Thinking Skills Group B by Nurul Aina Johari

Thinking Skills Group B by Nurul Aina Johari https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB Made with big dreams en-us 2020-03-23 09:07:42 UTC 2025-11-08 02:19:16 UTC hello@padlet.com https://padlet.net/icons/png/263a.png Effective Reading ainajohari https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475778774 When studying, especially at higher levels, a great deal of time is spent reading.

Academic reading should not be seen as a passive activity, but an active process that leads to the development of learning.

Reading for learning requires a conscious effort to make links, understand opinions, research and apply what you learn to your studies.

Everything we read tells us something about the person who wrote it. Paying close attention to how and why the author writes something will open ourselves up to their perspective on life, which in turn enriches our understanding of the world we live in.

How Reading Develops

Learning to read as a child usually results in the ability to read simple material relatively easily.

As we develop our skills in reading, the process often becomes more challenging. We are introduced to new vocabulary and more complex sentence structures. Early school textbooks offer us facts or ‘truths’ about the world which we are required to learn; we are not, at this stage encouraged to question the authority of the writers of these published materials.

As schooling progresses however, we are led to consider a range of perspectives, or ways of looking at a topic, rather than just one. We learn to compare these perspectives and begin to form opinions about them.

This change in reading from a surface approach (gathering facts) to a deep approach (interpreting) is essential in order to gain the most out of our studies.

Reading becomes not simply a way to see what is said but to recognise and interpret what is said, taking into account subtleties such as bias, assumptions and the perspectives of the author.

Academic reading, therefore, means understanding the author’s interpretation of reality, which may be very different from our own.

The Goal of Reading

Most of us read in everyday life for different purposes – you are reading this page now, for a purpose.

We read to gain factual information for practical use, for example, a train timetable or a cinema listing. For such documents we rarely need to analyse or interpret.

We may also read fiction in order to be entertained; depending upon the reader, a level of interpretation may be applied, and if reading fiction as part of an English Literature degree, then analysis of the author’s writing style, motives etc. is imperative.

Many of us read newspapers and magazines, either in print or online, to inform us about current events. In some cases the bias of the writer is explicit and this leads us to interpret what is said in light of this bias. It is therefore easy to view a particular article as a statement of opinion rather than fact. Political biases, for example, are well known in the press.

When reading academic material such as textbooks, journals and so on, you should be always reading to interpret and analyse. Nothing should be taken as fact or ‘truth’. You will be engaged in, what is termed as, critical reading.

When you read while studying an academic course, your principal goal will be to gather information in order to answer an assignment question or gain further information on a subject for an exam or other type of assessment.

Underlying this is the more general theme of learning and development, to develop your thoughts, to incorporate new ideas into your existing understanding, to see things from different angles or view-points, to develop your knowledge and understanding and ultimately yourself.

Learning, therefore, comes about not from reading and remembering details, but from developing your understanding of the meaning of the details. To engage with your ideas and opinions and rethink them in a positive and constructive way.

Necessary Reading Materials

When you are engaged in formal study, for example at college or university, there will be distinct areas of reading that you will be directed towards.

These may include:

Course Materials
Course materials will vary considerably from one institution to another and also across different disciplines and for different teachers.
You may be given course materials in the form of a book, especially if you are taking a distance-learning course, or in hand-outs in lectures. Such materials may also be available online via a virtual learning environment (VLE).
You may be expected to make your own notes from lectures and seminars based around the syllabus of the course. The course materials are your main indication of what the course is about, the main topics covered and usually the assessment required. Course materials also often point you to other types of reading materials.
Core Texts
Core texts are the materials, usually books, journals or trusted online resources which you will be directed to via the course materials.
Core texts are essential reading, their aim is usually to expand on the subjects, discussions and arguments presented in the course materials, or through lectures etc. Remember that core texts are primarily what you will be assessed on. You will need to demonstrate comprehension of theories and ideas from these texts in your assignments.
Suggested Reading
As well as indicating core texts, reading lists may also recommend other sources of material.
Suggested reading will not only increase your comprehension of a subject area but will potentially greatly enhance the quality of your written work.
Other Sources
Perhaps one of the most important academic reading skills is to identify your own additional reading materials.
Do not just stick to what you have been told to read but expand your knowledge further by reading as much as you can around the subjects you are studying. Keep a note of everything relevant you have read, either in print or online, as you will need this information for your reference list or bibliography when producing an assignment.

Attitudes to Reading

Often, when we begin to read books relating to a new topic, we find that the language and style are difficult to follow.

This can be off-putting and disheartening, but persevere; specialist subject areas will contain their own specialist ‘language’ which you will need to learn. Perseverance will mean that you become more familiar with the style of writing and the vocabulary or jargon associated with the specific subject area.

More generally, academic writing tends to use a very cautious style or language. The writer may seem to use elaborate, long sentences, but this is usually to ensure that they are saying precisely what they mean.

A useful aid to reading is to have a good quality dictionary to hand; however, you may find a specialist dictionary is necessary for some subject areas – there are many free online dictionaries also. Even though a dictionary can be useful, it should not be relied upon too heavily. Dictionaries do not often take into account the context and, therefore, you may not fully grasp the meaning the author intended by simply looking up a word or phrase.

Fundamentally it is important to remain detached from, and be objective towards, what you are reading, in order to see and understand the logic within an argument. Objectivity differs from subjectivity which means bringing your own emotions and opinions to what you read. Being objective allows you to stand back and be emotionally detached from your reading. This allows you to focus attention upon what you are reading and not on your feelings about what you read.

It helps if you have a genuine interest in the subject that you are reading about. If you find that you are reading something that is designated as relevant then it is important to try to develop an interest so that you may get out of it what is required. You may, in such circumstances, find it useful to ask yourself questions as you read, such as: “Why does the author find this theme interesting or important?”, “How does what I’m reading relate to what I already know about the topic?”

]]> 2020-03-26 06:08:01 UTC https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475778774 How to Speed Read ainajohari https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475786655

When studying, especially at higher levels, a great deal of time is spent reading.

Academic reading should not be seen as a passive activity, but an active process that leads to the development of learning.

Reading for learning requires a conscious effort to make links, understand opinions, research and apply what you learn to your studies.

How Reading Develops

Learning to read as a child usually results in the ability to read simple material relatively easily.

This change in reading from a surface approach (gathering facts) to a deep approach (interpreting) is essential in order to gain the most out of our studies.

Reading becomes not simply a way to see what is said but to recognise and interpret what is said, taking into account subtleties such as bias, assumptions and the perspectives of the author.

Academic reading, therefore, means understanding the author’s interpretation of reality, which may be very different from our own.

The Goal of Reading

Most of us read in everyday life for different purposes – you are reading this page now, for a purpose.

When you are engaged in formal study, for example at college or university, there will be distinct areas of reading that you will be directed towards.

