Critical Thinking

Boise State faculty agree that students should develop habits of mind that enable them to think critically.  Critical thinking is, in fact, the first of the four main learning outcomes in our Core Curriculum (for a full description of the learning outcomes, see the 2002-2003 Undergraduate Catalog, page 40). But what is critical thinking?  What kinds of thinking abilities do we want students to acquire?

Critical thinking was one of the topics examined by participants in the 2002 Faculty Writing Seminar.  They did some impromptu writing about critical thinking in their disciplines, responding to the following questions:  What constitutes critical thinking in your discipline? How do professionals in your discipline pose and solve problems?  What kinds of thinking are you expecting students to do?

Kinds of critical thinking

From the impromptu writings, four different areas of meaning emerged, each one mentioned by teachers in a variety of disciplines: (1) constructing and evaluating arguments, (2) posing and solving problems, (3) analyzing and reflecting, and (4) seeing beyond surface appearances.  This classification into four areas is admittedly rough and subject to a lot of overlap, but it is a useful way to see the components of critical thinking as perceived by the teachers who responded to the questions.

1. Constructing and evaluating arguments. This category, by its very label, is the most obvious component of critical thinking. Students should learn how to recognize sound and unsound arguments, distinguish facts from inferences and opinions, and be aware of the persuasive tactics of everything from editorials to professional journal articles to advertising.

In his response to writing prompt, Andrew Cortens (Philosophy) wrote that critical thinking of this type is ingrained in the teaching of philosophy.  “Thinking clearly, rigorously, logically is what philosophers are supposed to be very good at.”  Moreover, philosophers agree to a surprising degree about what critical thinking is:  “First and foremost, I suppose, is the ability to discern when one thing is a logical consequence of another and when it is not.  Closely related is the ability to identify ambiguities of meaning that have to be cleared up if we are going to answer the question of what follows from what.  But just as important as the above – and much more difficult to explain – is the ability to tell what sorts of points, criticisms, and observations are, for lack of a better word, dialectically relevant.”

2.  Posing and solving problems.  Knowing how to solve problems is the form of critical thinking that many participants put at the top of the list.  In the seminar, faculty in electrical engineering, construction management, philosophy, and social work all thought of problem-solving as one of the main aspects of critical thinking they want their students to learn.   They try to teach students how to investigate alternatives, how to use their imaginative faculties to find creative solutions, and how to use their critical faculties to decide on the best solution.

But just as important as solving problems is the ability to pose good questions and problems to be solved.  A researcher has to first pose a good research question before working on finding answers; otherwise, the answers will be worthless.  Gail Shuck (English, ESL) gave an example from linguistics where the lack of critical thinking led to a bad research design.  A student ran into trouble by trying to investigate how writing affects second language acquisition.  The problem was, writing is one aspect of language; second-language acquisition includes writing development.  One can’t influence the other because they’re not separate comparable categories of experience.  “Even if they were mutually exclusive,” Gail wrote, “the question is so huge that it’s impossible to answer: Affects what about language acquisition? What aspect of language acquisition is ‘writing’ supposed to affect? Even if you limit ‘language’ to speaking, that raises other questions: does writing affect one’s general eloquence? Does writing affect learners’ understanding of how different spelling conventions signal particular pronunciations?” 

Posing good problems also includes “problematizing” the common assumptions of a discipline.  As Jim Knapp (Social Work) noted about social work in a cross-cultural setting, “The dominant culture is most often an assumed frame of reference for students who are now engaged in working with others who frequently are of a different social class or cultural orientation than their own.  The unexamined cultural lens through which students view the world must be challenged, questioned, brought into awareness at a more conscious level than students realize at the outset.”

3.  Analyzing and reflecting.  Although this category has a lot of overlap with the first two, it does emerge as a separate category, because some disciplines require certain kinds of critical thinking that don’t directly connect with either argument or problem-solving.  The following excerpts reveal a variety of explanation for the importance of reflection and analysis.

Bonnie Noonan: “Course work [in Early Childhood Development] requires students to be reflective, to look at their own childhood and assess the influences on who they are today and what their belief systems [are] about how children grow and develop, and what they should be like.”

