A

Methodological tools for Geographical Research

Internal Assignment for Research Methodology in Geography

PhD Course Work, Department of Geography

Jamia Millia Islamia

By

Mehebub Sahana

1|Page
Critical Thinking is under process!

2|Page
 Content

Critical thinking........................................................................................................................4

Definitions.................................................................................................................................5

Why Critical Thinking? ............................................................................................................5

Why Teach Critical Thinking?...................................................................................................6

Characteristics of Critical Thinking...........................................................................................6

How is critical thinking different from thinking?......................................................................7

Characteristics of a critical thinker............................................................................................8

Steps of critical thinking process...............................................................................................9

Tools Used in Teaching Critical Thinking...............................................................................10

Why should we teach Critical Thinking?.................................................................................11

Critical Thinking in Education................................................................................................13

The Logic of Critical Thinking................................................................................................14

The Ethics of Critical Thinking................................................................................................15

Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework.................................................................................17

A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking.....................................................................20

A Brief Conceptualization of Critical Thinking.......................................................................23

Conclusion...............................................................................................................................24

References...............................................................................................................................24

3|Page
Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is clear, reasoned thinking involving critique. Its details vary amongst those
who define it. According to Beyer (1995), critical thinking means making clear, reasoned
judgements. During the process of critical thinking, ideas should be reasoned and well
thought out/judged. The National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking defines critical
thinking as ‘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.' 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". So
Critical thinking is that mode of thinking - about any subject, content, or problem - in which
the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the
structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them.

Definitions of critical thinking, its Petress, 2004; Holyoak & Morrison, 2005;
elements, and its associated activities fill among others).
the educational literature of the past forty
years. Critical thinking has been described
as an ability to question; to acknowledge
and test previously held assumptions; to
recognize ambiguity; to examine, interpret,
evaluate, reason, and reflect; to make
informed judgments and decisions; and to
clarify, articulate, and justify positions
(Hullfish & Smith, 1961; Ennis, 1962;
Ruggiero, 1975; Scriven, 1976; Hallet,
1984; Kitchener, 1986; Pascarella &
Terenzini, 1991; Mines et al., 1990;
Halpern, 1996; Paul & Elder, 2001;
This conceptualization of critical thinking has been refined and developed further by Richard
Paul and Linder Elder into the Paul-Elder framework of critical thinking. Currently, this
approach is one of the most widely published and cited frameworks in the critical thinking
literature. According to the Paul-Elder framework, critical thinking is the:

Analysis of thinking by focusing on the parts or structures of thinking ("the Elements

of Thought")

Evaluation of thinking by focusing on the quality ("the Universal Intellectual

Standards")

Improvement of thinking by using what you have learned ("the Intellectual Traits")

4|Page
Some Definitions:

When examining the vast literature on critical thinking, various definitions of critical thinking
emerge. Here are some samples:

• "The process of actively and skill fully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing,

synthesizing, and evaluating information to reach an answer or conclusion" (Angelo, T.
A. (1995).

• disciplined, self-directed thinking which exemplifies the perfection of thinking

appropriate to a particular mode or domain of thinking (Paul, 1989, p. 214)

• "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" (Scriven, 1996 ).

• "Most formal definitions characterize critical thinking as the intentional application of

rational, higher order thinking skills, such as analysis, synthesis, problem recognition and
problem solving, inference, and evaluation" (Angelo, 1995, p. 6 ).

• "Critical thinking is thinking that assesses itself" ( Center for Critical Thinking, 1996b ).

• "Critical thinking is the ability to think about one's thinking in such a way as 1. To
recognize its strengths and weaknesses and, as a result, 2. To recast the thinking in
improved form" (Center for Critical Thinking, 1996c).

Perhaps the simplest definition is offered by Beyer (1995): "Critical thinking... means making
reasoned judgments" (p. 8). Basically, Beyer sees critical thinking as using criteria to judge
the quality of something, from cooking to a conclusion of a research paper. In essence,
critical thinking is a disciplined manner of thought that a person uses to assess the validity of
something (statements, news stories, arguments, research, etc.).

Why Critical Thinking?

Everyone thinks; it is our nature to do so.

But much of our thinking, left to itself, is
biased, distorted, partial, uninformed or
down-right prejudiced. Yet the quality of
our life and that of what we produce,
make, or build depends precisely on the
quality of our thought. Shoddy thinking is
costly, both in money and in quality of
life. Excellence in thought, however, must
be systematically cultivated.
Figure 2. Build a framework to think critically

5|Page
Why Teach Critical Thinking?

Oliver & Utermohlen (1995) see students as too often being passive receptors of information.
Through technology, the amount of information available today is massive. This information
explosion is likely to continue in the future. Students need a guide to weed through the
information and not just passively accept it. Students need to "develop and effectively apply
critical thinking skills to their academic studies, to the complex problems that they will face,
and to the critical choices they will be forced to make as a result of the information explosion
and other rapid technological changes."

