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
1