systematic approach to teaching critical thinking through debate

• Effective Instruction

A Systematic Approach to Teaching Critical Thinking through Debate

by David Rear

Shibaura Institute of Technology (Tokyo, Japan)

The development of critical thinking (CT) skills has become a key goal for educators in first and second language contexts. Teachers in EFL contexts, however, are often constrained by the linguistic skills of their students. This paper outlines a systematic approach towards developing the critical thinking skills of students with relatively low linguistic abilities. It will report on a program designed by the author at a university in Japan, which used a taxonomy of skills drawn up by Facione (1990) to create a course based around debates of social issues. It took students through a six-stage process, showing them how to clarify the nature of a problem, gather and organize appropriate data, evaluate the worth of that data, analyze the data to draw conclusions, express those conclusions clearly in the form of a debate, and finally appraise their performance for future improvement.

Arriving at a working definition of critical thinking

The cognitive dimension

Until the 1990s, critical thinking was generally discussed in the realm of first language education (e.g. Ennis, 1962; McPeck, 1981). More recently, however, second language theorists and practitioners have also begun to take an interest in the concept, leading to serious debates over both what the term “critical thinking” means and how it might be taught in a second language context. Needless to say, there is no single accepted definition, and the sheer variety of interpretations can sometimes make it hard for teachers to know how to make a start in introducing it to their classes. Ennis (1985) defines CT as “reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do” (p. 28).  Paul (1984) describes it as “a set of integrated macro-logical skills ultimately intrinsic to the character of the person” (p. 5). Stall and Stahl (1991) found the most popular conception of the term to be the development of “cohesive, logical reasoning patterns and understanding assumptions and biases underlying particular positions” (p. 82). Gieve (1998), meanwhile, states that for students to think critically they must be able to “examine the reasons for their actions, their beliefs, and their knowledge claims, requiring them to defend themselves and question themselves, their peers, their teachers, experts, and authoritative texts” (p. 126).

If teachers are to implement CT training in their classes, it is important to develop a working definition that can be applied to pedagogical materials (and explained to the students) in a practical way. Fortunately, despite the wide variety of definitions, there is broad agreement on what cognitive skills are necessary for becoming a successful “critical thinker.” Bloom’s seminal work of 1956 identified six major cognitive categories, which have provided the basis for future taxonomies. Ennis (1987), for instance, produced a list of twelve key abilities: Facione (1990), meanwhile, organized a consensus of expert opinion to come up with the six broad categories of interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and selfregulation. Each category is further broken down into sub-skills, as follows:

Table 1. “Consensus List of CT Cognitive Skills and Sub-Skills” (Facione 1990, p. 6)

Facione’s list of cognitive skills provides a workable framework for drawing up a critical thinking course based around organized debates. As will be explained below, each of the six categories defined by Facione can be translated into a specific stage involved with the research, preparation and performance of a debate.

Critical thinking and social awareness

Debate offers a second advantage in that it allows educators to take account of another important aspect of most conceptions of critical thinking: that of social awareness and criticism. Ennis’s (1985) definition of the term as “reasonable and reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do” (p. 28 ) implies an emancipatory quality to the concept, a freeing of people’s minds from an unquestioning acceptance of conventional beliefs. Benesch (1993) is even more explicit, seeing critical thinking as “a search for the social, historical, and political roots of conventional knowledge and an orientation to transform learning and society” (p. 546). Paul (1984) argues that the development of cognitive skills for “vocational” or “technical” purposes is only critical thinking “in the weak sense” (p. 5). Critical thinking “in the strong sense” implies “emancipatory reason” and an inclination for people to “free themselves from the self-serving manipulations of their own leaders”.

While we must, as educators, be wary of transplanting our own criticisms of society or government into the minds of our students, it is important to help them develop skills that will allow them to form their own views. Fortunately, the cognitive and socio-critical aspects of critical thinking are distinct and divorced. If students have the ability to analyze arguments, assess claims, query evidence and draw conclusions (Facione, 1990), they also have the tools to evaluate the pronouncements of authorities and to critically examine the society and world in which they live. This is a form of liberation and surely a key goal of education in both first and second language contexts.