Beyer sees the teaching of critical thinking

as important to the very state of our nation.
He argues that to live successfully in a
democracy, people must be able to think
critically in order to make sound decisions
about personal and civic affairs. If students
learn to think critically, then they can use
good thinking as the guide by which they
live their lives.

Figure 3. Why critical thinking?

Characteristics of Critical Thinking

Wade (1995) identifies eight characteristics of critical thinking. Critical thinking involves
asking questions, defining a problem, examining evidence, analyzing assumptions and biases,
avoiding emotional reasoning, avoiding oversimplification, considering other interpretations,
and tolerating ambiguity. Dealing with ambiguity is also seen by Strohm & Baukus (1995) as
an essential part of critical thinking, "Ambiguity and doubt serve a critical-thinking function
and are a necessary and even a productive part of the process" (p. 56).

In the book, Critical Thinking, Beyer elaborately explains what he sees as essential aspects of
critical thinking. These are:

• Dispositions: Critical thinkers are skeptical, open-minded, value fair-mindedness,

respect evidence and reasoning, respect clarity and precision, look at different points
of view, and will change positions when reason leads them to do so.

• Criteria: To think critically, must apply criteria. Need to have conditions that must be
met for something to be judged as believable. Although the argument can be made
that each subject area has different criteria, some standards apply to all subjects. "...
an assertion must... be based on relevant, accurate facts; based on credible sources;
precise; unbiased; free from logical fallacies; logically consistent; and strongly
reasoned" (p. 12).

6|Page
 • Argument: Is a statement or proposition with supporting evidence. Critical thinking
involves identifying, evaluating, and constructing arguments.

• Reasoning: The ability to infer a conclusion from one or multiple premises. To do so

requires examining logical relationships among statements or data.

• Point of View: The way one views the world, which shapes one's construction of
meaning. In a search for understanding, critical thinkers view phenomena from many
different points of view.

• Procedures for
Applying
Criteria: Other
types of thinking
use a general
procedure. Critical
thinking makes
use of many
procedures. These
procedures
include asking
questions, making
judgments, and
identifying
assumptions.

Figure 4. Functions of critical thinking

How is critical thinking different from thinking?

Thinking Critical thinking

Focus on formation: data, facts, examples on On ideas: assumptions, biases, flaws in
ideas: opinions positions reasoning, point of view, context,
implications
Activity Organizing and making connections Deeply and broadly questioning and
between pieces of information or testing the ways in which an idea is formed
ideas, sometimes making basic as well as how you have been interpreting
inferences. and examining the idea. Thinking about
your own thinking while you are thinking
about the thinking of others.
Goal To form an opinion about what you To apply criteria in forming a conclusion
are thinking about or evaluation about what you have been
thinking about and how you have been
thinking about it.

7|Page
Characteristics of a critical thinker
Once an individual has mastered the process of critical thinking they will normally be
described as having the characteristics listed: open minded
Questioning
Empathetic
Honest
Analytical
Objective

Figure 5. Evolutions of critical thinking

Steps of critical thinking process:

CRITICAL THINKING STAGE DESCRIPTION

Observe Determine what information is available
gather information from a variety of sources
ascertain what information currently exists
explore the different perspectives identify
similarities or contradictions?

Analyse break down the information into the main

themes or arguments

Evaluate discriminate the value of the information

prioritise important information differentiate
opinion from fact

Question consider possible alternatives develop new

hypotheses

Contextualise contextualise information in relation to:

historical consideration ethical
considerations political considerations
cultural considerations environmental
considerations specific circumstances
(Rhodes 2010)

Reflection question and test conclusions reflect on

possible outcomes [link to Reflective
practice section of Self-management]

8|Page
9|Page
Tools Used in Teaching Critical Thinking:
Critical thinking is fundamental to scholarly work. Universities have always undertaken to
teach these skills in some form or to some degree through the history of academia.
Nowadays, some universities provide introductory units to support students in developing
critical thinking skills. The outline of one such course at University of Sydney provides a
number of tools for teaching critical thinking. Deakin Study Support Unit also provides
resources on critical thinking to which academics can refer students.
Applying the critical thinking process to tasks that provide students with a clear context (for
example, future workplace) can assist their analysis. This would include:
Written essays analysing a problem within the workplace
Problem based learning
Case studies
Simulations
Work integrated learning through placement or practicum.

Figure 8. tools of critical thinking

An example of critical thinking in the health discipline would be asking students to critically
analyse the actions of a nurse when treating a gravely ill patient. The students would already
be familiar with the context of the hospital in relation to policies and ethical considerations.
Teaching Strategies to Help Promote Critical Thinking

The 1995, Volume 22, issue 1, of the journal, Teaching of Psychology , is devoted to the
teaching critical thinking. Most of the strategies included in this section come from the
various articles that compose this issue.

