INTRODUCTION TO CRITICAL THINKING
Dr. Richard Paul and His Model of Critical Thinking Education
Dr. Richard Paul’s ideas about critical thinking and education are the most powerful exposition on learning I have encountered during my studies and career as an educator. His ideas help to define my framework for learning and inform how I teach. He argues that the goal for learning should be to help students become free and independent by helping them to develop the capacity to think, evaluate, draw conclusions, and take action for themselves. Therefore, the essential goal in education should be to advance the students’ ability to critically think.
Similarly, the goal of each discipline of study should be to enhance student thinking and their ability to construct knowledge in that discipline. The goal of a course in history should be for students to develop their ability to think historically and do what real historians do; they should learn to conduct historical analysis, weight evidence, draw conclusions, and evaluate historical thinking. Rather than simply memorizing the historical conclusions of others, a deep training in history provides students with the tools to do their own historical thinking and decide for themselves which historical narratives are best supported by evidence and sound reasoning. Fostering historical thinking provides a more actionable and significant training in history than one that focuses on merely absorbing the historical conclusions of selected authorities.
The ultimate goal of my program in the humanities is to facilitate the students’ ability to think like a historian, social scientist, literary critic, and writer. The objective is to give them the tools to do their own thinking and construct their own understanding in these fields of study.
Dr. Richard Paul
Thinking-Centered Learning Unifies Education
My program of study in the humanities teaches students foundational inquiry and critical thinking tools applicable to all domains of life. I ask students to compare how the tools of inquiry and thinking used in the humanities are similar to and different from those used in other subjects. We explore the scientific process and see how it relates to the methods used for building knowledge in the humanities; we compare how knowledge is constructed in math with the other disciplines. In this way, my course works to pull together the students’ learning and highlight the common ground and universality of methods used in the subject areas.
The Problem of Fragmentation in Schooling
This unification of the disciplines helps to combat the problem of fragmentation that Dr. Paul sees as a significant problem for student learning. A student in a traditional school experiences the subjects of study as separate and is taught in a variety of ways based on the individual methods of each teacher. Some critics have described schools like a mall where an assortment of teachers can rent a room, close the door, ply their wares, and do their own thing undisturbed. In such a setting, students miss the opportunity of a unified approach, where all teachers work in a similar way toward similar ends and employ a universal vocabulary and set of tools, where all disciplines work together to support and reinforce student learning. I firmly believe that students suffer from the fragmentation of schooling and value thinking-centered learning as a powerful way of overcoming this problem.
CRITICAL THINKING SKILL DEVELOPMENT
Clarifying Terminology: Macro Processes and Micro Skills
I want to begin by clarifying a few terms I will use throughout this introduction to my teaching. In my program of study we learn about the processes used to investigate a broad body of information such as a historical time period, a novel, or a unit of study that could last for several months; these broad processes help us to understand how to conduct inquiry of a larger topic. Dr. Richard Paul’s critical thinking tools help us to accomplish this, as well as the analytical essay writing process for the humanities I designed. These two processes help students to define the purposes of their investigation, establish the overarching questions that drive the study, conduct the research, draw conclusions, contemplate implications, and communicate their findings. They provide students with a macro-level process for carrying out intellectual inquiry on broad topics of study.
At the same time, the tools of critical thinking also work on the micro-level and allow students to better analyze and understand a single sentence in a novel or one historical fact. The analytical essay writing process does the same and helps students to focus and discover ideas on the micro-level as well.
In addition to these two sets of critical thinking tools, the other core learning skills of reading, writing, and discussion also all work on both a macro and micro-level. Students learn to read to gain an understanding of the novel as a whole as well as the single sentence or word. They learn to write to communicate their learning about an entire historical period as well as to construct a more effective sentence or choose the word that best conveys their meaning.
That being said, in general when I use terms like the process of intellectual inquiry or inquiry skills, I am referring to methods used to organize and conduct an investigation on broad topics, on the larger, macro-level. When I employ terms like the key tools of learning or the essential learning skills I typically am referring to the use of critical thinking, reading, writing, and speaking skills on a smaller, micro-level. I simply wanted to note this to provide you with greater clarity as you read about my teaching program.
