In my experience, some undergraduate students tend to be naive and accept information without much critical analysis. I have been experimenting with methods for teaching the basic skills of critical thinking, and I would like to read about other educators' experiences in this area.
I have found the best way to teach critical thinking. Pair your students up and then put an object in front of your class and tell them they have two minutes to write down 20 questions about that object. Why? Critical thinking is directly connected to the quantity and quality of the questions we ask. If I ask you a question and you give me an answer you are not thinking but regurtitating info. If i ask you a question and you ask me back 2 questions now I know you are thinking. Now take a topic your class is working on and give each group 2 minutes to write down 20 questions about that topic. Now give them 10 minutes to sort and organize their questions into 3 groups. Next ask them to answer their questions. Next ask them to organize their answers into a presentation.
David, Have you looked into argument mapping?
See Twardy, Charles R. (2003) Argument Maps Improve Critical Thinking. Teaching Philosophy 27:2 June 2004 (at http://cogprints.org/3008/); and/or http://rationale.austhink.com/ and/or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_map. I was part of the team that evaluated argument mapping at the University of Melbourne many years ago and developed the Rationale software. The method was evaluated as well as any in pedagogical research, and was found to be quite effective (around a 0.8 SD improvement, if I recall correctly). That approach involved students intensively using argument maps to analyse real arguments (not canned examples) and then evaluate them systematically (the claims/premises and inferences). Aside from the effect of intense practice, I am convinced that a 'penny drops', at least for some students, when they understand arguments have structure and there's a procedure for evaluating them.
Also, if you can get hold of Claudia Alvarez's meta-analysis (Alvarez, Claudia M. 2007. Does philosophy improve critical thinking skills, MA Thesis, Department of Philosophy, University of Melbourne) you may find it helpful as she compared the results of all empirically tested courses available at the time.
In Community of Inquiry (CoI) model, critical thinking is stimulated via triggering event, exploration, integration, and resolution. You may refer to this post for further details. http://sco.lt/7vekQD
In addition, critical thinking was found best taught beyond the classroom. Asking juicy questions is a transferable skill for deepening collaborative inquiry into the science content. Further details can be found in this post. http://sco.lt/6aZi1h
Thank all of you for your suggestions, which look quite useful at first glance. I'll look at the material you have provided and get back to this thread in a few days.
You're most welcome, David. Critical thinking is one of my research areas. Besides what I have stated earlier, Marquis (2013) found the steps of critical thinking by Scriven and Paul (1987) mirror the levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy of learning: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating. He combined these two models and provided a new model called hyper-connected critical thinking for a media rich, hyper-connected world. In this model, we need to research, conceptualize, evaluate, analyze, synthesize, and create. The related post can be accessed here. http://sco.lt/7aIfjd
Perhaps I can share my own teaching and authoring experiences pertaining to critical thinking.
When I exposed my students to blogging activity in the classroom, they were found extremely excited and indeed enjoyed themselves, throughout the blogging process. They brainstormed, exploited their thinking, created their own ideas, turned their ideas into writing, and finally got their ideas published to the cyber world. These had engaged their metacognition to a great extent I would say.
Therefore, I have found five ways in general on how blogging can lead to critical thinking. Thus, I wrote a book chapter entitled "Enhancing ESL Learners' Creative and Critical Thinking through Blogging". Among the points I have highlighted are as follows:
1. Blogging empowers bloggers to be more analytical and reflective.
2. The sense of language accuracy in expressions is increased.
3. A more communicative way of writing skill can be developed.
4. Blogging clarifies the bloggers' thoughts.
5. Blogging brings pleasure during the writing process.
The mentioned publication details can be found in the following link.
Chapter Enhancing ESL Learners' Creative and Critical Thinking throu...
In my research methods class, we spend time each week critiquing a journal article. We discuss the purpose, whether a strong rationale for the research was provided as well as what type of evidence for the need was provided (i.e., epidemiological, empirical, anecdotal). We discuss the sample framework, sample size, characteristics of the study sample and how that related to external validity. We examine the methods used, whether any scales used were reliable and valid, and if the results were interpreted appropriately or exaggerated. I also have found it helpful to ask students if there are alternative ways in examining the problem and interpreting the findings. In my other courses, I tell my students to question everything. I discuss the importance of developing a critical analytic eye in life and the dangers of being a passive consumer of information. I take popular topics in the media such as whether it is unhealthy to consume high fructose corn syrup and provide youtube clips from corn growers and contrast that with peer reviewed published research on this topic. Students seem to really appreciate these activities because they feel a sense of protection from being "duped."
I will share my opinion as a former high school mathematics teacher and college level TA. Within a classroom setting, I think small group learning is best. A small group has 3 or 4 students (5+ starts to ostracize group members). Give each group a problem. One member from each group is designated to write the groups solution on the board. A second member from each group is designated to explain the groups solution. A third member fields questions from the teacher and other groups about their solution.
In small groups like this, it is somewhat difficult for a group member to be 'invisible.' Within a small group setting, students usually feel more comfortable expressing themselves. If the class is not forthcoming with questions the teacher can simply point to a point in the solution and ask "Why did you put that there?" If the student is struggling or unable to answer the question, do not make an example of him/her; let others from his/her group help with the answer. Defining and explaining their reasoning is the basic definition of critical thinking. Setting up an environment where students can begin to feel comfortable presenting in front of a large group is also beneficial. Timid and shy students are either afraid to be wrong or are not confident in their answers. Once these more timid students see their group members make mistakes without serious repercussion, the more apt they are to try it themselves. And, invariably, a group representative will share with the class an answer inspired by the timid student. When everyone agrees with the answer, that will bolster the timid student's confidence in their ability. Also helping them to 'come out of their shell' so to speak.
What do you think?