• CATS (Classroom Assessment Techniques): Angelo stresses the use of ongoing

classroom assessment as a way to monitor and facilitate students' critical thinking. An
example of a CAT is to ask students to write a "Minute Paper" responding to questions
such as "What was the most important thing you learned in today's class? What question

10 | P a g e
 related to this session remains uppermost in your mind?" The teacher selects some of the
papers and prepares responses for the next class meeting.

• Cooperative Learning Strategies: Cooper (1995) argues that putting students in group
learning situations is the best way to foster critical thinking. "In properly structured
cooperative learning environments, students perform more of the active, critical thinking
with continuous support and feedback from other students and the teacher" (p. 8).

• Case Study /Discussion Method: McDade (1995) describes this method as the teacher
presenting a case (or story) to the class without a conclusion. Using prepared questions,
the teacher then leads students through a discussion, allowing students to construct a
conclusion for the case.

• Using Questions: King (1995) identifies ways of using questions in the classroom:

• Reciprocal Peer Questioning: Following lecture, the teacher displays a list of question
stems (such as, "What are the strengths and weaknesses of...). Students must write
questions about the lecture material. In small groups, the students ask each other the
questions. Then, the whole class discusses some of the questions from each small group.

• Reader's Questions: Require students to write questions on assigned reading and turn them
in at the beginning of class. Select a few of the questions as the impetus for class
discussion.

• Conference Style Learning: The teacher does not "teach" the class in the sense of
lecturing. The teacher is a facilitator of a conference. Students must thoroughly read all
required material before class. Assigned readings should be in the zone of proximal
development. That is, readings should be able to be understood by students, but also
challenging. The class consists of the students asking questions of each other and
discussing these questions. The teacher does not remain passive, but rather, helps "direct
and mold discussions by posing strategic questions and helping students build on each
others' ideas" (Underwood & Wald, 1995, p. 18 ).

• Dialogues: Robertson and Rane-Szostak (1996) identify two methods of stimulating

useful discussions in the classroom:

o Written dialogues: Give students written dialogues to analyze. In small groups,

students must identify the different viewpoints of each participant in the dialogue.
Must look for biases, presence or exclusion of important evidence, alternative
interpretations, misstatement of facts, and errors in reasoning. Each group must decide
which view is the most reasonable. After coming to a conclusion, each group acts out
their dialogue and explains their analysis of it.

o Spontaneous Group Dialogue: One group of students are assigned roles to play in a
discussion (such as leader, information giver, opinion seeker, and disagreer). Four
observer groups are formed with the functions of determining what roles are being

11 | P a g e
 played by whom, identifying biases and errors in thinking, evaluating reasoning skills,
and examining ethical implications of the content.

• Ambiguity: Strohm & Baukus advocate producing much ambiguity in the classroom.
Don't give students clear cut material. Give them conflicting information that they must
think their way through.

Why should we teach Critical Thinking?

As explained in the pages above, critical thinking is essential for effective functioning in the
modern world. In an essay that "takes a Socratic approach to defining critical thinking and
identifying its value in one's personal, professional, educational, and civic life," Peter
Facione (a dean at Santa Clara University) discusses "what and why" in Critical Thinking:
What It Is and Why It Counts and concludes with a consensus statement (of experts in the
field) about critical thinking and the ideal critical thinker.

"We understand critical thinking to be seeking relevant information, reasonable in

purposeful, self-regulatory judgment the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry,
which results in interpretation, analysis, and persistent in seeking results which are
evaluation, and inference, as well as as precise as the subject and the
explanation of the evidential, conceptual, circumstances of inquiry permit. Thus,
methodological, criteriological, or educating good critical thinkers means
contextual considerations upon which that working toward this ideal.
judgment is based. [Since this includes
almost all types of logical reasoning,] CT
is essential as a tool of inquiry. As such,
CT is a liberating force in education and a
powerful resource in one's personal and
civic life. While not synonymous with
good thinking, CT is a pervasive and self-
rectifying human phenomenon. The ideal
critical thinker is habitually inquisitive,
well-informed, trustful of reason, open-
minded, flexible, fair-minded in
evaluation, honest in facing personal
biases, prudent in making judgments,
willing to reconsider, clear about issues,
orderly in complex matters, diligent in
Education in critical thinking offers an alternative to a drift toward postmodern relativism, by
emphasizing that we can "distinguish between facts and opinions or personal feelings,
judgments and inferences, inductive and deductive arguments, and the objective and
subjective." {MCC General Education Initiatives} Critical thinking encourages us to
recognize that our "rationally justifiable confidence" in a claim can span a wide range, from
feelings to fact and everything in between. Three Categories of Questions explains why,
because students don't recognize questions involving "reasoned judgment" (which are neither

12 | P a g e
fact nor opinion), they "fail to see the difference between offering legitimate reasons and
evidence in support of a view and simply asserting the view as true." You can
see samples from The Art of Asking Essential Questions.