Critical Thinking and the Processes of Intellectual Inquiry
At the start of the year, after students gain a foundational understanding of intelligence and learning, they will complete an introductory unit that gives them an overview of the key aspects of critical thinking. Students will learn the overarching goals and fundamental ideas of critical thinking as well as the basic vocabulary and important sets of tools used by critical thinkers. Thereafter, we will use the vocabulary and employ the skills of critical thinking on a daily basis in everything we do throughout the rest of the year. Class discussions on the subject matter we investigate will require students to use the vocabulary of critical thinking to make the thoughts they share more clear, precise, and deep, making all of our discussions practice sessions for critical thinking. All of the projects we undertake in literature, writing, and history will be designed to develop specific critical thinking tools and abilities. Everything we do will be to further our understanding of the core skills of intellectual inquiry and critical thinking.
Definitions of Critical Thinking and Its Importance to Humanity
One of our first topics is to explore different definitions of critical thinking, from the simple to the more complex. A straightforward definition we use is that critical thinking is when a person makes it a habit, to think about her thinking, while she is thinking, in order to improve the quality of her thinking. Critical thinking means working to improve the quality of thinking by analyzing, assessing, and reconstructing it. People who aspire to become critical thinkers first need to become more aware of their thinking and to observe how they are putting their thoughts together. They need to make watching their thinking a habit and be willing to examine and revise it to make it better.
Secondly, our introduction to critical thinking explores the question of the importance of critical thinking and the role it has played in history. We investigate how critical thinking is humankind’s most powerful tool and is what makes us unique in the animal kingdom. Through it we have constructed the knowledge known in all fields of study, and it has been the engine of all our progress.
Critical Thinking’s Lack of Importance in American Education
Ironically, although critical thinking is our greatest tool, it is little understood and seldom taught in American education. Dr. Paul and the Center for Critical Thinking (Paul, et. al. 1997) was hired by the state of California to conduct an extensive study of critical thinking teaching in public and private universities, from community colleges to Stanford University. Their results may be surprising to many; they found that a high percentage of university professors:
In sum, while critical thinking is highly valued by professors, the vast majority cannot define what it is and do nothing to help develop their students’ critical thinking abilities. On the K-12 level, the situation is much the same. It is easy for schools to profess their dedication to teaching critical thinking on a website curriculum overview or course description, but it is another thing to give it a place of importance in the curriculum and take concrete steps to develop their students thinking. My students are typically shocked to hear the findings noted above, but recent studies have confirmed that this is the basic state of affairs in American education, public or private, at all levels of schooling. This helps students to understand the rare opportunity they are being given to be in a classroom that puts critical thinking at the center of our work and has the know-how and track record of developing it in its students.
The Natural Flaws of Thinking
In our overview of critical thinking we will explore a number of important subtopics. First, we will investigate what I call the natural flaws of thinking. These are the common problems and pitfalls that plague humankind to make our thinking typically uncritical and unsound. We learn that while we are born with the ability to think, we often do not think well. Typical flaws that limit our thinking are unconscious thoughts, emotions, and desires, and our tendency to be egocentric and sociocentric. In addition, defense of the ego, denial, and self-deception as well as the passive acceptance of ideas also reduces the quality of our thinking. Finally, the fact that we lack training in the basic skills of thinking limits our success. Knowing the enemies that undermine our reasoning helps us to become more aware of our thinking processes and is an important aspect of making our thinking better.
The Intellectual Virtues
If the natural flaws of thinking are like the disease, the intellectual virtues are the first part of the cure. Each flaw can be neutralized by one of the intellectual virtues. The virtues are the guiding principles that we must use to direct our thinking in order to make it critical rather than uncritical thinking. Another way to think about the intellectual virtues is to consider them to be the rules of the game of critical thinking. When you let your thinking be ruled by these virtues, you are playing the game of thinking correctly and making it critical thinking. If you break these rules, you are not really playing the game of thinking correctly; if you play basketball by running down the court without dribbling, you are not really playing the game of basketball. To make our thinking critical, we must let it be ruled by the virtue of fair-mindedness, where we consider all points of view without pre-judgment and critique them with equal rigor so that our analysis of the different possibilities is guided by a sense of fairness. To be a critical thinker will at times require intellectual courage and the willingness to investigate fairly ideas that others may pressure you not to investigate. Intellectual autonomy also will be necessary and require you to think for yourself and not just passively accept the ideas of others around you. These are just a few of the important intellectual virtues that you must let guide your reasoning if you hope to be a critical thinker. You can find more of the virtues discussed in my writing entitled “Introduction to Critical Thinking” starting on page 9.