Teaching critical thinking through debate

The course this paper will report on sought to recognize this dual nature of critical thinking by developing the cognitive skills necessary for successful critical thinking while simultaneously encouraging the students to look in depth at issues affecting their society and environment. For this reason, debate was thought to be a suitable medium, as it allowed the students to prepare for the discussion of serious topics while gradually building up the skills necessary to do it successfully. It also gave the course a linguistic focus, centered on the language of discussion and agreement – again, functions that the students would find pertinent once they entered the world of work.

Twenty students were enrolled in the course, all third and fourth years studying at Kanda University of International Studies in Chiba Prefecture, Japan. They had varying linguistic abilities, ranging from elementary to intermediate, and were split evenly between male and female. The course ran for one thirteen-week semester and met for ninety minutes twice a week. In the first class, the objectives of the course were laid out as follows:

 To develop critical thinking skills by preparing and performing two debates. To improve the ability to work successfully in a team. To improve oral presentation skills. To learn and use language for argument and discussion.

During the course, the students prepared for and completed two debates, each lasting approximately thirty minutes. For the first debate, whose topic was chosen by the teacher, they were given eight weeks to prepare; for the second, whose topic they could choose themselves, they had five weeks. The lengthy preparation time was considered extremely important, as it is unfair to expect students to discuss an issue critically and intelligently without giving them sufficient opportunity to understand it.

For each debate, the students were led through a six-stage process, which echoed the six cognitive competencies detailed above:

Identify and clarify the issue (Interpretation)

Gather and organize information about the issue (Analysis)

Evaluate that information for accuracy and applicability (Evaluation)

Draw conclusions from the evidence (Inference)

Explain conclusions logically in the form of a debate (Explanation)

Critically appraise and examine one’s performance (Self-regulation)

Development of the six skills

The topic of the first debate was this: “Do violent movies, television shows, and video games lead to violent behavior?” This somewhat complex issue was chosen because of the large amount that has been written on it, in research papers, popular magazines and newspapers. Some of the supposed evidence that has been presented for either side is strong and convincing, whilst other parts can be seen as weak and contradictory. It was hoped that the students would eventually be able to judge one from the other.

In the first stage of preparation, the students were asked to discuss whether there was any part of the question they felt was unclear or ambiguous. This was a tough beginning and many students struggled, but eventually certain suggestions were made, most pertinently concerning the question of what “violence” meant. How does one define what is or is not a “violent” movie? Must people die in order for a film to be violent? Is a war film automatically violent? How about a Tom and Jerry cartoon? In this way, they began to see that what might seem like a fairly straightforward issue is, in fact, not straightforward at all. They also saw that before one can go about answering a question, it is often important to define the relevant terms.

The second stage began with the students forming groups of four, in which they would eventually perform their debate. Two students took each side, either based on their genuine opinion or by playing devil’s advocate. They then discussed in their team what kind of information or data they wished to gather, forming a series of questions they felt they needed to answer. They were also given a short article by the teacher containing relevant data, and were shown how to make notes about it by distilling it into its main arguments and supporting evidence. After this, they were given guidance on searching the Internet and on using the electronic database of the university library. Finally, they were sent away to gather evidence that would support their side, either in English or Japanese, depending on preference.

In the third stage, they learned how to evaluate that data for trustworthiness and strength. The motto we adopted was “Be Suspicious!” that is, to be wary of taking information at face value without testing it for certain qualities. They were taught to ask questions of everything they read:

 Is the information based on fact or opinion? Can it be expected to be biased or one-sided? Is it written by an expert? Is it based on well-supported evidence, which is up-to-date and transparent? Has it been sufficiently explained? Does it come from a reputable source, like an academic journal or a serious newspaper?

They were given practice in appraising certain items of information provided by the teacher, deciding if they felt each one was credible and why. After that, they did the same with the data they had gathered themselves, frequently asking the teacher for guidance when they felt it necessary.

The fourth stage involved planning the debate itself, which was conducted with three speeches on each side: the opening address, the attack and rebuttal, and the summation. The students were required to write the opening address in full, analyzing the information they had gathered in order to create two or three strong arguments supported by reliable data. The speech was then checked by the teacher before being given to the opposing team, who could probe it for weaknesses for their attack. Although ideally in a debate spontaneity would be encouraged by keeping a speech secret beforehand, it was felt that in consideration of the relatively low linguistic abilities of the students, preparation time for the attack was necessary if the debate were to be successful. The attack speech itself, however, was kept secret, so the students were required to defend their arguments impromptu as the debate progressed.

