edd 5229 liberal studies in knowledge society topic 10

EDD 5229Liberal Studies in Knowledge Society

Topic 10Understanding the Curriculum Aim of Liberal Studies:

How Critical is Critical Thinking?

Critical Thinking in Senior-Secondary Curriculum Liberal Studies of HKSAR

In Sept, 2001, Learning to Learning: The Way Forwards in Curriculum Development Critical Thinking is identified as one of the nine generic skills

within the framework of the curriculum reform Critical thinking has been defined as one of the three generic

skills that should be prioritized among the nine skills.

“Since public feedback indicated that the curriculum reform envisaged is too broad, a priority focus will be placed on the development of three of these generic skills, namely communication skills, creativity and critical thinking skills, though the others should not be neglected.” (Curriculum Development Council, 2001, p. 25)


In Sept, 2001, Learning to Learning: The Way Forwards in Curriculum Development The idea of critical thinking: In the document, critical thinking i

s depicted as

“Critical thinking skills help students to draw out meaning from given data or statements, generate and evaluate arguments, and make their own judgement.” (CDC, 2001, p. 24)


In July, 2007 Liberal Studies Curriculum and Assessment Guide (Secondary 4-6) Curriculum Aims

“The aims of Liberal Studies at the Senior Secondary Level are: ...

(d) to develop in students a range of skills for life-long learning, including critical thinking skills, creativity, problem-solving skills, communication skills and information technology skills; …” (CDC and HKEAA, 2007, p. 5)


In July, 2007 Liberal Studies Curriculum and Assessment Guide (Secondary 4-6) Learning Outcomes

“By the end of the course, students should be able to: …

(d) identify the values underlying different views and judgments on personal and social issues, and apply critical thinking skills, creativity and different perspectives in making decisions and judgments on issues and problems at both personal and social levels. …”(CDC and HKEAA, 2007, p. 6)


In 2009, Package on The Learning and Teaching of Critical Thinking Skills” (Senior Secondary)

“Although it sometimes seems that there is very little that academics can agree upon, there is considerable agreement among experts in the field regarding the definition of critical thinking. …Different authors use different terms and vary in the breadth of their definition, but overall there are no major disagreements about the sorts of skills that are included under a critical thinking rubric.” (Halpern, 2003 Quoted in Ku et al., 2009, p.2)

“The term critical thinking is the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. It is purposeful, reasoned, and goal directed. It is the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions. Critical thinkers use these skills appropriately, without prompting, and usually with conscious intent, in a variety of settings. That is, they are predisposed to think critically. When we think critically, we are evaluating the outcomes of our thought processes — how good a decision is or how well a problem is solved. Critical thinking also involves evaluating the thinking process — the reasoning that went into the conclusion we’ve arrived at or the kinds of factors considered in making a decision.” (Halpern, 2003 Quoted in Ku et al., 2009, p.2)

The five categories of critical thinking skills :

1. Verbal Reasoning Skills

2. Argument Analysis Skills

3. Skills in Thinking as Hypothesis Testing

4. Using Likelihood and Uncertainty, and

5. Decision Making and Problem Solving Skills

Critical Thinking: An Intrinsic Evaluation

The idea of critical thinking in education can be traced back to John Dewey’s concept of “reflective thinking” (Dewey, 1933; 1939). Throughout its short history of development, particularly in the US, the field is filled with contentions and disagreements. It is far from a field of “considerable agreement” or “no major disagreement”.


First round of debate: In 1962, Robert Ennis’ paper entitled “A concept of critical

thinking” was published in Harvard Educational Review. In the paper, critical thinking was defined as “a correct assessing of statement.” (Ennis, 1962, p. 81) Ennis further conceptualizes that “twelve aspects of critical thinking are:


First round of debate: …“twelve aspects of critical thinking are:

Grasping the meaning of a statement.Judging whether there is ambiguity in a line of reasoning.Judging whether certain statements contradict each other.Judging whether a conclusion follows necessarily.Judging whether a statement is specific enough.Judging whether is actually the application of a certain principle.Judging whether an observation statement is reliable. Judging whether an inductive conclusion is warranted.Judging whether the problem has been identified.Judging whether something is an assumption.Judging whether a definition is adequate.Judging whether a statement made by an alleged authority is

acceptable.” (Ennis, 1962, 83)


First round of debate: Ennis' conception of critical thinking has been criticized as “p

ure skills conception (Siegel, 1988, p. 6) and it is but a “battery of atomic technical skills.” (Paul, 1994, p. 185; see also Burbules and Berk, 1999; Walters, 1994; Thayer-Bacon, 2000)


The second round of debate: In the 1980s, Ennis took two further initiations in developing hi

s conception of critical thinkingHe developed two sets of standardized-test instruments, i.e. Cor

nell Critical Thinking Tests (Ennis and Millman, 1982) to measure levels of critical thinking performance.