These may include:

Course Materials
Course materials will vary considerably from one institution to another and also across different disciplines and for different teachers.
You may be given course materials in the form of a book, especially if you are taking a distance-learning course, or in hand-outs in lectures. Such materials may also be available online via a virtual learning environment (VLE).
You may be expected to make your own notes from lectures and seminars based around the syllabus of the course. The course materials are your main indication of what the course is about, the main topics covered and usually the assessment required. Course materials also often point you to other types of reading materials.
Core Texts
Core texts are the materials, usually books, journals or trusted online resources which you will be directed to via the course materials.
Core texts are essential reading, their aim is usually to expand on the subjects, discussions and arguments presented in the course materials, or through lectures etc. Remember that core texts are primarily what you will be assessed on. You will need to demonstrate comprehension of theories and ideas from these texts in your assignments.
Suggested Reading
As well as indicating core texts, reading lists may also recommend other sources of material.
Suggested reading will not only increase your comprehension of a subject area but will potentially greatly enhance the quality of your written work.
Other Sources
Perhaps one of the most important academic reading skills is to identify your own additional reading materials.
Do not just stick to what you have been told to read but expand your knowledge further by reading as much as you can around the subjects you are studying. Keep a note of everything relevant you have read, either in print or online, as you will need this information for your reference list or bibliography when producing an assignment.

Attitudes to Reading

Often, when we begin to read books relating to a new topic, we find that the language and style are difficult to follow.

]]> 2020-03-26 06:22:05 UTC https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475786655 Critical Thinking ainajohari https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475868330
What is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally, understanding the logical connection between ideas. Critical thinking has been the subject of much debate and thought since the time of early Greek philosophers such as Plato and Socrates and has continued to be a subject of discussion into the modern age, for example the ability to recognise fake news.

Critical thinking might be described as the ability to engage in reflective and independent thinking.

In essence, critical thinking requires you to use your ability to reason. It is about being an active learner rather than a passive recipient of information.

Critical thinkers rigorously question ideas and assumptions rather than accepting them at face value. They will always seek to determine whether the ideas, arguments and findings represent the entire picture and are open to finding that they do not.

Critical thinkers will identify, analyse and solve problems systematically rather than by intuition or instinct.

Someone with critical thinking skills can:

Understand the links between ideas.
Determine the importance and relevance of arguments and ideas.
Recognise, build and appraise arguments.
Identify inconsistencies and errors in reasoning.
Approach problems in a consistent and systematic way.
Reflect on the justification of their own assumptions, beliefs and values.

Critical thinking is thinking about things in certain ways so as to arrive at the best possible solution in the circumstances that the thinker is aware of. In more everyday language, it is a way of thinking about whatever is presently occupying your mind so that you come to the best possible conclusion.

Critical Thinking is:

A way of thinking about particular things at a particular time; it is not the accumulation of facts and knowledge or something that you can learn once and then use in that form forever, such as the nine times table you learn and use in school.

The Skills We Need for Critical Thinking

The skills that we need in order to be able to think critically are varied and include observation, analysis, interpretation, reflection, evaluation, inference, explanation, problem solving, and decision making.

Specifically we need to be able to:

Think about a topic or issue in an objective and critical way.
Identify the different arguments there are in relation to a particular issue.
Evaluate a point of view to determine how strong or valid it is.
Recognise any weaknesses or negative points that there are in the evidence or argument.
Notice what implications there might be behind a statement or argument.
Provide structured reasoning and support for an argument that we wish to make.

The Critical Thinking Process

You should be aware that none of us think critically all the time.

Sometimes we think in almost any way but critically, for example when our self-control is affected by anger, grief or joy or when we are feeling just plain ‘bloody minded’.

On the other hand, the good news is that, since our critical thinking ability varies according to our current mindset, most of the time we can learn to improve our critical thinking ability by developing certain routine activities and applying them to all problems that present themselves.

Once you understand the theory of critical thinking, improving your critical thinking skills takes persistence and practice.

Try this simple exercise to help you to start thinking critically.

Think of something that someone has recently told you. Then ask yourself the following questions:

Who said it?

Someone you know? Someone in a position of authority or power? Does it matter who told you this?

What did they say?

Did they give facts or opinions? Did they provide all the facts? Did they leave anything out?

Where did they say it?

Was it in public or in private? Did other people have a chance to respond an provide an alternative account?

When did they say it?

Was it before, during or after an important event? Is timing important?

Why did they say it?

Did they explain the reasoning behind their opinion? Were they trying to make someone look good or bad?

How did they say it?

Were they happy or sad, angry or indifferent? Did they write it or say it? Could you understand what was said?

What are you Aiming to Achieve?

One of the most important aspects of critical thinking is to decide what you are aiming to achieve and then make a decision based on a range of possibilities.

Once you have clarified that aim for yourself you should use it as the starting point in all future situations requiring thought and, possibly, further decision making. Where needed, make your workmates, family or those around you aware of your intention to pursue this goal. You must then discipline yourself to keep on track until changing circumstances mean you have to revisit the start of the decision making process.

However, there are things that get in the way of simple decision making. We all carry with us a range of likes and dislikes, learnt behaviours and personal preferences developed throughout our lives; they are the hallmarks of being human. A major contribution to ensuring we think critically is to be aware of these personal characteristics, preferences and biases and make allowance for them when considering possible next steps, whether they are at the pre-action consideration stage or as part of a rethink caused by unexpected or unforeseen impediments to continued progress.

The more clearly we are aware of ourselves, our strengths and weaknesses, the more likely our critical thinking will be productive.

The Benefit of Foresight

Perhaps the most important element of thinking critically is foresight.

Almost all decisions we make and implement don’t prove disastrous if we find reasons to abandon them. However, our decision making will be infinitely better and more likely to lead to success if, when we reach a tentative conclusion, we pause and consider the impact on the people and activities around us.

The elements needing consideration are generally numerous and varied. In many cases, consideration of one element from a different perspective will reveal potential dangers in pursuing our decision.

For instance, moving a business activity to a new location may improve potential output considerably but it may also lead to the loss of skilled workers if the distance moved is too great. Which of these is the more important consideration? Is there some way of lessening the conflict?

These are the sort of problems that may arise from incomplete critical thinking, a demonstration perhaps of the critical importance of good critical thinking.

]]> 2020-03-26 07:58:08 UTC https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475868330 Assessment for Higher Order Thinking ainajohari https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475872388 A Model for the National Assessment of Higher Order Thinking

Richard Paul with Gerald M. Nosich

Abstract

This paper, co-authored by Richard Paul and Gerald Nosich, was commissioned by the United States Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement of the National Center for Education Statistics. It provides exactly what its title implies: a model for the national assessment of higher order thinking. The paper consists of a preface and five main sections.

