The purpose of this article is to consider all of the issues surrounding the idea of teaching thinking in schools. Nickerson begins by considering all of the possible implications surrounding the teaching of thinking, ie--What is thinking?, Is there a need to teach thinking? Who should do the teaching?, or Does society want thinkers?,etc. He then goes on to discuss how thinking is multifaceted and how necessary it is to consider exactly what types of thinking are being taught and assessed and to what level of effectiveness. He stresses the need not to oversimplify the idea of "thinking" and instead to challenge and improve the ideas and concepts that are already embedded in many school curriculums. Following from this discussion is the idea of the value of thinking and exactly why it is or is not valid as something to be taught.

After a lengthy discussion considering all sides of the issue concerning whether or not to teach thinking he reviews seven approaches or programs that are necessary in teaching thinking:

1. Basic operations or processes
2. Domain-specific knowledge and know-how
3. Knowledge of normative principles of reasoning
4. Knowledge of informal principles and tools of thought
5. Metacognitive Knowledge
6. Attitudes, dispositions, values, styles
7. Beliefs

Nickerson briefly looks at each area with a full explanation of what it is and gives available examples of current programs working to expand on that aspect of thinking. He concludes by mentioning issues that he is not able to consider in this paper but need attention when considering the teaching of thinking. The issues being transfer, teacher training, assessment, and better understanding of thinking.

The article seems more like an editorial on whether or not to teach thinking in schools than a scholarly article convincing you to do so. The article is mostly composed of nebulous thoughts and generalized questions and offers very few answers or concrete thoughts. The issue is important to consider and needs to be thought of, but it could have been written in a more convincing way if there had been less rhetoric and more empirical examples in order to illustrate points and answer questions.