Ennis published a paper entitled “A Taxonomy of Critical Thinking Disposition and Ability”. In the paper, Ennis responded to the criticism of skill-bias by adding disposition into the conception of critical thinking. According, he developed a taxonomy consisting of 14 levels of dispositions and 12 levels of ability. (Ennis, 1987)


The second round of debate: Ennis’ efforts triggered another round of criticism.

John McPeck criticizes that “critical thinking cannot be reduced to a few mechanical ‘decoding’ skills” and more specifically “the major shortcomings of both the Cornell tests is that the format of a standardized multiple-choice test does not permit the comprehensive or circumspect judgements that are required by the concept of critical thinking.” (McPeck, 1981, p.145)



Harvey Siegel also criticizes “So instead of two roughly equal components of critical thinking, proficiencies (skills) and tendencies (dispositions), what Ennis’s conceptionamounts to is actually a highly complex list of proficiencies coupled with the simple admonition to exercise the proficiencies. …(T)he tendencies to utilize critical thinking skills is under-analyzed and under-attended to in Ennis’s work.” (Siegel, 1988, p.7)

Siegel specifically criticizes the Cornel Critical Thinking Tests as “the one-sided heroic effort to develop effective tests for the proficiencies (skills) in the total absence of effort to develop effective tests for the tendency (disposition)” (Siegel, 1988, p.8)



More recently, Burbules (1993; Burbeles & Beck,1999) and Walters (1994) criticize that critical thinking may plausibly be reduced to examination skills of mechanical logicism.


The third round of the debate John McPeck queries whether it is possible to teach critical thi

nking as generalized skills without relating it to specific subject content. He criticizes the content-free approach to critical-thinking instruction commonly adopted in the 1970s. He underlines that “thinking is always thinking about something. To think about nothing is a conceptual impossibility.” (1981, p.3) More specifically, McPeck contends that


The third round of the debate …“In isolation from a particular subject, the phrase ‘critical thi

nking’ neither refers to nor denotes any particular skill. It follows from this that it makes no sense to talk about critical thinking as a distinct subject and that it therefore cannot profitably be taught as such. To the extent that critical thinking is not about a specific subject X, it is both conceptually and practically empty. The statement ‘I teach critical thinking’, simpliciter, is vacuous because there is no generalized skill properly call critical thinking.” (p. 5)


The third round of the debate McPeck’s criticism meets with forceful counter-arguments fro

m Stephen Norris (1990), Richard Paul, and Harvey Siegel (1990). Norris and Paul defend that critical-thinking instruction is content-free, while Siegel provides a more balanced view of suggesting that some aspect of critical thinking can be taught in terms of generalized skills, while some are subject and content specific. (Siegel, 1988; 1990)


Round four: Reformulations and elaborations. Harvey Siegel re-conceptualizes critical thinking by injecting

the concept of reason into critical thinking instruction. He suggests that “to be a critical thinker is to be appropriately

moved by reasons…. A critical thinker is one who appreciates and accepts the importance, and convicting force, of reasons. When assessing claims, making judgments, evaluating procedures, or contemplating alternative actions, the critical thinker seeks reasons on which to base her assessments, judgments, and actions. To seek reasons, moreover, is to recognize and commit oneself to principles.” (Siegel, 1988, p.32-33)


Round four: Reformulations and elaborations. Harvey Siegel re-conceptualizes critical thinking by injecting t

he concept of reason into critical thinking instruction. By reason, Siegel makes use the conception put forth by Scheffl

er. He indicates that “reason is always a matter of abiding by general rules or principles… reason is always a matter of treating equal reasons equally, and of judging the issues in the light of general principles to which one has bound oneself… if I could judge reasons differently when they bear on my interests, or disregard my principles when they conflict with my own advantage, I should have no principles at all. The concepts of principles, reasons and consistency thus go together.” (Scheffler, 1973; quoted in Siegel, 1988, p.33)


