Hello

Dear Christopher as I saw in my opinion science and social has process of problem solving and innoviative graduates. The question was about thinking at academic institutions and what's the best approach of instilling critical thinking on students? I respect your points of view, I am not medicine doctor sorry

Ingrid

Knowledge societies generally face challenges using information and communication technologies(ICT)to promotecollaborative knowledge building and developing skills forthe 21stcentury.Some authors are prioritizing social intelligence, the role of positive feelings and emotions in mental development of learning activity. Therefore, we understand socialization as a process of personal development given training opportunityat the group.

Present educational model embraces increasingly (ICT) as an essentialas essential elements in shaping future professionals share experiences on instructional designmodel for collaborative virtual environments,based on situated learning approaches, as proposed training.Emerging technological applications or tools, social software(Wikis, Blogs, chat rooms, instant messaging, etc.). Enabled computer group interaction and for thisreasonthey can be considered as a techno-social phenomenon, characteristic of knowledge society.

(PDF) La instrucción diferenciada y la centrada en el alumno en ambientes virtuales. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269871852_La_instruccion_diferenciada_y_la_centrada_en_el_alumno_en_ambientes_virtuales [accessed Jan 04 2019].

Technological approach in teaching noted

I agree with Ingrid, but I would like to point out that she has addressed the question in general but not to the particular case of Engineering and I would include Science in general. Classic Critical Thinking is all about determining what are the facts and coming to a logical conclusion. We, the students, researchers and professors are overloaded with information that is diluting recent hard won knowledge. Yet, this is and has been one of the most difficult problems of science, and it is accelerated today. There are so many antiquated or simply bogus theories on the internet, books and scientific journals accessible to everyone. Engineers need to be able to determine what is true to plan, research, accomplish goals. This is simply not possible if theories are incorrect.

Let me try to explain. In science, medicine and technology we have discovered so many new things that often refute many cherished ideas. How can we filter out the obsolete, demoded, or invalid by highlighting their contradictions or exploring the implications?

Concretely, I would like to explain with two case studies from Medicine & Healthcare Engineering.

1. Take Anorexia, in the Ecological Immunology community it has been known for decades that the gram negative bacteria endotoxin Lipopolysaccharide (lps) causes anorexia in animals and can regulate the entire ecosystem. Today in medical research, we are becoming aware that gram negative bacteria in Human Microbiota are implicated in Anorexia in humans. Article Food matters: how the microbiome and gut–brain interaction m...

Yet, at least in Europe, and perhaps worldwide, patients diagnosed with Anorexia are still routinely treated by psychologists and psychiatrists. Students are no more aware of this development than medical practitioners.

2. The Free Radical Theory of Aging is false. The use of antioxidants increases not diminishes your cancer risks as shown in case after case see.

Article The Free Radical Theory of Aging Is Dead. Long Live the Damage Theory!

(word of warning, I doubt that any other proposed theory of aging is worthwhile either)

or read the Chapter on mega-vitamins in Pandora's Lab by Paul A. Offit

(or all the book)

So what? antioxidants are used to explain all sorts of things, like uric acid's preventive effects with Alzheimer's and Parkinson's diseases. However, since there are no preventive effects from antioxidants so no one is investigating how uric acid actually reduces the risk of getting these two diseases. (I suspect there is a startup or two there.) So, basically, a great deal of modern medical theory and research is based on a defunk concept at present. Don't doubt, there are countless other examples of known and yet to be debunked science theories and teaching our students how, why, and where to doubt is essential. Of even better what if... is always critical;-)

Hello

Dear Christopher as I saw in my opinion science and social has process of problem solving and innoviative graduates. The question was about thinking at academic institutions and what's the best approach of instilling critical thinking on students? I respect your points of view, I am not medicine doctor sorry

Ingrid

Thanks Christopher and Ingrid. According to Chris, students should be opportunity to test theories other bombarding them with a lot of theories.

Bruce spot on! ( Sorry sometimes I get obtuse) Bombarding them, yes, but even worse accepting at face value what was true before the textbook was published.