The Elements of Reason
Once we understand the rules of the game defined by the intellectual virtues, we are ready to play. Dr. Paul’s great insight and contribution to the field of critical thinking is that reasoning is composed of eight essential parts. I help students to grasp this idea through the maxim “thinking is a process of construction.” Whenever we think, we are building, putting eight components together in a particular way to erect a thought construct. We say it more informally in my classroom by stating when we think, we are building a house of thought. We are slapping the eight elements of reason together in a particular way to construct our thought and arrive at a conclusion. This is the key understanding essential to thinking critically, and puts the elements of reason at the heart of critical thinking.
When we think, we can only do so by using the eight elements of reason. We will have a purpose we are trying to achieve that leads us to some important questions to answer. This will require us to look at the situation from certain points of view that will make some assumptions, use particular concepts, and gather information, data, and facts to make inferences and arrive at a conclusion. Our conclusion will lead to some consequences or implications that we also would be wise to consider. Understanding the eight elements that go into any thinking provides us with a powerful tool for making our thinking better. It allows us to consciously check the eight components that went into building our thought construct and critique how we have built our house, enabling us to judge if it is solid and will stand up to the winds of questions and the rains of evaluation.
My students learn to employ the eight elements of reason when they are constructing their thinking and to use them to analyze and critique the thinking of others. We wield them constantly during class discussions and undertake projects that build visual houses of thought to analyze history and literature. They are one of the most powerful tools available to develop a student’s thinking abilities in all subject areas and domains of life.
My program of study in the humanities teaches students foundational inquiry and critical thinking tools applicable to all domains of life. I ask students to compare how the tools of inquiry and thinking used in the humanities are similar to and different from those used in other subjects. We explore the scientific process and see how it relates to the methods used for building knowledge in the humanities; we compare how knowledge is constructed in math with the other disciplines. In this way, my course works to pull together the students’ learning and highlight the common ground and universality of methods used in the subject areas.
The Problem of Fragmentation in Schooling
This unification of the disciplines helps to combat the problem of fragmentation that Dr. Paul sees as a significant problem for student learning. A student in a traditional school experiences the subjects of study as separate and is taught in a variety of ways based on the individual methods of each teacher. Some critics have described schools like a mall where an assortment of teachers can rent a room, close the door, ply their wares, and do their own thing undisturbed. In such a setting, students miss the opportunity of a unified approach, where all teachers work in a similar way toward similar ends and employ a universal vocabulary and set of tools, where all disciplines work together to support and reinforce student learning. I firmly believe that students suffer from the fragmentation of schooling and value thinking-centered learning as a powerful way of overcoming this problem.
CRITICAL THINKING SKILL DEVELOPMENT
Clarifying Terminology: Macro Processes and Micro Skills
I want to begin by clarifying a few terms I will use throughout this introduction to my teaching. In my program of study we learn about the processes used to investigate a broad body of information such as a historical time period, a novel, or a unit of study that could last for several months; these broad processes help us to understand how to conduct inquiry of a larger topic. Dr. Richard Paul’s critical thinking tools help us to accomplish this, as well as the analytical essay writing process for the humanities I designed. These two processes help students to define the purposes of their investigation, establish the overarching questions that drive the study, conduct the research, draw conclusions, contemplate implications, and communicate their findings. They provide students with a macro-level process for carrying out intellectual inquiry on broad topics of study.
At the same time, the tools of critical thinking also work on the micro-level and allow students to better analyze and understand a single sentence in a novel or one historical fact. The analytical essay writing process does the same and helps students to focus and discover ideas on the micro-level as well.
In addition to these two sets of critical thinking tools, the other core learning skills of reading, writing, and discussion also all work on both a macro and micro-level. Students learn to read to gain an understanding of the novel as a whole as well as the single sentence or word. They learn to write to communicate their learning about an entire historical period as well as to construct a more effective sentence or choose the word that best conveys their meaning.
