Critical thinking goals
Is thinking, thinking is al thinking in every domain of knowledge and intellectual standards to assess student le intellectual sal intellectual ng with analysis & assessment of ry of critical thinking guishing between inert information, activated ignorance, activated al thinking: identifying the guishing between inferences and al thinking development: a stage ng a critic of your nd russell on critical ate this page from english... Machine translated pages not guaranteed for here for our professional al thinking: identifying the ct the goal of this chapter is to set out clearly what critical thinking is in general and how it plays itself out in a variety of domains: in reading, in writing, in studying academic subjects, and on the job. Richard paul and jane willsen provide down-to-earth examples that enable the reader to appreciate both the most general characteristics of critical thinking and their specific manifestations on the concrete level. The danger of misunderstanding and mis-application is touched upon in this chapter at the end, but is developed at great length in another chapter, “pseudo critical thinking in the educational establishment” (p. If i can’t tell if my idea or belief is reasonable or defensible, how can i have confidence in my thinking, or in myself? Effectively evaluating our own thinking and the thinking of others is a habit few of us practice. We evaluate which washing machine to buy after reading consumer reports, we evaluate which movie to go see after studying the reviews, we evaluate new job opportunities after talking with friends and colleagues, but rarely do we explicitly evaluate the quality of our thinking (or the thinking of our students). How many of our beliefs have we come to through rigorous, independent thinking, and how many have been down-loaded from the media, parents, our culture, our spouses or friends? As we focus on it, do we value the continuing improvement of our thinking abilities? Do we have parallel criteria and standards as we strive to improve our abilities, our performances in thinking? There are appropriate standards for the assessment of thinking and there are specific ways to cultivate the learning of them. The research into critical thinking establishes tools that can help us evaluate our own thinking and the thinking of others, if we see their potential benefit and are willing to discipline our minds in ways that may seem awkward at first. We present examples of student thinking that demonstrate critical and uncritical thinking as we define those terms. In other chapters, we identify approaches to teaching critical thinking that are flawed, and explain why they undermine the success of those who attempt to use them. Important research findings first finding: national assessments in virtually every subject indicate that, although our students can perform basic skills pretty well, they are not doing well on thinking and reasoning. Our students are not doing well at thinking, reasoning, analyzing, predicting, estimating, or problem solving. Critical thinking: a picture of the genuine article critical thinking is a systematic way to form and shape one’s thinking. Critical thinking is distinguishable from other thinking because the thinker is thinking with the awareness of the systematic nature of high quality thought, and is continuously checking up on himself or herself, striving to improve the quality of thinking.
As with any system, critical thinking is not just a random series of characteristics or components. Critical thinking is based on two assumptions: first, that the quality of our thinking affects the quality of our lives, and second, that everyone can learn how to continually improve the quality of his or her thinking. Critical thinking implies a fundamental, overriding goal for education in school and in the workplace: always to teach so as to help students improve their own thinking. As students learn to take command of their thinking and continually to improve its quality, they learn to take command of their lives, continually improving the quality of their lives. Comprehensive critical thinking has the following characteristics it is thinking which is responsive to and guided by intellectual standards, such as relevance, accuracy, precision, clarity, depth, and breadth. It is thinking that deliberately supports the development of intellectual traits in the thinker, such as intellectual humility, intellectual integrity, intellectual perseverance, intellectual empathy, and intellectual self-discipline, among others. It is thinking in which the thinker can identify the elements of thought that are present in all thinking about any problem, such that the thinker makes the logical connection between the elements and the problem at hand. For example, the critical thinker will routinely ask himself or herself questions such as these about the subject of the thinking task at hand: what is the purpose of my thinking? For each element, the thinker must be able to reflect on the standards that will shed light on the effectiveness of her thinking. Note: most “thinking skill” programs ignore most or all of the basic elements of thought and the need to apply standards to their evaluation. The thinker takes steps to assess the various dimensions of her thinking, using appropriate intellectual standards. But what is essential to recognize is that if students are not assessing their own thinking, they are not thinking critically. The thinker is able, not only to critically examine her thought as a whole, but also to take it apart, to consider its various parts, as well. Furthermore, the thinker is committed to thinking within a system of interrelated traits of mind; for example, to be intellectually humble, to be intellectually perseverant, to be intellectually courageous, to be intellectually fair and just. Ideally, the critical thinker is aware of the full variety of ways in which thinking can become distorted, misleading, prejudiced, superficial, unfair, or otherwise defective. Note: most “thinking skills” programs are not well integrated and lack a broad vision of the range of thinking abilities, standards, and traits that the successful critical thinking student will develop. It is thinking that yields a predictable, well-reasoned answer because of the comprehensive and demanding process that the thinker pursues. If we know quite explicitly how to check our thinking as we go, and we are committed to doing so, and we get extensive practice, then we can depend on the results of our thinking being productive.
