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

Browse by:



Displaying: 1-7 of 7 documents


1. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 27 > Issue: 2
Frank Fair From the Editor’s Desk
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
2. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 27 > Issue: 2
Mark Weinstein Critical Thinking from the Margins: A Personal Narrative
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
A narrative review of a 35-year career in critical thinking reflecting an idiosyncratic approach to both practical and theoretical matters. The social as well as the intellectual context is described. Critical thinking across the disciplines and metamathematics are discussed as alternatives to more standard perspectives such as informal logic.
3. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 27 > Issue: 2
Martin Davies Computer-Aided Mapping and the Teaching of Critical Thinking: Part I
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
This paper is in two parts. Part I outlines three traditional approaches to the teaching of critical thinking: the normative, cognitive psychology, and educational approaches. Each of these approaches is discussed in relation to the influences of various methods of critical thinking instruction. The paper contrasts these approaches with what I call the “visualisation” approach. This approach is explained with reference to computer-aided argument mapping (CAAM) which uses dedicated computer software to represent inferences between premise and conclusions. The paper presents a detailed account of the CAAM methodology, and theoretical justification for its use, illustrating this with the argument mapping software Rationale™. A number of Rationale™ design conventions and logical principles are outlined including the principle of abstraction, the MECE principle, and the “Holding Hands” and “Rabbit Rule” heuristics. Part II of this paper outlines the growing empirical evidence for the effectiveness of CAAM as a method of teaching critical thinking.
4. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 27 > Issue: 2
Maralee Harrell Assessing the Efficacy of Argument Diagramming to Teach Critical Thinking Skills in Introduction to Philosophy
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
After determining one set of skills that we hoped our students were learning in the introductory philosophy class at Carnegie Mellon University, we performed an experiment twice over the course of two semesters to test whether they were actually learning these skills. In addition, there were four different lectures of this course in the first semester, and five in the second; in each semester students in some lectures were taught the material using argument diagrams as a tool to aid understanding and critical evaluation, while the other students were taught using more traditional methods. In each lecture, the students were given a pre-test at the beginning of the semester, and a structurally identical post-test at the end. We determined that the students did develop the skills in which we were interested over the course of the semester. We also determined that the students who were taught argument diagramming gained significantly more than the students who were not. We conclude that learning how to construct argument diagrams significantly improves a student’s ability to analyze arguments.
5. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 27 > Issue: 2
Brenda Oyer, Mark Gillespie, Mohammed Issah, Daniel Fasko The Role of Personality in Argument Evaluation
abstract | view |  rights & permissions | cited by
Argument evaluation, the ability to separate prior belief from evaluation of the quality of an argument, is an essential element of critical thinking. The present study examined the ability of three personality traits (dogmatism, openness to experience, and open-mindedness) to predict argument evaluation quality and belief bias. One hundred and twelve undergraduate students completed the Argument Evaluation Test (Stanovich & West, 1997), measures of Dogmatism, Open-Mindedness, Openness to Experience, and a Vocabulary test. Argument Evaluation Quality was negatively related to Dogmatism, and positively related to Openness to Experience and Vocabulary. Path analysis showed that, when controlling for Vocabulary, Dogmatism was the only personality variable that significantly (negatively) predicted Argument Evaluation Quality. None of the variables in our study were related to belief bias. Implications for future research and educational practice are discussed.
6. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 27 > Issue: 2
Marc Carter Review of Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
view |  rights & permissions | cited by
7. Inquiry: Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines: Volume > 27 > Issue: 2
Frank Zenker Review of Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman
view |  rights & permissions | cited by