Critical thinking

Last updated

Sculpture of Socrates Head of Socrates in Palazzo Massimo alle Terme (Rome).JPG
Sculpture of Socrates

Critical thinking is the analysis of facts to form a judgment. [1] The subject is complex, and several different definitions exist, which generally include the rational, skeptical, unbiased analysis, or evaluation of factual evidence. Critical thinking is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. [2] It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem-solving abilities as well as a commitment to overcome native egocentrism [3] [4] and sociocentrism.

Contents

History

The earliest documentation of critical thinking are the teachings of Socrates recorded by Plato. Socrates established the fact that one cannot depend upon those in "authority" to have sound knowledge and insight. He demonstrated that persons may have power and high position and yet be deeply confused and irrational. He established the importance of asking deep questions that probe profoundly into thinking before we accept ideas as worthy of belief.

Socrates established the importance of seeking evidence, closely examining reasoning and assumptions, analyzing basic concepts, and tracing out implications not only of what is said but of what is done as well. His method of questioning is now known as "Socratic questioning" and is the best known critical thinking teaching strategy. In his mode of questioning, Socrates highlighted the need for thinking for clarity and logical consistency. He asked people questions to reveal their irrational thinking or lack of reliable knowledge. Socrates demonstrated that having authority does not ensure accurate knowledge. He established the method of questioning beliefs, closely inspecting assumptions and relying on evidence and sound rationale. Plato recorded Socrates' teachings and carried on the tradition of critical thinking. Aristotle and subsequent Greek skeptics refined Socrates' teachings, using systematic thinking and asking questions to ascertain the true nature of reality beyond the way things appear from a glance. [5]

Socrates set the agenda for the tradition of critical thinking, namely, to reflectively question common beliefs and explanations, carefully distinguishing beliefs that are reasonable and logical from those that—however appealing to our native egocentrism, however much they serve our vested interests, however comfortable or comforting they may be—lack adequate evidence or rational foundation to warrant belief.

Critical thinking was described by Richard W. Paul as a movement in two waves (1994). [6] The "first wave" of critical thinking is often referred to as a 'critical analysis' that is clear, rational thinking involving critique. Its details vary amongst those who define it. According to Barry K. Beyer (1995), critical thinking means making clear, reasoned judgments. During the process of critical thinking, ideas should be reasoned, well thought out, and judged. [7] The U.S. National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking [8] defines critical thinking as the "intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action." [9]

Etymology

In the term critical thinking, the word critical , (Grk. κριτικός = kritikos = "critic") derives from the word critic and implies a critique; it identifies the intellectual capacity and the means "of judging", "of judgement", "for judging", and of being "able to discern". [10] The intellectual roots of critical [11] thinking are as ancient as its etymology, traceable, ultimately, to the teaching practice and vision of Socrates [12] 2,500 years ago who discovered by a method of probing questioning that people could not rationally justify their confident claims to knowledge.

Definitions

Traditionally, critical thinking has been variously defined as follows:

Contemporary critical thinking scholars have expanded these traditional definitions to include qualities, concepts, and processes such as creativity, imagination, discovery, reflection, empathy, connecting knowing, feminist theory, subjectivity, ambiguity, and inconclusiveness. Some definitions of critical thinking exclude these subjective practices. [22] [13]

  1. According to Ennis, “Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action.” [23] This definition Ennis provided is highly agreed by Harvey Siegel, [24] Peter Facione, [20] and Deanna Kuhn. [25]
  2. According to the definition by Ennis, critical thinking requires a lot of attention and brain function. When critical thinking approach toward education it will help the students brain to be more function-able and understand texts differently.
  3. Critical thinking can be specifically identified into many different portions, different fields of student requires different types of critical thinking. Critical thinking provides more angles and perspectives upon the same material,

Logic and rationality

The ability to reason logically is a fundamental skill of rational agents, hence the study of the form of correct argumentation is relevant to the study of critical thinking. It is, therefore, linked to the field of logic, which is concerned with the analysis of arguments, including the appraisal of their correctness or incorrectness. [26] Another interpretation holds that in the field of epistemology, critical thinking is considered as the logically correct thinking, which allows the differentiation between the logically true and the logically false statements. [27]

"First wave" logical thinking consists of understanding the connections between two concepts or points in thought. It follows a philosophy where the thinker is removed from the train of thought, while the connections and its analysis are devoid of any bias. Kerry S. Walters describes this ideology in his essay Beyond Logicism in Critical Thinking as follows: "A logistic approach to critical thinking conveys the message to students that thinking is legitimate only when it conforms to the procedures of informal (and, to a lesser extent, formal) logic and that the good thinker necessarily aims for styles of examination and appraisal that are analytical, abstract, universal, and objective. This model of thinking has become so entrenched in conventional academic wisdom that many educators accept it as canon". [28] The adoption of these principals parallels themselves with the increasing reliance on a quantitative understanding of the world.