The main focus for the fifth stage was on presentation skills and language. In terms of presentation skills, the importance of eye contact, voice control, and visual aids were stressed, as well as the need to tailor performance and language to the specific audience being addressed. The linguistic element had a triple focus. First, the students were provided with a list of discourse markers that would help them with the overall structure of a speech. Second, they were taught how to organize their paragraphs internally, incorporating expressions to signal topic sentences, reasons, and supporting evidence. Finally, they were given phrases commonly used in formal debates for attacking and refuting arguments. The students were required to practice their opening addresses and attack speeches in front of the teacher, so that individual advice could be given. When all the groups felt they were ready, the debates were held over two class periods.

This left the sixth and final stage: the critical self-appraisal of the students’ performances. During the debate, three types of appraisal were carried out: by the teacher, by the audience, and by the participants themselves. In each case, two main aspects were considered: the content of the debate (clarity and persuasiveness of the arguments, strength and reliability of the supporting evidence) and the quality of its presentation. Each student filled out a selfappraisal sheet and was directed to consider what aspects of their performance they had been pleased or dissatisfied with. These points would then be borne in mind for the second selfchosen debate, with improvements hopefully made.

Second debate

The second debate followed the same six-stage process as the first. However, since each of the five groups was free to choose their own topic, a greater degree of independence was required in the research, preparation and performance of the debates. The teacher assisted the students initially by providing some English background material to their chosen topic, but after that acted in an advisory role, giving support or help when and if the students required it. The students picked topics based on their own interests, most of them pertaining to issues specific to Japan:

 Is the privatization of the post office a good thing for Japan? Should Japan reform Article 9 (the ‘peace clause’) of its constitution?  Should Japan abolish the death penalty? Should Japan increase the rate of immigration into the country? Is religion a positive influence on the world?

None of the topics was straightforward, but the students were able to work with a good deal of independence, researching information (mainly in Japanese), asking questions of its accuracy, and using it to formulate two or three strong arguments. Although the teacher’s assistance was needed through all stages of the process, the fact that the students had been able to choose the debate topics themselves gave them motivation to work through their own initiative.

Reflections on the course

Student performance in the debates

The complexity of the topics chosen by the teacher and students made the two debates challenging for the students. They were forced to work hard both inside and outside the class in order to prepare and perform the debates to an acceptable standard. One of the major issues they struggled with was finding ways to explain difficult concepts and arguments in language that both they, as debaters, would be able to present comfortably and that their classmates in the audience would be able to understand. As a consequence, the first debates tended to be rather hesitant and dry in presentation, as the performers concentrated on simply carrying out their speeches without considering how those were being received by the audience. It was doubtful at times whether the audience was really following the details of the debate.

For the second debate, therefore, much more effort was made both by the teacher and the students to tackle this problem. A lot of individual help was required, as the students attempted to use their own words at all times instead of relying on sentences and phrases copied down from English source material. Inevitably, given the complexity of the topics they were speaking about, it was necessary for them to utilize some difficult lexical terms which would be beyond the comprehension of their watching classmates. In these cases, the performers drew up bilingual word lists on the board, which they could point to at the relevant moment. This, along with the confidence they had gained from performing the first debate, made the second debates both smoother and more dynamic in presentation.

Student reactions to the course

At the end of the course, the students were asked to fill out an anonymous questionnaire to gauge their reactions to what they had studied. Three questions were judged to be particularly important:

 Did they feel the topic of the first debate was interesting? Were they happy with its degree of difficulty? What did they feel they had learned on the course as a whole?

The first question was answered with a Likert Scale, from 1 (not interesting at all) to 5 (very interesting). The mean of the scores was 4.4, with the major reason for the high level of student interest being the fact that they saw the topic as relevant to today’s society. The second question was similarly scored on a scale, with by far the most common answer being “difficult but manageable.” Few students felt it was the “right level,” but this was not surprising considering the high degree of complexity involved in the topic. The fact that only one student professed it to be “too difficult” was quite welcome, and perhaps reflective of the amount of time and support that was allocated to them throughout the course.

As to the question of what the students felt they had learned a variety of answers were received here. A typical selection follows:

“I think I could learn how to criticize for information we get and about peoples’ opinions.”   “I couldn’t speak English well, but I became to think it’s fun to speak English with various people.”   “I try to consider a problem in all its aspects and read newspaper more.”   “I learned how to debate, collect data and so on.”   “I think we can get the skill to gather information, and to speak more strongly, and so on.”   “I think many classmates understand a little how to make a Critical Thinking. Also I never forget ‘Be Suspicious!’”

