Critical Thinking (2) Learner Development Unit

Transcription

1 Critical Thinking (2) Learner Development Unit

2 Critical Critically Emphasise Serious Salient Brainstorming In depth examination analytical Thorough / thoroughness Rigour / rigorous Attention to detail Detail Evidence Analysis / analyse /

3 Thinking Finding things out implications Noticing connections Working things out Analysing Realising Deciding Summarising underpinnings Solving Hypothesising Noticing i Justifying Evaluating assumptions Remembering Sequencing Testing (Adapted from McGuinness, 1999) Planning Ordering McGuinness, C. (1999). From Thinking Skills to Thinking Arguing g Sorting Classrooms: A Review and Evaluation of Approaches for Identifying Classifying Developing Pupils' Thinking. Nottingham: DfEE Publications. Speculating Grouping Calculating Predicting Comparing Concluding Deducing Distinguishing Realising Noticing exceptions

4 Thinking (1)

5 Thinking (2)

6 Thinking (3)

7 What kind of Thinker are you? (1) I hate talk shows where people p shout their opinions but never give any reasons at all. Figuring out what people really mean is important to me." I always do better in jobs where I'm expected to think things out for myself. I hold off making decisions until I have thought through my options. Rather than relying on someone else's notes, I prefer to read the material myself. lf I try to see the merit in another s opinion, even if I reject it later. Even if a problem is tougher than I expected, I will keep working on it. Making intelligent decisions is more important than winning arguments. Based on Facione, P. (2010). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts.

8 What kind of Thinker are you? (2) I prefer jobs where the supervisor says exactly what to do and exactly how to do it. No matter how complex the problem, you can bt bet there will be a simple solution. I don't waste time looking things up. I hate when teachers discuss problems instead of just giving ii the answers. If my belief is truly sincere, evidence to the contrary is irrelevant. Selling an idea is like selling cars, you say whatever works. Based on Facione, P. (2010). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts.

9 We Human Beings are S times Poor Thinkers Because We jump to conclusions filt fail to think through h implications focus on the trivial fail to notice contradictions accept inaccurateinformationinformation ask vague / irrelevant questions give / accept vague / irrelevant answers ask loaded questions answer questions we are not competent to answer come to conclusions based on inaccurate or irrelevant information ignore information that does not support our view make unjustified inferences distort data and state it inaccurately fail to notice the inferences we make come to unreasonable conclusions fail to notice our assumptions often make unjustified assumptions miss key ideas use irrelevant tideas form superficial concepts misuse words ignorerelevant relevant viewpoints cannot see issues from other points of view are unaware of our own prejudices think narrowly think imprecisely think illogically think one sidedly think simplistically think hypocritically think superficially think ethnocentrically think egocentrically communicate our thinking poorly have little insight into our own ignorance a critic.cfm

10 More Reasons for Bad Thinking (1) In what ways are our minds influenced by factors within ourselves? Psychologically (our personality and ego) Philosophically (our personal philosophy) Ethically (our ethical character) Biologically (our biology and neurology) Are these factors static or dynamic? Are these factors innate or learned? Are we in control of these factors? To what extent? [Are they really within ourselves?!] Based on ct teaching students study learn p4.cfm

11 More Reasons for Bad Thinking (2) Inwhat ways are ourminds influencedby factors beyond ourselves? Sociologically y( (the social groups to which we belong) Intellectually (the ideas we hold, how we reason) Anthropologically (our cultural practices, mores, and taboos) Ideologically & politically (the structure of power and its use by interest groups around us) Economically (the economic conditions under which we live) Historically (our history and how we recountit) Theologically (our religious beliefs) Are we in control of these factors? To what extent? [Are they really beyond ourselves?!] Based on ct teaching students study learn p4.cfm

12 What is Critical Thinking?... a composite of attitudes, knowledge and skills. This composite includes: (1) attitudes of inquiry that involve an ability to recognize the existence of problems and an acceptance of the general need for evidence in support of what is asserted to be true; (2) knowledge of the nature of valid inferences, abstractions, and generalizations in which the weight or accuracy of different kinds of evidence are logically determined; d and (3) skills in employing and applying the above attitudes and knowledge. Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal

13 What is Critical Thinking? We understand critical thinking to be purposeful, self regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. CT is essential as a tool of inquiry. As such, CT is a liberating force in education and a powerful resource in one's personal and civic life. While not synonymous with good thinking, CT is a pervasive and self rectifying human phenomenon. The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well informed informed, trustful ofreason reason, open minded, flexible, fairminded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit. Thus, educating good critical thinkers means working toward this ideal. It combines developing CT skills with nurturing those dispositions which consistently yield useful insights and which are the basis of a rational and democratic society. Facione, A. (1990) "Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Facione, A. (1990) Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction. A Report for the American Philosophical Association.

14 What is Critical Thinking? Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skilfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, orcommunication communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem, or question at issue, t i assumptions, concepts, empirical grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions, implications and consequences, objections from alternative viewpoints, and frame of reference. Michael Scriven and Richard Paul National Council for Excellence in Critical Michael Scriven and Richard Paul, National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking.

15 What is Critical Thinking? Critical thinking is a desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to consider, carefulness to dispose and set in order; and hatred for every kind of imposture. Francis Bacon (1605)

16 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Intellectual Humility Intellectual Courage Intellectual lempathy Intellectual Integrity Intellectual Perseverance Faith In Reason Fairmindedness Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking. intellectual traits.cfm

17 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy As you read the ideas beneath, consider what the various definitions and understandings imply.» Human nature» Human capacities» Rationality What underlying ideologies, assumptions etc does the author himself hold / make? To what extent do you dis/agree with the To what extent do you dis/agree with the ideas? In what respects? Why?

18 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Intellectual Humility: Having a consciousness of the limits of one's knowledge, including a sensitivity to circumstances in which one's native egocentrism is likely to function self deceptively; sensitivity to bias, prejudice and limitations of one's viewpoint. Intellectual Courage: Having a consciousness of the need to face and fairly address ideas, beliefs or viewpoints toward which we have strong negative emotions and to which we have not given a serious hearing. This courage is connected with the recognition that ideas considered dangerous or absurd are sometimes rationally justified (in whole or in part) and that conclusions and beliefs inculcated in us are sometimes false or misleading. Intellectual Empathy: Having a consciousness of the need to imaginatively put oneself in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them, which requires the consciousness of our egocentric tendency to identify truth with our immediate perceptions p of long standing g thought or belief. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking. intellectual traits.cfm intellectual traits cfm

19 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Intellectual Integrity: Recognition of the need to be true to one's own thinking; to be consistent in the intellectual standards one applies; and to honestly admit discrepancies and inconsistencies in one's own thought and action. Intellectual Perseverance: Having a consciousness of the need to use intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations; firm adherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others;. FihI Faith In Reason: Confidence that, in the long run, one's ownhigher h interests and those of humankind at large will be best served by giving the freest play to reason, by encouraging people to come to their own conclusions by developing their own rational faculties. Fairmindedness: Having a consciousness of the need to treat all viewpoints alike, without reference to one's own feelings or vested interests, or the feelings orvested interests ofone's ofones friends, communityornation. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking. intellectual traits.cfm / ti l / l itll t

20 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Intellectual Humility: Having a consciousness of the limits of one's knowledge, including a sensitivity to circumstances in which one's native egocentrism is likely to function self deceptively; sensitivity iii to bias, prejudice and limitations i i of one's viewpoint. Intellectual humility depends on recognizing that one should not claim more than one actually knows. It does not imply spinelessness or submissiveness. It implies the lack of intellectual pretentiousness, boastfulness, or conceit, combined with insight into the logical foundations, or lack of such foundations, of one's beliefs. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking intellectual traits.cfm