In the ‘second wave’ of critical thinking, as defined by Walters, [28] many authors moved away from the logocentric mode of critical thinking that the ‘first wave’ privileged, especially in institutions of higher learning. Scholars began to take a more inclusive view of what constituted critical thinking, but rationality and logic are still widely accepted in many circles as the primary examples of critical thinking. Walters summarizes logicism as "the unwarranted assumption that good thinking is reducible to logical thinking". [28]

Deduction, abduction and induction

Argument terminology used in logic Argument terminology used in logic.png
Argument terminology used in logic

There are three types of logical reasoning. Informally, two kinds of logical reasoning can be distinguished in addition to formal deduction, which are induction and abduction.

Deduction

 e.g., X is human and all humans have a face, so X has a face.

Induction

  • Induction is drawing a conclusion from a pattern that is guaranteed by the strictness of the structure to which it applies.

e.g. The sum of even integers is even.

Let then are even by definition. which is even so summing two even numbers results in an even number.

Abduction

  • Abduction is drawing a conclusion using a heuristic that is likely, but not inevitable given some foreknowledge.
 e.g., I observe sheep in a field, and they appear white from my viewing angle, so sheep are white.       Contrast with the deductive statement:"Some sheep are white on at least one side."

Critical thinking and rationality

Kerry S. Walters, professor emeritus of philosophy at Gettysburg College, argues that rationality demands more than just logical or traditional methods of problem solving and analysis or what he calls the "calculus of justification" but also considers "cognitive acts such as imagination, conceptual creativity, intuition and insight" (p. 63). These "functions" are focused on discovery, on more abstract processes instead of linear, rules-based approaches to problem-solving. The linear and non-sequential mind must both be engaged in the rational mind. [28]

The ability to critically analyze an argument – to dissect structure and components, thesis and reasons – is essential. But so is the ability to be flexible and consider non-traditional alternatives and perspectives. These complementary functions are what allow for critical thinking to be a practice encompassing imagination and intuition in cooperation with traditional modes of deductive inquiry. [28]

Functions

The list of core critical thinking skills includes observation, interpretation, analysis, inference, evaluation, explanation, and metacognition. According to Reynolds (2011), an individual or group engaged in a strong way of critical thinking gives due consideration to establish for instance: [29]

In addition to possessing strong critical-thinking skills, one must be disposed to engage problems and decisions using those skills. Critical thinking employs not only logic but broad intellectual criteria such as clarity, credibility, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, significance, and fairness. [30]

Critical thinking calls for the ability to:

In sum:

"A persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports or refutes it and the further conclusions to which it tends." [31]

Habits or traits of mind

The habits of mind that characterize a person strongly disposed toward critical thinking include a desire to follow reason and evidence wherever they may lead, a systematic approach to problem solving, inquisitiveness, even-handedness, and confidence in reasoning. [32]

According to a definition analysis by Kompf & Bond (2001), critical thinking involves problem solving, decision making, metacognition, [33] rationality, rational thinking, reasoning, knowledge, intelligence and also a moral component such as reflective thinking. Critical thinkers therefore need to have reached a level of maturity in their development, possess a certain attitude as well as a set of taught skills.

There is a postulation by some writers that the tendencies from habits of mind should be thought as virtues to demonstrate the characteristics of a critical thinker. [34] These intellectual virtues are ethical qualities that encourage motivation to think in particular ways towards specific circumstances. However, these virtues have also been criticized by skeptics, who argue that there is lacking evidence for this specific mental basis that are causative to critical thinking. [35]

Research

Edward M. Glaser proposed that the ability to think critically involves three elements: [31]

  1. An attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one's experiences
  2. Knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning
  3. Some skill in applying those methods.

Educational programs aimed at developing critical thinking in children and adult learners, individually or in group problem solving and decision making contexts, continue to address these same three central elements.

The Critical Thinking project at Human Science Lab, London, is involved in the scientific study of all major educational system in prevalence today to assess how the systems are working to promote or impede critical thinking. [36]

Contemporary cognitive psychology regards human reasoning as a complex process that is both reactive and reflective. [37] This presents a problem which is detailed as a division of a critical mind in juxtaposition to sensory data and memory.