Overall, the course was rated a success, and the students felt they had gained something that would help them in their future studies and careers.

Teacher reflections on the course

Reflecting on the course from the teacher’s perspective, there are a number of points that seem to be important for creating a debating / critical thinking course for relatively low-level students:

Providing a step-by-step process for preparing debate speeches.

Giving plenty of time for preparation, both in writing and practicing the speeches.

Attending to the students on an individual basis – a total of twenty students is probably the optimal maximum for a course of this nature.

Allowing the students to read each other’s opening speeches before the debate in order that they can find areas to attack.

Pointing out the importance of audience awareness and helping the students to use language comprehensible both to themselves and their listeners.

Benesch, S. (1993). Critical thinking – A learning process for democracy. TESOL Quarterly, 27 (3) , 545-547.

Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational  goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive Domain . New York: McKay.

Ennis, R. (1962). A concept of critical thinking. Harvard Educational Review , 32 , 82-111.

Ennis, R. (1985). Critical thinking and the curriculum. National Forum, 65 , 28-31.

Ennis, R. (1987). A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities. In J. Baron & R. Sternberg (Eds.), Teaching thinking skills: Theory and practice (pp. 9-27). New York: Freeman and Company.

Facione, P. (1990). Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus – The Delphi Report . California: California Academic Press.

Gieve, S. (1998). Comments on Dwight Atkinson’s ‘A critical approach to critical thinking in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 32 (1), 123-129. McPeak, F. (1981). Critical thinking and education. New York: St Martin’s Press.

Paul, R. (1984). Critical thinking: Fundamental to education for a free society. Educational  Leadership, 42 (1), 4-14.

Paul, R. (1993). Critical thinking – what every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing  world. California: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Stall, N.N., & Stahl, R.J. (1991). We can agree after all! Achieving consensus for a critical  thinking component of a gifted program using the Delphi Technique. Roeper Review,  14 (2), 79-88.

About the Author

David Rear is an EFL lecturer at Shibaura Institute of Technology, Tokyo. He received Masters degrees from Cambridge University and Essex University in the UK, and is currently working towards a PhD in Applied Linguistics. He is interested in discourses of critical thinking in Japan.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Subscribe By Email

Get a weekly email of all new posts.

Your Email Leave this field blank

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

A Systematic Approach to Teaching Critical Thinking through Debate

• Department of English

Research output : Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

T1 - A Systematic Approach to Teaching Critical Thinking through Debate

AU - Rear, David

AU - David, Rear

PY - 2010/2/19

Y1 - 2010/2/19

M3 - Article

SP - (online)

JO - English Language Teaching World: Voices from the Classroom

JF - English Language Teaching World: Voices from the Classroom

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Increasing Critical Thinking Skill Through Class Debate

Related Papers

Bačíková Zuzana

The purpose of this document is to explore an effect of debate used in university education process on development of critical thinking. This study used a quasi-experimental research and involved two classes of students grouped into experimental group and control group. A tailored version of standardized critical thinking test inspired by Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, a test of controversy and a self-evaluation were used as research instruments. Even thought, that our results showed that a use of debate has no effect on development of critical thinking level and critical thinking drill has no effect on level of estimate in self-evaluation, there are some implications for educators, psychologists, methodologists and philosophers.

marzieh kalbali

Critical thinking can be the main objectives of education in a world that is an integral part of any educational system. In schools today, the emphasis is only on the skills of reading, writing and counting, while these skills are not inherently valuable and no scholarism in education. Thoughtful people exercise training schools. People tend to interpret the impact on recall information. It is necessary, adopt methods that enhance student motivation and challenge thought processes, change the passive and cautious in the exchange of ideas and thinking. The aim of this review study is to investigate the importance of developing critical thinking in students. Showed results of a study books and review previous research, can be reached in the light of faith and reason and thought and higher level of humanity. Critical thinking is one of the fundamental objectives of education at global level. Critical thinking can be judged on authenticity and value of the information and arguments presented. So for the future, we empower people with the freedom of thought and creativity, to nurture them from an early age. So schools have to replace the transfer of knowledge and disciplinary dry environments that require only reproduce knowledge, to provide conditions to build their students' knowledge.