Figure 10. Facts of critical thinking

Critical Thinking in Education

LEARNING Critical Thinking — Educating Yourself If you want to learn, you can use
online tutorials about The Logic of Critical Thinking offered by Critical Thinking
Web plus Mission Critical and Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum, from Hong Kong,
San Jose, and Kansas City!

TEACHING Critical Thinking — Activities & Strategies

Useful ideas about critical thinking and education are in Critical Thinking by Design (Joanne
Kurfiss) and Critical Thinking: Basic Questions and Answers (Richard Paul). For a broad
overview, A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking. And to help those responsible for
big-picture decisions, Peter Facione (past president of the American Conference of Academic
Deans) wrote 26 Case Studies for Conversation and Reflection for academic deans and
department chairs. Thinking is encouraged by a creative use of Thinking Activities (*) such
as Socratic Teaching (Six Types of Socratic Questions) and other teaching tactics that
encourage active learning. * Eventually there will be "critical thinking activities" (especially
for K-12 teachers) in the area for TEACHING ACTIVITIES; although most principles of
critical thinking are useful for teachers & students at all levels, instructional activities should
be customized for students with different ages, experiences, and abilities. Dany Adams
explains how, "because the scientific method is a formalization of critical thinking, it can be
used as a simple model that removes critical thinking from the realm of the intuitive and puts

13 | P a g e
it at the centre of a straightforward, easily implemented, teaching strategy," in Critical
thinking and Scientific Method.

ERIC Digests offers relevant today. } And ERIC has a wide range of resources,
excellent introductory letting you search for research & other information
summary/overviews for about thinking skills (critical thinking, evaluative thinking,
teaching critical thinking decision making, ...) and much more.
in schools at all levels,
from K-12 through higher
education — How Can
We Teach Critical
Thinking? & Promoting
Critical Thinking in the
Classroom & Strategies
for Teaching Critical
Thinking — plus methods
for teaching critical
thinking in the contexts
of environmental
education &literature & te
levision & adult ESL.
{ All except "adult ESL"
were written between
1989 and 1994, so they're
not up-to-date, but most
principles for "teaching
critical thinking" were
discovered/invented
before 1989 and are still

The Role of Critical Thinking in Education and Life

All proponents of thinking skills (critical, creative,.) emphasize the relevance of thinking for
many aspects of life, not just those usually associated with "thinking." For example, the
Critical Thinking Community says, "Critical thinking is the art of taking charge of your own
mind. Its value is simple: if we can take charge of our own minds, we can take charge of our
lives." In another page they describe the centrality of thinking, and a common educational
problem: "Critical thinking is not an isolated goal unrelated to other important goals in
education. Rather, it is a seminal goal which, done well, simultaneously facilitates a rainbow
of other ends. It is best conceived, therefore, as the hub around which all other educational
ends cluster. For example, as students learn to think more critically, they become more
proficient at historical, scientific, and mathematical thinking. Finally, they develop skills,
abilities, and values crucial to success in everyday life. ...
Recent research suggests that critical thinking is not typically an intrinsic part of

14 | P a g e
instruction at any level. Students come without training in it, while faculty tend to take it for
granted as an automatic by-product of their teaching. Yet without critical thinking
systematically designed into instruction, learning is transitory and superficial."

The Logic of Critical Thinking

The essence of critical thinking is logic, and logical evaluation — by

using reality checks and quality checks — is the essence of Scientific Method and Design
Method. On the other end of the logic spectum, we see a variety of Logical Fallacies that
include circular reasoning and strawman arguments. This section features three excellent
websites that will help you learn the fundamentals of good logic and bad logic. { These sites
were developed for college students and teachers, but with suitable adjustments they are also
useful for K-12 because logic is logic, for the young and old. But in the future, we'll be
looking for websites that are specifically designed for younger students, that introduce logical
principles in a way that is simple and fun. }

Critical Thinking Web offers tutorials about Logic, Fallacy, Argument Analysis, Venn
Diagrams, Scientific Reasoning, and much more. You can begin exploring with
their sitemap. It's run by Joe Lau & Jonathan Chan from the University of Hong Kong &
Hong Kong Baptist University.

Mission: Critical (from San Jose State University in California's Silicon Valley) has a well
organized Main Menu with information and activities in three areas — The Basics, Analysis
of Arguments, Fallacies and Non-Rational Persuasion — and you can explore their Home
Page.

Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum (from Longview Community College in Kansas
City) aims for "an application of logical concepts to the analysis of everyday reasoning and
problem-solving." The main content is in six pages: Critical Thinking Core
Concepts (supplemented by Truth Tables), Informal Fallacies (which are interesting because
they make a direct connection with everyday experience); Facts, Opinions and Reasoned
Judgements; Statistical Arguments; Charts & Graphs and Visual Trickery.
You can also explore other pages, starting with the Home Page and moving on to
the Table of Contents which provides an overview of topics in the six main pages and also
has links to other pages about teaching, software, and deduction, plus resources for critical
thinking in specific disciplines (psychology, philosophy, law, political science, english,
music, math, automotive, office systems, nursing, writing, and reading), and more.