The psychological theory disposes of the absolute nature of the rational mind, in reference to conditions, abstract problems and discursive limitations. Where the relationship between critical thinking skills and critical thinking dispositions is an empirical question, the ability to attain causal domination exists, for which Socrates was known to be largely disposed against as the practice of Sophistry. Accounting for a measure of "critical thinking dispositions" is the California Measure of Mental Motivation [38] and the California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory. [39] The Critical Thinking Toolkit is an alternative measure that examines student beliefs and attitudes about critical thinking [40]

Education

John Dewey is one of many educational leaders who recognized that a curriculum aimed at building thinking skills would benefit the individual learner, the community, and the entire democracy. [41]

Critical thinking is significant in the learning process of internalization, in the construction of basic ideas, principles, and theories inherent in content. And critical thinking is significant in the learning process of application, whereby those ideas, principles, and theories are implemented effectively as they become relevant in learners' lives.

Each discipline adapts its use of critical thinking concepts and principles. The core concepts are always there, but they are embedded in subject-specific content. For students to learn content, intellectual engagement is crucial. All students must do their own thinking, their own construction of knowledge. Good teachers recognize this and therefore focus on the questions, readings, activities that stimulate the mind to take ownership of key concepts and principles underlying the subject.

Historically, the teaching of critical thinking focused only on logical procedures such as formal and informal logic. This emphasized to students that good thinking is equivalent to logical thinking. However, a second wave of critical thinking, urges educators to value conventional techniques, meanwhile expanding what it means to be a critical thinker. In 1994, Kerry Walters [42] compiled a conglomeration of sources surpassing this logical restriction to include many different authors’ research regarding connected knowing, empathy, gender-sensitive ideals, collaboration, world views, intellectual autonomy, morality and enlightenment. These concepts invite students to incorporate their own perspectives and experiences into their thinking.

In the English and Welsh school systems, Critical Thinking is offered as a subject that 16- to 18-year-olds can take as an A-Level. Under the OCR exam board, students can sit two exam papers for the AS: "Credibility of Evidence" and "Assessing and Developing Argument". The full Advanced GCE is now available: in addition to the two AS units, candidates sit the two papers "Resolution of Dilemmas" and "Critical Reasoning". The A-level tests candidates on their ability to think critically about, and analyze, arguments on their deductive or inductive validity, as well as producing their own arguments. It also tests their ability to analyze certain related topics such as credibility and ethical decision-making. However, due to its comparative lack of subject content, many universities do not accept it as a main A-level for admissions. [43] Nevertheless, the AS is often useful in developing reasoning skills, and the full Advanced GCE is useful for degree courses in politics, philosophy, history or theology, providing the skills required for critical analysis that are useful, for example, in biblical study.

There used to also be an Advanced Extension Award offered in Critical Thinking in the UK, open to any A-level student regardless of whether they have the Critical Thinking A-level. Cambridge International Examinations have an A-level in Thinking Skills. [44]

From 2008, Assessment and Qualifications Alliance has also been offering an A-level Critical Thinking specification. [45] OCR exam board have also modified theirs for 2008. Many examinations for university entrance set by universities, on top of A-level examinations, also include a critical thinking component, such as the LNAT, the UKCAT, the BioMedical Admissions Test and the Thinking Skills Assessment.

In Qatar, critical thinking was offered by AL-Bairaq—an outreach, non-traditional educational program that targets high school students and focuses on a curriculum based on STEM fields. The idea behind AL-Bairaq is to offer high school students the opportunity to connect with the research environment in the Center for Advanced Materials (CAM) at Qatar University. Faculty members train and mentor the students and help develop and enhance their critical thinking, problem-solving, and teamwork skills. [46] [ failed verification ]

Efficacy

In 1995, a meta-analysis of the literature on teaching effectiveness in higher education was undertaken. [47] The study noted concerns from higher education, politicians, and business that higher education was failing to meet society's requirements for well-educated citizens. It concluded that although faculty may aspire to develop students' thinking skills, in practice they have tended to aim at facts and concepts utilizing lowest levels of cognition, rather than developing intellect or values.

