Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
I think critically, therefore I am
6 August 2009
Teaching students to read and understand a text properly is essential to their intellectual survival in a complex world, says Linda Elder
About 15 years ago, while teaching psychology, I happened upon an article on critical thinking. I had long been interested in the workings of the human mind, but I lacked the broader perspective on the mind that a rich conception of critical thinking can offer. What I knew for certain was that I was dissatisfied with my teaching. I felt I had a reasonably sound grasp of psychology, but no clear path for reaching my students. I knew that the art of questioning was an important instructional approach, and that written assignments should be an integral part of teaching. I just didn’t have the tools to serve the purpose.
Once introduced to critical thinking, my perspective broadened dramatically, as tools for developing the mind became much more vivid, accessible and concrete. By studying the theory of critical thinking and tenaciously applying it to classroom practice, I began to see more clearly how to approach content as a mode of thought, rather than as fragmented bits of information. I began to see the intimate connection between thinking and learning, to see how to intervene in thinking deliberately and constructively to deepen one’s understanding, and to interface the content of my subject with the values and motivations of students.
I also began to appreciate the difficulties in cultivating the intellect – both my own and that of students. When deeply understood, critical thinking offers a network of concepts and principles for developing the mind. There are copious effective strategies for fostering critical thinking, but developing the human intellect is a messy process. It is often confusing, both for teacher and student. It isn’t procedural. It can’t be taught through formulas. It isn’t neat and tidy. But it is deeply rewarding when we grasp its significance and begin to work it out for ourselves.
In 1980, Richard Paul, a pre-eminent authority on critical thinking, established the Center for Critical Thinking, and the same year it hosted its first international conference. Since then, the centre has worked towards the cultivation of critical societies through the reform of education. In 1990, in an open letter to educators, Paul summed up the problem that a robust conception of critical thinking addresses.
“Many college and university professors say they have little time to focus on the students’ thinking because of the need to cover content. These professors fail to see that thinking is the only means by which the mind digests content. They fail to see that undigested content is content unlearnt or mislearnt. They fail to see that all content is embedded in ideas, that ideas have logical connections, that logical connections must be thought through to be grasped… Furthermore, though this problem is ancient, the negative consequences are daily becoming more and more significant. The nature of professional and everyday life increasingly demands critical thinking. Indeed the cost of generating a growing mass of uncritical thinkers as workers and citizens is staggering… Intellectually undisciplined, narrow-minded thinking will not solve increasingly complex, multidimensional problems, let alone provide the basis for democratic decision-making.”
Critical thinking forms the heart and soul of every subject because its concepts and principles are presupposed in, and give rise to, the logic of every subject. Accordingly, teachers use critical thinking concepts in approaching their disciplines (albeit often implicitly and subconsciously). If we are to effectively address the challenges facing us as a species, and if we are ever to create truly critical societies, we need to take thinking more seriously in every part of human life, and certainly in teaching. When all is said and done, however highly we may rate our educational programmes, schools, colleges, universities and, yes, even our own classes, students are not developing the intellectual skills and character traits they need to survive in an increasingly complex world.
Thankfully, critical thinking is accessible, to some degree, to all who would enter its doors. From the beginning, the most basic principles are fairly easy to grasp. What is more, the process of translating principles into strategies is reasonably accessible. At the Center and Foundation for Critical Thinking we have developed many resources for incorporating critical thinking into instruction, tested over many years with students and faculty. Of course, teaching for critical thinking is an art, not a science; there are an unlimited number of ways to cultivate the intellect.
Let me offer, by way of example, one set of instructional activities I have found to be highly effective in fostering critical thinking. These activities are most powerful when repeatedly used within a term, focusing on the core content of the course. Collectively, these structures develop students’ abilities to read closely, write substantively and reason analytically. They enable students to empathise with a broad range of views, even (perhaps most importantly) with those views contrary to their own. These activities illuminate for students the fact that articles, chapters, essays and other written works should be viewed as products of reasoning that, in most cases, can be intellectually analysed and assessed.
There are four parts to this instructional process. As you read through this series of activities, remember that any of the details can and should be contextualised to fit the situation, student group, and so forth.