Hi. Great idea, Jason. I have read a wonderful article that comes with 8 ways to turn your classroom into an idea factory. I have shared it on Scoop.it as follows.
http://sco.lt/6mrsCf
Perhaps this piece of infographic can be helpful in finding ways to developing 21st century critical thinkers.
http://sco.lt/6xu0or
I teach a course in evidence-based medicine for residents in psychiatry. One exercise I've found effective is to give them a brief multiple choice quiz about things they think they already know, things they're smugly confident about and seldom bother to look up and verify. (For this field, these are things like the FDA-approved dose range of commonly used antidepressants, the speed of onset of effect of certain sedating drugs, etc.) After they have committed their answers to paper, I direct them to the publicly available online product labeling, a resource they should be consulting but seldom do because of a combination of time pressure and overconfidence. Once they look up the answers, they discover that, what they think they know, they don't really know. The idea is to pop their bubble of overconfidence and get them to realize that, in the future, they should assign a lower level of confidence to their beliefs and thus have a lower threshold for looking things up.
I think that the topic that is dealt within the class should be sensitized thoroughly. Sensitization can help them make aware of the diverse points of view which would gradually help them in understanding the content better. An Issue based learning is better to develop critical thinking skills as would inculcate in them an a practical approach to the problems they face. The above mentioned like dividing it into group, presentation, discussion are all strategies that would help them in dealing with the content in a better way by asking questions, finding causes, identifying the problem, possible remedies.
Perhaps the socratic method applies to many of these posts. The idea of using questions to lead thinkers through the process of evaluating evidence. The use of well thought out questions, which seek to take a learner through a process of thought, can apply both in small group and classroom work. Of course the balance is always assuring that those not answering are processing the question. Blogging might be one way to get at underlying questions of evaluation, synthesis, and reasoning. Small groups might work together through the questioning process; issues based learning through relevant topics take students through questions that are personal and relevant to their world. All of the ideas in these responses might be summarized in the idea that the "teacher" takes the "student" through the process of critical thinking through questions. That is not the only way to do it, but I do see that it could apply in several of the exemplars represented here.
I agree with Boon Yih Mah!, writing is a great tool, but writing for passion and not by obligation. It's a great option.
My number one idea but I don't know if all of you can make it work, because you can have departmental tests, it's design 4 question, with not an unique answer, solving a problem depending with the subject, for example: you have a child with cognitive disability and hearing issues, this kid is 5 years old and doesn't pay attention: design a program to teach him to read... this is only one example, the real goal is make the student to use cognitive and meta cognitive skills and creativity, but it's the kind of problems they will find the real world
Great responces, as a former high school teacher in my experience, when it comes to critical thinking you have to create an classroom environment in which students feel free to participate in challenging task. moreover introduce different ways of teaching and learning like a cross fit training. Some examples: read, listen, asnwer specific questions, talk, write a bout it or take notes, draw and present using technology. Critical thinking needs to be nurtured
One trick I have up my sleeve in my managment class is to use games as demonstration for the need to thinkk critically. I find games very powerful tools to open people's mind up. It's by no means comprehensive but I use specific games to get student to see the need to get out fo the box, test assumptions, etc
One easy strategy is to make students ask and write down questions which they expect to be answered or addressed in a class / a lecture / a speech. This activity changes the intensity (depth and range) of Information processing and usually makes it easier for the listeners to come up with questions for clarification or evidence and to find examples pro and con for what was presented. This, in my view, is the Initial step to critical thinking.
Generally I have students read a short story and lthen I have them watch a movie or vice versa. I ask them to work in pairs or in groups to critique the written story and the film. I ask them to prepare for a debate on how they would do things differently in the text and in the movie.
Finally, students have to write two paragraphs on how they would change the written story.
As it is suggested in psychology, if you force your students to read, they will hate it. However, if you convince them that they are doing something for fun, they will learn to read critically uncousciously.
My students learn by solving actual problems: http://fisit.kneu.edu.ua/ua/news_of_faculty_fisit/UkrBirzha/
These magazines are student group work.
For the development of critical thinking, leading to the same few ideas are:
a. Perception of information and interpretation.
b. Hypothesis generation.
c. Strategies for data analysis
d. Formulation of the problem.
e. Decision making
The analysis of the problem leads to:
a. Encode and correctly interpret the language in which the problem is expressed.
b. Clarify the information and conditions of the problem.
c. Understand the question that defines the problem.
d. Set the variables involved in the problem.
e. Separate and sort all the data in a mental image of the problem (supported with graphics, if possible).
We also recommend:
1. In teaching problem solving strategies, proceed from the simplest. In this case, since the algorithms to conclude high hermeneutic exercises. The analysis phase, however, must be included in each part of the process from start to finish.
2. The teacher should take advantage of the problems in assessing student failures in its reasoning and negative attitudes. Based on this feedback can be provided. Further agrees that dialogue with them about the nature of each element of the process to solve problems, that in order for the student to make their own diagnosis.
3. If a student does not solve a problem, you can creársele a feeling of inferiority. Therefore, the problems that arise should be commensurate with their ability, otherwise, the teacher should help you to discover for himself the solution.
April.
4. Negative attitudes of the student frequently face the problems are
impulsivity and the feeling of helplessness, the patience, dialogue, observation and detail are good vehicles to overcome, and the gradation of difficulty in the exercises.
I don't lecture, I discuss, even in classes of several hundred. I ask students questions and I wait for them to answer them. I encourage them to make educated guess and then asked them to tell me how they formulated their answer so the rest of the class can learn new strategies. I try to make it fun, cracking jokes while they're working the problem, telling them they are getting warmer or colder. Most importantly I do not tell them the answer. I wait until a student answers the question correctly, then I flesh out the topic with the details. At first I often have to pick a student at random and ask them to guess. As the semester proceeds students get more comfortable and more willing to volunteer an answer. Also, when the student explains how they formulated their answer I consistently see more complex reasoning used as the semester progresses. I get many emails, sometimes years later, that this was one of the most important things they learned in undergrad.
In some classes debating works well. Students know beforehand which contentious topics will be discussed, and they can bring background information. They also have to anticipate opposing viewpoint to be able to make a clear argument. They get better at debating with a bit of repetition/ practice, of course.