What we have is the opportunity for the first time, to see all of science as a whole! Imagine in the British library the aisle for Chemistry, kilometers long, it would take months for someone to look at just the indexes of all those books. In this Cyber-Renaissance, with tools like search engines, web of science, Google Scholar, even customized AI like Watson et al , anyone can see"all of Chemistry in seconds, if abet imperfectly. That's is where teachers and critical thinking come into play. We have an obligation to learn and teach in the classroom the possibilities of this new paradigm

Any one can postulate a test theory and devise a plan to test their idea with a series of pertinent keywords and phrases. Often the very same experiment you would have liked to conduct has already been done. Ingrid and Bruce, try this for yourselves for example the hypothesis that fortifying food with iron is unhealthy. Brainstorm with your students, set up a plan of attack: iron and inflammation, iron and insulin resistance, iron and sexually transmitted diseases etc. send each student (including yourselves) with a differing set of keywords and come back and collaborate!

Currently, there haven been 5 approaches about critical thinking instruction in terms of domain general/specific. Ennis (1989) has conceptualized four approaches contextualizing subject-based instruction: general approach, infusion approach, immersion approach and mixed model approach. Niu et al (2013) advanced another approach called “holistic approach” which refers to developing critical thinking through a whole degree program in general instead of via a subject.

Behar-Horenstein and Niu (2011) have examined effectiveness of different approaches of critical thinking instruction by reviewing 61 empirical studies published during 1994-2009, which focused on the improvement of college students’ critical thinking skills through instructional interventions, and found that the most frequently used approach (52% of the studies reviewed) is immersion; the second one is holistic approach (19%), and the other three approaches have an equal rank as the third (each 9.5%). Immersion is reported to yield lowest growth of students’ critical thinking out of all the approaches.

Abrami et al. (2008) conducted a meta-analysis of instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills with 117 empirical studies published from 1960s through 2005 and found that the mixed approach outperforms and the immersion underperforms the other three instructional approaches significantly. General approach and infusion are found to have moderate effects. Infusion and immersion are employed more frequently than the other two approaches. In another meta-analysis of effects of instructional interventions on college students’ critical thinking skills, in which immersion is the first frequently used approach and holistic approach is second, Niu et al. (2013) found that a single intervention longer than 12 weeks is more effective than single interventions shorter than 12 weeks or the holistic approach. It can be inferred from such findings that the effect of a single intervention is confounded with length of exposure to that intervention. The longer exposure to a single intervention, the more effective such single intervention is.

To summarize, in terms of effectiveness of each approach, immersion approach has been used most frequently but yielded the smallest effect. Mixed approach is presented as the most effective approach to improve students’ critical thinking. General and infusion approaches have a moderate effect. Holistic approach is better than immersion approach but only has a small effect.

Thanks Sun

For example, introducing to the educational process debates, discussions, etc. Establishing a school discussion club. Encouraging participation in discussions conducted by students on social media portals.

Best wishes

What a discussion, I agree with @Zhihong Sun

I agree with Ingrid, but I would like to point out that she has addressed the question in general but not to the particular case of Engineering and I would include Science in general. Classic Critical Thinking is all about determining what are the facts and coming to a logical conclusion. We, the students, researchers and professors are overloaded with information that is diluting recent hard won knowledge.

First, there is one note. Creators and innovators are needed always indeed. However, there is a couple of subjective and objective stopping factors. High creativity is a quite unique thing, it is not enough just to learn it, one has to have some born skills and intelligence as well - some people do and some don't have it. Second, there is a lot of practical needs for solid specialists in a variety of fields. It is a much prevailing necessity, than having innovators / creators. The more time one spend in the field and mature as a specialist, the more chances to become a serial innovator.

Learning critical thinking skills is critical to developing the ability to make appropriate decisions about the situations facing the individual. Therefore, the programs and research that were developed in order to teach individuals in general and students in particular the skills of thinking of different kinds.

Following answers