Part one: reading closely
Students are often asked to read, but they generally do not understand what it means to read closely. They do not understand that to do so presupposes disciplined reasoning. Students seldom use reading to improve their thinking or thinking to improve their reading. They don’t see the connection between thoughtful reading and living the life of a reasonable person. I introduce close reading to students by first explaining that to read for deep understanding, they must learn to actively engage in a silent dialogue with the author. I emphasise that, if they are to become educated people, it is essential that they develop their ability to read for deep understanding and that they consistently do so throughout the course of their lives.
In this activity, then, the purpose is to teach students how to read a text closely. The basic design entails students working together in groups, focusing on an assigned text. Students take turns reading the text aloud, interpreting it, and then getting feedback from the other group members on their interpretation. Here is the structure I suggest:
Students working in groups of three are assigned a text to read together. Student A reads one paragraph aloud, periodically stopping and stating in her own words what she understands each sentence to be saying. After each act of interpretation, students B and C either agree with the interpretation or offer a different one. Then student B takes the next paragraph, and the same process continues (with A and C giving feedback on each interpretation). Student C takes the next paragraph, and on it goes with one student reading, interpreting and receiving feedback from the other two students on the original interpretation until you (the teacher) end the activity or the reading is completed.
Before beginning this assignment, I remind students that the process should entail mutual participation and support, rather than passivity or conflict. The idea is to work together toward the most reasonable interpretation of the text. I may, as I often do, model the kind of feedback I am looking for from students. For instance, I may say something like “I am interpreting this a little differently than you seem to be doing. I agree with this part of your interpretation, but in this sentence, I think the author means X rather than Y. Do you agree, or are you still seeing it another way?”
Part two: analysing the text
Once students are able to carefully read a text, they are in a position to analyse it. It is important for them to understand that any essay, article or chapter in a text can be explicitly analysed as a product of reasoning. Here are the primary questions I ask students to answer in analysing the text (in a written assignment):
- What is the author’s fundamental purpose?
- What is the author’s point of view with respect to the issue?
- What assumptions is the author making in his or her reasoning?
- What are the implications of the author’s reasoning?
- What information does the author use in reasoning through this issue?
- What are the most fundamental inferences or conclusions in the article?
- What are the most basic concepts used by the author?
- What is the key question the author is trying to answer?
Part three: sharing papers and giving feedback to one another
After students have completed part two as an out-of-class assignment, they are ready to give and receive feedback on their papers. Working in groups of three, students take turns reading their papers aloud, periodically stopping to allow other students to give feedback. It is essential that, in giving feedback, students use intellectual standards – for example, clarity, accuracy, relevance, depth and breadth. In this activity, the students are focused on helping one another become clearer in their writing, more accurately represent what the author is saying, more deeply understand the author’s argument, more logically present the author’s reasoning, and so forth.
When students are working in groups, I monitor and encourage the accurate assessment of thought. Thus, I will periodically stop the feedback process and again model the thinking I would like to see. I may say, for example: “Nina commented on the lack of clarity in Josh’s purpose. This is what I am looking for – the explicit use of intellectual standards.” Or, “Seth pointed out that some of the information mentioned by Susan wasn’t actually in the text. This was a good intellectual move. I suggest that the group now look at the original text for information that Susan can include.”
Part four: speaking in the voice of the author
Having closely read and analysed the text and compared written analyses with those of other students, students are now in a position to role-play the thinking of the author. Roleplaying an author is, in one way, the ultimate test of understanding, by saying in essence:
“I will enter the mind of the author and speak as if I were the author. I will try to answer any questions you may have about the text by adopting the voice of the author and will answer your questions as I think the author would. I will speak in the first person singular. I will try to be the author fully and truly for the purpose of this exercise, even if, and most especially if, I disagree with the author.”
To role-play an author, students need a partner who has read the text and is willing to ask important questions about it. Responding to questions forces students to think within the author’s logic. Practising speaking within the voice of an author is a good way to get a sense of whether students have absorbed the core meanings of a text.
In this activity, one student takes the role of the author, speaking in the first person. The other student asks probing questions, using the questions in part two as guidelines. The student who is questioning will lead the discussion, perhaps beginning with the first question, “What was your purpose in writing this article about people who live in absolute poverty?” This question might be followed up by any of the following questions: “What were you assuming about this issue when you wrote this article?”, “What information did you use in coming to your main conclusions?”, “Was there any essential information relevant to the issue that you might have excluded, either intentionally or not?”, “What are some important implications of people taking your line of reasoning seriously?”, “What are some important implications of people failing to take your line of reasoning seriously?”