A simpler technique that works very well in my Animal Behavior course is to first introduce specific concepts using traditional examples, then presenting a "shocker" that students have to discuss. For example, I explain how sexual selection works, using the peacock's feather train as an example, then show them a picture of human sexual selection.... Tom Selleck's bushy moustache. This provokes quite a bit of discussion, but also critical thinking about evolution shaping human behavior, about cultural changes, etc. Most of all, the surprise factor means that the concepts stick.
Case studies/scenarios are very helpful. Give a group of students a scenario related to the topic you want them to critically think about. Do not make it too long or too complex. Discuss as a group by asking questions and working the "case" of all the possibilities and alternative ways of solving it. It works!
The use of two questions has worked with students, whether in debate or when answering in writing, "yes, but" and "what does other evidence suggest?" Creating an atmosphere which is based on the concept that every question has at least ten ways of being solved means that students start to consider alternatives. Getting students to use examples from their own experiences means that models and frameworks can be applied then evaluated.
I'm taking this all in. Thanks to all for your thoughts.
I looked at your article, Inna, and found it very interesting. For the others, it can be read and downloaded here: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/45286569_Promotion_of_critical_thinking_by_using_case_studies_as_teaching_method
Article Promotion of critical thinking by using case studies as teac...
When talking to my students about a topic i add a short story on a closely similar subject that will arouse dipper thinking in my students. This way they open their mind to dipper thinking on the subject matter and also helps them to read more on their own
In my opinion students are more interested in those topics that are familiar for them. So I would suggest to make students try to solve real problems.
one way to improve critical thinking is through writing. If students are to learn they must write. They must connect the dots, also, writing allows students to contemplate though until it becomes the best thinking of which they are capable.
All these comments are valuable. I asked the question because I'm going to teach a couple of courses next semester on research methods. Both are for art students, one for first semester undergrads and the other for first semester master's students. I've taught similar courses to undergrad and graduate students in disciplines as diverse as history, literature, philosophy, architecture, graphic design, law, accounting, et cetera, but I think the art students are going to be a special challenge.
What I have done in the past is start of with a one-month crash course on Homo sapiens, using science to shake up previous notions, looking at hominid evolution (look, we're primates), neurobiology (the embodied mind), visual perception (it's not veridical, but it is understandable), and traditional ways of knowledge (how do we know?).
The next step is to construct a toolbox for critical analysis, on 8 x 5" note cards, with the rules of science and types of fallacies, taken from two very brief and simple distillations of the scientific method, which provides a methodological basis for critical thinking: (1) the "baloney detection kit", from Carl Sagan's book The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark (see http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html), and (2) the six rules from James Lett's article "A field guide to critical thinking" (http://www.csicop.org/si/show/field_guide_to_critical_thinking/). These two sources are complemented with other texts, selected by each student, for example Karl Popper's explanation about falsifiability as a criterion for scientific discussion.
Then we look at some obviously and blatantly pseudoscientific texts, like those found in UFO websites, and apply the tools as a group exercise.
With this experience in hand and mind, the students are ready to select texts that they suspect might be pseudoscientific in nature, and analyze them by cutting them up into paragraphs, with one paragraph on each note card. Then each paragraph can be compared systematically with each of the tools in the toolbox, like playing a card game. Thus they learn to apply the tools independently.
Near the end the students write up a report with the results of their critical analysis. Since they have everything on note cards, it's not hard for them to follow a style sheet and register sources in footnotes and a reference section. (A plus is that they learn to register sources because I ask them to put the bibliographical data on each card. If they find this to be too tedious I suggest that they use the copy and past functions in their word processors.) What I'm supposed to be teaching them in the first place, according to the official syllabus, is to write a research paper, which we eventually get around to, but I like to introduce critical thinking into the program in this way, since there is not really much sense in writing a paper that isn't critical of its sources and of itself.
The last classes are dedicated to a symposium organized by the students in which each participant presents the results of their critical analysis. This motivates them to do more serious work than if they merely turned in their final reports.
My challenge now is to adapt this teaching technique for art students. One way will be to put more emphasis on visual perception and optical illusions. Another will be to choose texts that deal with visual arts for the exercises where the toolkit is applied. Of course these texts should have a scientific intent and orientation, since there's no point in applying the rules of science to other genres, for example to a poetic interpretation of visual art. I plan to use some of the suggestions provided in this thread, so thank you all for responding!
I use computer-aided argument mapping. It only takes some instructions on methodology of mapping, a few practice exercises, a computer, and a meaningful task (either discipline-specific or generic in nature), and the teaching of CT becomes both achievable and fun.
For a simple overview, see: http://www.jostwald.com/ArgumentMapping/ARGUMENT%20MAPPING.pdf
See also: http://www.austhink.com.
Repeated quantitative studies on argument mapping have shown .8 SD increases in CT skills in around 10 weeks under pre- and post-test controlled trials. See my page for published articles that summarize the innovation.
Thank you Yanna and Martin. The argument mapping method looks good. I just found a free e-book on argumentation and fallacies in Spanish that my students can download and use, and I think it might work well with this method. I'll see what I can come up with.
No problem. Also have a look at: http://www.course.improvingreasoning.com/
A freely available course on critical thinking using argument mapping.
I'm looking at the e-book I mentioned and it has argument mapping in an appendix, based on Stephen Toulmin's work "The uses of argument". It looks like it would work better for my graduate students, not so much in the "light" version of the course I'm putting together for the undergrads, many of whom will be struggling with basics, like using a computer and writing original papers (besides the fact that I will only meet two hours a week with the undergrads versus four with the Master's students).
Here's the data on the e-book in Spanish, in case anybody else is interested in it:
García Damborenea, Ricardo, Uso de razón; el arte de razonar, persuadir, refutar; un programa integral de iniciación a la lógica, el debate y la dialéctica, edición corregida y ampliada, sin lugar, edición privada, 2012 (http://books.google.com.mx/books?id=sz1aOYkPwwAC&dq=garcia+damborenea+%22uso+de+raz%C3%B3n%22&hl=es&source=gbs_navlinks_s, acceso: 7 jul. 2013).
