do we mean by “cognitive rigor”?
Cognitive Rigor Frameworks in the Classroom
Most educators are well-acquainted with Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy, a framework for supporting students’ ascension from factual recall toward more complex and agentic thinking throughout the arc of learning. Another framework—Webb’s Depth of Knowledge Framework—builds off of this approach, introducing considerations of not only the type of thinking we ask students to engage in but the level of challenge involved in that thinking. Author Paul Main describes the difference:
“Bloom's Taxonomy and Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) are two well-known learning frameworks used by educators to promote deeper student learning. While they share some similarities, there are also some important conceptual differences that set them apart.
One of the key differences between Bloom's Taxonomy and Webb's DOK is their conceptual approach. Bloom's Taxonomy focuses on different types of cognitive tasks, from basic recall to more complex and abstract thinking, while Webb's DOK focuses on the level of rigor required to complete a particular task or assignment. This means that Bloom's Taxonomy is more focused on the type of thinking required, while Webb's DOK is more focused on the level of cognitive complexity required to complete a task” (2023).
The framework emphasizes four levels of cognitive rigor; below, we share examples of ways to encourage students’ upward movement, toward deeper thinking and learning, in the writing classroom. We also offer ways to incorporate AI to supplement, not replace, student learning.
DOK-1: Recall
Level 1 of Webb’s framework asks students to practice their factual retrieval skills, working with basic information. This level builds a foundation for more cognitively complex tasks.
In the writing classroom, you might engage students at this level by inviting them to:
- make lists of key literary devices or genre elements related to your current unit;
- draw a map or diagram portraying historical facts relevant to you their writing (or a course text);
- match characters’ names with their bios on a worksheet;
- or recite definitions of vocabulary words to a partner.
Optional AI extension: You might invite students to prompt an AI tool to create an adaptive quiz on the factual information covered at DOK-1. An adaptive quiz adjusts the challenge of the questions shared according to students’ correct/incorrect answers. Students (or teachers) can pre-populated the AI with the terms, facts, or definitions to cover.
DOK-2: Skill/Concept
Level 2 asks students to apply their informational understanding to new concepts or skills—whereas the content covered in DOK-1 asks “who, what, when, where,” DOK-2 introduces the conceptual questions: “Why?” “How?”
At this level, you can invite students to
- identify patterns in or across their written works (or their course texts);
- infer why an antagonist demonstrates certain behaviors in a narrative (whether their own or a course text);
- make observations about their own writing processes and those of professional authors, highlighting similarities and differences;
- modify a previous draft of their writing based on new factual knowledge of literary devices.
Optional AI extension: Ask students to identify patterns in or across written works, then feed those works to an AI tool like ChatGPT, prompting the tool to do the same. Next, ask students to compare and contrast their responses with the AI’s. What similarities and differences do they notice? Do they agree or disagree with the AI output, and why? What do they notice and wonder about its answers? What additional information might they need in order to find out more?
DOK-3: Strategic Thinking
The third level of the framework moves students deeper, into strategizing and problem-solving. It encourages transfer of knowledge to new contexts.
In the writing classroom, ask students to
- compare how their writing differs across subject areas in school,
- differentiating literary devices that change or stay the same across disciplinary writings,
- hypothesize why they are drawn toward certain genres, authors, or literary styles, based on their identities, life experiences, and/or hopes for the future: Why do they write in the unique voice that they do? How did that voice develop?
- develop a logical argument for why a course text is or is not an example of great writing, based on their work at DOK-1 and DOK-2,
- assess how a peer’s work could become even stronger through a peer review.
Optional AI extension: Position an AI tool to act as an interviewer probing a writer’s hypothesis about their own writing development, in the style of a podcast host. Then, use an AI podcast generator to bring that podcast to life, giving students some real-world author treatment! Or, ask an AI tool to simulate a counterargument for students’ assertions about the validity of a course text as an exemplar of great writing.
DOK-4: Extended Thinking
The fourth and final level of the framework brings students into deep cognitive work by positioning them to not only intake but become creators of new knowledge.
At this level, invite students to apply their learnings from previous levels—in connection with course content and learning objectives—
- to create an original short story, book proposal, or museum exhibit based on their writings.
- Position them to analyze multiple course texts in a comparative analytical essay;
- critique a new novel by writing a book review or creating a podcast;
- apply concepts from ELA instruction to a science writing assignment, then write a reflective memo comparing and contrasting the written works and their processes as the author.
These tasks lend nicely to summative assessments—and are made all the more meaningful if you can secure real-world audiences with whom students can share them.
Optional AI extension: Invite students to use AI tools to support multimedia work—generating charts and graphs, cover images, podcast audio, or a character simulation to complement their final writings. Or, ask a writer to reflex ton how they have grown and changed across a unit or semester; then, have them feed their drafts into the AI tool, asking it to compare and highlight for the writer how they have grown and changed. Do the AI responses reflect the writer’s own metacognition? How so? Why or why not?
For additional ideas, please refer to the action verb and question stem diagrams that further expand upon Webb’s Theory. Use any of these ideas in your classroom or have more to add? Email us at educators@writetheworld.org to share!