The preface delineates the problem of lower order learning, summarizes the state of research into critical thinking and educational reform, and explains the five-part structure of the paper. The first main section of the paper states and explicates 21 criteria for higher order thinking assessment. The second section makes the case for how a “rich, substantive concept of critical thinking” meets those criteria. In making this case, Paul and Nosich spell out the dangers of a non-substantive concept of critical thinking. The third section of the paper spells out four domains of critical thinking: elements of thought, abilities, affective dimensions, and intellectual standards. The fourth section of the paper makes substantive recommendations regarding how to assess the various domains of critical thinking, the test strategies that may be used, the value of the proposed strategy for the reform of education, and the suggested implementation of the proposal.

Section One: Objectives
What Should be the Main Objectives
of a Process to Assess Higher Order Thinking?

It should assess students’ skills and abilities in analyzing, synthesizing, applying, and evaluating information.
It should concentrate on thinking skills that can be employed with maximum flexibility, in a wide variety of subjects, situations, contexts, and educational levels.
It should account for both the important differences among subjects and the skills, processes, and affective dispositions that are crucial to all the subjects.
It should focus on fundamental, enduring forms of intellectual ability that are both fitted to the accelerating pace of change and deeply embedded in the history of the advancement of the disciplines.
It should readily lead to the improvement of instruction.
It should make clear the inter-connectedness of our knowledge and abilities, and why expertise in one area cannot be divorced either from findings in other areas or from a sensitivity to the need for interdisciplinary integration.
It should assess those versatile and fundamental skills that are essential to being a responsible, decision-making member of the work-place.
It should be based on clear concepts and have well-thought-out, rationally articulated goals, criteria, and standards.
It should account for the integration of communication skills, problem-solving, and critical thinking, and it should assess all of them without compromising essential features of any of them.
It should respect cultural diversity by focusing on the common-core skills, abilities, and traits useful in all cultures.
It should test for thinking that is empowering and that, when incorporated into instruction, promotes (to quote the September, 1991 Kappan) “the active engagement of students in constructing their own knowledge and understanding.”
It should concentrate on assessing the fundamental cognitive structures of communication, for example:
- with reading and listening, the ability to
- create an accurate interpretation,
- assess the author’s or speaker’s purpose,
- accurately identify the question-at-issue or problem being discussed,
- accurately identify basic concepts at the heart of what is said or written,
- see significant implications of the advocated position,
- identify, understand, and evaluate the assumptions underlying someone’s position,
- recognize evidence, argument, inference (or their lack) in oral and written presentations,
- reasonably assess the credibility of an author or speaker,
- accurately grasp the point of view of the author or speaker,
- empathetically reason within the point of view of the author or speaker.
  with writing and speaking, the ability to
- identify and explicate one’s own point of view and its implications,
- be clear about and communicate clearly, in either spoken or written form, the problem one is addressing,
- be clear about what one is assuming, presupposing, or taking for granted,
- present one’s position precisely, accurately, completely, and give relevant, logical, and fair arguments for it,
- cite relevant evidence and experiences to support one’s position,
- see, formulate, and take account of alternative positions and opposing points of view, recognizing and evaluating evidence and key assumptions on both sides,
- illustrate one’s central concepts with significant examples and show how they apply in real situations,
- empathetically entertain strong objections from points of view other than one’s own.
It should assess the skills, abilities, and attitudes that are central to making sound decisions and acting on them in the context of learning to understand our rights and responsibilities as citizens, as well-informed and thinking consumers, and as participants in a symbiotic world economy.
It should avoid any reductionism that allows a multi-faceted, theoretically complex, and authentically usable body of abilities and dispositions to be assessed by means of oversimplified parts that do not adequately reflect the whole.
It should enable educators to see what kinds of skills are basic for the future.
It should be of a kind that will assess valuable skills applied to genuine problems as seen by a large body of the populace, both inside and outside of the educational community.
It should include items that assess both the skills of thoughtfully choosing the most reasonable answer to a problem from among a pre-selected set and the skills of formulating the problem itself and of making the initial selection of relevant alternatives.
It should contain items that, as much as possible, are examples of the real-life problems and issues that people will have to think out and act upon.
It should be affordable.
It should enable school districts and educators to assess the gains they are making in teaching higher order thinking.
It should provide for a measure of achievement against national standards.

Section Two: Critical Thinking and Criteria for Assessment

What Is Included in a Rich,
Substantive Concept of Critical Thinking?

Most of the language we shall use is drawn from draft statements of the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction. The National Council has been established precisely to articulate standards in critical thinking by 50 key leaders in critical thinking research and 105 leading educators. It is in the process of establishing regional offices and setting up 75 research-based committees to articulate the state of research in the field.

THE NATIONAL COUNCIL DEFINITION

Critical thinking is 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.
This is the working definition of the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction. Though the definition as well as the other draft statements of the Council are subject to modification and refinement, the basic idea is one that is common to practitioners and researchers in critical thinking.

GLOSS ON THE DEFINITION

“In its exemplary form, [critical thinking] is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject-matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness.” (National Council Draft Statement)

| a) “It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose; problem, or question-at-issue; assumptions; concepts; empirical grounding; inferences; implications and consequences; objections from alternative viewpoints, and frame of reference.” (National Council Draft Statement)b) It entails larger-scale abilities of integrating elementary skills in such a way as to be able to apply, synthesize, analyze, and evaluate complicated and multidimensional issues. These include such abilities as clarifying issues, transferring insights into new contexts, analyzing arguments, questioning deeply, developing criteria for evaluation, assessing solutions, refining generalizations, and evaluating the credibility of sources of information. Among the abilities are included also the central forms of communication: critical reading, writing, speaking, and listening. Each of them is a large-scaled mode of thinking which is successful to the extent that it is informed, disciplined, and guided by critical thought and reflection. (Paraphrased from National Council Draft Statement.)

c) Critical thinking entails the possession and active use of a set of traits of mind and affective dimensions: independence of thought, fair-mindedness, intellectual humility, intellectual courage, intellectual perseverance, intellectual integrity, curiosity, confidence in reason, and the willingness to see objections, to enter sympathetically into another’s point of view, and to recognize one’s own egocentricity or ethnocentricity. (Paraphrased from National Council Draft Statement.)
Critical thinking — in being responsive to variable subject areas, issues, and purposes — is incorporated in a family of interrelated modes of thinking, among them: scientific thinking, mathematical thinking, historical thinking, anthropological thinking, economic thinking, moral thinking, and philosophical thinking (National Council Draft Statement).
|

Assessment of Elements of Thought

Any program for the assessment of critical thinking skills must itself be assessed in terms of its validity and reliability in testing for the ability to think about, and in terms of, the elements of thought. These abilities can be successfully assessed in three related ways: by a restricted use of standard multiple-choice items, by multiple-rating items, and by short essay items. Both multiple-choice and multiple-rating items are machine-gradable, while essay items are not.

Although our recommendations about the content of the assessment will be spelled out in detail in Section Four, some of these can be anticipated here with respect to the assessment of reasoning abilities centering on the elements of thought.
Multiple-choice testing (as in the existing Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal or the Cornell Critical Thinking Tests) is an important part of an assessment of critical thinking, but its legitimate use is restricted to testing only the most basic skills of identifying and recognizing elements of thought, and then only as they occur in relatively short and unambiguous excerpts.