That being said, in general when I use terms like the process of intellectual inquiry or inquiry skills, I am referring to methods used to organize and conduct an investigation on broad topics, on the larger, macro-level. When I employ terms like the key tools of learning or the essential learning skills I typically am referring to the use of critical thinking, reading, writing, and speaking skills on a smaller, micro-level. I simply wanted to note this to provide you with greater clarity as you read about my teaching program.
Critical Thinking and the Processes of Intellectual Inquiry
At the start of the year, after students gain a foundational understanding of intelligence and learning, they will complete an introductory unit that gives them an overview of the key aspects of critical thinking. Students will learn the overarching goals and fundamental ideas of critical thinking as well as the basic vocabulary and important sets of tools used by critical thinkers. Thereafter, we will use the vocabulary and employ the skills of critical thinking on a daily basis in everything we do throughout the rest of the year. Class discussions on the subject matter we investigate will require students to use the vocabulary of critical thinking to make the thoughts they share more clear, precise, and deep, making all of our discussions practice sessions for critical thinking. All of the projects we undertake in literature, writing, and history will be designed to develop specific critical thinking tools and abilities. Everything we do will be to further our understanding of the core skills of intellectual inquiry and critical thinking.
Definitions of Critical Thinking and Its Importance to Humanity
One of our first topics is to explore different definitions of critical thinking, from the simple to the more complex. A straightforward definition we use is that critical thinking is when a person makes it a habit, to think about her thinking, while she is thinking, in order to improve the quality of her thinking. Critical thinking means working to improve the quality of thinking by analyzing, assessing, and reconstructing it. People who aspire to become critical thinkers first need to become more aware of their thinking and to observe how they are putting their thoughts together. They need to make watching their thinking a habit and be willing to examine and revise it to make it better.
Secondly, our introduction to critical thinking explores the question of the importance of critical thinking and the role it has played in history. We investigate how critical thinking is humankind’s most powerful tool and is what makes us unique in the animal kingdom. Through it we have constructed the knowledge known in all fields of study, and it has been the engine of all our progress.
Critical Thinking’s Lack of Importance in American Education
Ironically, although critical thinking is our greatest tool, it is little understood and seldom taught in American education. Dr. Paul and the Center for Critical Thinking (Paul, et. al. 1997) was hired by the state of California to conduct an extensive study of critical thinking teaching in public and private universities, from community colleges to Stanford University. Their results may be surprising to many; they found that a high percentage of university professors:
- Considered critical thinking to be a key goal of their courses [89%]
- Could not give a satisfactory definition of critical thinking [81%]
- Did nothing in their courses to develop it in their students [91%]
In sum, while critical thinking is highly valued by professors, the vast majority cannot define what it is and do nothing to help develop their students’ critical thinking abilities. On the K-12 level, the situation is much the same. It is easy for schools to profess their dedication to teaching critical thinking on a website curriculum overview or course description, but it is another thing to give it a place of importance in the curriculum and take concrete steps to develop their students thinking. My students are typically shocked to hear the findings noted above, but recent studies have confirmed that this is the basic state of affairs in American education, public or private, at all levels of schooling. This helps students to understand the rare opportunity they are being given to be in a classroom that puts critical thinking at the center of our work and has the know-how and track record of developing it in its students.
The Natural Flaws of Thinking
In our overview of critical thinking we will explore a number of important subtopics. First, we will investigate what I call the natural flaws of thinking. These are the common problems and pitfalls that plague humankind to make our thinking typically uncritical and unsound. We learn that while we are born with the ability to think, we often do not think well. Typical flaws that limit our thinking are unconscious thoughts, emotions, and desires, and our tendency to be egocentric and sociocentric. In addition, defense of the ego, denial, and self-deception as well as the passive acceptance of ideas also reduces the quality of our thinking. Finally, the fact that we lack training in the basic skills of thinking limits our success. Knowing the enemies that undermine our reasoning helps us to become more aware of our thinking processes and is an important aspect of making our thinking better.