21 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Intellectual Courage: Having a consciousness of the need to face and fairly address ideas, beliefs or viewpoints toward which we have strong negative emotions and to which we have not given a serious hearing. This courage is connected with ihthe recognition ii that ideas considered dangerous or absurd are sometimes rationally justified (in whole or in part) and that conclusions and beliefs inculcated in us are sometimes false or misleading. To determine for ourselves which is which, we must not passively and uncritically ca "accept" what we have "learned." ed Intellectual ectua courage comes into play here, because inevitably we will come to see some truth in some ideas considered dangerous and absurd, and distortionor falsity insome ideas strongly held inour socialgroup group. We need courage to be true to our own thinking in such circumstances. The penalties for non conformity can be severe. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking intellectual traits.cfm

22 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Intellectual Empathy: Having a consciousness ofthe need to imaginatively put oneself in the place of others in order to genuinely understand them, which requires the consciousness of our egocentric tendency to identify truth with our immediate perceptions of long standing thought or belief. This trait correlates with the ability to reconstruct accurately the viewpoints and reasoning of others and to reason from premises, assumptions, and ideas other than our own. This trait also correlates with the willingness to remember occasions when we were wrong in the past despite an intense conviction that we were right, and with the ability to imagine our being similarly deceived in a case at hand. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking intellectual traits.cfm

23 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Intellectual Integrity: Recognition of the need to be true to one's own thinking; to be consistent in the intellectual t lstandards d one applies; to hold one's self to the same rigorous standards of evidence and proof to which h one holds one's antagonists; to practice what one advocates for others; and to honestly admit discrepancies and inconsistencies in one's own thought and action. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking intellectual traits.cfm

24 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy IntellectualPerseverance Perseverance: Having a consciousness of the need to use intellectual insights and truths in spite of difficulties, obstacles, and frustrations; firmadherence to rational principles despite the irrational opposition of others; a sense of the need to struggle with confusion and unsettled questions over an extended period of time to achieve deeper understanding or insight. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking intellectual traits.cfm

25 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Faith In Reason: Confidence that, in the long run, one's own higher interests and those of humankind at large will be best served by giving the freest play to reason, by encouraging people to come to their own conclusions by developing their own rational faculties; faith that, with proper encouragement and cultivation, people can learn to think for themselves, to form rational viewpoints, draw reasonable conclusions, think coherently and logically, persuade each other by reason and become reasonable persons, despite the deep seated obstacles in the native character of the human mind and in society as we know it. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking intellectual traits.cfm

26 Critical Thinking as an Ethical Philosophy Fi Fairmindedness: idd Having a consciousness of the need to treat all viewpoints alike, without reference to one's own feelings or vested interests, or the feelings or vested interests of one's friends, community or nation; implies adherence to intellectual standards without reference to one's own advantage or the advantage of one's group. Valuable Intellectual Virtues (June 1996). Foundation For Critical Thinking intellectual traits.cfm

27 Critical Thinking Requires DEPTH BREADTH RIGOUR LOGIC EMPATHY SELF AWARENESS ACCURACY Based on Elder, L. & Paul, R. (1996). Universal Intellectual PRECISION CLARITY RELEVANCE Standards. Available at intellectualstandards.cfm

28 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning RELEVANCE: Is this connected to the issue / question? Why / not? In what ways? To what extent? How does this bear on the issue / question? Why?

29 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning CLARITY: Could / should I / you elaborate further on that point? If so, how? Could / should I / you express that point in another way? If so, how? Could / should I / you give [me] an illustration? ti Could / should I / you give [me] an example?

30 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning ACCURACY: Is that really true? To what extents is that [not] really true? In what ways is that [not] really true? How could we check that? How could I find out if that is true? What information i / source do I need? Is that information / source sound? Can I trust Is that information / source sound? Can I trust it? Why / not? In what ways? To what extent?

31 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning PRECISION: Could I / you give more details? Could I / you be more specific? What exactly am I / are you saying? What exactly might I / you be [inadvertently] suggesting / implying? Is that intended / justified? Why / not?

32 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning DEPTH: Does my / your statement / answer truly address the complexities in the question? Why / not? Am I / are you taking into account the problems in the issue / question? In what ways? To what extents? Am I / are you dealing with the most significant factors? Why / not? In what ways?

