CRTW 201Hiner

In-Class Discussion: Critical Thinking in your Discipline

Attempt to divide yourselves into groups based on discipline or major (business, sciences, art and photography, education, specific humanities, sports science/nutrition, etc.). Then, within your groups, attempt to answer the following questions for class participation credit:

  1. For your discipline, what would it mean to “think the way a person in your field would think”? In other words, what would it mean to have a biologist’s, business major’s, artist’s, English major’s, etc. perspective on events, texts, and on human behavior?
  2. Following the examples provided for you on pages 99 – 103 of Nosich, attempt to determine the “logic” of your major field. In order to determine the logic of your field, apply the elements of reasoning to your field. What is the information used to generate conclusions in your field? What are some of the conclusions drawn by people in your field? What are the assumptions of professionals in your discipline? What is their point of view? What is the purpose of inquiry in your major? What are the central questions at issue? What are some implications and consequences of the conclusions or findings in your major? What effect do these findings have on your life, on the world we live in?
  3. Choose one or two paragraphs from representative textbooks in your field. In these paragraphs, try to identify:
  4. A process of reasoning in which information leads to conclusions.
  5. Specific conclusions or inferences of the author(s).
  6. Assumptions of the text or the authors.
  7. Specific information that is used in the field (types of tests, observations, experiments).
  8. Based on your knowledge of your field and on representative textbooks from your field, can you identify:
  9. The Fundamental and Powerful Concepts in your major – what are some key concepts that help explain and interpret data in your field? What are some fundamental concepts that help you understand how everything else works together or help you to work out a body of questions, problems, information, and situations?
  10. The Point of View of the discipline -- what distinguishes the central way of looking at the world in your discipline or major? What makes your way of looking at things unique and valuable? What things might the point of view of your major tend to overlook or dismiss?
  11. Some of the major Impediments you might face in your studies in your field? See pages 119 – 124. Are you likely to dismiss some findings and conclusions as “just school stuff” that has no relevance to your life? Do some conclusions in your major go against the background stories and beliefs you hold about how the world really works?
  12. At this point in your studies in your major, have you begun to ask more questions about the field, about your readings, about the relevance of the material to your own life, or about the implications of the material? Think of one or two examples where you have found yourself asking more questions. Are you more confused or puzzled now than when you first began taking courses in your major? Why or why not? Do you agree with Nosich that one sign of whether or not you are a critical thinker in your field is “notic[ing] a lot more places where things are not as clear to you as they seemed before” (92)? Why or why not?
  13. Nosich identifies ways in which we may not follow the reasoning in our field, or may not believe the results of our reasoning (94 – 95). For your specific discipline, what are some conclusions that often do not result in action or fundamental belief? What are some conclusions that have or have not resulted in a change in the way you behave, think about the subject, or interpret findings?
  14. For your discipline, what would it mean to “think the way a person in your field would think”? In other words, what would it mean to have a biologist’s, business major’s, artist’s, English major’s, etc. perspective on events, texts, and on human behavior?
  15. Following the examples provided for you on pages 99 – 103 of Nosich, attempt to determine the “logic” of your major field. In order to determine the logic of your field, apply the elements of reasoning to your field. What is the information used to generate conclusions in your field? What are some of the conclusions drawn by people in your field? What are the assumptions of professionals in your discipline? What is their point of view? What is the purpose of inquiry in your major? What are the central questions at issue? What are some implications and consequences of the conclusions or findings in your major? What effect do these findings have on your life, on the world we live in?

Richard Paul and Linda Elder, in their text Critical Thinking: Learn the Tools the Best Thinkers Use, assert, “Though all college students take college classes, few master the logic of any academic discipline that they study” (108). Paul and Elder offer the following facts about college courses:

  1. Every field of study is subject to continual and (in most cases) enormous expansion.
  2. Textbooks, which are the basis for most college classes, are getting larger and larger, and lectures are, in turn, tending to “cover” more and more content.
  3. Most students do not know how to internalize large bodies of content independently.
  4. Most students use periodic cramming to pass their exams.
  5. Most students read, write, and listen at a superficial level.
  6. Most students lack intellectual standards by which to assess their own thinking and learning.
  7. Many colleges assess faculty through what amounts to popularity contests, with student evaluations of faculty heavily influenced by the grade they expect to get. (108 – 109)

Paul and Elder follow this disconcerting list of facts with a list of possible implications:

  1. Most college exams are constructed so that the majority of students in class can cram well enough to pass them.
  2. Grade inflation – the practice of giving higher and higher grades for the same level of work – is rampant.
  3. Most students probably could not pass the final exam for a course six months after the course ends.
  4. Most students do not learn to think in the broader context of the course (for example, they take history but do not learn to think historically; they take science but do not learn to think scientifically).
  5. Instructors certify students as understanding subjects that they do not in fact understand.
  6. Students think they are learning, but regularly forget most of what they cram into their heads (self-deception). (108 – 109)

A critical thinking course like this one, Paul and Elder imply, is designed to move students away from passive learning and to allow them to fully integrate the information they learn in their college courses into an overall understanding of the logic of their discipline (109).

In your small groups, discuss these assertions about college instruction and its possible implications. Do you agree or disagree with Paul and Elder’s assessment? Where have you seen evidence of these types of superficial learning in your courses? Where have you seen efforts to move you toward critical thinking or a full understanding of the logic of your disciplines?