García Damborenea, Ricardo, Uso de razón; el arte de razonar, persuadir, refutar; un programa integral de iniciación a la lógica, el debate y la dialéctica, con una extensa relación de argumentos y el más completo diccionario de falacias, sin fecha (http://perso.wanadoo.es/usoderazonweb/html/, acceso: 7 jul. 2013).
Great Tool on argument mapping I also found that when guided by Essential Questions. Jay Mctighe suggest we need to look at the size and scope of the topic and ask metacognitive questions, also questions that lead, guide and hook.
I agree to all of your views, students learn in various circumstances. In a smaller group there will be higher participation, as it stands, if these small group students do not speak who else is going to speak and generate ideas. To obtain skills in critical thinking studetns have to discuss. In critical thinking socratic questioning is an important element.
In my own perspective and use... I usually do socratic-experiential instruction...
Socratic methods make learners open up to different perspective around them guided questions then fall unto experiences and examples that are observable...
Making the learners ASK and REASON OUT...
Using the Six Steps to Effective Thinking and Problem Solving, or “IDEALS” (Facione, 2007), the problem-solver works through a case study or activity by responding to questions from the peer coach. The IDEALS are to Identify, Define, Enumerate, Analyze, List, and Self-Correct:
I-identify the Problem: What is the real question we are facing?
D-Define the Context: What are the facts that frame this problem?
E- Enumerate the Choices: What are plausible options?
A -Analyze Options: What is the best course of action?
L- list Reasons Explicitly: Why is this the best course of action?
S- self-correct: Look at it again … What did we miss?
This problem-solving technique guides students through the critical thinking process and utilizes learner collaboration. Similar strategies include integrating project-based learning activities that require students to apply their knowledge by constructing a real-world product.
Great strategies thank you for sharing. It all comes down to helping students through the process of learning so they can apply it in many situations such as ; when something goes wrong, when they need to make a choice or implement change and or better understand complex issues
I try to stimulate my students to analyze interesting problems, for example:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Gontar_D
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Los_V
(Sviridov I., Gontar D., Los V. OASIS/F.I.S.T. - (Sylantyev S. – Supervisor). - Kiev : KNEU, 2013. - 31 p.)
Dear All,
I fully agree, the Socratic method of teaching helps a lot . But what also works is using analogy and metaphor . Give your participants a metaphor, like for example an organisation is like a bike and let them present the relationship between the different parts of a bike in comparison with the different parts of an organisation. After all parts have been defined and agreed on start to to change things on the bike like for example changing the back wheel into a very big back wheel and ask them what does that mean for the performance of the bicycle and translate this back to the performance of an organisation. The nice thing of using a metaphor is that it is related to discovery learning and the learning does not stop after the assignment. Very often participants continue thinking about it even after class. The only challenge for the trainer is that he or she needs to have fast analytical skill to
be able to give good feedback (if possible in a Socratic way) so that the defining of the metaphor is consistent and logic . And my experience in training trainers is that the use of metaphors in class is one of the most difficult training tools concerning the facilitation of the groups discussion on the metaphor
Great answers from all of you i also like to add promting students to think about thinking will help students to get depth of their content understanding and benefit them for live
I fully agree to all .Socratic method is vital in teaching of critical thinking. This facilitates the students to think in depth and the metaphor helps in students' discovery learning as well.
Critical thinking can be encouraged in students by giving them some interesting and relevant projects to work on ! We can also give them some incentives in the form of marks or grades. I have tried organising quiz competitions for students, which have worked well in this direction! Getting them involved and interested, is the trick !
I have read about a lot of strategies for improving critical thinking. Unfortunately, there are few empirical studies that show that any of these techniques are effective. It is important to distinguish between self-reports of effectiveness, and actual effectiveness. These two are generally uncorrelated (see Sitzmann et al., Acad of Mgt Learning & Educ., 2010). Most of the critical thinking papers I have seen use self-reports of learning.
Our understanding of improving critical thinking has been slow because reliable and valid measures are hard to find, and the time interval required to show noticeable improvements is quite large, generally larger than one semester.
For education to advance, we need more attention to studies that actually show which techniques are effective.
A nice reflection of valuable experiences and strategies and also a reassurance that improving critical thinking among young students is not a challenge for me only ...
My experience is that while inculcating critical thinking might be (relatively) a straight forward job when teaching one subject it can be a real challenge teaching another subject. Similarly, different cultures, ages and environments may also increase or decrease the difficulty. Having said all that, I have found that the teacher's playing a devils advocate [always coming up with creative counter arguments] is more effective strategy than any other [though I don't have any formal study to support it] and works in almost any subject and settings. In some cases however, especially when teaching culturally/religiously diverse groups, a teacher would need to be careful about framing the counter arguments that do not offend the audience.
Through reviews of research and in consultation with prominant scholars, the district school improvement team last year was confident to announce that critical thinking starts with reading. Reading in many forms, is the boost for the wow factor of all learning. Not so much the activities that lead to crtitical thinking but the fact that students can read the text and understand the content cognitively and textually. Students need to be exposed to deep reading at a young age to develop critical thinking skills. How many of you feel the same
Delegate responsibility; ask for their opinion, but not before giving them time to study the topic enough. Do not hide from them the fact that research and learning are part of our life, that everyone may be wrong sometime. That there is no shame in making a mistake. I usually tell them that the knowledge expands all the time, and a fact may look different from different viewpoint, especially after expanding the knowledge of the technology of the experiment and data management techniques.
To build on Don Bacon's response, research and practice are also hampered by lack of a clear and common definition of 'critical thinking skills'. For example, Stephen Brookfield (2012) differentiated five 'Critical Traditions':
analytic philosophy and logic; hypothetic-deductive method; Prgamatism; psychoanalysis; and critical theory.