The Intellectual Virtues
If the natural flaws of thinking are like the disease, the intellectual virtues are the first part of the cure. Each flaw can be neutralized by one of the intellectual virtues. The virtues are the guiding principles that we must use to direct our thinking in order to make it critical rather than uncritical thinking. Another way to think about the intellectual virtues is to consider them to be the rules of the game of critical thinking. When you let your thinking be ruled by these virtues, you are playing the game of thinking correctly and making it critical thinking. If you break these rules, you are not really playing the game of thinking correctly; if you play basketball by running down the court without dribbling, you are not really playing the game of basketball. To make our thinking critical, we must let it be ruled by the virtue of fair-mindedness, where we consider all points of view without pre-judgment and critique them with equal rigor so that our analysis of the different possibilities is guided by a sense of fairness. To be a critical thinker will at times require intellectual courage and the willingness to investigate fairly ideas that others may pressure you not to investigate. Intellectual autonomy also will be necessary and require you to think for yourself and not just passively accept the ideas of others around you. These are just a few of the important intellectual virtues that you must let guide your reasoning if you hope to be a critical thinker. You can find more of the virtues discussed in my writing entitled “Introduction to Critical Thinking” starting on page 9.
The Elements of Reason
Once we understand the rules of the game defined by the intellectual virtues, we are ready to play. Dr. Paul’s great insight and contribution to the field of critical thinking is that reasoning is composed of eight essential parts. I help students to grasp this idea through the maxim “thinking is a process of construction.” Whenever we think, we are building, putting eight components together in a particular way to erect a thought construct. We say it more informally in my classroom by stating when we think, we are building a house of thought. We are slapping the eight elements of reason together in a particular way to construct our thought and arrive at a conclusion. This is the key understanding essential to thinking critically, and puts the elements of reason at the heart of critical thinking.
When we think, we can only do so by using the eight elements of reason. We will have a purpose we are trying to achieve that leads us to some important questions to answer. This will require us to look at the situation from certain points of view that will make some assumptions, use particular concepts, and gather information, data, and facts to make inferences and arrive at a conclusion. Our conclusion will lead to some consequences or implications that we also would be wise to consider. Understanding the eight elements that go into any thinking provides us with a powerful tool for making our thinking better. It allows us to consciously check the eight components that went into building our thought construct and critique how we have built our house, enabling us to judge if it is solid and will stand up to the winds of questions and the rains of evaluation.
My students learn to employ the eight elements of reason when they are constructing their thinking and to use them to analyze and critique the thinking of others. We wield them constantly during class discussions and undertake projects that build visual houses of thought to analyze history and literature. They are one of the most powerful tools available to develop a student’s thinking abilities in all subject areas and domains of life.
The Standards of Reason
I tell my students that critical thinking has twin suns at the center of its solar system. One is the elements of reason, the components that we put together to think. The second sun is the standards of reason, the criteria we use to judge the quality of thinking. Together the elements and standards of reason form the core of critical thinking.
To make thinking critical requires that we critique it. We must criticize thinking and judge its quality; we need to discern what is good or bad about the reasoning. To do this, we need to indentify the criteria that makes thinking good or bad, just like a judge of the pie baking contest needs specific criteria to determine which pie will be the winner or the gymnastics judge needs comparative devices to know what makes a balance beam performance inferior or superior. The standards of reason are simply the criteria by which we judge the quality of reasoning.
The first standard one’s thinking must pass is the criteria of clarity. Do I understand what the person’s thinking is? Can I comprehend what is being said, or is the thinking vague and leaves me wondering if the person meant this or meant that?
Next, I will examine if the thinking is relevant. Does it answer the question being asked or is it off topic and therefore useless as a solution?
Following that, is the person’s thinking logical? Does it follow the basics of making sense, where one element connects to the next in a way that can be supported by reason, where the leap connecting the parts is not a leap too far?
Is the thinking accurate, meaning basically true and so, as it is claimed to be, rather than being not so?
Is the thinking precise enough to be useful, or is it so general that it does not satisfy our needs in this situation or is it overly precise and more that we need?
Does it have depth, getting at the causal factors or fundamentals of the situation and can explain how the components of the thinking were built up one atop the other?
Does it have breadth, examining the question from multiple points of view and taking all the important considerations into account?
Is the thinking significant, providing a meaningful answer that will have impact and solve our question at hand?
Was the thinking fair-minded, following the guidance of the intellectual virtues, or did it twist the rules of thinking in order to arrive at the predetermined answer to which it wanted to arrive?