When we approach teaching with activities like these, using critical-thinking principles to process academic content, we honour and develop the intellects of students. We engage them in the thinking we want them to do. We help them recognise that the only way to learn any important set of ideas is to think those ideas into their thinking using their thinking, and to do so critically. With such an approach, we do a lot of modelling; but we place the responsibility for learning on students’ shoulders. Most importantly, we help them develop the intellectual skills, ability and character they need to reason through virtually any problem or issue, in any subject or discipline. We help them gain the intellectual tools they need to survive successfully and fairmindedly in the complex and unpredictable world they face.
Linda Elder is an educational psychologist, and president and fellow of the Foundation for Critical Thinking, a non-profit organisation that seeks to foster critical societies through education and social reform.
Readers' comments
Dr. Elder has made one of the most pertinent point in the discussion of the value of HE degrees today. I personally think it is 'critical thought' and 'contextual application' of information that seperates the educated from the not. A major challenge is in recognising that HE today has evolved into quite a different beast to the old romantic idea of institutionalisation of the ‘blue-skies-thinker’. Our students have to compete in the job markets with their degrees in hand and the tailor made requirements for each job sector can a be considerable burden to carry within the curriculum. The modularisation of courses has given the students an opportunity to widen their education base. This intention was based on the premise that it would enhance contextual application of the core knowledge of the students. Instead we find students opting for courses that will enable them to get an easier passage through the degree years. In taking a music course by a sports scientist or a philosophy module by a computing student we no longer see the relevance of understanding our world from an outside perspective. Moreover, the need to develop specific job related skills takes precedence over life skills and the elective choices of our undergraduates reflect this. It seems almost that life skills such as critical thought and contextual application becomes ‘self-study’ in today’s degree courses. As a lecturer I would like to argue that almost the reverse should be true. Information can certainly be imparted outside of the university and indeed the technological advancement can be used very effectively for such a purpose. However the survival skills that would otherwise distinguish an educated person from the one that is not cannot be ‘self-study’. This paradigm is not only self defeating from the context of ‘society’ but also a clear way to the demise of the value of HE degrees in the future.
You tend to base your "parts", if you will, more like stages. Critical thinking is definitely an important skill to have, and a very desirable learning outcome. To that extent, your "part 2" is the most crucial step here because it outlines very well what's needed. Part 2 actually ties in part 1 as an activity and quite obviously lays the "groundwork" so to say for parts 3 and 4. That said, I think your idea of paper sharing and feedbacks is absurd, dangerous, insensitive to the rights of students to remain reticent, and might as well be viewed as potential infringement/insensitivity of the right of a student who may not be comfortable to speak out in front of a small group. It may have its own educational value (ie fostering public speaking and so forth), but where that's not applicable, it can give rise to major resentment. All in all, an excellent resource, needs to be retweeted and spread among colleagues. But also, the part approach to the teaching is a little awkward, IMO. /Arin Basu
I know too many a lecturer that would not give a hoot about teaching their students critical thought. Linda is a bit out of touch with the skills and knowledge that is required in a global world. Her view is too Eurocentric, steeped in pseudo-Marxist rhetoric as if we were able to extrapolate some form of objective truth. We are so fragmented as a cultural entity that concatenating interpretations or readings are running in parallel. British, European, Muslim, Black, BNP, Cannibalism. Can any of these text be defined? Well yes but It depends of individual perspective, how each of us interpret and deconstrruct meaning. Lecturers shy away from this complexity as quite a few are terrified of freedom of thought. It is much easier to tick a box and hit the numbers! Critical thinking can be developed in their (the student's) own time! And good luck to them.
This story has helped me to broaden my views on breaking down listening and reading material a lot faster by simply understanding the speaker or author's argument logically and analysing the information.
@Harry London -I think your point on 'freedom of thought' is perhaps the missing link. Critical thinking is not just qualitative understanding of a topic but a built in resilence almost to go along with what is merely PC. I mentioned in my comment that - "It seems almost that life skills such as critical thought and contextual application becomes ‘self-study’ in today’s degree courses. As a lecturer I would like to argue that almost the reverse should be true". The most imortant element in teaching critical thought is practising it. That perhaps remains our biggest challenge.