Within this domain, multiple-choice questions will require students:

to identify an author’s purpose in a passage;
to rate selected inferences as justified, probably true, insufficiently evidenced, probably false, unjustified;
to select among formulations of the problem at issue in a passage those that are clearly reasonable, probably reasonable, probably unreasonable, clearly unreasonable;
to recognize unstated assumptions;
to distinguish evidence from hypotheses and conclusions;
to rate described evidence as reliable, probably reliable, probably not reliable, unreliable.

Abilities

The elements of thought do not exist in isolation from one another, nor — more importantly for the concept of an assessment procedure — do they exist outside a particular context of application. In the practice of good critical thinking, skills more closely associated with elements of thought are orchestrated into larger-domained abilities which are applied to thinking about complex and sometimes ambiguous issues, problems, decisions, theories, states of affairs, social institutions, and human artifacts.

These critical thinking abilities include being skillful at:

refining generalizations and avoiding over-simplifications,
comparing analogous situations: transferring insights into new contexts,
developing one’s perspective: creating or exploring the implications of beliefs, arguments, or theories,
clarifying issues, conclusions, or beliefs,
clarifying and analyzing the meanings of words and phrases,
developing criteria for evaluation: clarifying values and standards,
evaluating the credibility of sources of information,
questioning deeply: raising and pursuing root or significant questions,
analyzing or evaluating arguments, interpretations, beliefs, or theories,
generating or assessing solutions,
analyzing or evaluating actions or policies,
reasoning dialogically: comparing perspectives, interpretations, or theories,
reasoning dialectically: evaluating perspectives, interpretations, or theories,
reading critically: constructing an accurate interpretation of, understanding the elements of thought in, and evaluating, the reasoning of a text,
listening critically: constructing an accurate interpretation of, understanding the elements of thought in, and evaluating, the reasoning of an oral communication,
writing critically: creating, developing, clarifying, and conveying, in written form, the logic of one’s thinking,
speaking critically: creating, developing, clarifying, and conveying, in spoken form, the logic of one’s thinking.

Abilities like these play a central role in a rich and substantive concept of critical thinking. They are essential to approaching actual issues, problems, and situations rationally. Understanding the rights and duties of citizenship, for example, requires that one at least have the ability to compare perspectives and interpretations, to read and listen critically, to analyze and evaluate policies. In fact, there is no macro-ability on the list that would not be relevant or even crucial to thinking deeply about the rights and duties of citizenship.

Similarly, the capacity to make sound decisions, to participate knowledgeably in the work-place, to function as part of a global economy, to master the content in anything as complex as the academic disciplines, to apply those subject area insights to real-life situations, to make insightful cross-disciplinary connections, to communicate effectively — each of these relies in a fundamental way on having a significant number of the abilities listed. Take, for example, the capacity to make sound decisions: such decision-making is hardly possible without an attendant ability to (going down the list of abilities in order) refine generalizations, compare analogous situations, develop one’s perspective, clarify issues, and so forth.

The last four abilities listed — the ability to read, write, listen, and speak, each in a critical, informed, constructive way — are best considered not as in the usual model, not as manifestations of thinking already accomplished, but as being themselves actual modes of constructive thinking. As such, they are structured amalgams of elementary skills together with any number of other abilities.

Assessment of Abilities

The assessment of abilities, too often neglected, is essential to assessment of critical thinking. Since these are the abilities implicit in the realistic use of thinking, no assessment tool that fails to assess a significant number of these abilities could justifiably be called an assessment of higher order thinking. The assessment, moreover, needs to address such abilities directly (rather than through secondary indicators), systematically (rather than haphazardly as a result of an attempt to assess other variables like academic achievement), and in settings as authentic as possible given the requirement of uniform, relevant grading.
Assessment of abilities that meets these four criteria cannot be accomplished within the confines of a standard multiple-choice-type test. It can be accomplished, however, for all of the abilities (except those having to do with oral communication), by means of a combination of machine-gradable multiple-rating items and essay items.

For any macro-ability, there will be dimensions of the ability that are generative and other dimensions of it that are selective. In trying to solve a real problem, for example, much of one’s thinking is devoted to generating a formulation of the problem that will make it more susceptible to solution. Another, and quite different, aspect of problem solving, is the ability to select, from among a large variety of possibilities, that avenue of thought which will most likely result in a solution. Students who are trained using a rich, substantive concept of critical thinking tend to improve in both dimensions of this ability, and both are genuine dimensions of real problem-solving.

The selective dimensions of an ability can be assessed accurately, even in complex, ambiguous, and subtle cases, using multiple-rating items. The generative dimension, on the other hand, cannot. Since it requires students to come up with their own critical thinking approaches within that macro-ability, this dimension can be assessed adequately only by carefully constructed and carefully graded essay tests. Details of the assessment and samples of assessment items will be presented in Section Four.

Affective Dimensions

Higher order thinking requires more than higher order thinking skills. Critical thinking, in any substantive sense, includes more than abilities. The concept also includes, in a crucial way, certain attitudes, dispositions, passions, traits of mind. These affective dimensions are not merely important to critical thinking; they are essential to the effective use of higher order thinking in real settings.
These affective dimensions include:

thinking independently,
exercising fair-mindedness,
developing insight into egocentricity and socio-centricity,
developing intellectual humility and suspending judgment,
developing intellectual courage,
developing intellectual good faith and integrity,
developing intellectual perseverance,
developing confidence in reason,
exploring thoughts underlying feelings and feelings underlying thoughts,
developing intellectual curiosity.

Without intellectual perseverance, one could not solve the complicated, multi-faceted problems one confronts in industry. Without intellectual courage, one could not maintain a defense of citizenship rights in the face of scare tactics. Without fair-mindedness, one could not enter into another’s point of view and thus would lack that empathetic understanding necessary for a reasonable approach to living in a pluralistic society. Without developing insight into egocentricity and socio-centricity one could employ one’s reasoning skills in a merely self-serving and prejudiced way. Without confidence in reason one could not adequately address those complex and frequently ambiguous real-life problems that require reasonable decisions in the face of crucial uncertainties.

Assessment of Affective Dimensions

The assessment of affective dimensions of critical thinking is an important part of an assessment of higher order thinking. An initial problem is that from the fact that all these dimensions are essential, it does not follow that all are directly testable, nor does it follow that any of them is easily testable. For some of these affective dimensions (intellectual perseverance, for example), any testing would have to take place over an appropriately long period of time and thus could not be legitimately assessed at all during a time frame suitable for a national test.
Nevertheless, a number of affective dimensions can be assessed in a relatively straightforward way using essay items and, especially, machine-gradable multiple-rating items.