In a more recent meta-analysis, researchers reviewed 341 quasi- or true-experimental studies, all of which used some form of standardized critical thinking measure to assess the outcome variable. [48] The authors describe the various methodological approaches and attempt to categorize the differing assessment tools, which include standardized tests (and second-source measures), tests developed by teachers, tests developed by researchers, and tests developed by teachers who also serve the role as the researcher. The results emphasized the need for exposing students to real-world problems and the importance of encouraging open dialogue within a supportive environment. Effective strategies for teaching critical thinking are thought to be possible in a wide variety of educational settings. [48] One attempt to assess the humanities' role in teaching critical thinking and reducing belief in pseudoscientific claims was made at North Carolina State University. Some success was noted and the researchers emphasized the value of the humanities in providing the skills to evaluate current events and qualitative data in context. [49]

Scott Lilienfeld notes that there is some evidence to suggest that basic critical thinking skills might be successfully taught to children at a younger age than previously thought. [50]

Importance in academics

Critical thinking is an important element of all professional fields and academic disciplines (by referencing their respective sets of permissible questions, evidence sources, criteria, etc.). Within the framework of scientific skepticism, the process of critical thinking involves the careful acquisition and interpretation of information and use of it to reach a well-justified conclusion. The concepts and principles of critical thinking can be applied to any context or case but only by reflecting upon the nature of that application. Critical thinking forms, therefore, a system of related, and overlapping, modes of thought such as anthropological thinking, sociological thinking, historical thinking, political thinking, psychological thinking, philosophical thinking, mathematical thinking, chemical thinking, biological thinking, ecological thinking, legal thinking, ethical thinking, musical thinking, thinking like a painter, sculptor, engineer, business person, etc. In other words, though critical thinking principles are universal, their application to disciplines requires a process of reflective contextualization. Psychology offerings, for example, have included courses such as Critical Thinking about the Paranormal, in which students are subjected to a series of cold readings and tested on their belief of the "psychic", who is eventually announced to be a fake. [51]

Critical thinking is considered important in the academic fields for enabling one to analyze, evaluate, explain, and restructure thinking, thereby ensuring the act of thinking without false belief. However, even with knowledge of the methods of logical inquiry and reasoning, mistakes occur, and due to a thinker's inability to apply the methodology consistently, and because of overruling character traits such as egocentrism. Critical thinking includes identification of prejudice, bias, propaganda, self-deception, distortion, misinformation, etc. [52] Given research in cognitive psychology, some educators believe that schools should focus on teaching their students critical thinking skills and cultivation of intellectual traits. [53]

Critical thinking skills can be used to help nurses during the assessment process. Through the use of critical thinking, nurses can question, evaluate, and reconstruct the nursing care process by challenging the established theory and practice. Critical thinking skills can help nurses problem solve, reflect, and make a conclusive decision about the current situation they face. Critical thinking creates "new possibilities for the development of the nursing knowledge." [54] Due to the sociocultural, environmental, and political issues that are affecting healthcare delivery, it would be helpful to embody new techniques in nursing. Nurses can also engage their critical thinking skills through the Socratic method of dialogue and reflection. This practice standard is even part of some regulatory organizations such as the College of Nurses of Ontario – Professional Standards for Continuing Competencies (2006). [55] It requires nurses to engage in Reflective Practice and keep records of this continued professional development for possible review by the College.

Critical thinking is also considered important for human rights education for toleration. The Declaration of Principles on Tolerance adopted by UNESCO in 1995 affirms that "education for tolerance could aim at countering factors that lead to fear and exclusion of others, and could help young people to develop capacities for independent judgement, critical thinking and ethical reasoning." [56]

In computer-mediated communication

The advent and rising popularity of online courses have prompted some to ask if computer-mediated communication (CMC) promotes, hinders, or has no effect on the amount and quality of critical thinking in a course (relative to face-to-face communication). There is some evidence to suggest a fourth, more nuanced possibility: that CMC may promote some aspects of critical thinking but hinder others. For example, Guiller et al. (2008) [57] found that, relative to face-to-face discourse, online discourse featured more justifications, while face-to-face discourse featured more instances of students expanding on what others had said. The increase in justifications may be due to the asynchronous nature of online discussions, while the increase in expanding comments may be due to the spontaneity of ‘real-time’ discussion. Newman et al. (1995) [58] showed similar differential effects. They found that while CMC boasted more important statements and linking of ideas, it lacked novelty. The authors suggest that this may be due to difficulties participating in a brainstorming-style activity in an asynchronous environment. Rather, the asynchrony may promote users to put forth “considered, thought out contributions.”