Minerva Chavez

Critical thinking is considered as a factor in the quality of education that the local can offer. Thus, the study aims to identify the perception of the teachers and students in infusing critical thinking skills in terms of classroom instruction. This study also explores how teachers perceive their teaching of critical thinking skills and their students’ perceptions about their understandings and awareness of learning critical thinking. Moreover, this propose intervention activities to develop critical thinking skills among college students. The questionnaire from the Foundation for Critical Thinking was administered to 1,050 respondents from the teachers and students. Results show the strength of the students in terms of critical thinking would be their view on determining the reliability of the sources of the information they use and receive in class. There is a need to improve the teachers’ instruction to aid the students in identifying the differences among assumptions, inferenc...

Review of Education, Administration & LAW

Dr. Syed Nasir Hussain ECE & ETED

The ultimate aim of education is to develop human beings in such a way that they can act beneficial for themselves as well as for the society and can think well and think critically. Development of critical thinking skills is the fundamental aim of education. The present study intended to assess the critical thinking skills among students at higher secondary level in the province of Punjab, Pakistan. The study is quantitative in nature. Population of the study comprises students enrolled in higher secondary level in Punjab. Multistage sampling technique was used to select the sample. A self-developed multiple choice item test was used to assess the critical thinking skills among students. Expert opinion was taken to validate the test and reliability coefficient was 0.86. It was found that majority of students did not perform satisfactory on the critical thinking skill test and scored low on all dimensions of critical thinking skills. The study concluded that curriculum and teaching ...

Umbreen Mumtaz

Education is the process by which a student learns how to progress in all aspects of his life. Critical thinking is one of the essential skills in education to enhance students learning process and improve their thinking abilities. The primary goal of this research is to identify the relevance of critical thinking skills in education, particularly at the higher education level, and to comprehend how critical thinking skills help students learn more successfully. The objectives of this study were to explain the importance of critical thinking skills for students at the Higher Education level and secondly to know the development of critical thinking skills in students to improve their learning at the Higher Education level. For this purpose, a review of related literature was searched using the Research Gate (Social Networking site). In the present paper, 12 publications were select after an independent evaluation by the researcher that explicitly addressed the stated purpose. After the content analysis, this study demonstrated that researchers believe that diverse teaching and instructional strategies can assist instructors and educators build critical thinking abilities in their students. It is suggested that students may also try out different reading and writing strategies to increase their critical thinking abilities and learning.

Moosa Ahmed H A S S A N Bait Ali Sulaiman

With this attempt as a backdrop that enhancing students critical thinking (CT) in instructional practices is of vital importance in ESL/EFL classrooms, the current study was carried out to investigate the effect of Socratic questioning (SQ) on students CT skills with reference to the five domains of CT 1). Inference, 2). Recognition of Assumptions, 3). Deduction, 4). Interpretation, and 5). Evaluation of Arguments, in grade 12 in Omani female schools. The present study made an attempt to look for differences among students in using CT skills in reading classes. A quasi-experimental design was used in this study. Therefore, a total of 60 EFL female students distributed in two groups. Data analysis showed statistically significant differences between mean scores of those who are taught through SQ and those obtained by students who are taught CT skills in a normal setting. The students in the experimental group managed to implement better CT skills than those who were taught through traditional methods. Also, results showed that CT domains were significantly affected by SQ skills. In view of the discussion of findings pedagogical implications are explored and recommendations made.

YASALDEZ EDER LOAIZA ZULUAGA

Ryan Pecson

The study aimed to assess the development of students' critical thinking skills by Araling Panlipunan (Social Studies) teachers at public secondary schools of Dinalupihan District, Division of Bataan during the School Year 2015-2016. Included in the study are the profiles of the respondents in terms of age, sex, highest educational attainment, length of service, and relevant seminars and trainings attended; the methods utilized in developing critical thinking skills such as asking questions, analyzing situations, interpretation of data, and panel discussion; the difficulties encountered in developing the critical thinking skills of the students; and the measures to develop the students' critical thinking skills. The study used the descriptive method of research with the utilization of survey questionnaire and unstructured interview as the main data gathering instruments. The data gathered were organized, tallied, tabulated and subjected to statistical tools such as frequency counts, percentage, ranking, and mean. From the gathered data, the following conclusions were withdrawn: majority of teacher-respondents were within the 45 to 47 years age bracket and with a mean age of 37.25 years old, females, graduates of Baccalaureate Degree with Master's Degree units, have rendered service from 1 to 9 years, and have attended 1-3 seminars and training relative to critical thinking; teachers always developed the critical thinking skills of the students in terms of asking questions, analyzing situations, interpretation of data, and panel discussion, especially the analysis of data; sometimes encountered difficulties in developing students' critical thinking skills; and always chose their best options and took necessary measures in developing students' critical thinking skills.

