Already a subscriber? - Login here
Not yet a subscriber? - Subscribe here

Browse by:



Displaying: 1-6 of 6 documents


1. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 28 > Issue: 2
Frank Fair From the Editor’s Desk
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
2. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 28 > Issue: 2
Donald L. Hatcher Reflections on Critical Thinking: Theory, Practice, and Assessment
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This autobiographical piece is in response to Frank Fair’s kind invitation to write a reflective piece on my involvement over the last 30 years in the critical thinking movement, with special attention given to 18 years of assessment data as I assessed students’ critical thinking (CT) outcomes at Baker University. The first section of the paper deals with my intellectual history and how I came to a specific understanding of CT. The second deals with the Baker Experiment (1988 to 2009) in combining instruction in CT with written composition, with a special focus on Deductive Reconstruction. The third section goes over our attempts at assessment and what we discovered by using three separate tests. The final section of the paper presents my conclusions about the challenges of teaching CT based on the Baker Experiment.
3. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 28 > Issue: 2
Robert Ennis Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum: The Wisdom CTAC Program
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Discussions of critical thinking across the curriculum typically make and explain points and distinctions that bear on one or a few standard issues. In this article Robert Ennis takes a different approach, starting with a fairly comprehensive concrete proposal (called “The Wisdom CTAC Program”) for a four-year higher-education curriculum incorporating critical-thinking at hypothetical Wisdom University. Aspects of the Program include a one-year critical thinking freshman course with practical everyday-life and academic critical thinking goals; extensive infusion of critical thinking in other courses; a senior project; attention to both critical thinking dispositions and skills; a glossary of critical thinking terms; emphasis on teaching (interactive discussion, using multiple varied examples, teaching for transfer, and making principles explicit); communication at all levels; and last, but definitely not least, assessment. Advantages and disadvantages will be noted. Subsequently, Ennis takes and defends a position on each of several relevant controversial issues, including: 1) having a separate critical thinking course, or embedding critical thinking in existing subject matter courses, or doing both (the last being the position he takes here); 2) the meaning of “critical thinking”; 3) the importance of teaching critical thinking because of its role in our everyday vocational, civic, and personal lives, as well as in our academic experiences; 4) the degree of subject-specificity of critical thinking; 5) the importance of making critical thinking principles explicit; and 6) the possible threat to subject matter coverage from the addition of critical thinking to the curriculum.
4. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 28 > Issue: 2
Robert Ennis, Sheryl Murphy-Manley, Scott Miller, Marcus Gillespie The Wisdom CTAC Proposal: Editors’ Comments and Ennis’ Replies
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Three Associate Editors of INQUIRY raise several critical issues for Robert Ennis’ vision as proposed in his “Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum: The Wisdom CTAC Program.” Ennis gives specific responses (in italics) to each of the issues they raise, thereby clarifying the intent of the proposed CTAC program and several of its particular features.
5. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 28 > Issue: 2
Amanda Hiner Critical Thinking in the Literature Classroom, Part II: Dickens’s Great Expectations and the Emergent Critical Thinker
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Literary analysis offers English instructors an ideal vehicle for modeling, practicing, and teaching critical thinking skills. In Part I of this paper (Hiner 2013a), I argued that, because literature students must master the skills of analysis, reasoning, evaluation, and argumentation, they can benefit from deliberate and explicit instruction in the concepts and practices of critical thinking in the classroom, including instruction in the elements of reasoning and the standards of critical thinking described by critical thinking experts Richard Paul, Linda Elder, and Gerald Nosich. In Part II of this paper (Hiner 2013b), a demonstration is given of how protagonists in literary works such as Pip from Dickens’s Great Expectations (1860-61/1996) can be understood and interpreted as literary representations of an individual’s transition from a first-order, unreflective thinker to a second-order, reflective, metacognitive critical thinker, further illuminating the literary texts and further reinforcing students’ understanding of the concepts of critical thinking.
6. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 28 > Issue: 2
Linda Carozza A Review of Good Reasoning Matters! by Leo A. Groarke and Christopher Tindale
view |  rights & permissions | cited by