“Reasoning Within Conflicting Points of View,” a central aspect of the disposition of fair-mindedness, is already being assessed on a machine scorable test developed by Dr. Richard Paul. This Appraisal asks students to select the strongest (that is, the most defensible) argument in favor of each side of a pair of conflicting and sometimes emotionally charged points of view. Proficiency on these items indicates a fair-minded willingness to distinguish the concept of reasonable defensibility from that of personal belief.

Multiple-rating items are currently being prepared that address aspects of intellectual courage, other aspects of fair-mindedness, aspects of intellectual humility, and aspects of the development of insight into one’s own egocentricity and socio-centricity.

Intellectual Standards

In any domain where assessment is taking place, there are standards implicit in that assessment. Higher order thinking is thinking that meets universal intellectual standards. Thus, when assessing a student’s ability to compare and evaluate perspectives (a macro-ability) and to do so with fair-mindedness (a trait of mind), we would judge whether she had made such evaluations in a relevant and consistent way, with attention to accuracy, fairness, and completeness in describing each perspective, and with a sensitivity to the degree of precision appropriate to the topic.

We would assess critical thinking about and in terms of the elements of thought in very much the same way: to judge a person’s skill at recognizing the frame of reference underlying a position, we would want to judge whether she could see relevant alternatives, whether the frame of reference she identified fits the available evidence, whether her answer was deep or merely mechanical, clear or vague, fair or biased. Intellectual standards apply to thinking in every subject.

The process of learning to teach so as to foster critical thinking is the very process by means of which one establishes intellectual standards for assessing thinking, and, by extension, for assessing instruction itself. Such standards are more useful if they are made explicit — to the students who are taking the test, to those doing the assessing, and to classroom teachers. Making standards explicit benefits student test-takers because they can then see that there are standards, that the standards are not arbitrary, and that understanding the standards gives them insight into what good critical thinking is. It benefits those doing the assessing because, in addition to the reasons already mentioned, it fosters both uniformity in grading and a strong correlation between the grade and the skills being graded. Judging a response by how clearly and completely it states a position, for example, is using a critical thinking standard and dictates a certain level of assessment; judging a response by how concisely or how elegantly it states a position, on the other hand, is using a standard that is inappropriate to critical thinking assessment. Explicit standards — part of a rich and substantive concept of critical thinking — might have avoided at least some of the mistaken assessment on the California Assessment Program, cited earlier. Thus, making standards explicit promotes both the reliability and the validity of the assessment. Finally, it benefits classroom teachers because such standards can readily be built into classroom instruction. The standards, after all, are those implicit in teaching for higher order thinking; they are therefore invaluable both for teachers to use explicitly with their classes and — an essential feature of critical thinking-internalized — for students to learn to use as part of assessing themselves.

Section Four:

Recommendations of the Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique

What is the most workable solution to the design of a process to assess higher order thinking?

In this section we will 1) briefly survey existing assessment tools; 2) make recommendations regarding the substance and format of a national assessment tool — the critical thinking domains to be assessed, the varieties of assessment strategies to be used (including sample test items), and the dual interdisciplinary and intradisciplinary scope of the assessment — 3) appraise the value of the proposed assessment strategy for the reform of instruction, and 4) make recommendations regarding the implementation of the assessment.

Existing Assessment Tools

There are limitations in all twelve of the commercially available critical thinking tests as instruments for assessing higher order thinking:

Cornell Class Reasoning Test, Form X (1964)
Cornell Conditional Reasoning Test, Form X (1964)
Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level X (1985)
Cornell Critical Thinking Test, Level Z (1985)
The Ennis–Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test (1985)
Judgment: Deductive Logic and Assumption Recognition (1971)
Logical Reasoning (1955)
New Jersey Test of Reasoning Skills (1983)
Ross Test of Higher Cognitive Processes (1976)
Test on Appraising Observations (1983)
Test of Enquiry Skills (1979)
Watson–Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (1980)

In addition there are limitations in all of the other available “higher studies” tests which might be taken as a possible model for the assessing of higher order thinking: the SAT, LSAT, the Test of Academic Aptitude (British), ACT, the Graduate Record Exam, the Commonwealth Secondary Scholarships Exam (Australia). We do not have the space here to review each of these tests one-by-one. Instead we will summarize the general situation as we see it.

Though aspects and dimensions of critical thinking are tested, some more and some less, in all of the above tests, none has been designed with the 21 criteria in Sections one and two in mind. Most importantly, none was designed to serve as a national assessment tool which establishes national standards in higher order thinking and as a motivation for and guide to instruction.

Behind none of these tests was there a comprehensive model for the elements of thought, the abilities of critical thinking, or the affective dispositions (as we have here provided). The relative recentness of the bulk of scholarship in critical thinking makes it unlikely that long-established tests will fill the bill.
Of course any new test for assessing higher order thinking should be based on a thorough review of established test strategies to incorporate those with significant application.

Given the need for assessment on the basis of a rich and substantive concept of critical thinking, there are two areas where competing values and objectives come into play. The first concerns the substance and format of the test itself: Which domains exactly are to be covered, and with what emphases? What kinds of question will be asked? Will it include both interdisciplinary and intradisciplinary items? What kind of assessment questions best test for skills of citizenship and the challenges of the work place? The second area concerns the implementation of the test and how it is conceived: Should it be value-added or simply criterion-referenced? Who will do the assessing and who will be assessed? How much will the assessment cost and who will pay for it? How often will the test be given?
Some of these are difficult questions, with genuine values and goals on different sides, where reasonable cases can be made for more than one position. Others of these questions are clearer, especially once the objectives of the test as a whole are brought into focus.

Substance and Format

The overall recommendations of the Center for Critical Thinking are set forward below.

1) DOMAINS TO BE ASSESSED

The national assessment of higher order thinking must test for a rich and substantive concept of critical thinking, and this testing must be geared to assessment within all four domains of critical thinking.

A) ELEMENTS OF THOUGHT

Skills of identifying, explicating, and using the elements of thought need to be assessed. They are necessary for any of the abilities to be employed with precision, depth, or accuracy. They are required if essential affective traits are to be rooted in solid, locatable, intellectual skills and the concepts they presuppose.
Lack of a solid grounding in these skills, and the concepts behind them, results in thinking which, good intentions notwithstanding, is far removed from the close, careful reasoning demanded by the rigors of higher order thinking. Among testing personnel, lack of the informed use of these concepts is part of what results in such poor assessment tools and grading as we found in the California Direct Writing Assessment.