Researchers assessing critical thinking in online discussion forums often employ a technique called Content Analysis, [58] [57] where the text of online discourse (or the transcription of face-to-face discourse) is systematically coded for different kinds of statements relating to critical thinking. For example, a statement might be coded as “Discuss ambiguities to clear them up” or “Welcoming outside knowledge” as positive indicators of critical thinking. Conversely, statements reflecting poor critical thinking may be labeled as “Sticking to prejudice or assumptions” or “Squashing attempts to bring in outside knowledge.” The frequency of these codes in CMC and face-to-face discourse can be compared to draw conclusions about the quality of critical thinking.

Searching for evidence of critical thinking in discourse has roots in a definition of critical thinking put forth by Kuhn (1991), [59] which emphasizes the social nature of discussion and knowledge construction. There is limited research on the role of social experience in critical thinking development, but there is some evidence to suggest it is an important factor. For example, research has shown that 3- to 4-year-old children can discern, to some extent, the differential creditability [60] and expertise [61] of individuals. Further evidence for the impact of social experience on the development of critical thinking skills comes from work that found that 6- to 7-year-olds from China have similar levels of skepticism to 10- and 11-year-olds in the United States. [62] If the development of critical thinking skills was solely due to maturation, it is unlikely we would see such dramatic differences across cultures.

See also

Related Research Articles

Reason Capacity for consciously making sense of things

Reason is the capacity of consciously making sense of things, applying logic, and adapting or justifying practices, institutions, and beliefs based on new or existing information. It is closely associated with such characteristically human activities as philosophy, science, language, mathematics, and art, and is normally considered to be a distinguishing ability possessed by humans. Reason, or an aspect of it, is sometimes referred to as rationality.

A fallacy is the use of invalid or otherwise faulty reasoning, or "wrong moves" in the construction of an argument. A fallacious argument may be deceptive by appearing to be better than it really is. Some fallacies are committed intentionally to manipulate or persuade by deception, while others are committed unintentionally due to carelessness or ignorance. The soundness of legal arguments depends on the context in which the arguments are made.

Rationality is the quality or state of being rational – that is, being based on or agreeable to reason. Rationality implies the conformity of one's beliefs with one's reasons to believe, and of one's actions with one's reasons for action. "Rationality" has different specialized meanings in philosophy, economics, sociology, psychology, evolutionary biology, game theory and political science.

A teaching method comprises the principles and methods used by teachers to enable student learning. These strategies are determined partly on subject matter to be taught and partly by the nature of the learner. For a particular teaching method to be appropriate and efficient it has to be in relation with the characteristic of the learner and the type of learning it is supposed to bring about. Suggestions are there to design and selection of teaching methods must take into account not only the nature of the subject matter but also how students learn. In today's school the trend is that it encourages a lot of creativity. It is a known fact that human advancement comes through reasoning. This reasoning and original thought enhances creativity.

Inductive reasoning is a method of reasoning in which the premises are viewed as supplying some evidence for the truth of the conclusion; this is in contrast to deductive reasoning. While the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument may be probable, based upon the evidence given. Many dictionaries define inductive reasoning as the derivation of general principles from specific observations, though there are many inductive arguments that do not have that form.

Argumentation theory, or argumentation, is the interdisciplinary study of how conclusions can be reached through logical reasoning; that is, claims based, soundly or not, on premises. It includes the arts and sciences of civil debate, dialogue, conversation, and persuasion. It studies rules of inference, logic, and procedural rules in both artificial and real world settings.

Belief bias is the tendency to judge the strength of arguments based on the plausibility of their conclusion rather than how strongly they support that conclusion. A person is more likely to accept an argument that supports a conclusion that aligns with his values, beliefs and prior knowledge, while rejecting counter arguments to the conclusion. Belief bias is an extremely common and therefore significant form of error; we can easily be blinded by our beliefs and reach the wrong conclusion. Belief bias has been found to influence various reasoning tasks, including conditional reasoning, relation reasoning and transitive reasoning.

Logical form form for logical arguments, obtained by abstracting from the subject matter of its content terms

In mathematics and philosophy, a logical form of a syntactic expression is a precisely-specified semantic version of that expression in a formal system. Informally, the logical form attempts to formalize a possibly ambiguous statement into a statement with a precise, unambiguous logical interpretation with respect to a formal system. In an ideal formal language, the meaning of a logical form can be determined unambiguously from syntax alone. Logical forms are semantic, not syntactic constructs; therefore, there may be more than one string that represents the same logical form in a given language.

