File Name: strategies techniques and approaches to critical thinking answer key.zip
What is important? What else do I What inferences need to know? Instant feedback is provided for correct and incorrect answers so you get the most out of your valuable study time.
Click Here for our professional translations. Question: Critical thinking is essential to effective learning and productive living. Would you share your definition of critical thinking? Paul: First, since critical thinking can be defined in a number of different ways consistent with each other, we should not put a lot of weight on any one definition. Definitions are at best scaffolding for the mind.
Two things are crucial:. To put it briefly, it is self-improvement in thinking through standards that assess thinking. Question: Could you give me an example? Paul: Certainly, one of the most important distinctions that teachers need to routinely make, and which takes disciplined thinking to make, is that between reasoning and subjective reaction.
If we are trying to foster quality thinking, we don't want students simply to assert things; we want them to try to reason things out on the basis of evidence and good reasons. Often, teachers are unclear about this basic difference. Many teachers are apt to take student writing or speech which is fluent and witty or glib and amusing as good thinking.
They are often unclear about the constituents of good reasoning. Hence, even though a student may just be asserting things, not reasoning things out at all, if she is doing so with vivacity and flamboyance, teachers are apt to take this to be equivalent to good reasoning. This was made clear in a recent California state-wide writing assessment in which teachers and testers applauded a student essay, which they said illustrated "exceptional achievement" in reasoned evaluation, an essay that contained no reasoning at all, that was nothing more than one subjective reaction after another.
The assessing teachers and testers did not notice that the student failed to respond to the directions, did not support his judgment with reasons and evidence, did not consider possible criteria on which to base his judgment, did not analyze the subject in the light of the criteria, and did not select evidence that clearly supported his judgment. Instead the student:.
The assessing teachers were apparently not clear enough about the nature of evaluative reasoning or the basic notions of criteria, evidence, reasons, and well-supported judgment to notice the discrepancy. The result was, by the way, that a flagrantly mis-graded student essay was showcased nationally in ASCD's Developing Minds , systematically misleading the , or so teachers who read the publication.
Question: Could this possibly be a rare mistake, not representative of teacher knowledge? Paul: I don't think so. Let me suggest a way in which you could begin to test my contention.
If you are familiar with any thinking skills programs, ask someone knowledgeable about it the "Where's the beef? Namely, "What intellectual standards does the program articulate and teach? And then when you explain what you mean, I think you will find that the person is not able to articulate any such standards.
Thinking skills programs without intellectual standards are tailor-made for mis-instruction. For example, one of the major programs asks teachers to encourage students to make inferences and use analogies, but is silent about how to teach students to assess the inferences they make and the strengths and weaknesses of the analogies they use. This misses the point. The idea is not to help students to make more inferences but to make sound ones, not to help students to come up with more analogies but with more useful and insightful ones.
Question: What is the solution to this problem? How, as a practical matter, can we solve it? Paul: Well, not with more gimmicks or quick fixes. Not with more fluff for teachers.
Only with quality long-term staff development that helps the teachers, over an extended period of time, over years not months, to work on their own thinking and come to terms with what intellectual standards are, why they are essential, and how to teach for them. The State Department in Hawaii has just such a long-term, quality, critical thinking program see " mentor program ".
So that's one model your readers might look at. In addition, the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction is focused precisely on the articulation of standards for thinking. I am hopeful that eventually, through efforts such as these, we can move from the superficial to the substantial in fostering quality student thinking.
The present level of instruction for thinking is very low indeed. Question: But there are many areas of concern in instruction, not just one, not just critical thinking, but communication skills, problem solving, creative thinking, collaborative learning, self-esteem, and so forth.
How are districts to deal with the full array of needs? How are they to do all of these rather than simply one, no matter how important that one may be?
Paul: This is the key. Everything essential to education supports everything else essential to education. It is only when good things in education are viewed superficially and wrongly that they seem disconnected, a bunch of separate goals, a conglomeration of separate problems, like so many bee-bees in a bag. In fact, any well-conceived program in critical thinking requires the integration of all of the skills and abilities you mentioned above.
Hence, critical thinking is not a set of skills separable from excellence in communication, problem solving, creative thinking, or collaborative learning, nor is it indifferent to one's sense of self-worth. Question: Could you explain briefly why this is so?
Paul: Consider critical thinking first. We think critically when we have at least one problem to solve. If there is no problem there is no point in thinking critically.
The "opposite" is also true. Uncritical problem solving is unintelligible. There is no way to solve problems effectively unless one thinks critically about the nature of the problems and of how to go about solving them.
Thinking our way through a problem to a solution, then, is critical thinking, not something else. Furthermore, critical thinking, because it involves our working out afresh our own thinking on a subject, and because our own thinking is always a unique product of our self-structured experience, ideas, and reasoning, is intrinsically a new "creation", a new "making", a new set of cognitive and affective structures of some kind.