33 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning BREADTH: What might this look like from a different viewpoint? Do I need to consider another point of view? Why / not? Whose point of view? Why? To what extents? Are there other way/s to look at this issue / question? What? Why? Are they valid? Why / not? To what extents are they [not] valid? What evidence is there to support me / them?

34 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning LOGIC: Does this really make sense? Why / not? To who? In what ways? Does this really follow from what I / you said / wrote before? Why / not? To what extents? How? Have I / you said / written other ideas which contradict this? What? Where? Can both be true? Why / not? To what extents? In what ways? Is there sufficient evidence to support this? Why / not? Is evidence possible here? Why / not? Does a lack of evidence invalidate the argument? Why /not? Is the logic only subjectively logical or is it objectively logical? Why? In what ways? Is this a problem? Why / not?

35 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning RIGOUR Is there sufficient evidence to support this? Why / not? Is evidence possible here? Why / not? Does a lack of evidence invalidate the argument? Why /not? Is the logic only subjectively logical or is it objectively logical? Why? In what ways? Is this a problem? Why / not? Has my / your ideology influenced my / your logic? To what extent? Is this a problem? Why / not? Are there any caveats to my / your argument / point ofview? What? Do theyinvalidateanything? anything? Why / not?

36 Becoming a Critical Thinker Questioning EMPATHY & SELF AWARENESS How will my / your point of view seem to other people? Has my / your ideology influenced my / your logic? To what extent? Is this a problem? Why / not?

37 Life is complex A statement may be clear, accurate, precise, and relevant, but superficial (i.e. lack depth). For example, the ant drugs statement, "Just say No!. This is clear, accurate, precise, and relevant. But does it satisfy the criterion of depth? Does it truly deal with the complexities of the issue? Any argument may be clear accurate, precise, relevant, and deep, but lack breadth For example, an argument froma politically conservative or liberal standpoint may satisfy various of these criteria, but is it likely to satisfy the criterion of breadth?

38 These ideas put another way (1) A. Affective Strategies S 1 thinking independently S 2 developing insight into egocentricity or sociocentricity S 3 exercising fairmindedness S 4 exploring thoughtsunderlying underlying feelings and feelings underlying thoughts S 5 developing intellectual humility and suspending judgment S 6 developing intellectual courage S 7 developing intellectual good faith or integrity S 8 developing intellectual perseverance S 9 developing confidence in reason Available at strategy list.cfm#s1

39 These ideas put another way (2) B. Cognitive Strategies Macro Abilities S 10 refining generalizations and avoiding oversimplifications S 11 comparing analogous situations: transferring insights to new contexts S 12 developing one s perspective: creating or exploring beliefs, arguments, or theories S 13 clarifying issues, conclusions, or beliefs S 14 clarifying and analyzing the meanings of words or phrases S 15 developing criteria for evaluation: clarifying values and standards S 16 evaluating the credibility of sources of information S 17 questioning deeply: raising and pursuing root or significant questions S 18 analyzing or evaluating arguments, interpretations, beliefs, or theories S 19 generating or assessing solutions S 20 analyzing or evaluating actions or policies S 21 reading critically: clarifying or critiquing texts S 22 listening critically: the art of silent dialogue S 23 making interdisciplinary i connections S 24 practicing Socratic discussion: clarifying and questioning beliefs, theories, or perspectives S 25 reasoning dialogically: comparing perspectives, interpretations, or theories S 26 reasoning dialectically: evaluatingperspectives perspectives, interpretations, or theories Available at strategy list.cfm#s1

40 These ideas put another way (3) C. Cognitive Strategies Micro Skills S 27 comparing and contrasting ideals with actual practice S 28 thinking precisely about thinking: using critical vocabulary S 29 noting significant similarities and differences S 30 examining or evaluating assumptions S 31 distinguishing relevant from irrelevant facts S 32 making plausible inferences, predictions, or interpretations S 33 giving reasons and evaluating evidence and alleged facts S 34 recognizing contradictions S 35 exploring implications i and consequences Available at strategy list.cfm#s1 p// g/ / gy