Argument map Visual representation of the structure of an argument

In informal logic and philosophy, an argument map or argument diagram is a visual representation of the structure of an argument. An argument map typically includes the key components of the argument, traditionally called the conclusion and the premises, also called contention and reasons. Argument maps can also show co-premises, objections, counterarguments, rebuttals, and lemmas. There are different styles of argument map but they are often functionally equivalent and represent an argument's individual claims and the relationships between them.

Higher-order thinking A concept of education reform

Higher-order thinking, known as higher order thinking skills (HOTS), is a concept of education reform based on learning taxonomies. The idea is that some types of learning require more cognitive processing than others, but also have more generalized benefits. In Bloom's taxonomy, for example, skills involving analysis, evaluation and synthesis are thought to be of a higher order than the learning of facts and concepts which requires different learning and teaching methods.

Outline of thought Overview of and topical guide to thought

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to thought (thinking):

Dysrationalia is defined as the inability to think and behave rationally despite adequate intelligence. It is a concept in educational psychology and is not a clinical disorder such as a thought disorder. Dysrationalia can be a resource to help explain why smart people fall for Ponzi schemes and other fraudulent encounters.

Socratic questioning Type of question to predict knowledge on topic

Socratic questioning was named after Socrates, who is thought to have lived c. 470 BCE–c. 399 BCE. Socrates utilized an educational method that focused on discovering answers by asking questions from his students. According to Plato, Socrates believed that "the disciplined practice of thoughtful questioning enables the scholar/student to examine ideas and be able to determine the validity of those ideas". Plato, a student of Socrates, described this rigorous method of teaching to explain that the teacher assumes an ignorant mindset in order to compel the student to assume the highest level of knowledge. Thus, a student has the ability to acknowledge contradictions, recreate inaccurate or unfinished ideas and critically determine necessary thought.

In logic and philosophy, an argument is a series of statements, called the premises or premisses, intended to determine the degree of truth of another statement, the conclusion. The logical form of an argument in a natural language can be represented in a symbolic formal language, and independently of natural language formally defined "arguments" can be made in math and computer science.

Informal logic

Informal logic encompasses the principles of logic and logical thought outside of a formal setting. However, perhaps because of the "informal" in the title, the precise definition of "informal logic" is a matter of some dispute. Ralph H. Johnson and J. Anthony Blair define informal logic as "a branch of logic whose task is to develop non-formal standards, criteria, procedures for the analysis, interpretation, evaluation, criticism and construction of argumentation." This definition reflects what had been implicit in their practice and what others were doing in their informal logic texts.

John L. Pollock (1940–2009) was an American philosopher known for influential work in epistemology, philosophical logic, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence.

Logic Study of inference and truth

Logic is the systematic study of the forms of inference, the relations that lead to the acceptance of one proposition, the conclusion, on the basis of a set of other propositions, the premises. More broadly, logic is the analysis and appraisal of arguments. The premises may or may not support the conclusion; when they do not, the relation is characterized as a fallacy.

As the study of argument is of clear importance to the reasons that we hold things to be true, logic is of essential importance to rationality. Arguments may be logical if they are "conducted or assessed according to strict principles of validity", while they are rational according to the broader requirement that they are based on reason and knowledge.

Deanna Kuhn American psychologist and academic

Deanna Zipse Kuhn is an American psychologist. She is Professor of Psychology and Education at Teachers College, Columbia University. She is known for contributions to the psychology of science – the scientific study of scientific thought and behavior. Her research program has focused on the development of scientific reasoning skills, critical thinking, metacognition, informal reasoning, and constructivist teaching methods, such as problem-based learning and collaborative learning.