Note: because most “thinking skills” programs lack intellectual standards and do not require a comprehensive process of thinking, the quality of student response is unpredictable, both for the students and for the teacher. It is thinking that is responsive to the social and moral imperative to not only enthusiastically argue from alternate and opposing points of view, but also to seek and identify weaknesses and limitations in one’s own position. When one becomes aware that there are many legitimate points of view, each of which — when deeply thought through — yields some level of insight, then one becomes keenly aware that one’s own thinking — however rich and insightful it may be, however carefully constructed — will not capture everything worth knowing and seeing. Because most “thinking skills” programs lack intellectual standards, the students are unable to identify weaknesses in their own reasoning nor are they taught to see this as a value to be pursued. The following section highlights examples of legitimate, substantial, comprehensive critical thinking in a variety of contexts. These examples will provide the reader with concrete samples of the criteria, the standards and characteristics integral to genuine critical thinking. Identifying the target: critical thinking at school critical thinking has an appropriate role in virtually every dimension of school learning, very little that we learn that is of value can be learned by automatic, unreflective processes. Let’s look at two students who are each “reading” a passage from a story and see if we can identify the consequences of critical and uncritical reading habits and abilities. This example is taken from an important article by stephen norris and linda phillips, “explanations of reading comprehension: schema theory and critical thinking theory,” in teachers college record, volume 89, number 2, winter 1987. We are thus invited to reconstruct, from the students’ responses, our own appraisal of the quality of their thinking. The utility of intellectual standards such as clarity, relevance, accuracy, consistency, and depth of thinking come into sharp focus once one begins to assess specific thinking for “quality. In what follows we will present episode-by-episode stephen and colleen’s thinking aloud as they work through the passage. We have chosen to make our example detailed, because we see this as the best route for providing specificity to otherwise vague generalizations about the relationship between reading and thinking. Comprehensive, legitimate critical thinking enables us to explore the meaning of the concept “to read” and to come to understand that there is a spectrum of quality of readings, some superficial and mechanical, some deep and thorough. Colleen has “read” the passage but we can quickly see that the quality of her thinking lacks characteristics that we equate with sound reasoning, with critical thinking. She has been ineffective in thinking within the system of meanings inherent in what was said in the passage she tried to read. On the other hand, stephen has “read” the passage by means of critical reasoning, effectively decoding not only the words but the writer’s thoughts. These habits, traits and abilities are among those we find in individuals for whom critical thinking is a comprehensive, substantial system of thought embedded, ideally, in every aspect of their lives.
Although colleen and stephen have each “read” the passage, a useful distinction can be drawn between “critical reading” and “uncritical reading. Colleen will only be able to improve with professional assistance, that is, with instruction that helps her assess her thinking using intellectual standards and a sense of the elements of thought. So, too, do we feel intellectual stress as we stretch our minds to develop our thinking. Let’s now look at two student written responses and examine the quality of the thinking displayed, keeping in mind the implications for the students’ future effectiveness. Observations susan is basically doing a good job critically analyzing which characteristics are desirable in a friend. Her writing is clear, relevant to the issue, systematic, well-reasoned, and reflects deep thinking for her age. Until carl learns to discipline his mind to stick to the question at hand, he will have trouble doing any quality thinking. Learning to write out our thinking is one of the best ways to improve it. Writing requires that one systematize one’s thinking, arranging thought in a progression that makes the system of one’s thought accessible to others. When the writer’s thinking lacks a clear purpose, lacks focus, lacks documentation and logic, and standards by which to judge the merit of the ideas, these flaws are revealed in the written work. Writing, then, which is excellent is excellently thought through and is produced by someone with definite standards for both thinking and writing. See the chapters: “why students and teachers don’t reason well” and “pseudo critical thinking in the educational establishment. It is obvious as we read the responses of carl and susan that each has a very different understanding of what is well-thought-out thinking and writing, critical and uncritical thinking and writing. The consequences for carl’s uncritical thinking are minimal in 8th grade, but how will he be affected when he demonstrates the same confusions on the job? We don’t often recognize that what is really important about school subjects is that they—when properly learned provide us raw materials upon which to practice thinking in a more proficient and insightful manner. Critical thinking, with its system-unlocking orientation, is the perfect set of tools to take command of the systems inherent in subject matter. Most students, unfortunately, have never been introduced to critical thinking, so cannot systematically use it to guide and empower their learning. By teaching history in a critical manner students can readily transfer what they learn to “life-centered” situations.