The Ethics of Critical Thinking

Peter Facione describes a limitation that occurs with all types of thinking: A person can be
good at critical thinking, meaning that the person can have the appropriate dispositions and
be adept at the cognitive processes, while still not being a good (in the moral sense) critical
thinker. For example, a person can be adept at developing arguments and then, unethically,
use this skill to mislead and exploit a gullible person, perpetrate a fraud, or deliberately
confuse and confound, and frustrate a project. The experts were faced with an interesting

15 | P a g e
problem. Some, a minority, would prefer to think that critical thinking, by its very nature, is
inconsistent with the kinds of unethical and deliberately counterproductive examples given.
They find it hard to imagine a person who was good at critical thinking not also being good in
the broader personal and social sense. In other words, if a person were "really" a "good
critical thinker" in the procedural sense and if the person had all the appropriate dispositions,
then the person simply would not do those kinds of exploitive and aggravating things. The
large majority, however, hold the opposite judgment. They are firm in the view that good
critical thinking has nothing to do with... any given set of ethical values or social mores. The
majority of experts maintain that critical thinking conceived of as we have described it above,
is, regrettably, not inconsistent with its unethical use. A tool, an approach to situations, these
can go either way, ethically speaking, depending on the character, integrity, and principles of
the persons who possess them. So, in the final analysis the majority of experts maintained
that "it is an inappropriate use of the term to deny that someone is engaged in critical thinking
on the grounds that one disapproves ethically of what the person is doing. What critical
thinking means, why it is of value, and the ethics of its use are best regarded as three distinct
concerns." { from Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts }Richard Paul describes
two beneficial dispositions that are encouraged (but not guaranteed) by critical thinking
education: "Fairminded thinkers take into account the interests of everyone affected by the
problem and proposed solutions. They are more committed to finding the best solution than
to getting their way." And a critical thinker "has confidence that, in the long run, one's own
higher interests and those of humankind at large will be best served by giving the freest play
to reason,... despite the deep-seated obstacles in the native character of the human mind and
in society as we know it.

Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking – about any subject, content, or problem — in
which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the
structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them. (Paul and
Elder, 2001). The Paul-Elder framework has three components:

1. The elements of thought (reasoning)

2. The intellectual standards that should be applied to the elements of reasoning

3. The intellectual traits associated with a cultivated critical thinker that result from the
consistent and disciplined application of the intellectual standards to the elements of
thought

16 | P a g e
According to Paul and Elder (1997), there are two essential dimensions of thinking that
students need to master in order to learn how to upgrade their thinking. They need to be able
to identify the "parts" of their thinking, and they need to be able to assess their use of these
parts of thinking.

Elements of Thought (reasoning)

The "parts" or elements of thinking are as follows:

1. All reasoning has a purpose

2. All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some question, to solve
some problem

3. All reasoning is based on assumptions

4. All reasoning is done from some point of view

5. All reasoning is based on data, information and evidence

6. All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas

17 | P a g e
 7. All reasoning contains inferences or interpretations by which we
draw conclusions and give meaning to data

8. All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequences

Universal Intellectual Standards

The intellectual standards that are to these elements are used to determine the quality of
reasoning. Good critical thinking requires having a command of these standards. According
to Paul and Elder (1997 ,2006), the ultimate goal is for the standards of reasoning to become
infused in all thinking so as to become the guide to better and better reasoning. The
intellectual standards include:

Clarity

Could you elaborate?

Could you illustrate what you mean?

Could you give me an example?

Accuracy

How could we check on that?

How could we find out if that is true?

How could we verify or test that?

Precision

Could you be more specific?

Could you give me more details?

Could you be more exact?

Relevance

How does that relate to the problem?

How does that bear on the question?

How does that help us with the issue?

Depth

What factors make this difficult?

What are some of the complexities of this question?

What are some of the difficulties we need to deal with?

18 | P a g e
Breadth

Do we need to look at this from another perspective?

Do we need to consider another point of view?

Do we need to look at this in other ways?

Logic

Does all of this make sense together?

Does your first paragraph fit in with your last one?

Does what you say follow from the evidence?

Significance

Is this the most important problem to consider?

Is this the central idea to focus on?

Which of these facts are most important?

Fairness

Is my thinking justifiable in context?

Am I taking into account the thinking of others?

Is my purpose fair given the situation?

19 | P a g e
Selection of a Critical Thinking Framework

The University of Louisville chose the Paul-Elder model of Critical Thinking as the approach
to guide our efforts in developing and enhancing our critical thinking curriculum. The Paul-
Elder framework was selected based on criteria adapted from the characteristics of a good
model of critical thinking developed at Surry Community College. The Paul-Elder critical
thinking framework is comprehensive, uses discipline-neutral terminology, is applicable to all
disciplines, defines specific cognitive skills including metacognition, and offers high quality
resources.