References

  1. Edward M. Glaser. "Defining Critical Thinking". The International Center for the Assessment of Higher Order Thinking (ICAT, US)/Critical Thinking Community. Retrieved 22 March 2017.
  2. Clarke, John (2019). Critical Dialogues: Thinking Together in Turbulent Times. Bristol: Policy Press. p. 6. ISBN   978-1-4473-5097-2.
  3. "Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development". www.telacommunications.com. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  4. "It's a Fine Line Between Narcissism and Egocentrism". Psychology Today. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  5. "A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking". www.criticalthinking.org. Retrieved 14 March 2018.
  6. Walters, Kerry (1994). Re-Thinking Reason. Albany: State University of New York Press. pp. 181–98.
  7. Elkins, James R. "The Critical Thinking Movement: Alternating Currents in One Teacher's Thinking". myweb.wvnet.edu. Archived from the original on 13 June 2018. Retrieved 23 March 2014.
  8. "Critical Thinking Index Page".
  9. "Defining Critical Thinking".
  10. Brown, Lesley. (ed.) The New Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (1993) p. 551.
  11. "Lexical Investigations: Critical Thinking - Everything After Z by Dictionary.com". Everything After Z by Dictionary.com. 25 June 2013. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  12. "Socrates". Biography. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  13. 1 2 3 "Critical – Define Critical at Dictionary.com". Dictionary.com. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  14. Facione, Peter A. (2011). "Critical Thinking: What It is and Why It Counts". insightassessment.com. p. 26. Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 July 2013. Retrieved 4 August 2012.
  15. Mulnix, J. W. (2010). "Thinking critically about critical thinking". Educational Philosophy and Theory. 44 (5): 471. doi:10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x.
  16. "Critical Thinking: A Question of Aptitude and Attitude?" (PDF). Retrieved 22 March 2018.
  17. Carmichael, Kirby; letter to Olivetti, Laguna Salada Union School District, May 1997.
  18. "critical analysis". TheFreeDictionary.com. Retrieved 30 November 2016.
  19. "Book Reviews and Notes : Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice. Joan Baron and Robert Sternberg. 1987. W.H. Freeman, & Co., New York. 275 pages. Index. ISBN 0-7167-1791-3. Paperback". Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 8 (1): 101. February 1988. doi:10.1177/0270467688008001113. ISSN   0270-4676.
  20. 1 2 Facione, Peter A.; Facione, Noreen C. (March 1993). "Profiling critical thinking dispositions". Assessment Update. 5 (2): 1–4. doi:10.1002/au.3650050202. ISSN   1041-6099.
  21. Halpern, Diane F. (2006), "The Nature and Nurture of Critical Thinking", Critical Thinking in Psychology, Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–14, doi:10.1017/cbo9780511804632.002, ISBN   9780511804632
  22. Walters, Kerry (1994). Re-Thinking Reason. Albany: State University of New York Press.
  23. Ennis, Robert H. (2015), "Critical Thinking", The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education, Palgrave Macmillan, doi:10.1057/9781137378057.0005, ISBN   9781137378057
  24. Siegel, Harvey (27 September 2013). Educating Reason. doi:10.4324/9781315001722. ISBN   9781315001722.
  25. Kuhn, Deanna (January 2015). "Thinking Together and Alone". Educational Researcher. 44 (1): 46–53. doi:10.3102/0013189x15569530. ISSN   0013-189X.
  26. Salmon, Merrilee H. (2013). Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking, Sixth Edition. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning. p. 12. ISBN   978-1-133-04975-3.
  27. Sherrie, Wisdom (2015). Handbook of Research on Advancing Critical Thinking in Higher Education. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. p. 294. ISBN   978-1-4666-8412-6.
  28. 1 2 3 4 5 Kerry S. Walters (1994). Re-Thinking Reason: New Perspectives in Critical Thinking. SUNY Press. ISBN   978-0-7914-2095-9.
  29. Reynolds, Martin (2011). Critical thinking and systems thinking: towards a critical literacy for systems thinking in practice. In: Horvath, Chrii. and Forte, James M. eds. Critical Thinking. New York: Nova Science Publishers, pp. 37–68.
  30. Jones, Elizabeth A., & And Others (1995). National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identifying College Graduates' Essential Skills in Writing, Speech and Listening, and Critical Thinking. Final Project Report (NCES-95-001) (PDF). from National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, University Park, PA.; Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC.; U.S. Government Printing Office, Superintendent of Documents, Mail Stop: SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-9328. PUB TYPE - Reports Research/Technical (143) pp. 14–15. ISBN   978-0-16-048051-5 . Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  31. 1 2 Edward M. Glaser (1941). An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking. New York, Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University. ISBN   978-0-404-55843-7.