Carole Whiteleather:  “Critical thinking in Theatre Arts is rooted in asking ‘why.’  We try to explore the reasons directors, designers, and playwrights do what they do.  Why are designs chosen, why did the director choose that particular convention, why has the playwright chosen these characters to propel this story.  When we ask why questions, we are apt to get a number of different reasons for the answers.  This is hopefully going to give us great discussions in class and cause the students to ‘think more critically.’”

Ed Lonsdale (Manufacturing Systems Technology): “When a person presses the go button on a computer and the machine attached thereto doesn’t go, the pressure is on to find out why.  Is it mechanical, electrical, a broken tube or wire, a binding joint, a poorly designed computer program, an issue with Windows?  At 10’s of 1000’s of dollars per hour in lost productivity the solution is very important to locate very rapidly.  [Students have to learn to resist] the temptation . . . to go for the ‘swapnicion’ cure.  Change a board and see if that fixes the problem.  If so, stop, if not go on.  The question as to what caused the board to fail is not addressed. . . .”

4.  Seeing beyond surface appearances.  This category is the broadest of the four, containing a variety of different kinds of thinking.  Several participants came up with ideas about critical thinking that seemed to have in common an ability to see beneath, or beyond, the surface of things:

· Ability to discern connections between seemingly disparate issues

· Ability to see underlying principles that govern a variety of phenomena

· Ability to view things from multiple perspectives, to embrace complexity and not look for just one theory or answer.

· Ability to see the need for innovations, finding a shortcoming in an established position

· Ability to think not just about the actual state of affairs, but about possibilities

· Ability to transfer thinking processes from one subject to another and from the classroom to the “real world”

For all their variety, the items in this category have in common the faculty of perception, the ability to see more than what appears on the surface or see other possibilities and connections.

Learning to perceive in new ways may not be as difficult as learning to analyze, pose and solve problems, or construct sound arguments.  But it can cause discomfort and an unsettling shift in one’s point of view.  Angela Bean (Applied Academics) provided an example of how gaining new perspectives can sometimes be unsettling to students.  Her APPACAD 111 class “discussed the September 11 attack in terms of cowardice.  I submitted that the terrorists were not cowards.  The students were in an uproar that I dare ask them to view that perspective.  This class gave me the best discussion of the semester because it was something that everyone felt passionate about.  The students did have a hard time looking from the hijacker perspective, but it gave them a deeper understanding of peer pressure and charismatic leaders. It was interesting to see how they viewed patriotism.  Several students discussed that they felt less patriotic now, as if, by understanding the other view, they somehow agreed with or sympathized with the terrorists.”

Implications

Most frequently, the seminar participants identified writing as the main way to develop critical thinking.  Writing is particularly crucial to philosophy.  Andrew Cortens noted, “Writing is nothing less than the main means by which philosophers communicate with one another. . . . More importantly, for most philosophers, the process of getting their ideas clear, of developing their criticisms and arguments is one that takes place in the very act of writing.”  Very few philosophers, he notes, are “able to ‘think it through’ in their heads and then ‘write it all down’ later.”

If we want to tell our students that one goal of a course is to help them develop their critical thinking, we might consider defining more precisely what kinds of critical thinking we want them to develop.  Perhaps we should be talking among ourselves about the definition of critical thinking in the Core Curriculum learning goals.  Perhaps we should be working together to develop ways to encourage these kinds of thinking.

Final note: The fun of critical thinking

It would not be right to conclude these thoughts on critical thinking without including the point that critical thinking can be a pleasurable and rewarding experience.  Bonnie Noonan wrote that critical thinking can be a kind of play: “I love to play with ideas and the variety of reasons things happen in a classroom or why a child behaves the way she does.  I really want students/teachers to love this too.  It gives depth and complexity to our work and raises it up a notch professionally.” 

Carole Whiteleather added the fascinating observation that critical thinking “increases the flavor of life” as one becomes more engaged in any activity.  “It’s like living in a color world as opposed to a black and white one.  The picture is the same but the colors make it brighter, richer, more complex.  I truly don’t believe that it matters whether or not you are an engineer, a football player, or a Pulitzer Prize winning playwright – critical thought would have an impact in your life.  I suppose I would also compare it to being able to read any book in the library as opposed to having only one book in your life.  If you are only an observer at life, and don’t dig in and ask why questions, in my humble estimation, you might just as well be a robot.  There are arguments to this, of course, since those who don’t ask why may ultimately be less complicated.  And I am certainly not saying this is wrong, but if that is the case, why go to a Liberal Arts university?”