Critical thinking is valuable, of course, not only in school but in the world beyond school as well. If we are teaching properly, our students not only learn how to apply critical thinking effectively to their reading, writing, and subject-matter learning, they also begin to apply it to their everyday lives. The result is that students, for the first time in their lives, begin to evaluate their own thinking and do so in a way that is increasingly disciplined and objective. Let’s look at three examples of college students beginning to discover the value of applying intellectual standards to their own work and thinking. In organizing my thinking logically i have learned to break down my thought processes down into specific parts. These examples demonstrate that some students are prepared to take advantage of critical thinking instruction, though others are less ready. Identifying the target: critical thinking in the workplace with accelerating change and the increasing complexity of problems facing us at the dawn of the 21st century, we are striving to compete within the new global economic realities. Our public education system has not successfully made the shift from teaching the memorization of facts to achieving the learning of critical thinking skills. Critical thinking is valuable not only in school but in the world beyond school as well. How important, then, is it that we, ourselves, devote our professional energies to examining and assessing our own thinking? How much care, then, should we use in selecting materials that will take us where we want to go, to a deep and comprehensive understanding and working knowledge of legitimate critical thinking? Off the target: pseudo-critical thinking approaches and materials critical thinking cannot be seen, touched, tasted or heard directly, and thus it is readily subject to counterfeit, readily confused with thinking that sounds like, but is not critical thinking, with thinking that will not lead students to success in school and beyond. Critical thinking is readily falsified in the commercial world by those who seek to capitalize on its growing legitimacy. We increasingly need a regular consumer report that enables the reader to effectively recognize the counterfeits of good thinking, which are multiplying daily, to help us recognize the latest gimmick du jour. The characteristics of comprehensive critical thinking outlined in this chapter make available just a beginning set of criteria by which professionals and parents can evaluate educational resources in this field. Smooth, slick, and shallow thinking are everywhere around us, filled with promises of simple, quick, instant solutions, or misdirecting us into schemes that misspend our own or public monies. That we need sound critical thinking to protect ourselves and the public good is intuitively obvious, once we are clear about what critical thinking is and what it can do. Comprehensive, legitimate critical thinking enables us to explore the meaning of the concept ldquo;to readrdquo; and to come to understand that there is a spectrum of quality of readings, some superficial and mechanical, some deep and thorough.
Colleen has ldquo;readrdquo; the passage but we can quickly see that the quality of her thinking lacks characteristics that we equate with sound reasoning, with critical thinking. Span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"on the other hand, stephen has ldquo;readrdquo; the passage by means of critical reasoning, effectively decoding not only the words but the writerrsquo;s thoughts. Although colleen and stephen have each ldquo;readrdquo; the passage, a useful distinction can be drawn between ldquo;critical readingrdquo; and ldquo;uncritical ; /span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"most reading is performed at the lower end of the spectrum in school today. Letrsquo;s now look at two student written responses and examine the quality of the thinking displayed, keeping in mind the implications for the studentsrsquo; future effectiveness. Span/p\r\npstrongspan style=\"color: #000099; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"are we hitting the target, br / assessing student thinking in writing? Span/p\r\npspan style=\"color: #666666; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"strongemobservations/em/strong/span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"susan is basically doing a good job critically analyzing which characteristics are desirable in a friend. Span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"learning to write out our thinking is one of the best ways to improve it. Span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"writing requires that one systematize onersquo;s thinking, arranging thought in a progression that makes the system of onersquo;s thought accessible to others. When the writerrsquo;s thinking lacks a clear purpose, lacks focus, lacks documentation and logic, and standards by which to judge the merit of the ideas, these flaws are revealed in the written work. Span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"writing, then, which is excellent is excellently thought through and is produced by someone with definite standards for both thinking and writing. See the chapters: ldquo;why students and teachers donrsquo;t reason wellrdquo; and ldquo;pseudo critical thinking in the educational ;) it is obvious as we read the responses of carl and susan that each has a very different understanding of what is well-thought-out thinking and writing, critical and uncritical thinking and writing. Spanspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"the consequences for carlrsquo;s uncritical thinking are minimal in 8th grade, but how will he be affected when he demonstrates the same confusions on the job? We donrsquo;t often recognize that what is really important about school subjects is that theymdash;when properly learned provide us raw materials upon which to practice thinking in a more proficient and insightful manner. By teaching history in a critical manner students can readily transfer what they learn to ldquo;life-centeredrdquo; situations. Span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"critical thinking is valuable, of course, not only in school but in the world beyond school as well. Letrsquo;s look at three examples of college students beginning to discover the value of applying intellectual standards to their own work and thinking. I often say one thing and do ;br / br / strongkristin:/strong ldquo;this semester i have learned how to organize my thinking through critical thinking. I certainly didnrsquo;;/span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"these examples demonstrate that some students are prepared to take advantage of critical thinking instruction, though others are less ready.