I'd go further and say that the chief skill a university degree conferment should represent is that of critical thinking; the subject-specific knowledge is important but will inevitably change during the course of the graduates' working lives - in some areas, some specialist knowledge will be redundant within a few years. It's the old adage - "give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day, teach him to fish and he'll eat for life". Further, I think critical thinking is what employers want to buy (hence the number of graduates that are employed in fields unrelated to the course content of their particular degree). I have to say that I'm sometimes surprised when I meet new students embarking on a BSc(hons) who don't quite appreciate that critical analysis should be at the heart of taking a scientific approach to the world. Indeed, some hope to negotiate their way through a science degree whilst avoiding that bit. It seems to me that the fact that could ever be even slightly true is at the centre of the debate about slipping standards. If the universities could be said to make some contribution to the health and welfare of society, it ought to be in this respect: it should not be remotely possible that policy makers and senior managers could get away with making statements based on supposition alone. They shouldn't even be capable of thinking that way, and even if one slipped through the net, an educated and critical population should be able to spot the un(dis)provable waffle straight away.
When I was an instructor on Effective Writing at the Palawan State College (now Palawan State University) I told my students that if all they learned in my class was to think, I would be happy as their teacher. I said think, as in knowing how to think. To think is the hardest thing to do. And knowing how to think critically is doubly hard. I like the quotation of Linda Elder, : I think critically, therefore I am.
For a clear and brief statement of the problem, enjoy Richard Paul's keynote at the annual Critical Thinking Society's gathering... Embedded youtube video can be watched at this link: http://www.criticalthinking.org Get the whole enchilada. Short and sweet.
I think Critical Thinking is a very powerful tool.
Critical thinking will bring a revolution to every area of human endeavour. Whoever said christians must not think!
Critical thinking? I want to get out!
Here is my effort at "creative thinking' What is the article about? 'how to approach content as a mode of thought, rather than as fragmented bits of information.' (is this latter content? '') The claims -all content is embedded in ideas, that ideas have logical connections, -that logical connections must be thought through to be grasped…' -concepts and principles are presupposed in, and give rise to, the logic of every subject -thinking is the only means by which the mind digests content' (note the metaphor) 'students are not developing the intellectual skills and character traits they need to survive in an increasingly complex world. -teaching for critical thinking is an art, not a science; there are an unlimited number of ways to cultivate the intellect.' The recipe (Four stages of a pedological practice are described (see article and note my word' practice') ) Key practical assumptions or claims about outcomes: -any essay, article or chapter in a text can be explicitly analysed as a product of reasoning. -The idea is to work together toward the most reasonable interpretation of the text -in giving feedback, students use intellectual standards – for example, clarity, accuracy, relevance, depth and breadth -(students become) clearer in their writing, more accurately represent what the author is saying, more deeply understand the author’s argument, more logically present the author’s reasoning Conclusions 'we help them develop the intellectual skills, ability and character they need to reason through virtually any problem or issue, in any subject or discipline. We help them gain the intellectual tools they need to survive successfully and fairmindedly in the complex and unpredictable world they face'. My Question about the Claims and Practice -Have they this been justified either in part or in whole? Some final questions from me..... How much reading are students required to do per week? how fast can they read? Given this, how much of their reading can they read 'closely'?
Peter - you say"Key practical assumptions or claims about outcomes: -any essay, article or chapter in a text can be explicitly analysed as a product of reasoning" - Over and above this, one could hold the assumption that any such text can be analysed in terms of the unconsious or subconsious reasoning that contributed to its production. In other words, often an author can think he/she is saying one thing, and whilst that may be true on the surface, they can also be transmitting something else, quite without concious intention. In some texts, these accidental transmissions can usefully complement the analysis of the intended message. Obvious examples are when some text seems to be deliberately written in an obscure and/or pedantic manner - the question is why? - why would someone bother to obscure their meaning? - is it intended as 'coded message', preaching to the converted or simply a smoke-and-mirrors attempt to conceal the lack of depth? My point ihere is that authors usually reveal more about themselves than they intend, and the more they try to conceal, the more one wants to know what they're concealing and why they are motivated to do so. Political speeches offer fabulous examples, since once one has thrown out all supposition and unsubstantiatable assertions, then identified all the weasel words, the actual stated-as- factual content is often very little. If political speeches were supposed to exemplify the thought processes that go into public policy decisions, one would be alarmed indeed - and if they're not, why are these people wasting my time and taking up the airwaves? I'm often reminded of magicians who distract by asking me to ascertain that there is nothing upthe sleeve/under the cup/ whatever - well of course there isn't - they're up to something else whilst I'm distracted.