INTED2010 …

Saizo Aoyagi

RELATED PAPERS

Francesco Caglioti

Health education & behavior : the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education

Jaime newton Gode

原版复刻阿卡迪亚大学毕业证 uvic毕业证文凭学位证书毕业证认证原版一模一样

International Journal of Molecular Sciences

Claudio Pugliesi

Mostafa Fadaili

Journal of Hypertension

Alberto Morganti

The Evolution of Galaxies

Daniel Thomas

Jutisi : Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Informatika dan Sistem Informasi

I WAYAN RADITYA

Lithic technology

Robert Tykot

Aprilia Dwi Yustika

Goran Milas

saloko saloko

Security and Communication Networks

Sultan Aljahdali

paul ajakaye

Journal of Materials Research and Technology

Omolayo Ikumapayi

Open Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sciences

Burcu Köksal

MURALIKRISHNA REDDY

Journal of Aging and Health

Costas Anastasiou

sofia flores

Amc Acta medica colombiana

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Advertisement

Integrating direct and inquiry-based instruction in the teaching of critical thinking: an intervention study

• Published: 16 May 2013
• Volume 42 , pages 251–269, ( 2014 )

Cite this article

• Kelly Y. L. Ku 1 ,
• Irene T. Ho 2 ,
• Kit-Tai Hau 3 &
• Eva C. M. Lai 4  

4321 Accesses

38 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Critical thinking is a unifying goal of modern education. While past research has mostly examined the efficacy of a single instructional approach to teaching critical thinking, recent literature has begun discussing mixed teaching approaches. The present study examines three modes of instruction, featuring the direct instruction approach and the inquiry-based approach in different sequences and proportions, in enhancing Chinese secondary student’s critical thinking performance. A total of 651 Grade 12 students participated in an 18-hour intervention with pre- and post-intervention measures on critical thinking performance and critical thinking dispositions. Specifically, critical thinking assessments utilizing different response format were used. Those who received training showed greater improvement on at least one of the critical thinking assessments compared to those who received no training. Participants’ performances with regards to different critical thinking assessments are discussed. Benefits of adopting more than one instructional approach to teaching critical thinking are highlighted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Teaching Critical Thinking: An Operational Framework

How to teach critical thinking: an experimental study with three different approaches

Critical Thinking Skills in the EAP Classroom

Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., et al. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 78 (4), 1102–1134. doi: 10.3102/0034654308326084 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions . Newbury: Sage.

Google Scholar  

Alfieri, L., Brooks, P. J., Aldrich, N. J., & Tenenbaum, H. R. (2011). Does discovery-based instruction enhance learning? Journal of Educational Psychology, 103 (1), 1–18. doi: 10.1037/a0021017 .

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Instructional effects on critical thinking: Performance on ill-defined issues. Learning and Instruction, 19 (4), 322–334. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.010 .

Barrows, H. S., & Tamblyn, R. M. (1980). Problem-based learning: An approach to medical education (vol. 1) . New York: Springer Publishing Company.

Beyer, B. K. (2001). What research says about teaching thinking skills. In A. Costa (Ed.), Developing minds: A resource book for teaching thinking (pp. 275–284). Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Beyer, B. K. (2008). What research tells us about teaching thinking skills. The Social Studies, 99 (5), 223–232. doi: 10.3200/TSSS.99.5.223-232 .

Brown, A. (1997). Transforming schools into communities of thinking and learning about serious matters. American Psychologist, 52 , 399–413. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.52.4.399 .

Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery. Harvard Educational Review, 31 , 21–32.

Cacioppo, J., Petty, R., & Kao, C. (1984). The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment, 48 (3), 306–307. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa4803_13 .

Clifford, J. S., Boufal, M. M., & Kurtz, J. E. (2004). Personality traits and critical thinking skills in college students: Empirical tests of a two-factor theory. Assessment, 11 (2), 169–176. doi: 10.1177/1073191104263250 .

Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Thomason, S., & Firth, A. (2005). The impact of collaborative continuing professional development (CPD) on classroom teaching and learning . London: EPPI—Centre.

Costa, P., & McCrae, R. (1992). Professional manual: Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI) . Odessa: Psychological Assessment Resources.

Dick, R. D. (1991). An empirical taxonomy of critical thinking. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 18 , 79–92.

Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educational Researcher, 18 , 4–10.

Ernst, J., & Monroe, M. (2004). The effects of environment-based education on students’ critical thinking skills and disposition toward critical thinking. Environmental Education Research, 10 , 507–522. doi: 10.1080/1350462042000291038 .

Facione, P. A. (1990). Executive summary: Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction . Millbrae: The California Academic Press.

Facione, N. C., & Facione, P. A. (1997). Critical thinking assessment in nursing education programs: An aggregate data analysis . Millbrae: The California Academic Press.

Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: Dispositions, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. American Psychologist, 53 (4), 449–455. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449 .

Halpern, D. F. (2003). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (4th ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Halpern, D. F. (2007). Halpern critical thinking assessment using everyday situations: Background and scoring standards . Claremont: Claremont McKenna College.

Hmelo-Silver, C., Duncan, R. G., & Chinn, C. A. (2007). Scaffolding and achievement in problem-based and inquiry learning: A response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006). Educational Psychologist, 42 (2), 99–107. doi: 10.1080/00461520701263368 .

Hui, N. H. H. (2003). Nomological network of need for cognition: A study with Chinese college students . Unpublished manuscript. Hong Kong: Department of Psychology. Chinese University of Hong Kong.

Jones, E. D., Krouse, D. F., Feorene, D., & Saferstein, C. A. (1985). A comparison of concurrent and sequential instruction of four types of verbal math problems. Remedial and Special Education, 6 (5), 25–31. doi: 10.1177/074193258500600506 .

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41 , 75–86. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 .

Klahr, D. (2009). To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heavens: What about direct instruction? In S. Tobias & T. M. Duffy (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure? (pp. 291–310). New York: Routledge.

Koschmann, T. D., Myers, A., Feltovich, P. J., & Barrows, H. S. (1994). Using technology to assist in realizing effective learning and instruction: A principled approach to the use of computers in collaborative learning. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 3 , 227–264. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0303_2 .

Kosonen, P., & Winne, P. (1995). Effects of teaching statistical laws on reasoning about everyday problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 87 , 33–46. doi: 10.1037/0022-0663.87.1.3 .

Ku, K. Y. L., Ho, I. T., & Hau, K. T. (2009). Critical thinking teaching package for senior secondary school students . Hong Kong: Hong Kong Education Bureau.

Ku, K. Y. L., Ho, I. T., & Hau, K. T. (2011). Critical thinking skills: Scenarios for inquiry learning . Hong Kong: Hong Kong Education Bureau.

Kuhn, D. (2007). Is direct instruction an answer to the right question? Educational psychologist, 42 (2), 109–113. doi: 10.1080/00461520701263376 .

Macpherson, R., & Stanovich, K. E. (2007). Cognitive ability, thinking dispositions, and instructional set as predictors of critical thinking. Learning and Individual Differences, 17 , 115–127.

Marsh, H. W., & Hau, K. T. (1996). Assessing goodness of fit: Is parsimony always desirable? The Journal of Experimental Education, 64 , 364–390.

Mayer, R. E. (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? American Psychologist, 59 (1), 14–19. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.59.1.14 .

McGuinness, C. (1999). From thinking skills to thinking classrooms: A review and evaluation of approaches for developing pupils’ thinking. Research Report No 115. London: Department of Education and Employment Review.

McPeck, J. E. (1981). Critical thinking and education . New York: St. Martin’s Press.

Neilens, H. L., Handley, S. J., & Newstead, S. E. (2009). Effects of training and instruction on analytic and belief-based reasoning processes. Thinking and Reasoning, 15 (1), 37–68. doi: 10.1080/13546780802535865 .

Norris, S. P. (2003). The meaning of critical thinking test performance: The effects of abilities and dispositions on scores. In D. Fasko (Ed.), Critical thinking and reasoning: Current research, theory and practice . Cresskill: Hampton Press.

Paul, R. (1995). Critical thinking: How to prepare students for a rapidly changing world . Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2004). The nature and functions of critical and creative thinking . Dillon Beach: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Perkins, D. N., Jay, E., & Tishman, S. (1993). Beyond abilities: A dispositional theory of thinking. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39 (1), 1–21.

