CRITICAL THINKING
... what is the question? Workshop aim
• To provide an opportunity for participants to explore critical thinking in theory, and in practice as relates to their own work with students Intended outcomes
Participants will have opportunities to:
develop their awareness of critical thinking in general, and as it relates to their own subject and their teaching
evaluate a model for the development of critical thinking and argument
What is critical thinking?
You first!
take a few minutes to jot down your ‘first thoughts’ in response to the questions: a) what is CT in general? b) what is CT in your discipline?
Then discuss … ‘critical’
Ancient Greek κριτικός (kritikos, “of or for judging, able to discern”) < κρίνω (krinō, “I separate, judge”) http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/critical - accessed 13/03/2012 ‘thinking’
Analysis: process of separating a whole into its parts to discover function, relationship, etc. See also logic; psychology.
Cogitation: 1. act of meditation, contemplation. 2. faculty of thinking. 3. a thought; a design or plan.
Dianoetic: relating to operation of the mind through logical rather than intuitive thought processes; intellectual activity.
Ideation: the process of forming ideas. — ideational, adj.
Illation: the process of inferring or deducing; also, that which is inferred or deduced. — illative, adj. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/thinking - accessed 13/03/2012 So what is critical thinking?
a set of skills and mental processes for problem- solving? (e.g. de Bono, 1996)
a way of formulating or critiquing arguments? (e.g. Warburton, 2007; Kaye 2009)
a discipline-specific practice (e.g. McPeck, 1990)
a general intellectual approach or attitude? (e.g. Paul and Elder, 2006)
all of the above, plus ... (e.g. Cottrell, 2005; Mason, 2008; hooks, 2010; Noddings 2012)
Suggested questions for discussion:
In your view can thinking be taught independently of a particular subject?
Is critical thinking mostly to do with cognitive skills? Does affect (emotion or psychological state) have a role in thinking?
What is the role of language – social or regional dialect, or subject-specific language – in the development of critical thinking?
“WHAT IS WANTED IS NOT THE WILL TO BELIEVE, BUT THE WISH TO FIND OUT ...”
BERTRAND RUSSELL, SCEPTICAL ESSAYS, 1928; 2004) The philosophical background
Questioning: the Socratic method
Eliciting detail to clarify a description, e.g. “Tell me more about ...”; “What kind of ... was it?” To reveal underlying assumptions, or test conclusions, e.g. “Is that always the case?”; “Might there be another reason for that happening ...?” To identify evidence, e.g. “Why might these data have arisen?”; “What changed as a result of ...?” To examine the implications of a particular action, e.g. “What might happen as a result of ...?”
Argument in philosophy
Arguments from Authority Formal Logic
the valid manipulation of symbolic forms e.g.
if X = 2Y then Y = 0.5X
if X = 3 and Y = 1.5 then X plus Y = 4.5
The validity of the argument is based on the consistency of the premises. If the premises are also true then the argument will be sound – valid and true!
Deductive Logic
All men must die
Socrates is a man
Socrates will die Deductive Reasoning
Deductive reasoning leads to a conclusion whose truth is based on the truth of its premises – if a and b are true then c will follow. These may be valid or invalid. ‘Validity’ of the argument - i.e. internal consistency - does NOT imply that the premises are true! ‘Valid’ argument but untrue!
All men are stupid
Barack Obama is a man therefore
Barack Obama is stupid
‘valid’ as an argument but not true ... Invalid argument - ‘true’ conclusion!
All women are stupid
Barack Obama is not a woman
therefore
Barack Obama is not stupid Inductive Logic
In my experience, “The Archers” has always been on BBC Radio 4 after the 7pm news on weekdays
If I tune my receiver to Radio 4 at 7.02 tonight, I will hear the theme tune: “tum te tum te tum te tum...”
Inductive Reasoning
Based on probability rather than certainty.
Degree of probability not necessarily stated but can range from ‘almost certain’ to ‘quite likely’ …
Inductive logic is judged on how ‘sound’ it is – i.e. degree of likeliness to be true - dependent on factors such as number and range and conditions of observations
The truth of the premises in induction does NOT guarantee the truth of the conclusion
Arguments from Authority
Based on use of others’ reasoning. Such arguments are valid only if from a ‘true’ authority and correctly reported. What are the implications with respect to the peer review process, and academic referencing?
What do academics say?
A range of academics in science-related subjects were asked for their views on critical thinking. Here’s what some of them said:
(play sound files )
Summary: academics want students to ...
ask questions
go beyond description
analyse data
look at a number of perspectives
justify a position
come to some conclusions
Structure of Argument (after Toulmin 1958)
so, Grounds Qualifier Claim / and since /Data ‘unless…’ conclusions
Warrant ‘On account of..’ Rebuttal Backing / further evidence
Structure of Argument – a “dog and ball” story!