Brookfield goes on to propose teaching strategies at progressive levels, drawing on themes which students identify as helpful for learning critical thinking. (I think these strategies would apply to teaching in general.)
Interestingly, Brookfield pays limited attention to the context or content to be thought about. In contrast, researchers working within 'hypothetico-deductive' traditions are more likely to emphasize the importance of domain-specificity and of pedagogical content knowledge for teaching within a domain. Of course, these researchers are not necessarily addressing 'critical thinking' specifically, and the kind of research they conduct may be too distant from the practical suggestions you are looking for.
Overall,with a preference for evidence-informed approaches to teaching, I would be guided by a combination of Brookfield's distinctions and the general components of effective teaching identified in empirical studies: I would choose strategies which were consistent with these guidelines . For an outstanding analysis of research on 'what works' in teaching, see the meta-analyses reported by T. Seidel and R. J. Shavelson (2007) in: Teaching effectiveness research in the last decade: the role of theory and Research Design in Disentangling Meta-Analysis Results. REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 2007 77: 454
DOI: 10.3102/0034654307310317
I hope you will follow up and let us know what you decide, and how it works.
Another strategy to encourage critical thinking in the classroom is the use of argument maps, turn to argue and reach an agreement is a verbal ability based on the desire to convince someone of something by force of argument using logic reasoning , ability to negotiate and in the interest of meeting the goal of establishing a common field advantage.
Thanks for the question and great answers I have been reading. So much has been said. I just add my bit that critical thinking is one of the needs of students of the 21st century.
I use a cooperative learning (CL) approach. Within the small group (of 4), students discuss answers to Biology questions. They suggest their answers, others challenge the suggested answers and they must defend their views. I facilitate their discussions to ensure that no one is left out. Even slow learners, who may require more explanations and time to 'digest' these explanations, have something to contribute. Such learning situations allow students to think critically and creatively. I am indebted to Johnson & Johnson and other proponents of CL.
A student who can think critically will not tamely accept information from a teacher because he/she is able to search for information independently. The motivation to do so should be inherent; it is the natural curiosity they had as children. We must help our students to regain this curiosity because sadly, in my country at least, this curiosity seems eroded when students go through primary school.
Team,
Thank you so much for all the suggestion ! I will like to share with you the scenario about my school . We only take in student whom able score distinction in English ,Math and Science at Grade 6 level ( Primary Six in Malaysia ) ,and every year , we knock out those " unfit " ( whom fail to achieve average mark on 5 major subject - Math , English , Science ,Mandarin and our national language ), for those whom able to graduate from Junior section ( Grade 9 equivalent ) will put into Science stream ,and average student will put into Art stream . Normally , 40 % of the student are the above average student ,and 60 % are the average student . For ONE single class , we put in about 50 students due to the limitation of our class room ( we have 5,300 Students ) in my school . Every years , we win all the major mathematics competition ,and top in the external government examination in Kuala Lumpur ,and for UEC , we have dominate since 1990 ! The only issue I observe was , most of the my top students are only good learner ,and majority of them are not doing well in University , this issue have been bordering me for long time,and later , when do some reading with Personality theory ,and sociology , then, I realized what they lack off ..The critical thinking skills ! By reading all your feedback , I will need to implement some new learning technique ,and share with all my senior teacher ,and officer in the school !
Thank you very much !
Chin
Chong Hwa Private High School
Kuala Lumpur
Thanks for the great discussion.
While reading, I recalled a situation probably worth sharing.
Several years ago, while considering the issue of peer review (we usually devote some time to this within our thesis preparation research seminar) I distributed to students articles from local journals which I had at hand as a result of search within the systematic review just conducted before that. Certainly, I do not have results of a rigorous evaluation of how this exercise influenced my students' critical thinking, merely what can be called 'formative evaluation'. However, many surprises and insights were obvious.
What were the crucial factors?
First of all, though still an educational situation, it was less of a game than when an instructor pretends to have bizarre questions or an alternative point of view. These were real papers of renowned researchers (at least those well recognized within a country and accepted by journal editors) which nevertheless were extremely low quality from the point of view of what students have learnt at the university. It was obvious that there is no one ultimate truth, and no way out of this contradiction was possible without critical thinking.
Second, the exercise was probably very beneficial for those 'timid and shy' as mentioned above in this discussion. They discovered they have a case in an argument with those researchers who get published in scientific journals.
Third, my impression is that students realized the support of knowledge and thinking tools they have got from the university, that this inventory can be applied to real life situations, and that they have the right and the tools to address this kind of subject matter critically.
My overall belief is that room for critical thinking appears when knowledge acquired through reading and in-class discussions is exposed to real-life situations of research or practice.
Introducing concepts, tools and skills for critical thinking, and setting up a variety of interesting, current and multi-leveled ways to implement those skills is an important aspect of bringing critical thinking into the classroom.
Some of those skills can be implemented in groups - agreed, that there is some strong argumentation that builds when in groups - as well as individual learning activities. The point here is that the concepts, tools and skills need a framework; "critical thinking" can become a word that gets bandied about. A set of concepts, tools and skills with which to bring critical thought into a practice that is lively, interesting, engaging and fun...that is the key in the classroom. A clearly defined set of concepts, tools and skills also enables more appraisal and evaluation on the part of our scholarship of teaching and learning.
A wonderful and basic guide I like to share with undergraduates is Paul & Elder's "Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools" (in a 7th edition or so!!) which can be located at the Foundation for Critical Thinking: www.criticalthinking.org
Thanks, Sonia, the web site is a great resource. Since asking the question nearly two months ago I have begun teaching a course on research methods at the introductory undergrad level, and another at the introductory master's level, both for students in the fine arts. I'm using the texts by Carl Sagan and James Lett that I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread, as a basic toolkit for group and individual exercises for the critical analysis of texts dealing with the arts. In the past I have used group presentations and discussions, but with the entire group. Now I have larger groups, so the most useful suggestion in practical terms that I have carried away from all of the excellent comments on this thread is to break down the class into smaller groups at some point in the semester, to get everyone to interact with each other around these tools without my direct intervention.