Round four: Reformulations and elaborations. Harvey Siegel re-conceptualizes critical thinking by injecting

the concept of reason into critical thinking instruction. Siegel further differentiates critical thinking into two

dimensions, namely proficiency and spirit. The former refers to the capacities of making use of "reason" in assessing one's thinking, while the later signifies " a willingness to conform judgment and action to principle, not simply a ability to so conform. On who has the critical attitude has a certain character as well as certain skills: a character which is inclined to seek, and to base judgment and action upon, reasons; which rejects partiality and arbitrariness; which is committed to the objective evaluation of relevant evidence; and which values such aspects of critical thinking as intellectual honesty; justice to evidence, sympathetic and impartial consideration of interests, objectivity, and impartiality." (Siegel, 1988, p. 39)


Round four: Reformulations and elaborations. Richard Paul makes a distinction between the weak sense and

the strong sense of critical thinkingBy weal sense of critical thinking, it refers to training of “atomic

technical skills of logical thinking. As a result, “students studying critical thinking at the university level have highly developed belief systems buttressed by deep-seated uncritical, egocentric, and sociocentric habits of thought by which they interpret and process their experiences, whether academic or not, and place them into some larger perspective. …those students …become sophistic rather ten less so, more skilled in rationalizing and intellectualizing their biases.” (Paul, 1994, 184)



the strong sense of critical thinkingBy strong sense of critical thinking, it refers to the view which r

ejects the idea that critical thinking can be taught as a battery of atomic technical skills independent of egocentricbelief and commitments. Instead of “atomic arguments …it emphasizes argument network (points of view, frames of reference, worldviews, systems of thought); instead of merely teaching evaluation of atomic arguments it emphasizes a more dialectical and dialogical approaches.” (1994, p. 185-6)

“Teaching critical thinking in a strong sense helps students develop reasoning skills precisely in those areas where they are most likely to have egocentric and sociocentric biases. Such biases exist most profoundly in areas of their identities and vested interests.” (p. 190)



the strong sense of critical thinkingSubsequently, Richard Paul established The Center for Critical

Thinking at Sonoma State University in North California.

http://www.criticalthinking.org/about/centerforCT.cfm


The Delphi Report: A statement of expert consensus for purpose of educational assessment and instruction, American Philosophical Association.

http://www.insightassessment.com/pdf_files/DEXadobe.PDF




Definition of critical thinking:

“We understand critical thinking to be purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual consideration upon which that judgment is based. CT is essential as a tool of inquiry. As such, CT is a liberating force in education and a powerful resource in one’s personal and civic life. While not synonymous with good thinking, CT is a pervasive and self rectifying human phenomenon.


Definition of critical thinking: (cont’d)

“The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in face of personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit. Thus, educating good critical thinkers means working toward this ideal. It combines developing CT skills with nurturing those dispositions which consistently yield useful insights and which are the basis of a rational and democratic society.”

Skill Sub-skills

1. Interpretation CategorizationDecoding significanceClarifying meaning

2. Analysis Examining ideasIdentifying argumentsAnalyzing arguments

3. Evaluation Assessing claimsAssessing arguments

4. Inference Querying evidenceConjecturing alternativesDrawing conclusions

5. Explanation Stating resultsJustifying proceduresPresenting arguments

6. Self-regulation Self-examiningSelf-correcting

CT cognitive skills and sub-skills

Critical Thinking: An Intrinsic Evaluation Constituents of Critical Thinking: Affective dispositions

Approaches to life and living in general• inquisitiveness with regard to a wide range of issues,

• concern to become and remain generally well-informed,

• alertness to opportunities to use CT,

• trust in the processes of reasoned inquiry,

• self-confidence in one’s own ability to reason,

• open-mindedness regarding divergent world view,

• flexibility in considering alternatives and opinions,

• understanding of the opinions of other people,

• fair-mindedness in appraising reasoning,

• honesty in facing one’s own biases, prejudices, stereotypes, egocentric or sociocentric tendencies,

• prudence in suspending, making or altering judgments,

• willingness to consider and revise views where honest reflection suggests that change is warranted,


Constituents of Critical Thinking: Affective dispositions Approaches to specific issues, questions or problems:

• clarity in stating the question or concern,

• orderliness in working with complexity,

• diligence in seeking relevant information,

• reasonableness in selecting and applying criteria,

• care in focusing attention on the concern at hand,

• persistence though difficulties are encountered

• precision to the degree permitted by the subject and the circumstance.