Ruggiero, V. R. (1988). Teaching thinking across the curriculum . New York: Harper and Row.

Rutherford, F. J. (1964). The role of inquiry in science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 2 (2), 80–84. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660020204 .

Semerci, N. (2006). The effect of problem-based learning on the critical thinking of students in the Intellectual and Ethical Development Unit. Social Behavior and Personality: An international Journal, 34 (9), 1127–1136. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2006.34.1.41 .

Sigel, I. E. (1984). A constructivist perspective for teaching thinking. Educational Leadership, 42 (3), 18–21.

Spector, P. E., Schneider, J. R., Vance, C. A., & Hezlett, S. A. (2000). The relation of cognitive ability and personality traits to assessment center performance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30 (7), 1474–1491. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2000.tb02531.x .

Stanovich, K. E., & West, R. F. (1997). Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 , 342–357.

Tynjala, P. (1998). Traditional studying for examination versus constructivist learning tasks: Do learning outcomes differ? Studies in Higher Education, 23 (2), 173–189. doi: 10.1080/03075079812331380374 .

Voss, J. F., Perkins, D. N., & Segal, J. W. (1991). Informal reasoning and education . Hillsdale: Erlbaum.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Watson, G., & Glaser, E. M. (1980). Watson-glaser critical thinking appraisal . Cleveland: Psychological Corporation.

West, R. F., Toplak, M. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (2008). Heuristics and biases as measures of critical thinking: Associations with cognitive ability and thinking dispositions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 100 (4), 930–941. doi: 10.1037/a0012842 .

Download references

Acknowledgments

The support by the Research Grants Council of Hong Kong (CUHK4713/06H) is gratefully acknowledged.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Education Studies, Hong Kong Baptist University, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Kelly Y. L. Ku

Department of Psychology, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Irene T. Ho

Department of Educational Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Kit-Tai Hau

Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Eva C. M. Lai

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelly Y. L. Ku .

Course content of Chinese version of Halpern’s ( 2007 ) critical thinking teaching package

The critical thinking teaching package (Ku et al. 2011 ), adopted from Halpern ( 2007 ), consists of four modules: (1) argument analysis, (2) Evaluating causal claim, (3) understanding mental models, and (4) decision-making skills.

See Table  4 .

Example of scenario provided for group discussion/debate and class activities

Sample scenario: the fate of the island.

You live in a backward and remote island nation. For the past a 100 years or so, people on the island are self-sustained, living on farming and herding. Neighbouring the small island is a big, prosperous and advanced nation. Recently, using their instruments, specialists in that nation detected that within 3 weeks, the small island will be hit by intense earthquakes. The quakes could last months, generating a tsunami that will drown the entire island.

When the neighboring nation received the news, they sent a warning to your island. They urged you and your people to leave immediately. The nation also agreed to temporarily accommodate the island’s inhabitants. Your livestock, however, were forbidden to enter. The island government accepted this arrangement and asked its people to take shelter in the neighboring nation for at least a few months. This was met with strong objection from the local people on the island. They claim for hundreds of years people here had used animal behavior and weather changes to predict earthquakes, which had always been accurate. They predicted no earthquakes in the region around the island any time soon. They also considered the technology in the neighboring nation unreliable. Moreover, if they left behind all livestock and farmland for months, everything would have died before the people could come back. The next year’s provisions will be all but gone.

Scenario discussion

The discussion should guide students to make a rational and informed decision on whether a full evacuation of the island’s inhabitants is necessary.

Extended thinking

Guiding students to utilize decision-making skills to become a smart consumer of medical services.

Transfer and application

Guiding class to apply the techniques acquired from this scenario to discuss:

“How is people’s understanding of health affected by economic, social and other factors?”

“In what ways is people’s understanding of public health affected by health information, social expectations, personal values and beliefs in different cultures?”

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Ku, K.Y.L., Ho, I.T., Hau, KT. et al. Integrating direct and inquiry-based instruction in the teaching of critical thinking: an intervention study. Instr Sci 42 , 251–269 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9279-0

Download citation

Received : 26 August 2012

Accepted : 29 April 2013

Published : 16 May 2013

Issue Date : March 2014

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9279-0

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Critical thinking
• Instructional strategy
• Direct instruction
• Inquiry-based instruction
• Higher education
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research