This is a great idea and something that can be used with Assessment briefs as well since getting into the habit of engaging with the authors voice also enables a better avenue for flexing those ideas. On a personal level, I have arguments with Henry Miller all the time, it makes reading his work both exciting and productive.
this is exciting for me to to learn and practice close reading,ability to read for deep understanding. i would love to order the books.to heighten my horizons.
* What is the author’s fundamental purpose? And how, do you suppose, you will discover this by starting with the text? So completely missing the point . . .
Lerner Lone: - that was my point, rather - it doesn't matter how much an author tries to conceal, they still give away more than they realise. In fact, it's very telling if an author does try to conceal their fundamental purpose. So a forensic approach to a text can arrive at quite good-quality information about the background context regards
Thank you so much. This could be of good help in teaching my students. Like you, i really want to develop my students' critical thinking during discussion, but lacks the means to do so. I feel I have so much to teach them but i just cant find how to do so. Thank you again. I hope this works in my class where I stand infront of 75 teenagers.
don quixote; master i disgree with you completely!
Don Quixote is talking about hermeneutics. Sancho Panzer can disagree with him all he likes; it just reveals the gaps in Sancho Panzer's knowledge and understanding of interpretivist methodology. Perhaps Sancho Panzer is some sort of positivist?
Obviously 'Sancho Panzer' above should be read as 'Sancho Panza'. I'm not thick or something, just distracted. Just to clarify, Sancho Panzer is a comic book character who drives a tank, not the character from Cervantes or the guy who follows Don Quixote about on the THE readers' comments board disagreeing with everything he says regardless of its merits. That would be Sanch Panza with an '-a', not an '-er.' Thought I'd clear that one up before any of the pedants who leave their comments here suggest that the typos above can be taken as any kind of evidence that Max Weber from Beyond the Grave's views are worthless.
Thanks Dr. Elder. Your artical is very thought provoking. I am a senior staff engineer in the U.S. Air Force and one thing we are looking for in new employees is the ability to think critically. I am very interested in this topic and have been for several years. I am pursing a PhD in Constitutional Law and from day one (four years ago) the school I attend (George Wythe University, www.gwu.edu ) pushes students to "think critically". We have read a lot of the classics in almost every subject area so that we can understand how some of those great authors thought. It is much differet that the typical college. I have become a much better engineer, part-time college professor, husband, father, and community member because of what I have learred.
I like that image, Max - as I plod around on my tired old warhorse, with rusty armour, tilting at tyrannical windmills, my servant is clattering along behind in a tank taking potshots, negating all that knightly honour that I naively cherish. Actually, I wasn't thinking of formal hermeneutics (at least consciously) - just the obvious commonsense observation that every communication has to be embedded in a surrounding causal context, and the latter can often be deduced from the former. So even someone with a poker face is telling you that they are actually trying to gain advantage; someone who speaks in empty political rhetoric should make one stop and think: why is their communication so opaque? what are they trying to conceal? and as Forest says, applying the principle of critical thinking feeds through into every facet of one's life; it is, after all, the underlying principle of scientific method. So always look a gift horse in the mouth. Sancho - what is it now?
Thanks for the thoughtful article. As a RN now in graduate school, I certainly appreciate the value of critical thinking. Thankfully, this is something I learned early from my mother and continued in my undergraduate school at a liberal arts university. What I have found, unfortunately, is a tendency of younger professors to encourage something called "graduate level reading" which is the complete opposite of what you discuss and does not allow for full understanding of the author's position. The focus is on shallow reading of more authors. Since I find myself unable to do this, I am inevitably overwhelmed with reading! What's a critical thinker to do in the modern age of graduate level education???
Activities explained here are very practical and really help in cultivating critical thinking among the learners. Cultivating Critical Thinking skill should be given prime importance in curriculum The need for today is problem solving skills and that can be achieved only through developing critical thinking akills. Linda Elder, thank you somuch for this very insightful article.