Why the selection of a single critical thinking framework?

The use of a single critical thinking framework is an important aspect of institution-wide

critical thinking initiatives (Paul and Nosich, 1993; Paul, 2004). According to this view,
critical thinking instruction should not be relegated to one or two disciplines or departments
with discipline specific language and conceptualizations. Rather, critical thinking instruction
should be explicitly infused in all courses so that critical thinking skills can be developed and
reinforced in student learning across the curriculum. The use of a common approach with a
common language allows for a central organizer and for the development of critical thinking
skill sets in all courses.

Why Focus on Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is also known as "complex thinking" and "higher-order thinking." The
ability to think critically calls for a higher order thinking than simply the ability to recall
information. Our goals as educators should be to aid students in advancing from knowledge
of concepts to application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. We can do this by providing
opportunities for the application of critical thinking within courses and by promoting
culminating experiences that will further allow students to use and refine their skills in
problem solving.

For students to be prepared for practical application of knowledge beyond the university,
their critical thinking skills have to be regularly exercised in day-to-day classroom
experience, even when course content appears to be remote from real-world problems. In the
most recent (2002) revision of the General Education Program, faculties of all units of the
university endorsed three overarching goals for the program: critical thinking, effective
communication, and the understanding of cultural diversity. The choice of critical thinking as
central focus on i2a indicates a recognition by university faculty of critical thinking's
centrality both in general education and in undergraduate education as a whole. The 34-credit
hour General Education Program thus lays a foundation of critical thinking that will enhance
the programs in the major and pave the way for students' successful culminating experiences.

A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking

The intellectual roots of critical thinking are as ancient as its etymology, traceable, ultimately,
to the teaching practice and vision of Socrates 2,500 years ago who discovered by a method
of probing questioning that people could not rationally justify their confident claims to
20 | P a g e
knowledge. Confused meanings, inadequate evidence, or self-contradictory beliefs often
lurked beneath smooth but largely empty rhetoric. 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’ practice was followed by the critical thinking of Plato (who recorded Socrates’
thought), Aristotle, and the Greek skeptics, all of whom emphasized that things are often very
different from what they appear to be and that only the trained mind is prepared to see
through the way things look to us on the surface (delusive appearances) to the way they really
are beneath the surface (the deeper realities of life). From this ancient Greek tradition
emerged the need, for anyone who aspired to understand the deeper realities, to think
systematically, to trace implications broadly and deeply, for only thinking that is
comprehensive, well-reasoned, and responsive to objections can take us beyond the surface.

In the Middle Ages, the tradition of systematic critical thinking was embodied in the writings
and teachings of such thinkers as Thomas Aquinas (Sumna Theologica) who to ensure his
thinking met the test of critical thought, always systematically stated, considered, and
answered all criticisms of his ideas as a necessary stage in developing them. Aquinas
heightened our awareness not only of the potential power of reasoning but also of the need
for reasoning to be systematically cultivated and "cross-examined." Of course, Aquinas’
thinking also illustrates that those who think critically do not always reject established
beliefs, only those beliefs that lack reasonable foundations.

In the Renaissance (15th and 16th Centuries), a flood of scholars in Europe began to think
critically about religion, art, society, human nature, law, and freedom. They proceeded with
the assumption that most of the domains of human life were in need of searching analysis and
critique. Among these scholars were Colet, Erasmus, and Moore in England. They followed
up on the insight of the ancients.

Francis Bacon, in England, was explicitly concerned with the way we misuse our minds in
seeking knowledge. He recognized explicitly that the mind cannot safely be left to its natural
tendencies. In his book The Advancement of Learning, he argued for the importance of
studying the world empirically. He laid the foundation for modern science with his emphasis
on the information-gathering processes. He also called attention to the fact that most people,
if left to their own devices, develop bad habits of thought (which he called "idols") that lead
them to believe what is false or misleading. He called attention to "Idols of the tribe" (the
ways our mind naturally tends to trick itself), "Idols of the market-place" (the ways we
misuse words), "Idols of the theater" (our tendency to become trapped in conventional
systems of thought), and "Idols of the schools" (the problems in thinking when based on blind
rules and poor instruction). His book could be considered one of the earliest texts in critical
thinking, for his agenda was very much the traditional agenda of critical thinking.

21 | P a g e
Some fifty years later in France, Descartes wrote what might be called the second text in
critical thinking, Rules For the Direction of the Mind. In it, Descartes argued for the need for
a special systematic disciplining of the mind to guide it in thinking. He articulated and
defended the need in thinking for clarity and precision. He developed a method of critical
thought based on the principle of systematic doubt. He emphasized the need to base thinking
on well-thought through foundational assumptions. Every part of thinking, he argued, should
be questioned, doubted, and tested.