Critical thinking in students requires them to be able to perform well, with an expertise appropriate to their grade level, on items testing a list of skills that center around the elements of thought:

identify a plausible statement of a writer’s purpose;
rank formulations of an author’s objectives;
distinguish clearly between purposes, consequences, assumptions, and inferences;
choose the most reasonable statement of the problem an author is addressing;
discuss reasonably the merits of different versions of the question at issue;
recognize key common elements in formulations of different problems;
give a clear articulation of an author’s point of view;
identify the most reasonable statement of an author’s point of view;
recognize bias, narrowness, and contradictions in the point of view behind an excerpt;
identify assumptions and implications of a writer’s point of view;
distinguish evidence from conclusions based on that evidence;
give evidence to back up their position in an essay;
recognize data that would support, data that would oppose, and data that would be neutral with respect to, an author’s position;
recognize conclusions that go beyond the evidence;
note, in an evaluative essay, the presence, or the absence, of evidence in an excerpt;
identify the main concepts in a passage;
distinguish central from peripheral concepts;
identify the assumption underlying a given inference;
evaluate the aptness of different versions of an assumption;
choose the most reasonable statement of a background theory involved in a passage;
distinguish between inferences and assumptions;
rank different formulations of assumptions with respect to which is the most reasonable;
identify crucial implications of a passage;
discriminate between consequences that are necessary, probable, and improbable;
evaluate an author’s inferences;
make, in an evaluative essay, justified inferences;
choose the most accurate version of an author’s inferences;
draw reasonable inferences from positions they disagree with.

B) ABILITIES

Abilities, grounded in a thorough familiarity with the elements of thought, are the activities we actually use to perform our higher order thinking. Abilities like clarifying values and standards, comparing analogous situations, generating and assessing solutions, analyzing and evaluating actions or policies are the stuff of reasoning. They are the means whereby decisions are to be made, problems are to be solved, thinking in the work-place is to be strengthened, and understanding of rights and responsibilities deepened.

The abilities of critical reading and critical writing are keystones of any process to assess higher order thinking in that each of them, when considered at any level, is permeated by other critical thinking abilities. It is not as if we read and clarify values, read and compare analogous situations, write and generate solutions. To read critically is to clarify values, compare analogous situations, and to exercise the other abilities as well; to write is to generate solutions and much more besides.
Assessment of proficiency in the abilities can be keyed to student performance on test items that are geared to as many of the abilities listed on p. 127 as is feasible given the time constraints of the test.

C) AFFECTIVE TRAITS

Without assessing affective traits, only a diminished idea of critical thinking will be addressed. What allows us to confront our prejudices and analytically break them down is not just abilities but a commitment to use them for this purpose. What allows us to solve our problems in a sufficiently diligent way as to address complicated and intricate real-life problems, is again not just cognitive abilities. It is intellectual perseverance — a drive, a disposition, an affective trait. A similar point can be made for each of the intellectual traits which are the driving force behind sound and penetrating reasoning.

Assessment of the affective dimensions will concentrate on those aspects it is plausible to test for within the constraints imposed by a national assessment. These will include aspects of fair-mindedness, of the willingness to suspend judgment, of intellectual courage and intellectual integrity.

D) INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS

Assessment has to involve explicit universal standards. If we are not testing students’ abilities to be relevant, precise, logical, consistent, and the rest, then we are not assessing students’ abilities to engage in higher order thinking. And if testing personnel do not employ these same explicit standards, then they are grading for something other than higher order thinking.

Relative mastery of these intellectual standards requires students to be able to

recognize clarity vs. unclear;
distinguish accurate from inaccurate accounts;
decide when a statement is relevant or irrelevant to a given point;
identify inconsistent positions as well as (relatively) consistent ones;
discriminate deep, complete, and significant accounts from those that are superficial, fragmentary, and trivial;
evaluate responses with respect to their fairness;
prefer well-evidenced accounts to accounts that are unsupported by evidence;
tell good reasons from bad.

2) VARIETIES OF ASSESSMENT STRATEGIES

The assessment should contain three kinds of items: a) machine-gradable multiple-choice items; b) machine-gradable multiple-rating items; c) essay items.

A) MULTIPLE-CHOICE ITEMS

Legitimate use of multiple-choice items on the assessment is limited. This type of item is geared toward relatively straightforward skills of reasoning, particularly with respect to recognizing elements of thought, distinguishing one element of thought from another, and recognizing clear examples of faulty reasoning.

Two detailed samples of assessment items follow (the first, Figure 3, is on Inferences, the second, Figure 4, on Recognition of Assumptions).

Other abbreviated samples of appropriate multiple-choice items are as follows:

In the following excerpt, mark E for each item that is a piece of empirical evidence; mark C for each item that is a conclusion based on evidence; mark N for each item that is neither.…
In this test, each exercise consists of several statements (premises) followed by several suggested conclusions…. If you think the conclusion necessarily follows from the statements given, make a heavy black mark under “Conclusion Follows”; if you think it is not a necessary conclusion, put a mark under “Conclusion Does Not Follow.”
The following is a list of possible findings in relation to the experiment quoted above. For each, say whether it would support the author’s hypothesis, oppose the author’s hypothesis, or be neutral with respect to the author’s hypothesis….
Below is a series of questions. Each question is followed by several reasons. For the purpose of this test, you are to regard each reason as true. The problem then is to decide whether it is a strong reason or a weak reason….
Which of the following conclusions is C completely supported by the stated evidence, P partially supported by the stated evidence, or U unsupported by the stated evidence?
Which of the following is an implication of the author’s position in the passage cited?

B) MULTIPLE-RATING ITEMS

Though the use of multiple-choice questions is justified in assessing some micro-skills, the bulk of the machine-gradable items will be multiple rating rather than multiple-choice. Multiple-rating items allow one to ask questions where any number of answers from a provided list may be correct, or incorrect. It further allows students to rank, from a number of possibilities provided, those that are more correct. Thus students can be tested on their ability to arrange items on a continuum of reasonability. This allows much more subtle testing and grading.

The same list of possible answers can pertain to any number of independent test items. Thus, a list of twenty possibilities can be provided, and students can be asked to choose the appropriate response from that list to six different questions. There is no restriction on the number of times a given answer may be correct. Nor is there any guarantee that there will be a reasonable answer on the list to every question. Guessing, using the process of elimination, and scoring well because of test-taking skills are all but impossible.

By including clearly unreasonable choices among the multiple-rating possibilities, a grade can be much more sensitive to the degree of a macro-ability or to the intensity of an affective dimension. Thus, if there are five possible answers to a given question, they need not be graded 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Rather, they may be graded, say, 5, 4, 1, 1, -3.

We have provided two detailed samples of multiple-rating items: Figure 5 is on Reasoning Within Conflicting Points of View (and thus is an assessment of an aspect of the affective trait of fair-mindedness) and Figure 6 is on Comparing Analogous Situations (and is thus an assessment of a macro-ability). Each sample is limited here by having only four possible answers, a limitation that would not obtain on an actual test.

The following is a list of abbreviated samples of multiple-rating items, having to do with elements of thought, with abilities, with affective dimensions, and with intellectual standards.