I checked the "Miniature guide," which happily is available in Spanish on the same web site! I am adding it to the basic references for these courses.
Thanks to all who have responded. I have learned a lot from your comments.
Yes, the resources the Foundation for Critical Thinking has are exceptional - the Miniature Guide is something I go back to in every course - undergraduate and graduate. Their Soctratic Questioning resources are also excellent for enlivening critical thinking in the classroom. Teaching mental health nursing, I also use the Socratic Questioning and Socratic Dialogue resources to demonstrate and teach important skills for cognitive therapy. Critical thinking is therapeutic in a number of ways!
I've been looking at the material on the Foundation for Critical Thinking web site. On the critical side (:o ), the Spanish translations of several of Paul's and Elder's texts are so full of spelling and other errors that I hesitate to recommend them to my students. The downloadable English version is just a sample, and the complete versión must be purchased. All of this limits the usefulness of these tools for my purposes. Still, I am glad the site exists, since I consider critical thinking to be a key element in preparing the next generations of professionals to face the immense problems confronting our species (and all others), so any steps in this direction are welcome.
That is too bad re) the Spanish versions! Still, think about getting a copy for yourself of the English version (low cost)...I have the Mini Guide, plus the Socratic Questioning Guide, and the Clinical Reasoning Guide...all have been very useful for my teaching and learning activities.
I have found the best way to teach critical thinking. Pair your students up and then put an object in front of your class and tell them they have two minutes to write down 20 questions about that object. Why? Critical thinking is directly connected to the quantity and quality of the questions we ask. If I ask you a question and you give me an answer you are not thinking but regurtitating info. If i ask you a question and you ask me back 2 questions now I know you are thinking. Now take a topic your class is working on and give each group 2 minutes to write down 20 questions about that topic. Now give them 10 minutes to sort and organize their questions into 3 groups. Next ask them to answer their questions. Next ask them to organize their answers into a presentation.
One aspect that I see as a thread through the replies is the use of peer-teaching in some form or another. I have taught classes online that make use of in-course peer reviewers. Once a student has mastered a unit of study (evaluated by their written work), they can then evaluate other student's written work on that unit. Another way is the use of a method called "interteaching" that was developed by Boyce & Hineline (2002), and that Bryan Saville has continued to study. Saville's presentation at a regional conference sparked my interest in the method. Essentially, you use small units of study, develop some good "thinking" questions about the material to be studies before class, you lecture for a short time to either introduce the topic or clarify points. Then, the students pair off (they should choose a different partner each class), and discuss/debate their prepared answers - in effect, teaching their thinking process to each other. As they work in those groups, the instructor walks around. As I do this, I kindly prompt them to stay on task when needed, provide some clarification, and/or probe the group with a more challenging question if they think they "have it". In the latter part of the class meeting, the groups might share out their key points/questions, and everyone fills out a short sheet that includes questions about the interteaching experience, as well as what their 'big learning" was, and what they are still confused about. I take those back to my office, and set up the next day's mini-lecture based on the confusions. Over time, you learn to anticipate the confusions, and can structure the mini-lectures accordingly.
The students find this challenging, but they really do much better on all manner of assessments that I have used: exams, papers, in-class discussion, and even going out into internship placements. I think that the dialogue between the students is really important, and leads to important discussion/debate that is a necessary part of critical thinking.
Encouraging dialogue and debate led are essential for the promotion of critical thinking. In this process, we can use about three guiding questions around a specific topic, this producing brainstorming, arguments, disagreements and above the consensus to originate new subject positions or views that allow build new ideas, build processes and exercise especially with a view to the management of critical thinking.
One method I use for teaching students skills for critical thinking is to find a current affairs article, place in the centre of the classroom board and have students think of all the stakeholders involved in the article. Write the names of stakeholders around the article with arrows pointing in towards the article. Then get students to discuss what each stakeholders thoughts/ fellings might be. Students learn to think about various perspectives.
I hope this is helpful, I have found it very effective.
Also check out the following, fantastic website for Values Exchange - great critical thinking tool - www.vxcommunity.com
Hello. I wrote about my favourite techniques in an article: Graham, Deborah (2011) Thinking about thinking. Issues, 95 . pp. 8-11. It may perhaps be of interest. Cheers. Deb.
Hi Deborah, the article is available on the web? You can send the link if so? Thank you!
Asking stuedents role playing as teacher is good way for critical thinking.
My colleague and I have recently presented a paper in a conference where we were arguing about the use of photographs (photo-voice as a pedagogical tool) in capturing experiences and in the enhancement of critical thinking. The post graduate students (participants) were stimulated through the use of photographs that they themselves shot around campus based on the topics given. The experience proved to have empowered students with the development of deep cognitive skills. Collaborative participation and reflective practice also improved level of communication, responsibility and accountability.
Deborah Graham.. thanks for sharing your article! Quite useful.
Darlene C-T notes that peer learning & coaching can take place online. This is true. I note that there are, however, problems and benefits which each culture brings to the table. I wrote on this in Oman in this piece last spring:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/236336264_Supportive_Culture_of_Learning_May_Fail_Academically?ev=prf_pub
Basically, the benefits of meeting people all over the world or from different cultures is possibly greater online. So, the potential for acquiring new ways of inquiring or questioning experience and data may arise.
However, if everyone is from the same culture and do not know there are other ways to proceed with study and research, the benefits might just fly over participants heads.
Article Supportive Culture of Learning May Fail Academically
Choosing a good common textbook is also helpful for improving critical thinking. We used these texts with remedial students and non-native Speakers of English:
Everything's an Argument
Andrea A. Lunsford (Author), John J. Ruszkiewicz (Author), Keith Walters (Author)
How to Think Like Leonardo Da Vinci by Michael J. Gelb
The latter one has a free download: http://www.ebook3000.com/How-to-Think-Like-Leonardo-Da-Vinci_82790.html
Thanks, Kevin. The Leonardo book looks interesting. I'll take a look at it. I presently face the challenge of teaching critical thinking to undergrad and graduate students in the visual arts, so this one may be particularly useful, at least for those with good reading comprehension skills in English.
