Lesson 8 Standards of Critical Thinking

“Critical Thinking is skilful, responsible thinking that is conducive to good judgement because it is sensitive to context, relies on criteria and is self correcting”
Matthew Lipman

Critica Thinking done well by working with the 8+ elements of reasoning to ensure "reasonableness" (a high standard of logic) needs to be at a certain standard. As Lipman observes it is skilful and self correcting. The standards developed by Richard Paul and others are:

* clearness
*accuracy
*importance/relevance
*sufficiency
* depth
* breadth
* precision


Noisch (Learning to Think Things Through) set out the following questions students and other can ask themselves to check whether they have met the high standard required for critical thinking when presenting a reasoned argment, conclusion or decision.

CLEAR
Is my reasoning clear?
Do I understand this clearly?
Do I know the implications?
Have I given enough
§ examples?
§ contrasting examples?
§ hypothetical causes?
§ analogies?
Have I elaborated enough?
Is my presentation of my reasoning clear?
Have I clearly said what I meant?

ACCURATE
Is my reasoning accurate?
Is this in accord with
§ the best knowledge that I have?
§ the findings of the discipline?
§ reliable sources?
Do I need to check this out?
Check
Could this be based on
§ wishful thinking?
§ unexamined background stories?
§ hearsay, questionable sources?

Does my presentation display accuracy?
Have I supported the accuracy of my claims with reasons and good reasons?

IMPORTANT, RELEVANT
In my reasoning, have I focused on what is most important, given
§ my purpose?
§ the question at issue?
§ the context?
§ Do I have an overview?
§ Can I outline my reasoning?
§ Can I summarize my reasoning?
Have I presented my reasoning in a way that displays what is important?

SUFFICIENT
Have I reasoned this through enough, given
§ my purpose?
§ the question at issue?
§ the context?
Have I left out crucial steps?
Have I jumped to conclusions?
Are there any other essential issues to consider?
In my presentation have I said enough to show my audience that it is reasonable to come to my conclusions?

DEEP AND BROAD
In my reasoning, have I looked beneath the surface?
§ at underlying explanations, theories?
§ At the complexities of the issue?
Have I taken into account the other relevant perspectives?
In my presentation, have I presented my reasoning in such a way that displays its
§ depth?
§ breadth?

PRECISE
Is my reasoning precise enough, specific enough?
§ Do I need more details?
§ Do I need more exactness?
Have I stated the details and degree of exactness my audience needs?


REASONABLE OVERALL
Is my reasoning reasonable overall?
Have I presented a reasonable overall case?

Lesson 7 What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is thinking things through.

“Critical thinking is reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do”
Robert Ennis (http://www.criticalthinking.net/)

REASONABLE - Using reason and looking at logic (not just the usual definition of being fair, practical and sensible)
REFLECTIVE Thinking why do I have these ideas, why do I believe this, what basis have I decided to do this

Critical thinking is NOT:
Negative - A critical person is usually fault finding and to criticise usually means make a negative statement. Often, if we call someone a critic of something, we that person is against it. While critical thinking, we may make claims that are "negative" however critical means using criteria. The criteria for critical thinking is thinking that meets high standards of reasonablity (the use of reason).

Judgemental - When we are judgmental we may be harsh or over generalised, however critical thinking involves making judgments about what to believe or do but using deep and broad reasoning.

Emotionless – Emotions give us data. They can cloud judgement but also can illuminate. Critical thinking can also be used to analyse situtions which involve emotions.

Just problem solving – It is used to look at information and decide whether there is a problem that the thinker should be solving i.e. Are there any questions not answered by this information or reasoning? It can also add another dimension to your own problem solving by helping you check out your conclusions for "reasonableness".


“Critical thinking is thinking about your thinking, while you’re thinking, in order to make your thinking better.”
Richard Paul (www.criticalthinking.org)

Richard Paul developed the elements of reasoning circle to help us think about our thinking when learning critical thinking. Improving our thinking, and improving the way we think about our thinking is going to improve our understanding of a subject, the way we answer questions and ultimately our grades and marks.

Coming soon - some of the definitions developed in the classroom

Lesson 7 Working with the Elements of Reasoning

Looking at the logic of a piece of reasoning involves working round the circle of the elements of reasoning not in any particular order. The elements are part of a whole which critical thinkers can use to analyse a situation, theory or question. Using the elements you can also substitute MY or I to problem solve or develop your own reasoning.

The final question ALTERNATIVES is asked of each of the elements.

The questions below can be asked in the basic process of analysis (you may need to adapt the questions to fit the reasoning e.g. plurals etc)

1. What’s the person’s main purpose in this piece of reasoning? (What other goals or objectives does the person hope to accomplish in this piece of reasoning?)
2. What is the key question or problem the person is addressing? (What are the two or three most important subsidiary questions at issue?)
3. What is the most important information the person is using to reason through this issue? (What other information or data does the person need in this piece of reasoning?)
4. What are the person’s major conclusions? How is the person interpreting this issue? (How does the person answer the main question at issue? What solutions are being offered?)
5. What are the main concepts of the reasoning depends on (How does the person understand these concepts? How do those concepts fit together in the person’s reasoning?)
6. What are the main assumptions the person is making in this piece of reasoning? (What are the crucial unstated assumptions the author is making?)
7. What are the main implications and consequences of the person’s reasoning? (What are some of the unforeseen consequences of this line of reasoning?)
8. From what point of view is the person addressing? (What other points of view are necessary to understand this piece of reasoning, what discipline’s point of view is being used to address this issue? What other disciplines would help). Discipline = sociology, educational psychology etc.
9. What is the context of the issue the person is addressing? What circumstances led up to the issue and to this person’s reasoning? What is the background of the discipline (i.e. scientific, artistic, business) in which this issue is being addressed?)
10. What alternatives are there? (What alternative answers could you reasonably give to the preceding questions? What alternatives are there to the person’s reasoning?)

Based on Learning to Think Things Through, Nosich (Prentice-Hall 2001)

Lesson 7 Elements of Reasoning Diagram

Lesson 7 The Elements of Reasoning

“Critical thinking is reflective; it involves thinking-about-my-thinking. ……reflective thinking must meet high standards; (it is) ….. reasoning that is done well. ………. the elements are what we reflect about”

Learning to Think Things Through, Nosich (Prentice-Hall 2001)

Richard Paul (www.criticalthinking.org) put forward the methodology of examining the Elements of Reasoning. You will notice that they are in a circle because we can start an examination of someone's reasoning or our own reasoning at any point on the circle .

The square represents that all the elements are set in Context. To look at the context may be to examine historical, social, political, geographical, cultural setting of a piece of reasoning. It is looking at the wider picture of the reasoning and where it is placed in the world.

The central circle of Alternatives remindsw us that when examining the elements of reasoning we must look at alternatives. The question "And what else?"

The diagram can be found on the next page of the blog