Critical Thinking: An Extrinsic Evaluation

In the late 1970s, two theoretical perspectives have emerged and invoked new critical conceptions in educational study. They have invoked profound challenges to the conventional conception of critical-thinking instruction. They are critical literacy and critical pedagogy. Both perspectives owe their theoretical origins from two similar sources, on Critical Theory of the Frankfurt School and the conception of The Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1972) from a Brazilian educator Paulo Freire.


Critical literacy perspective: According to Freire's experiences in the program of literacy for

Brazilian farmers, he expends the concept of literacy from merely reading and writing of words to reading and writing of the world. In his own words

“It is impossible to carry out my literacy work or to understand literacy… by divorcing the reading of the word from the reading of the world. Reading the word and learning how to write the word so one can later read it are preceded by learning how to write the world, that is, having the experience of changing the world and touching the world.” (Freire and Macedo, 1987, p.49)


Critical literacy perspective: Subsequently, Green (1988), Lankshear and Knobel (2003) reco

nceptualize literacy into three levels Operational literacy: It refers to the mastery of the decoding (readi

ng) and encoding (writing) operations of systems of language or of other media. It indicates the ability to relate the words with the worlds “represented”.

Cultural literacy: It refers to the mastery of the "system of meanings" and cultural system underlying a specific linguistic system. It indicates the capacity to interpreting the meanings "signified" in media.


Critical literacy perspective: Subsequently, Green (1988), Lankshear and Knobel (2003) reco

nceptualize literacy into three levels Critical literacy: Based on the perspectives of the Critical Theory a

nd constructionism, critical-literacy theorists begin with the assumption of "social construction of reality". And they emphasize that there are hypostatized power relations and frozen ideological relation at work underlying these realities and they in turn serve as legitimation and reproduction mechanism of particular institutional configuration. (Habermas, 1971; 1979）

• Accordingly. Critical literacy is defined as ability to unveil the legitmation bases underlying particular linguistic and cultural systems.

• Furthermore, in Freire's conception, it is– To read the words and the read the world

– To write the words and to write the world

– To rewrite the world and to transform and improve the world


Critical pedagogy perspective: By applying the conception of social construction, legitimation and reproduction to education in general, the critical pedagogy put forth critical analysis beyond the conception of literacy and look into different aspects of pedagogy, such as (1) pedagogical content, (2) the pedagogical relationship, and (3) the pedagogical process,


Critical pedagogy perspective: Pedagogical content:

This perspective can be traced back to Basil Bernstien thesis “How a society selects, classifies, distributes, transmits and evaluates the educational knowledge it considers to be public, reflects both the distribution of power and the principles of social control." (Bernstein, 1970, p.74)

Accordingly, the concerns about pedagogical content is to reveal how a particular curriculum “legitimatizes” and “reproduces” a particular institutional configuration.

At the same time, how it "marginalizes", "suppressed" and “silences” the “others”


Critical pedagogy perspective: Pedagogical relationship

This aspect of inquiry in critical pedagogical can best be illustrated with Freire's conception of "the banking education".

“Education thus becomes an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqués and 'makes deposits', which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat. This is the 'banking' concept of education.… The students, alienated like the slave in the Hegelian dialectic, accept their ignorance as justifying the teacher's existence…" (Freire, 1972, p.45-46)


Critical pedagogy perspective: Pedagogical relationship

To rectify, Freire advocates a dialogical relation through which students are encourage to reflect and re-write the world in which they find themselves. And in the process to liberate themselves from the situated and submerged contexts

These aspect of inquiry has initiated researches in both the perspectives of feminism and post-colonialism.


Critical pedagogy perspective: Pedagogical process

This aspect of inquiry can be illustrated with Freire's conception of "problem-posing education."

By rejecting the banking concept of education, teachers and students can engage in a dialogical relation and "pose problem" to each others and more importantly to "the world" in which they are embedded.

