Critical Thinking Comments from the Participants

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking – comments from the participants

Applying principles to solve problems

Specific to general concepts – synthesis

Analysis

Weigh evidence and support for argument

Integrating

Evaluation of implication in context (identify conceptual framework)

Recognition of assumptions

Self-awareness of bias

Compare to …build on what you know

Martha added the word constructivism

Problem statement

Asking the right question

What are the other possibilities?

Understanding alternative explanations

Interpreting results of experiment (evaluation)

Functioning in society

Reasoned judgment, drawing a conclusion

No warm fuzzies

Recognition there is no objective reality

Assumption, evidence, reason…Chenyang’s Cornerstones

Be aware of these (assumption, evidence, etc.) to determine relevance

“Does a critical thinker have to be a scientist?” Ian Q.

“When you make a reasoned judgment, you are making decisions with in a context, with emotions, etc.”

The role of emotion seemed to be a big issue with some people.

Small groups came up with a list of 5-7 characteristics

using reason to evaluate evidence given the assumptions (including personal, cultural, social bias)
drawing conclusions using 1.
making arguments not assertions
knowing that not everything happens for a reason (shit happens)
there are no: alien abductions, angels ( as physical beings), ESP,

vampires, ghosts, no bad bacteria

Formulating the right question: Can it be answered? Can a method be designed?

Weigh/collect evidence: Does it support the argument? Relevance?

Reach or draw a conclusion: Interpreting results. Contextual considerations.

Identify/recognize assumptions

Formulate assumptions

Identify/recognize evidence

Generate evidence

Evaluate evidence

Apply/recognize reason

Assess sufficiency of reasoning

Process:

Identify a question
Identify assumptions (yours & others)
Collect or examine evidence in light of assumptions
Make reasoned conclusion

Mixed Group

Recognizing assumptions

Understanding questions

Identifying relevance of evidence

Applying correct reasoning

Understanding the implications of conclusion

Recognizing alternative interpretations

Bruce P collected these small group discussions. Representatives shared these with the rest of the group. Martha wrote down points of agreement.

Assumptions identify

Questions formulate hypothesis

Evidence evaluates sufficiency of reasoning

Make arguments

Reason: implications/applicability/alternatives

We discussed Martha’s list.

We discussed the scientific method vs. our list.

Usefulness of being a critical thinker

Way to understand phenomenon that works well

Less of a burden on others

Critical thinker out competes others

Democracy more effective- critical thinking necessary but not sufficient condition

More responsible citizen

Better class outcome and process

Leads to deliberate thought

Successful career/greater employability

“The unexamined life is not worth living” Socrates

counterpoint (sort of) to employability issue

We talked for a while about how critical thinking facilitating techniques mean the teacher giving up power.

Groups worked together to answer, “What can we do in our classroom to help students develop critical thinking skills?”

Provide opportunity to practice ----maybe break it down (chunking)

Time for feedback

Time for reflection

Provide model

Posing questions, respecting zone of proximal development

Start simple and continue to more challenging

Mutually accountable small groups

Condition students/ set parameters

Facilitate teaching

Give concept of critical thinking ---importance of

Be subversive

Modeling critical thinking

Use collaborative learning models such as jigsaw

Think pair-share, role-play, peer led team learning

Instructor must give up control (some)

Mix lecture (20 min max) with student active/interaction

A good book for this last one: Active Learning in the Classroom: 101 Strategies to teach any subject Silberman, M (1996) (in CWU library)

Bruce did a magnificent overview of The Delphi Report

Participants took their syllabus and evaluations (on a 0-5 scale) how well they incorporated the six critical thinking skills from The Delphi Report.

Martha wrote the six Delphi Skills next to our list:

Assumptions identify

Questions formulate hypothesis

Evidence evaluates sufficiency of reasoning

Make arguments

Reason: implications/applicability/alternatives

Interpretations

Analysis

Evaluation

Inference

Explanation

Self-regulation

Martha asked “How does the Delphi list match up with our list?”

Delphi list seems to be a subset of our list

We didn’t have interpretation on our list

We didn’t have self-regulation on our list

Martha went to her presentation:

Are we asking the right questions?

Participants categorized exam questions

One concern: good critical thinking but easily gradable exam items

Some people think you can’t test critical thinking on a multiple choice test

Some think you can

Ian did his presentation