… rubbish was strewn all We can around and Fletcher’s ball Qualifier conclude: so, was found in the litter bin ‘unless…’ Fletcher caused and since the mess!
he is known to raid bins someone else had dropped his ball in there on account of ... (unlikely) …
there often being food wrappers inside Structure of Argument (after Toulmin, 1958) Data Qualifier ‘unless…’ Claim or So, conclusion , Since
Backing / Warrant ‘On Evidence account of..’ Rebuttal Building an argument
Premise: statement or conclusion Then (claim)
Because Since (justify) (support) Detailed Key research findings example or or reasoning. case-study Adapted from Mitchell & Riddle 2000 Argument and paragraph structure First sentence ‘controls’ the rest of the paragraph Claim / Controlling Implications statement Identify the significance and link to next paragraph Support Justification
Theory & references Unpack the controlling statement Evidence Describe Case studies Explain Further analysis Analyse ‘The treatment of choice for some patients is desmopressin acetate because it decreases night-time urine production by acting on the renal collecting ducts to increase water absorption. Matthiason et al (2002) studied 151 patients (average age 64.5 years) of which 86 were treated with desmopressin acetate. They found that nocturnal voids decreased by 43% compared with 12% in the control group, suggesting moderate success.’
‘Although this medication isn’t licensed for the over 65s, desmopressin has been proposed as safe for this age group (Kuo 2002; Cannon et al 1999; Asplund et al 1998; Lose et al 2003 and 2004; Kuo 2002; Weatherall 2004). The body of literature in the use of this medication reports few side effects, but this cannot be applied to the elderly, especially where there is suspicion of cardiac failure, because of the risk of fluid retention. Adverse effects are a leading concern for the older population, most notably hyponatraemia [ref + evidence…]. If desmopressin is judged the best option for the individual case, then special precautions should be taken. Another option would be to consider other medication (for example anticonvulsants, SSRIs and diuretics), but perhaps best of all may be management without medication…’
(Adapted from Eustice and Wragg, 2005) Desmopressin should be used with caution when responding to nocturia (waking in the night to urinate) in elderly people… Claim / Controlling statement So what? Implications Therefore, medical …because there staff need to consider may be more Desmopressin as an appropriate adjunct to relieving Support Justification responses given nocturia and possible side implement regular This can be seen effects and the monitoring, and in… fact that other consider managing Evidence concerns may nocturia without underlie Example medication. nocturia. Case study [subject of next Theory paragraph]. …that reminds me of a story! (Gregory Bateson, 1979 ‘Mind and Nature’)
“I keep six honest serving-men: (they taught me all I knew) their names are What and Where and When and How and Why and Who.”
From “The Elephant's Child” Kipling, 1902
Question-Focussed Critical Thinking description Who? When? Where?
What?
Topic How? What next? Issue
So what? analysis evaluation Why? What if? The ‘metafunctions’ required in academic work and essential to critical thinking. Increasing levels of complexity and criticality:
Evaluation
Analysis
Description Discussions with academics identified the following examples of functions within the three ‘meta’ levels.
Conclude Critique Reflect on Evaluate Interpret Refute Problematise Synthesise Discuss Question
Triangulate Generalise Illustrate Argue Explain Evidence Analyse Support Compare Contrast Link
Introduce Report Describe Narrate Contextualise Outline Categorise Summarise Define Signpost
Question-Focussed Critical Thinking description Who? When? Where?
What?
Topic How? What next? Issue
So what? analysis evaluation Why? What if? Thought and language
Aloysius P. Martinich: “Since language is the expression of thought, clear language is the expression of clear thought.”
John Searle: “If you can’t express it clearly you don’t understand it yourself”
To give feedback on the Plymouth model, email: [email protected]
Online Resources for CT
Learning Development at Plymouth University, Critical Thinking study guide: www.learningdevelopment.plymouth.ac.uk/
LearnHigher Critical Thinking videos and resources www.learnhigher.ac.uk
The Critical Thinking Community: www.criticalthinking.org/
Peg Tittle, Critical Thinking - an appeal to reason: www.routledge.com/textbooks/tittle/
Critical Thinking on the Web: www.austhink.com/critical/
Critical.thinking.net: http: www.criticalthinking.net/index.html
Richard Paul and Linda Elder: Foundation for Critical Thinking www.criticalthinking.org
Critical thinking = commitment & disposition to subject all thinking to rigorous critique: a) dividing thought into elements: information, concepts, interpretations and assumptions and b) using criteria they claim are “universal intellectual standards” including: clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance and fairness. Click here to go back to slide seven Stella Cottrell
... in her popular book on critical thinking, Cottrell stresses CT as a process involving the development of the following skills:
observation, reasoning, decision-making; analysis; judgment and persuasion;
along with “categorising, selection, differentiation, comparing and contrasting”. (2005; 4) Click here to go back to slide seven