Hobbes and Locke (in 16th and 17th Century England) displayed the same confidence in the
critical mind of the thinker that we find in Machiavelli. Neither accepted the traditional
picture of things dominant in the thinking of their day. Neither accepted as necessarily
rational that which was considered "normal" in their culture. Both looked to the critical mind
to open up new vistas of learning. Hobbes adopted a naturalistic view of the world in which
everything was to be explained by evidence and reasoning. Locke defended a common sense
analysis of everyday life and thought. He laid the theoretical foundation for critical thinking
about basic human rights and the responsibilities of all governments to submit to the reasoned
criticism of thoughtful citizens..

Eighteenth Century thinkers extended our conception of critical thought even further,
developing our sense of the power of critical thought and of its tools. Applied to the problem
of economics, it produced Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations. In the same year, applied to the
traditional concept of loyalty to the king, it produced the Declaration of Independence.
Applied to reason itself, it produced Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason.

In the 19th Century, critical thought was extended even further into the domain of human
social life by Comte and Spencer. Applied to the problems of capitalism, it produced the
searching social and economic critique of Karl Marx. Applied to the history of human culture
and the basis of biological life, it led to Darwin’s Descent of Man. Applied to the
unconscious mind, it is reflected in the works of Sigmund Freud. Applied to cultures, it led to
the establishment of the field of Anthropological studies. Applied to language, it led to the
field of Linguistics and to many deep probings of the functions of symbols and language in
human life.

In the 20th Century, our understanding of the power and nature of critical thinking has
emerged in increasingly more explicit formulations. In 1906, William Graham Sumner
published a land-breaking study of the foundations of sociology and anthropology, Folkways,
in which he documented the tendency of the human mind to think sociocentrically and the
parallel tendency for schools to serve the (uncritical) function of social indoctrination :

John Dewey agreed. From his work, we have increased our sense of the pragmatic basis of
human thought (its instrumental nature), and especially its grounding in actual human
purposes, goals, and objectives. From the work of Ludwig Wittgenstein we have increased
our awareness not only of the importance of concepts in human thought, but also of the need
to analyze concepts and assess their power and limitations. From the work of Piaget, we have
increased our awareness of the egocentric and sociocentric tendencies of human thought and

22 | P a g e
of the special need to develop critical thought which is able to reason within multiple
standpoints, and to be raised to the level of "conscious realization." From the massive
contribution of all the "hard" sciences, we have learned the power of information and the
importance of gathering information with great care and precision, and with sensitivity to its
potential inaccuracy, distortion, or misuse. From the contribution of depth-psychology, we
have learned how easily the human mind is self-deceived, how easily it unconsciously
constructs illusions and delusions, how easily it rationalizes and stereotypes, projects and
scapegoats.

To sum up, the tools and resources of the critical thinker have been vastly increased in virtue
of the history of critical thought. Hundreds of thinkers have contributed to its development.
Each major discipline has made some contribution to critical thought. Yet for most
educational purposes, it is the summing up of base-line common denominators for critical
thinking that is most important. Let us consider now that summation.

As a result of the fact that students can learn these generalizable critical thinking moves, they
need not be taught history simply as a body of facts to memorize; they can now be taught
history as historical reasoning. Classes can be designed so that students learn to think
historically and develop skills and abilities essential to historical thought. Math can be taught
so that the emphasis is on mathematical reasoning. Students can learn to think
geographically, economically, biologically, chemically, in courses within these disciplines. In
principle, then, all students can be taught so that they learn how to bring the basic tools of
disciplined reasoning into every subject they study. Unfortunately, it is apparent, given the
results of this study, that we are very far from this ideal state of affairs. We now turn to the
fundamental concepts and principles tested in standardized critical thinking tests.

A Brief Conceptualization of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is self-guided, self-disciplined thinking which attempts to reason at the

highest level of quality in a fair-minded way. People who think critically consistently attempt
to live rationally, reasonably, empathically. They are keenly aware of the inherently flawed
nature of human thinking when left unchecked. They strive to diminish the power of their
egocentric and sociocentric tendencies. They use the intellectual tools that critical thinking
offers – concepts and principles that enable them to analyze, assess, and improve thinking.
They work diligently to develop the intellectual virtues of intellectual integrity, intellectual
humility, intellectual civility, intellectual empathy, intellectual sense of justice and
confidence in reason. They realize that no matter how skilled they are as thinkers, they can
always improve their reasoning abilities and they will at times fall prey to mistakes in
reasoning, human irrationality, prejudices, biases, distortions, uncritically accepted social
rules and taboos, self-interest, and vested interest. They strive to improve the world in
whatever ways they can and contribute to a more rational, civilized society. At the same
time, they recognize the complexities often inherent in doing so. They strive never to think
simplistically about complicated issues and always consider the rights and needs of relevant
others. They recognize the complexities in developing as thinkers, and commit themselves to
life-long practice toward self-improvement.