  32. The National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identification of the Skills to be Taught, Learned, and Assessed, NCES 94–286, US Dept of Education, Addison Greenwood (Ed), Sal Carrallo (PI). See also, Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. ERIC Document No. ED 315–423
  33. "Teaching Metacognition". Metacognition. Retrieved 3 April 2018.
  34. Facione, Peter A.; Sánchez, Carol A.; Facione, Noreen C.; Gainen, Joanne (1995). "The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking". The Journal of General Education. 44 (1): 1–25. ISSN   0021-3667. JSTOR   27797240.
  35. Bailin, Sharon; Case, Roland; Coombs, Jerrold R.; Daniels, Leroi B. (May 1999). "Common misconceptions of critical thinking". Journal of Curriculum Studies. 31 (3): 269–283. doi:10.1080/002202799183124. ISSN   0022-0272.
  36. "Research at Human Science Lab". Human Science Lab. Retrieved 5 March 2017.
  37. Solomon, S.A. (2002) "Two Systems of Reasoning," in Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, Govitch, Griffin, Kahneman (Eds), Cambridge University Press. ISBN   978-0-521-79679-8; Thinking and Reasoning in Human Decision Making: The Method of Argument and Heuristic Analysis, Facione and Facione, 2007, California Academic Press. ISBN   978-1-891557-58-3
  38. Research on Sociocultural Influences on Motivation and Learning, p. 46
  39. Walsh, Catherine, M. (2007). "California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory: Further Factor Analytic Examination". Perceptual and Motor Skills. 104 (1): 141–151. doi:10.2466/pms.104.1.141-151. PMID   17450973.
  40. Stupple, E. J. N., Maratos, F. A., Elander, J., Hunt, T. E., Cheung, K. Y., & Aubeeluck, A. V. (2017). Development of the Critical Thinking Toolkit (CriTT): A measure of student attitudes and beliefs about critical thinking. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 23, 91-100.
  41. Dewey, John. (1910). How we think. Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath & Co.
  42. Walters, Kerry. (1994). Re-Thinking Reason. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  43. Critical Thinking FAQs from Oxford Cambridge and RSA Examinations Archived 11 April 2008 at the Wayback Machine
  44. "Cambridge International AS and A Level subjects".
  45. "New GCEs for 2008", Assessment and Qualifications Alliance Archived 17 February 2008 at the Wayback Machine
  46. "Welcome to Al-Bairaq World". Archived from the original on 19 April 2014. Retrieved 5 July 2014.
  47. Lion Gardiner, Redesigning Higher Education: Producing Dramatic Gains in Student Learning, in conjunction with: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, 1995
  48. 1 2 Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Waddington, D. I., Wade, C. A., & Persson, T. (2014). Strategies for Teaching Students to Think Critically: A Meta-Analysis. Review of Educational Research, 1–40
  49. Frazier, Kendrick (2017). "Humanities, Too: In New Study, History Courses in Critical Thinking Reduce Pseudoscientific Beliefs". Skeptical Inquirer . 41 (4): 11.
  50. Lilienfeld, Scott (2017). "Teaching Skepticism: How Early Can We Begin?". Skeptical Inquirer . 41 (5): 30–31. Archived from the original on 10 August 2018.
  51. Baugher, Bob; Haldeman, Philip (July–August 2019). "Teaching College Students Critical Thinking Skills by Posing as a 'Registered Psychic'". Skeptical Inquirer . Vol. 43 no. 4. Center for Inquiry. pp. 50–52.
  52. Lau, Joe; Chan, Jonathan. "[F08] Cognitive biases". Critical thinking web. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
  53. "Critical Thinking, Moral Integrity and Citizenship". Criticalthinking.org. Retrieved 1 February 2016.
  54. Catching the wave: understanding the concept of critical thinking (1999) doi : 10.1046/j.1365-2648.1999.00925.x
  55. College of Nurses of Ontario – Professional Standards for Continuing Competencies (2006) Archived 12 September 2014 at the Wayback Machine
  56. "International Day for Tolerance . Declaration of Principles on Tolerance, Article 4, 3". UNESCO. Retrieved 24 February 2016.
  57. 1 2 Guiller, Jane; Durndell, Alan; Ross, Anne (2008). "Peer interaction and critical thinking: Face-to-face or online discussion?". Learning and Instruction. 18 (2): 187–200. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.03.001.
  58. 1 2 Newman, D. R.; Webb, Brian; Cochrane, Clive (1995). "A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer-supported group learning". Interpersonal Computing and Technology. 3 (September 1993): 56–77. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x. PMID   18352969.
  59. Kuhn, D (1991). The skills of argument. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  60. Koenig, M A; Harris, P L (2005). "Preschoolers mistrust ignorant and inaccurate speakers". Child Development. 76 (6): 1261–77. CiteSeerX   10.1.1.501.253 . doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00849.x. PMID   16274439.
  61. Lutz, D J; Keil, F C (2002). "Early understanding of the division of cognitive labor". Child Development. 73 (4): 1073–84. doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00458. PMID   12146734.
  62. Heyman, G D; Fu, G; Lee, K (2007). "Evaluating claims peoplemake about themselves: The development of skepticism". Child Development. 78 (2): 367–75. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01003.x. PMC   2570105 . PMID   17381778.

Further reading

Books

Articles