Your article has open my understanding to the concept of critical thinking and has posed a challenge to me to persue this line of descipline.
I feel good about the way Linda in this article did disect the concept of critical thinking. Many a time we seem to perform a task we know nothing about. A good compnent our our lesson planning in High School emphasizes incomporating critical thinking goals in the daily lesson objectives. But I can bet that not all teachers know what it means to actually help our students to think critically. My experience with my students points to the the increasing shrinking number of students who are willing to speak out intellectually in the class. Critical thinking is a natural part of science classroom activities, yet a very small number of our high school students have the ability to analyze and interprete information presented in a data table or graph they created by themselves. As Chetour pointed iabove, "activities explained here are very practical and really help in cultivating critical thinking among the learners" I seem a more ready to approach the this discipline with more enthusiasm.
CT is not new only for me but for my country too. Linda thanks a lot I enjoy much. I will use close reading for my students.
Angel@ This concept of chritical thinking will help me with my SSC/PSY Class and my APA style paper and to better understand my concept of thinking again Thanks!! College Student.
Atleast you have encoraged me to take this unit at the University so that i can go out there to shape my society.
I am teaching Critical Thinking to middle school students. Your article was read in my 5 classes. I'm hoping that all my students will become critical thinkers.
The framework that that Dr Linda Elder offers is a practical one that all teachers in higher education should adopt to facilitate students critical thinking. It offers staged approach to develop critical thinking. I certainly intend to use this model to develop critical thinking in my students. Thank you Dr Elder for offering us this approach to critical thinking development. Mayapan Pillay
Those who have reservation about Dr Elder's approach to facilitate students' critical thinking should appreciate that she is not suggesting that student should be co-erced into engaging with this approach.. She clearly refers to ground rules, which im my way of thinking allow students to opt out, should they wish to do so. However, it will be a missed opportunity if students wish not to engage in such activities where thinking aloud and articulating what one has read is so important to personal development in critical thinking. I would urge all students to participate if they wish to reap the benefits of higher education, of which critical thinking is so necessary.
Those who have reservation about Dr Elder's approach to facilitate students' critical thinking should appreciate that she is not suggesting that students should be co-erced into engaging with this approach..She clearly refers to ground rules, which im my way of thinking allow students to opt out, should they wish to do so. However, it will be a missed opportunity if students wish not to engage in such activities where thinking aloud and articulating what one has read is so important to personal development in critical thinking. I would urge all students to participate if they wish to reap the benefits of higher education, of which critical thinking is so necessary.
As a "seasoned RN" (23 years) back in school for my masters, I suppose I was intuitively using close reading, simply because the writing in nursing research is so painfully difficult to read. They use the word utilize, when use works just as well...terms like metatheory or epistemic pluralism with no explanation of what those concepts entail (as thought hey are concepts everyone in daily life has an intimate understanding of) are two good examples. I have always been a fairly bright person with a decent vocabulary; I find it tiresome when I have to read a book with a dictionary in the other hand. I understand that new learning is taking place, but to me it seems unnecessarily pedantic to make advanced nursing articles unreadable by lay people or even undergrad students.
Sheryl - I think this is the crucial point - that many people 'dress up' what they have to say in order to conceal the straightforwardness of what they are saying; in some cases, of course, it's actually to conceal lack of content. This is partly why I teach analytical skills - and I strongly discourage students using big and/or obscure words and phrases when simple ones will do - it's a simple application of Occam's Razor
Sheryl, As a RN currently seeking a Master's degree. I would have to say that although it is important to encourage students to analyze research material, it is equally important for teachers to provide specific instructions concerning methods. Many classes encourage students to analyze articles without providing the structure in which to do so. In order to minimize the, "dress up" phenomena their needs to be an concensus among faculty in order to simply/clarify critical thinking expectations.
I would like to share my experience using Linda's four stages with my students who are deaf and hard of hearing. To my surprise, they improved their reading assessments, between 30% and 85%. I must admit that I did modify the four stages a little by adding one more--from time to time they improvised short classroom skits. Having said that, I believe that my students will improve their writing skills in the coming semester now that they are able to think critically. Additionally, they are moving closer to achieving the minimum ACT scores.