23 | P a g e
Conclusion
Critical thinking is integral to scholarly activity. It is, like many skills, developed through
time and experiences. Students need to be challenged in many ways in order to facilitate the
development of this learning outcome. Employers seek graduates who have sharp critical
thinking skills as these need to be applied to various vocational based activities. Through
careful and explicit planning of tasks and activities, academics provide a fundamental basis
for the development of critical thinking skills in students that they then take on to develop
further as part of their professional and lifelong learning pathways.

References & Resources

• Angelo, T. A. (1995). Beginning the dialogue: Thoughts on promoting critical

thinking: Classroom assessment for critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1),
6-7.
• Beyer, B. K., (1995). Critical thinking, Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappa
Educational Foundation.
• Bean, J. C. (1996). Engaging ideas: The professor's guide to integrating writing,
critical thinking, & active learning in the classroom. Jossey-Bass.
• Bernstein, D. A. (1995). A negotiation model for teaching critical thinking. Teaching
of Psychology, 22(1), 22-24.
• Center for Critical Thinking (1996a,b,c). Structures for student self-assessment. [On-
line]. Available HTTP: http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/univclass/trc.nclk
• Cooper, J. L. (1995). Cooperative learning and critical thinking, Teaching of
Psychology, 22(1), 7-8. Carlson, E. R. (1995). Evaluating the credibility of sources. A
missing link in the teaching of critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 39-41
• Facione, P. A., Sanchez, C. A., Facione, N. C., & Gainen, J. (1995). The disposition
toward critical thinking. The Journal of General Education, 44(1), 1-25
• Halpern, D. F., & Nummedal, S. G. (1995). Closing thoughts about helping students
improve how they think. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 82-83.
• Jones, E. A. & Ratcliff, G. (1993). Critical thinking skills for college students,
National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning, and Assessment, University
Park, PA. (Eric Document Reproduction Services No. ED 358 772)
• Isbell, D. (1995). Teaching writing and research as inseparable: A faculty-librarian
teaching team. Reference Services Review, 23(4), 51-62.
• King, A. (1995). Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking
across the curriculum: Inquiring minds really do want to know: Using questioning to
teach critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1) , 13-17.
• McDade, S. A. (1995). Case study pedagogy to advance critical thinking. Teaching
Psychology, 22(1), 9-10.
• Oliver, H. & Utermohlen, R. (1995). An innovative teaching strategy: Using critical
thinking to give students a guide to the future.(Eric Document Reproduction Services
No. 389 702)

24 | P a g e
 • Robertson, J. F. & Rane-Szostak, D. (1996). Using dialogues to develop critical
thinking skills: A practical approach. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 39(7),
552-556.
• Sanchez, M. A. (1995). Using critical-thinking principles as a guide to college-level
instruction. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 72-74.
• Scriven, M. & Paul, R. (1996). Defining critical thinking: A draft statement for the
National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. [On-line]. Available HTTP:
http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/univlibrary/library.nclk
• Strohm, S. M., & Baukus, R. A. (1995). Strategies for fostering critical thinking
skills. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 50 (1), 55-62.
• Terenzini, P. T., Springer, L., Pascarella, E. T., & Nora, A. (1995). Influences
affecting the development of students' critical thinking skills. Research in Higher
Education, 36(1), 23-39.
• Underwood, M. K., & Wald, R. L. (1995). Conference-style learning: A method for
fostering critical thinking with heart. Teaching Psychology, 22(1), 17-21.
• Wade, C. (1995). Using writing to develop and assess critical thinking. Teaching of
Psychology, 22(1), 24-28.

On the Internet:

Carr, K. S. (1990). How can we teach critical thinking. Eric Digest. [On-line].
Available HTTP: http://ericps.ed.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/digests/1990/carr90.html
The Center for Critical Thinking (1996). Home Page. Available HTTP:
http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/
Ennis, Bob (No date). Critical thinking. [On-line], April 4, 1997. Available HTTP:
http://www.cof.orst.edu/cof/teach/for442/ct.htm
Montclair State University (1995). Curriculum resource center. Critical thinking
resources: An annotated bibliography. [On-line]. Available HTTP:
http://www.montclair.edu/Pages/CRC/Bibliographies/CriticalThinking.html
No author, No date. Critical Thinking is ... [On-line], April 4, 1997. Available HTTP:
http://library.usask.ca/ustudy/critical/
Scriven, M. & Paul, R. (1996). Defining critical thinking: A draft statement for the
National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. [On-line]. Available HTTP:
http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/univlibrary/library.nclk
Sheridan, Marcia (No date). Internet education topics hotlink page. [On-line], April 4,
1997. Available HTTP: http://sun1.iusb.edu/~msherida/topics/critical.html

25 | P a g e