All thinking, in short, is a creation of the mind's work, and when it is disciplined so as to be well-integrated into our experience, it is a new creation precisely because of the inevitable novelty of that integration. And when it helps us to solve problems that we could not solve before, it is surely properly called "creative".
The "making" and the "testing of that making" are intimately interconnected. In critical thinking we make and shape ideas and experiences so that they may be used to structure and solve problems, frame decisions, and, as the case may be, effectively communicate with others. The making, shaping, testing, structuring, solving, and communicating are not different activities of a fragmented mind but the same seamless whole viewed from different perspectives.
Question: How do communication skills fit in? Paul: Some communication is surface communication, trivial communication--surface and trivial communication don't really require education. All of us can engage in small talk, can share gossip. And we don't require any intricate skills to do that fairly well. Where communication becomes part of our educational goal is in reading, writing, speaking and listening.
These are the four modalities of communication which are essential to education and each of them is a mode of reasoning. Each of them involves problems. Each of them is shot through with critical thinking needs. Take the apparently simple matter of reading a book worth reading. The author has developed her thinking in the book, has taken some ideas and in some way represented those ideas in extended form.
Our job as a reader is to translate the meaning of the author into meanings that we can understand. This is a complicated process requiring critical thinking every step along the way. What data, what experiences, what evidence are given? What concepts are used to organize this data, these experiences? Is her thinking justified as far as we can see from our perspective? And how does she justify it from her perspective? How can we enter her perspective to appreciate what she has to say?
All of these are the kinds of questions that a critical reader raises. And a critical reader in this sense is simply someone trying to come to terms with the text. So if one is an uncritical reader, writer, speaker, or listener, one is not a good reader, writer, speaker, or listener at all.
To do any of these well is to think critically while doing so and, at one and the same time, to solve specific problems of communication, hence to effectively communicate. Communication, in short, is always a transaction between at least two logics. In reading, as I have said, there is the logic of the thinking of the author and the logic of the thinking of the reader. The critical reader reconstructs and so translates the logic of the writer into the logic of the reader's thinking and experience.
This entails disciplined intellectual work. The end result is a new creation; the writer's thinking for the first time now exists within the reader's mind. No mean feat! Question: And self esteem? How does it fit in? Paul: Healthy self-esteem emerges from a justified sense of self-worth, just as self-worth emerges from competence, ability, and genuine success.
If one simply feels good about oneself for no good reason, then one is either arrogant which is surely not desirable or, alternatively, has a dangerous sense of misplaced confidence. Teenagers, for example, sometimes think so well of themselves that they operate under the illusion that they can safely drive while drunk or safely take drugs. They often feel much too highly of their own competence and powers and are much too unaware of their limitations.
To accurately sort out genuine self-worth from a false sense of self-esteem requires, yes you guessed it, critical thinking. Question: And finally, what about collaborative learning? Paul: Collaborative learning is desirable only if grounded in disciplined critical thinking.
Without critical thinking, collaborative learning is likely to become collaborative mis-learning. It is collective bad thinking in which the bad thinking being shared becomes validated.
What they will expect, though, is for you to be able to think ; to know how to make connections between ideas and evaluate information critically. It seemed like something that my teachers just expected us to pick up in the course of our studies. While I venture that a lot of us did learn it, I prefer to approach learning deliberately, and so I decided to investigate critical thinking for myself. What is it, how do we do it, why is it important, and how can we get better at it? This post is my attempt to answer those questions. The above definition includes so many words because critical thinking requires you to apply diverse intellectual tools to diverse information.
Creative thinking is a way of looking at problems or situations from a fresh perspective to conceive of something new or original. Creative thinking is a process utilized to generate lists of new, varied and unique ideas or possibilities. Creative thinking brings a fresh perspective and sometimes unconventional solution to solve a problem or address a challenge.
Using these models, they developed the Critical Thinking Roadmap, a framework that breaks critical thinking down into four measurable phases: the ability to execute, synthesize, recommend, and generate. With critical thinking ranking among the most in-demand skills for job candidates , you would think that educational institutions would prepare candidates well to be exceptional thinkers, and employers would be adept at developing such skills in existing employees. Unfortunately, both are largely untrue. This confirms what a Wall Street Journal analysis of standardized test scores given to freshmen and seniors at colleges found: the average graduate from some of the most prestigious universities shows little or no improvement in critical thinking over four years. Employers fare no better. It starts with the fact that there is little agreement around what critical thinking is. From there, it gets even less clear.
Learning Skills:. Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day. Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally, understanding the logical connection between ideas.
The description of reflective thinking:.Eunice A. 30.05.2021 at 11:42
section of the Strategies, Techniques, and Approaches to Critical Thinking Knowledge Application ANSWER KEY FOR APPLYING CRITICAL THINKING.Sharon O. 31.05.2021 at 00:02
To browse Academia.Morgana B. 04.06.2021 at 06:07
Click Here for our professional translations.