"Problem-posing education involves a constant unveiling of reality … (It) strives for the emergence of consciousness and critical intervention in reality." (Freire, 1972, p.54)

"In problem-posing education, men develop their power to perceive critically the way they exist in the world with which and in which they find themselves; they come to see the world not as a static reality, but as a reality in process, in transformation." (Freire, 1972, p.56)


Critical pedagogy perspective: Pedagogical process

"Problem-posing education affirms men as beings in the process of becoming - as unfinished, uncompleted beings in and with a likewise unfinished reality." (Freire, 1972, p.56-57)

“This movement of inquiry must be directed towards humanization – man’s historical vocation. The pursuit of full humanity, however, cannot be carried out in isolation or individualism, but only in fellowship and solidarity; therefore it cannot unfold in the antagonistic relations between oppressors and oppressed…. Problem-posing education, as a humanist and liberating praxis, posits as fundamental that men subjected to domination mush fight for their emancipation.” (Freire, 1972, p.58)


Taking together, theorists of the critical literacy and critical pedagogy perspectives have waged some profound criticisms on critical thinking instruction. Criticism on the decontextualization of the thinking process:

It is criticized that critical thinking has abstracted human thinking processes as "decontextualized" and "disembedded" activities of pure reasoning and simple logical operations.

It is suggested that to rectify this pitfall the contextuality and historicity of thought should be reintroduced into critical thinking instruction.


Taking together, theorists of the critical literacy and critical pedagogy perspectives have waged some profound criticisms on critical thinking instruction. Criticism on the decontextualization of the thinking process:

The emphasis on the contextuality and historicity of thought has found echo in Max Horkheimer's critique on Immanuel Kant's famous conceptions of "pure reason" and " transcendental self"

"It is the human being who thinks, not the Ego or Reason…. [And that] is not something abstract, such as the human essence, but always human beings living in a particular historical epoch." (Horkheimer, 1968, p.145; quoted in Hoy and McCarthy, 1995, p.9)


…some profound criticisms on critical thinking instruction. Criticism on the desubjectification of the thinker:

It is criticized that critical thinking has abstracted thinkers as “disembodied” and “disinterest” individuals who are expected to provide assessment to argumentative claims with regards to their logical validity.

It is suggested that one way to rectify this fault, Habermas' thesis on the "knowledge-constitutive interests" should be reintroduced

Another way to rectify the fault of desubjectification, critical thinking instruction should "re-subjectify” thinkers as “relational self”, “situated self”, and “embodied self” and bring the conceptions of "care" and "recognition" back into the critical thinking instruction.


…some profound criticisms on critical thinking instruction. Criticism on the objectification of the objects of thinking:

It is criticized that critical thinking has abstracted the objects of inquiry as objectively existing realities and given facts. The primary concern is simply to assess the validity of the logical connections between premises and conclusions.

It is suggested that to rectify this pitfall, critical thinkers should think of the objects of inquiry as socially constructed realities, which are loaded with hypostatized power relations, frozen ideological configurations, and legitimatized systemic distortions.

Reconstructing of a Framework of Critical Thinking for Liberal Studies

To summarize, it seems that the main difference among the fractions in the controversy is the meanings each fraction gives to the concept of criticality. There seems to be at least five different meanings of criticality at work in these debates and criticisms on the meaning of critical thinking. These different meanings of criticality are


Critical means evaluative: To most of the scholars within the field of critical thinking, to be critical means to evaluate and assess. Accordingly, critical thinking is simply discerned as evaluating the logical correctness of thinking or more specifically argumentative claims. Critical thinking instruction is simply training of logical- operational skills.


Criticality means critique on the contextuality and historicity of thinking: Most of the topics and issues addressed in social studies and citizenship education are socio-politically framed issues and phenomena. Hence, to examined the discursive configuration at work behind each of these issues is vital in social studies and citizenship education.


Critique on the subjectivity and the situation of the thinkers: Participants in the discourse of social and political issues are "situated", "embodied" and "interest-bearing" subjects, to reveal and reflect on the subjectivities of these thinking participants is also vital in social studies and citizenship education.


Criticality means critique on the objects of inquiry: Critically thinking about social and political issues in the teaching of social studies and citizenship education should advance beyond logical validity of argumentative claim and penetrate to the power relations hypostatized, ideological configurations frozen, and systemic distortions legitimatized underlying the social and political phenomena in point.


Criticality means critical practice of social "re-writing" and transforming: The last meaning of criticality in critical thinking points to the liberating and transformative potentiality in critical thinking instruction. Critical thinking instruction should not be stay at the level of contemplating and it should entail actions. In social studies and citizenship education, it signifies initiations of social and participations which may lead to improvement and transformation of social and political phenomena in point.

Topic 8Understanding the Curriculum Aim of Liberal Studies:

How Critical is Critical Thinking?

End

edd 5229 liberal studies in knowledge society topic 10

Documents

idea of critical thinking

term critical thinking

critical thinking rubric

liberal studies curriculum

critical thinkers

kind of thinking

generic skills

communication skills