Using these criteria, my students are trained to critique and evaluate their own thinking, my thinking, the thinking of other students, and of the authors, historians, and social scientists we encounter in our studies. They learn to use the standards of reasoning as the basic vocabulary necessary to make judgments about any thinking, and thereby become more precise, substantive, and effective in their evaluations. After a few months of practice, students become comfortable and adept at employing this vocabulary in our classroom discussions and investigations.
I tell my students that critical thinking has twin suns at the center of its solar system. One is the elements of reason, the components that we put together to think. The second sun is the standards of reason, the criteria we use to judge the quality of thinking. Together the elements and standards of reason form the core of critical thinking.
To make thinking critical requires that we critique it. We must criticize thinking and judge its quality; we need to discern what is good or bad about the reasoning. To do this, we need to indentify the criteria that makes thinking good or bad, just like a judge of the pie baking contest needs specific criteria to determine which pie will be the winner or the gymnastics judge needs comparative devices to know what makes a balance beam performance inferior or superior. The standards of reason are simply the criteria by which we judge the quality of reasoning.
The first standard one’s thinking must pass is the criteria of clarity. Do I understand what the person’s thinking is? Can I comprehend what is being said, or is the thinking vague and leaves me wondering if the person meant this or meant that?
Next, I will examine if the thinking is relevant. Does it answer the question being asked or is it off topic and therefore useless as a solution?
Following that, is the person’s thinking logical? Does it follow the basics of making sense, where one element connects to the next in a way that can be supported by reason, where the leap connecting the parts is not a leap too far?
Is the thinking accurate, meaning basically true and so, as it is claimed to be, rather than being not so?
Is the thinking precise enough to be useful, or is it so general that it does not satisfy our needs in this situation or is it overly precise and more that we need?
Does it have depth, getting at the causal factors or fundamentals of the situation and can explain how the components of the thinking were built up one atop the other?
Does it have breadth, examining the question from multiple points of view and taking all the important considerations into account?
Is the thinking significant, providing a meaningful answer that will have impact and solve our question at hand?
Was the thinking fair-minded, following the guidance of the intellectual virtues, or did it twist the rules of thinking in order to arrive at the predetermined answer to which it wanted to arrive?
Using these criteria, my students are trained to critique and evaluate their own thinking, my thinking, the thinking of other students, and of the authors, historians, and social scientists we encounter in our studies. They learn to use the standards of reasoning as the basic vocabulary necessary to make judgments about any thinking, and thereby become more precise, substantive, and effective in their evaluations. After a few months of practice, students become comfortable and adept at employing this vocabulary in our classroom discussions and investigations.
Other Aspects of Critical Thinking
In addition to the tools noted above, our study of critical thinking also will explore several other important understandings. We will consider the idea that there are only three types of questions. All questions fall within only three general categories of questions of fact, questions of reasoned judgment, and questions of preference. [See Trapasso, Introduction to Critical Thinking, p. 12 for a full explanation.] This framework helps students to know how to answer each type and simplifies the challenge of thinking through complex topics. We also will discuss the various fields of study and investigate how the game of thinking is played differently or similarly in various domains. We will undertake analytical projects that use visual tools to map out someone’s thinking with the elements of reason, reconstructing in detail his or her house of thought, and to judge the quality of the thinking with the standards. These projects that use the elements and standards visually are powerful methods for analyzing thinking and are engaging and enjoyable to many students.
Through continual practice, my students become skillful critical thinkers who understand the value of these tools for improving their learning. They imbibe critical thinking deeply; it becomes a set of tools that they hold onto for life.
In addition to the tools noted above, our study of critical thinking also will explore several other important understandings. We will consider the idea that there are only three types of questions. All questions fall within only three general categories of questions of fact, questions of reasoned judgment, and questions of preference. [See Trapasso, Introduction to Critical Thinking, p. 12 for a full explanation.] This framework helps students to know how to answer each type and simplifies the challenge of thinking through complex topics. We also will discuss the various fields of study and investigate how the game of thinking is played differently or similarly in various domains. We will undertake analytical projects that use visual tools to map out someone’s thinking with the elements of reason, reconstructing in detail his or her house of thought, and to judge the quality of the thinking with the standards. These projects that use the elements and standards visually are powerful methods for analyzing thinking and are engaging and enjoyable to many students.
Through continual practice, my students become skillful critical thinkers who understand the value of these tools for improving their learning. They imbibe critical thinking deeply; it becomes a set of tools that they hold onto for life.