I have tried hard to help my students develop critical thinking in a context where the practice is totally foreign to them through engaging them in extensive reading habits. I ask them to read the books of their choice and keep reading logs for them to share their personal views and attitudes toward what they have read.And amzingly it works wonders.
Dear David:
I think this reference is important for you:
The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking : Concepts and Tools.
By Dr. Richard Paul and Dr. Linda Elder.
The foundation for Critical Thinking.
www.criticalthinking.org
There is a version in Spanish too.
Sincerely.
Diana.
Miraflores, Lima, Perú.
Thank you, Diana. This thread is getting too long to read completely, but somewhere in the middle there is a bit of a discussion regarding the Foundation for Critical Thinking website and the texts on it. Saludos.
Hello,
The advanced methods of teaching like smart classes for primary, secondary and higher secondary students and animated powerpoints and other internet resources for graduates has increased the critical thinking of the new generation. I would emphasize on the fact that there should be an appropriate blend of old and newer techniques depending upon subject, topic and the students and the teacher should be efficiently skilled to present the subject in the most effective way to initiate and maintain the interest of students from the beginning to the end of the class. There should always be active participation from both teacher and students. Students when encouraged properly, develops critical thinking and learn in their own way.
Through cross-culture and integration of arts.Every minute you must be a translator of different cultures.The cross-cultural (meta-cognitive) methodology leads to critical thinking, creative development, forming a culture of peace.
Thank you Irina. As a former student of visual arts from Michigan, with a PhD in Social Sciences (my thesis is on16th century Otomi pictorial manuscripts), married to an Otomi woman, teaching research methods in undergrad and graduate programs in the Arts in a small city in central Mexico, I guess I'm on the right track! I agree, the goal of a culture of peace is good to keep in mind as a basic premise in education, together with the cultivation of critical thinking.
The development of critical thinking should lead :
1. to be open and adventurous.
2. to ask questions, identify problems, investigate.
3. to construct explanations and interpretations.
4. to make plans and be strategic.
5. to be intellectually careful and precise.
6. to seek and evaluate reasons.
7. to be metacognitive.
From my experience of teaching Exploration Geophysics for twenty long years to the post graduate students coming mostly from small town or village background in the north east part of India, I observed that after any concentrated theoretical discussion, if the things are related to the examples of common experience, the gloomy back-benchers also start lightening up. Say for example, I remember a situation-after dealing with simple two layered situations and subsequently taking up multi-layered earth problems when I said, "Any question?", a student asked, "Sir, what is a layer?" From that experience onward, I have made a standard practice in the classroom to draw a horizontal line first and label it as the "ground surface". Secondly, if some problems are given mathematical forms, most of the students start thinking. Thirdly, majority of the students come with the assumption that every question is having unique answer and those "right answers are there inside the head of the teacher". Once, "Right now, I don't have the answer but tomorrow I might have" type attitude is projected, a confidence building atmosphere sets in which results into more questions from the students showing remarkable change in at least some of the selective students who do considerably well in their dissertation work.
Dear David,
One technique that I find is useful is to have the students do a lot of individual writing. And the teacher critiques the writing. The students continue to iteratively improve the quality of their treatment of a topic until the teacher feels they have done an acceptable job of conveying their thoughts and findings in a coherent, defensible, object way.
This type of exercise forces the student to use critical thinking if he/she is to be successful in the assignment.
One thing I have done is to have my students follow an short audiobook in class and then I have them answer five wh-questions in less than 4 minutes in pairs. I have them compete to see which pair or pairs provide the best answers. I use a timer to make this more interesting. In one sentence, have students compete so that they may get into the mood of producing the most in the least time possible. Isn't this the basis of the capitalist economy?
Not just capitalist economy, but academic reality! Gracias y saludos, José.
Dear Jose and David,
I hate to be the "dog in the manger", but respectfully, I submit the following:
I guess I am out of touch with the relatively new trend of group learning (ostensibly, "team work") and the old idea of "competition".
For me, real learning is done in a solitary mode - you, your mind, the challenge of the problem, and tranquility , a very austere atmosphere in which you can think clearly and deeply.
Trying to learn in a group or with another person can be distracting. Later, once you have formed your ideas, you are prepared to participate in a meaningful exchange of ideas.
As for competition, it forces the competitors to think of the fastest, most convenient ready-made "solutions", rather than pausing to turn the problem inside out, upside down, dissect and reassemble the problem, and look for analogies in your prior experience - in this way innovative breakthroughs may be accomplished. This s what Critical Thinking is about. (By the way, a pure capitalistic economy is not necessarily the best exemplar.)
I tend to be like you say, Antonio, and I make an effort to include some group activities in my clases to balance things out, since both solitary contemplation and group collaboration are usually required to make things work (besides the oft-mentioned pedagogical postulate that individual students have different learning styles). As for my research, I've been a lone wolf all my life, but lately I've been making a genuine effort to collaborate with colleagues in order to make a bigger social impact (ripples in the pond are effective, but waves in the ocean are sometimes necessary too). Un abrazo desde Guanajuato.
I agree with Antonio that teamwork and collaboration have become buzzwords in education and are often misapplied in the classroom, and that solitary “deep” thinking is not sufficiently valued. At the same time, we need to recognize that the organization of work in our post-industrial society has changed considerably since the industrial age, when education was conceived on the model of assembly-line production with highly specialized sectors of employees working in isolation from each other, the whole thing supervised and coordinated by management in a top-down fashion. Nowadays, the kinds of jobs that are available require close collaboration among the different parties involved, where each actor brings specialized expertise to the problem and at the same time needs to take the expertise of the other team members into account in order to complete the task ("the whole is greater than the sum of its parts"). A similar type of collaboration and teamwork can be implemented in the classroom through project work, in such a way that each member has to develop his/her own area of expertise” (involving solitary reflection and critical analysis from a particular standpoint) and then members bring their respective areas of expertise to bear on the problem or task at hand. The key to successful teamwork in the classroom is to ensure that each member is assigned a specific set of responsibilities that are crucial to the effective realization of the project.