MULTIPLE-RATING ITEMS, ELEMENTS OF THOUGHT

Here is a list of formulations of the writer’s objectives in this excerpt. Rank them from 1 to 5 with respect to which is the most reasonable in the light of the quoted passage….
For each of the underlined passages in the excerpts below, mark P on the answer sheet if it is a statement of the writer’s Purpose, C if it is a statement of the Consequences, A if it is a statement of the writer’s Assumptions, and I if it is an Inference the writer is making.
Which of the following would the author most likely give as the statement of the problem she is attempting to solve?
Read the excerpt; then, from the following list, identify the most plausible statement of the writer’s purpose.
Of the following statements of the author’s point of view in this passage, select the one from the following list that is both most reasonable and most relevant to the passage….
List A below is a list of various possible statements of the writer’s point of view in the quoted passage; List B is a list that includes possible assumptions and implications of those points of view. Match the items on list A with the items on list B…
Which of the following are main concepts in the passage cited; which are peripheral concepts?
For each inference below, decide whether the accompanying statement is U an unstated assumption, A an assertion, or N neither…
Rank the following items on a scale of 1 to 5 according to how reasonable it is as a statement of the author’s assumptions…
Look at each of the statements below as a possible consequence of the writer’s position in the excerpt cited. Rank each statement on a scale of 1 to 7, where 7 means that you consider the statement a necessary consequence of the passage, and 1 means that you consider the statement a highly unlikely consequence of the passage.
Each of the following is an inference one might draw from the passage. Rank each one on a scale from 1 to 5, according to whether it is completely justified (5) or completely unjustified (1)…
Which of the following is the most accurate formulation of the author’s inference in the cited passage?

MULTIPLE-RATING ITEMS, ABILITIES

Which of the following would be relevant to deciding whether A is a credible source of information on the topic…?
Here is a list of observations about the behavior of X’s, made by a responsible investigator. Which of the items from the following list would be a justified generalization about X’s?
A has the following beliefs about astrology. Which of the questions below would be root or significant questions that A would have to answer to claim his beliefs about astrology were rational?
A refuses to refund a customer’s money and, when asked, defends her action by stating that it is “dictated by store policy”. Which of the following would be relevant to deciding whether her action was indeed “dictated by store policy”? Which of the questions would be relevant to deciding if the store policy was rational?
Judge A makes the following ruling in a case… Which of the following is the clearest statement of the standards Judge A is using?
A compares the relation between managers and employees to the relation between teachers and students. Which of the following would A have to answer in order to continue using the analogy rationally?
A gives the following argument for…. Which of the listed comments would be the strongest objection to her argument?
Listen to the accompanying excerpt from an audiotape of a lecture by A. Which of the following questions would be of most help in clarifying A’s views?

MULTIPLE-RATING ITEMS, INTELLECTUAL STANDARDS

• The following are four definitions from Webster’s New World Dictionary. Which of them gives the clearest definition of…?
• Rank the following definitions for their precision on a scale of 1 to 7. 1 means “not precise at all”; 7 means “too precise for the subject matter”; and 4 means “exactly as precise as it should be”.
• Here is a list of data and a series of accounts summarizing the data. Which of the accounts is the most accurate summary of the data?
• For each statement below, tell whether it is relevant or irrelevant to the hypothesis in the passage cited.
• Which of the following is the fairest restatement of the author’s position [where the author is stating a highly controversial position]?
• Rank the following statements according to which are the best-evidenced and which are the least-evidenced.
• Which of the following is a good reason for believing the statement in question? Which is a bad reason? Which is somewhere in the middle?

C) ESSAY ITEMS

The full range of the use of critical thinking cannot be assessed without requiring writing on the part of the student. To confront real issues, balance competing interests, weigh objections and alternatives, and make a reasonable decision about a matter of some consequence — this is a major part of what it is to think critically.

The ability and the disposition to engage in full-fledged critical thinking is measured only in part by a person’s ability to choose from among a pre-selected list. A true measure of critical thinking, and thus of a program’s capacity to improve critical thinking, can be obtained only by including in the assessment generative as well as selective dimensions. Neither multiple-rating nor, obviously, multiple-choice items are adequate for testing this dimension.

Essay items will require proficiency in handling the elements of thought, in using appropriate abilities, in applying intellectual standards, and, what is more, it will require integrating these and bringing them to bear on a substantive issue.
Three detailed samples of essay items follow on the next page. Each has the same set of general directions.

In addition to full-blown essay tests, a series of short-justification items are currently being prepared. These would not ask students to write an essay on a topic, but would rather have them choose an answer from a pre-selected multiple-rating list and then justify their answer in a sentence of their own writing.

Interdisciplinary and Subject-Specific

SCOPE OF THE ASSESSMENT

An assessment of the results of critical thinking instruction ought to focus both on thinking within the framework of particular academic subjects, and on thinking in the interdisciplinary contexts that are so important to functioning as an autonomous, well-informed, productive member of a democracy.

A basic principle of critical thinking instruction, as applied to teaching subject matter in an area, is that (to quote the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction) “to achieve knowledge in any domain, it is essential to think critically”. A related principle is that in any domain where one is thinking well, one is thinking critically. Any example of good scientific thinking, or good historical thinking, or good anthropological thinking, or thinking in any other subject, will necessarily be an example of critical thinking: It will involve basic skills dealing with elements of thought; it will involve at least some, and probably many, of the abilities; it will involve affective traits like independent thinking and intellectual perseverance. And as far as instruction is concerned, there is a real sense in which learning biology is learning to think within and about the logic of biology.

Including critical thinking items taken from individual subject areas would also properly test those thinking skills that are more subject-specific, and it would do so in the context of presupposing a good deal of specialized knowledge. A critical thinking test in nursing or in history of art or in geology might well (in their different ways) test for skills of critical observation, while a test in sociology might assess thinking skills involved in constructing an unbiased questionnaire; a critical thinking test in English literature might well presuppose a knowledge of who Milton was, while a thinking test in physics might justifiably ask about a problem for which a knowledge of the second law of thermodynamics was taken for granted.

Even if we already had a series of critical thinking items within the various subject areas, however, we would not be testing for many of the interdisciplinary abilities we most want critical thinking for. Many of these have already been mentioned: the ability to make sound decisions in the context of understanding our rights and responsibilities as citizens, in the context of the work-place, as well-informed and thinking consumers, as members of our families, as participants in what is becoming a symbiotic and fragile world economy — the ability to reason about the gaps between subject areas, the bridges between them, and the generalizability of subjects to other areas.

To test critical thinking abilities, as they apply to these areas, what is needed are interdisciplinary questions. These are questions of broad interest, ones that shed light on the quality of and improvement in student thinking about realistic and fundamental issues; they ought to be the kind of questions that can be at least partially illuminated by well-integrated knowledge in any number of academic areas.

The national assessment we are proposing would offer a range of subject-specific items, from which students would choose those relevant to their subject-matter knowledge. The interdisciplinary items, on the other hand, would not provide choices because of the desirability of avoiding the loss of equivalency that is almost always involved. (That loss would have to be minimized in the case of subject-specific items by field testing and rewriting.)