41 Bloom s Taxonomy Instructional Strategy Cognitive Domain (Bloom, 1956) Affective Domain (Krathwohl, Bloom, & Masia, 1973) Psychomotor Domain (Simpson, 1972) Lecture, reading, audio/visual, demonstration, or guided 1. Knowledge 1. Receiving 1. Perception 2. observations, question and answer period phenomena Set Discussions, multimedia CBT, Socratic didactic method, reflection. Activities such as surveys, y, role playing, case studies, fishbowls, etc. On the Job Training (OJT), practice by doing (some direction or coaching is required), simulated job settings (to include CBT simulations) Use in real situations. Also may be trained by using several high level activities coupled with OJT. 2. Comprehension 2. Responding to 3. Guided 3. Application phenomena response 4. Mechanism 4. Analysis 3. Valuing 5. Complex response 5. Synthesis 4. Organize values into priorities 6. Adaptation Normally developed onown own (informal learning) through 6. Evaluation 5. Internalizing values 7. Origination self study or learning through mistakes, but mentoring and coaching can speed the process. Table taken from Bloom B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I: The Cognitive Domain. New York: David McKay Co Inc. Krathwohl, D. R., Bloom, B. S., & Masia, B. B. (1973). Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, the Classification of Educational Goals. Handbook II: Affective Domain. New York: David McKay Co., Inc. Simpson E. J. (1972). The Classification of Educational Objectives in the Psychomotor Domain. Washington, DC: Gryphon House.

42 Types Key Ability of Thinking [again!] Types of Thinking Evaluating Synthesising judge, appraise, choose, rate, assess,estimate, estimate, value, measure, criticise formulate, teach, design, develop, re define, dfi propose, create Analysing Applying Comprehending Knowing distinguish, differentiate, calculate, debate, relate, compare, experiment, contrast, examine demonstrate, schedule, operate, sketch, employ, use, practice restate, identify, discuss, locate, recognise, review, explain, tell, clarify recall, define, state, list, repeat, name, recount, present, find

43 Becoming a Critical Thinker Yourself Find the information you need Digest it grasp the key points, arguments & evidence Analysethese establish how ideas fit together andrelate to eachother; assess similarities & differences between the ideas; assess contradictions etc Try to take ownership of the ideas, arguments etc for yourself move from what someone says to what someone is saying Develop & establish your perspectives based on these ideas Develop your thinking & arguments, and bring together sources of information to support yourself Synthesise your sources bring together different sources of information to give authority to your arguments & ideas you are developing Evaluate always evaluate your ideas andother people s ideas (e.g. relevance, credibility, worth). Evaluate conclusions you are starting to draw Apply demonstrate your thinking, ideas and arguments (in exams, essays, dissertations etc)

44 Is this a fair summary? Why / not? 1. Is open minded and mindful of alternatives 2. Tries to be well informed 3. Judgeswell thecredibility of sources 4. Identifies conclusions, reasons, and assumptions 5. Judges well the quality of an argument, including its reasons, assumptions, and evidence 6. Can well develop & defend a reasonable position 7. Ak Asks appropriate it clarifying i questions 8. Formulates plausible hypotheses; plans experiments well 9. Defines terms in a way appropriate to the context 10. Draws conclusions when warranted cautiously! 11. Integrates all items in this list

45 What is Analysis Being Analytical? In depth depth, close examination of the literature Evidence & its interpretation? Arguments & their solidity? The why, the what & the how of research Connections & links between ideas / theories? [Likewise, Similarly, ] Differences & dissimilarities between ideas / theories? [In contrast,, Conversely, ] Thorough / thoroughness Rigorous / rigour Critical attitude

46 Being Critical Thinking Critically... What is the basis of the author s views does it draw on original research or is it developing the work of others (and if so, who; how; why)? What is the background and experience of the author practising i accountant, t manager, journalist, academic, etc. from which their ideas derive? If the work is research based, what enquiry methods are being used and how was the data collected? How recent is the reference when was it published, when was the research carried out, and is it still relevant?

47 Being Critical Thinking Critically... Logic of the reasoning behind the argument / claim? Quality of evidence to support the argument / claim? Critical Literature Review Appropriacy & rigour of methodology? Who is the author/s? What is their background?