Span/p\r\npstrongspan style=\"color: #000099; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"identifying the target: br / critical thinking in the workplace/span/strong/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"with accelerating change and the increasing complexity of problems facing us at the dawn of the 21st century, we are striving to compete within the new global economic realities. Span/p\r\n/td\r\n/tr\r\n/tbody\r\n/table\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"critical thinking is valuable not only in school but in the world beyond school as well. Span/p\r\npspan style=\"color: #000099; font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"strongoff the target: br / pseudo-critical thinking approaches and materials/strong/span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"critical thinking cannot be seen, touched, tasted or heard directly, and thus it is readily subject to counterfeit, readily confused with thinking that sounds like, but is not critical thinking, with thinking that will not lead students to success in school and beyond. Span/p\r\npspan style=\"font-family: arial,helvetica,sans-serif;\"that we need sound critical thinking to protect ourselves and the public good is intuitively obvious, once we are clear about what critical thinking is and what it can do. Thinking: identifying the targets sublinks:Content is thinking, thinking is al thinking in every domain of knowledge and intellectual standards to assess student le intellectual sal intellectual ng with analysis & assessment of ry of critical thinking guishing between inert information, activated ignorance, activated al thinking: identifying the guishing between inferences and al thinking development: a stage ng a critic of your nd russell on critical viewing articles in our online library, please contribute to our work. Like all significant organizations, we require funding to continue our the way, we give gifts for goals of critical are the primary goals, or aims, of critical thinking? Think there are two distinct sets of 1: improve the quality of our thinking (beliefs, judgments and decisions). One of the aims of critical thinking is to improve the quality of our beliefs, judgments and does this mean? But they can be rational or irrational, justified or unjustified, effective or ineffective, and so are all different ways that the quality of our thinking can be improved, and this is one of the goals of critical thinking — to improve the quality of our 2: learn to think critically and independently for ’s the second goal of critical thinking? We don’t want to think of ourselves as mindlessly parroting what we’ve been told to believe by governments, corporations, the media, religion, our peers, and so values are often associated with the aims of critical thinking, and they should , another important aim of critical thinking is to learn to think for ourselves, to be able to claim ownership and responsibility for our beliefs, judgments and my more recent writing i’ve condensed this discussion even further, when i need to be goals of critical thinking are:To improve the quality of our learn to think for goals express our fundamental critical thinking a reply cancel email address will not be published. Critical thinking is goals of critical al thinking is always for persuasion matrix and the challenge of critical al thinking for al thinking for freedom of al thinking for personal al thinking for healthy al thinking for critical thinking education has failed schools were never designed to teach critical and the problem of critical thinking education (or, the dojo vs the street). Thinking as a martial s we can learn from the popularity of martial arts classroom is my : mixed martial arts for critical ng and critical 2: critical : to develop thinkers who are able to unify factual, creative, rational, and value-sensitive modes of thought. Critical thinking will be taught and used throughout the general education curriculum in order to develop students' awareness of their own thinking and problem-solving procedures. To integrate new skills into their customary ways of thinking, students must be actively engaged in practicing thinking skills and applying them to open-ended ts will be able to:Gather factual information and apply it to a given problem in a manner that is relevant, clear, comprehensive, and conscious of possible bias in the information e and seek out a variety of possible goals, assumptions, interpretations, or perspectives which can give alternative meanings or solutions to given situations or e the logical connections among the facts, goals, and implicit assumptions relevant to a problem or claim; generate and evaluate implications that follow from ize and articulate the value assumptions which underlie and affect decisions, interpretations, analyses, and evaluations made by ourselves and others. Other countries: (international access code) + ping minds: a resource book for teaching thinking, 3rd by arthur l. Goals for a critical thinking curriculum and its al thinking, as the term is generally used these days, roughly means reasonable and reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do. In doing such thinking, it is helpful to employ the dispositions and abilities outlined in this chapter. These can also serve as a set of comprehensive goals for a critical thinking curriculum and for guiding its chapter is intended to be pedagogically and psychometrically useful, not theoretically elegant.
It outlines critical thinking content only, without specifying grade level, curriculum sequence, emphasis, teaching approach, or type of subject matter involved (such as standard content in a given discipline, content for everyday living, and vocational content).