The interdisciplinary part is constructable by experts well versed in a rich and substantive concept of critical thinking. Subject-specific critical thinking assessment items will be constructed by members of the discipline working in consultation with experts in critical thinking, perhaps the standing committees on the various disciplines of the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction. Both groups would work in conjunction with grade-level experts to construct appropriate levels of items, from the 6th-grade test through the college-graduate test.

The Value of the Proposed Assessment Strategy for the Reform of Instruction
Since higher order thinking has always been considered an important object of education, and since this assessment would furnish a measure of that concept, and since performance on this assessment would have a significant impact on the standing of the school not only in the eyes of the intellectual community but in the eyes of the public as well, administrators and teachers would have a strong motivation to become familiar with the concepts and program behind the assessment. Most importantly, teachers and others in charge of instruction and the formulation of educational goals would find in it a clear model for the articulation and integration of higher order thinking across the curriculum. Note the following:

The concept of the elements of thought not only provides a realistic analysis of the common dimensions of reasoning in every domain, it also encourages the explicit use in instruction of those critical/analytic terms which are the common possession of the intellectual community (question-at-issue, problem, evidence, data, concept, inference, assumption, implication, conclusion, point of view, frame of reference, etc.) and makes explicit the intellectual standards implicit in every subject as well as in the closely reasoned professional work in business and industry (clarity, precision, accuracy, logic, consistency . . . )
By highlighting reading, writing, speaking, and listening as modes of critical reasoning, the necessity of having instruction go beyond mere didactic coverage of content would become more intelligible. As long as reading, writing, speaking, and listening skills appear the sole province of specialized subjects and at specialized levels rather than modes of reasoning intrinsic to the construction and mastery of knowledge in any subject at any level, there will continue to be a significant lack of fit between modes of instruction and modes of necessary learning.
By highlighting the other abilities of critical thinking, each analyzed into the same elements of thought, there would be significant transfer of emphasis to important modes of higher order thinking within a larger number of student assignments. At present, many teachers fail to notice the extent to which they either presuppose that students already grasp the nature of fundamental intellectual processes, or they make assignments which, though they appear to call for such processes, can be successfully completed by simply repeating to the teacher what was said in lecture or written in the text.
By highlighting a common critical/analytic language across the curriculum, students are encouraged to seek to transfer learning and intellectual discipline emphasized in one domain of learning to other domains of learning and application. The fragmentation of the subject areas, in the minds of the students if not in fact, is now a serious problem in education. This problem is mirrored, of course, in business, industry, and government in the tendency to engage in fragmented, over-specialized problem solving which fails to address the multi-dimensional nature of many complex problems.
By highlighting the importance of intellectual discipline and grounding it in specific skills and abilities, teachers and other educational leaders will be given a reasonable impetus to help students make connections of a broader, more interdisciplinary nature. This will also be strongly re-enforced by the inclusion of everyday, multi-logical, interdisciplinary essay questions.

{Taken from Paul, R. (1993). Critical Thinking: What Every Student Needs to Survive in A Rapidly Changing World, Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation For Critical Thinking).

]]> 2020-03-26 08:01:37 UTC https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475872388 The Tendencies of Human Mind =) ainajohari https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475873967 The Human Mind Is Naturally Prone To the Following Egocentric Tendencies

egocentric memory (the natural tendency to "forget" evidence and information which does not support our thinking and to "remember" evidence and information which does)

egocentric myopia (the natural tendency to think absolutistically within an overly narrow point of view)

egocentric infallibility (the natural tendency to think that our beliefs are true because we believe them)

egocentric righteousness (the natural tendency to feel superior in the light of our confidence that we are in the possession of THE TRUTH)

egocentric hypocrisy (the natural tendency to ignore flagrant inconsistencies between what we profess to believe and the actual beliefs our behavior imply, or inconsistencies between the standards to which we hold ourselves and those to which we expect others to adhere)

egocentric oversimplification (the natural tendency to ignore real and important complexities in the world in favor of simplistic notions when consideration of those complexities would require us to modify our beliefs or values)

egocentric blindness (the natural tendency not to notice facts or evidence which contradict our favored beliefs or values)

egocentric immediacy (the natural tendency to over-generalize immediate feelings and experiences--so that when one event in our life is highly favorable or unfavorable, all of life seems favorable or unfavorable as well)

egocentric absurdity (the natural tendency to fail to notice thinking which has "absurd" consequences, when noticing them would force us to rethink our position)

]]> 2020-03-26 08:02:54 UTC https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475873967 How to Speed Read mustafa_rasheed https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475882435

When studying, especially at higher levels, a great deal of time is spent reading.

Academic reading should not be seen as a passive activity, but an active process that leads to the development of learning.

Reading for learning requires a conscious effort to make links, understand opinions, research and apply what you learn to your studies.

How Reading Develops

Learning to read as a child usually results in the ability to read simple material relatively easily.

This change in reading from a surface approach (gathering facts) to a deep approach (interpreting) is essential in order to gain the most out of our studies.

Reading becomes not simply a way to see what is said but to recognise and interpret what is said, taking into account subtleties such as bias, assumptions and the perspectives of the author.

Academic reading, therefore, means understanding the author’s interpretation of reality, which may be very different from our own.

The Goal of Reading

Most of us read in everyday life for different purposes – you are reading this page now, for a purpose.

When you are engaged in formal study, for example at college or university, there will be distinct areas of reading that you will be directed towards.

These may include:

Course Materials
Course materials will vary considerably from one institution to another and also across different disciplines and for different teachers.
You may be given course materials in the form of a book, especially if you are taking a distance-learning course, or in hand-outs in lectures. Such materials may also be available online via a virtual learning environment (VLE).
You may be expected to make your own notes from lectures and seminars based around the syllabus of the course. The course materials are your main indication of what the course is about, the main topics covered and usually the assessment required. Course materials also often point you to other types of reading materials.
Core Texts
Core texts are the materials, usually books, journals or trusted online resources which you will be directed to via the course materials.
Core texts are essential reading, their aim is usually to expand on the subjects, discussions and arguments presented in the course materials, or through lectures etc. Remember that core texts are primarily what you will be assessed on. You will need to demonstrate comprehension of theories and ideas from these texts in your assignments.
Suggested Reading
As well as indicating core texts, reading lists may also recommend other sources of material.
Suggested reading will not only increase your comprehension of a subject area but will potentially greatly enhance the quality of your written work.
Other Sources
Perhaps one of the most important academic reading skills is to identify your own additional reading materials.
Do not just stick to what you have been told to read but expand your knowledge further by reading as much as you can around the subjects you are studying. Keep a note of everything relevant you have read, either in print or online, as you will need this information for your reference list or bibliography when producing an assignment.

Attitudes to Reading

Often, when we begin to read books relating to a new topic, we find that the language and style are difficult to follow.

]]> 2020-03-26 08:09:16 UTC https://padlet.com/ainajohari/ThinkingSkillsGroupB/wish/475882435