Thanks for your insights, Denise. Several examples have been given in this thread. I can offer another that relates to what you have said. In art history classes, I ask each student to choose a topic that can be followed through time and space, carrying out individual research parallel to my general presentations in class. During the last weeks of the semester each student writes up a report with the fruits of their individual work. The group collaboration comes in when I show them how to work as a team, forming the organizing committee of a congress that is put together at the end of the semester, emulating formal academic meetings, with a program, poster, invitations to program coordinators and department heads, coffee, and so forth. Each student presents a summary of his or her project and receives criticism and comments from his or her classmates. This prepares the students for producing individual research and for participating in scholarly meetings. One group, several years ago, enjoyed the experience so much that they went on to organize several local congresses, then hosted a regional congress for undergraduate students of history from the entire northwestern region of Mexico!
Very insightful and empirical experiences!
In general, it seems to me that the participants in a team effort need to be fully prepared so that the team effort doesn't devolve into an exchange of opinions and a consensus ruling the outcome.
Unprepared "brain storming" is all right for issues in which common knowledge or subjective affective reactions are sufficient . But where science and technology are concerned, prior preparation is essential for effective team work or brain storming.
In fact a there is a saying for a poorly designed structure: "It was designed by committee." The implication being: Every such undertaking has to have a principal designer so that there is coherency. The principal designer has to solicit and depend on inputs from his team members, but she/he has to make the final decisions.
I don't think it is necessary to teach students "team work" in school or university. Team work will emerge naturally on a real project without having been trained for it.
@ Antonio, re. your last point. Maybe you don’t have to “teach” teamwork directly, but the experience of teamwork – as long as it is well-structured - is a tremendous source of learning: it fosters the development of communication skills, negotiation of meaning, active listening skills, openness and respect for difference, confrontation of opposing points of view through argumentation and debate, individual responsibility and accountability, organizational skills, leadership skills, and so on. Such skills cannot be learned or developed “in solo”.
Hi Denise,
You would think that this list of skills is learned naturally through the experiences of life, unless you are brought up in a dysfunctional family or society.
Hi Antonio,
I agree. And although I can't pronounce on families, I would say that, given the proliferation of war, international conflict, terrorism, poverty, racism and the destruction of the natural environment, we live in a pretty dysfunctional society, wouldn't you agree?
@ Antonio Lucero and @ Denise Morel - I am reflecting about being alone to think and reflect and working together as co-teachers and co-learners in a community of practice. To me both situations occur. I reflect and get good intuitive insight alone. When I work, I work alone and also with team. So probably it depends on the contexts.
Having said that, I have positive biased (preference) in favor of team work and therefore design curriculum and assessment for students to make a choice - working alone or working with team. In this way, the education empowers the students to fit there personal contexts and preference.
I like to start with some creativity exercises. I believe it helps students see outside the proverbial box. I use the components in the Torrance Test of creativity.
Fluency. The total number of interpretable, meaningful, and relevant ideas generated in response to the stimulus.
Flexibility. The number of different categories of relevant responses.
Originality. The statistical rarity of the responses.
Elaboration. The amount of detail in the responses.
I ask the students to write down how many different uses there are to a paper clip and time their responses. As we talk about the responses I go over fluency, flexibility, originality and elaboration. The most creative answer I've read about was a student saying a paper clip could be used as a crutch for a grasshopper. The students find this fun and it seems to open up an ability to think about creative solutions.
Although anecdotal reports on critical thinking are encouraging, they seem incongruent with the research. Many investigations have reported that the critical thinking skills of students tend to be low, even at the college level, which we should not expect if students are indeed receiving critical-thinking instruction/training. In their study of college freshmen, King and Kitchener (1994), for example, used a 7-stage model of critical thinking (with 1 being low and 7 being high) and found that participants scored an average of 3.5. At this level, students were only beginning to use evidence to support judgments; they relied primarily on personal opinion. King and Kitchener further reported that, for students in their study, only “ill-structured problems” without obvious solutions prompted critical thinking.
Likewise, Abrami et al. (2008) reported that critical thinking required explicit instruction and that merely setting critical thinking as a pedagogical goal had little if any effect on students’ abilities. They also found that effective instruction required a stand-alone component, as well as special training for the teacher, to be successful (also see Case, 2005). The absence of teacher training and explicit instruction may underlie Hove’s (2011) observation that “critical thinking strategies are not consistently taught” in American” schools (p. 6).
Given such studies, I can’t help but wonder whether the activities described in the previous posts are actually engaging students in critical thinking. How are you measuring the variable?
Those are good points, James. This thread got a bit off track over the last week, with a side discussion on the relative merits of individual and group work. Many of the earlier posts address the question more fully. I shared the technique I've been developing for teaching critical thinking in a long post on July 10. Other relevant contributions have been posted over the summer.
I begin teaching critical thinking by defining it as a unit of the basic communications model -- not a wholly emotional, nor wholly logical judgement, but the product of both feeling and thinking, as: "Is this what you said/wrote/showed?" communicated as the first response of the audience to the originator of the message. Children of a certain developmental age begin to lose the strongly emotional response, and, with wisdom and experience, gain more thoughtful responses. In order to help a child become more aware of their emotional responses, and to strengthen the more logical, the child should be presented with decision-making situations of greater complexity, and lesser simplicity -- that is, more potential for failure -- in a protected atmosphere. Creativity is one approach, since it fosters uncertainty in a safe environment, which is conducive to heightened critical thinking. But, another approach is engaging in problem-solving scenarios with unpredictable outcomes (realistic). Individual experience probably addresses one level of critical thinking; however, in a group or team, the expectations of predictable outcomes decrease, and therefor, the individual's efforts are either diluted or amplified, resulting in another level of critical thinking.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Teaching