Laird R. O. Edman
36
state that teaching critical thinking is a primary educational goal without ever stipulating
what they mean by critical thinking. Of the many definitions of term available, some pro-
scribe normative tenets of good thinking (Fisher & Scriven, 1997; Paul, 1995) and some
describe common thinking processes which tend to lead to successful outcomes (Baron &
Sternberg, 1987; Edman, 2000; Halpern, 1998). However, most theoretically rigorous
definitions of critical thinking present purposeful, self-regulatory judgment that is evidence-
based and contextually nuanced as the core of critical thinking (American Philosophical
Association, 1990; Edman, 2000; Kurfiss, 1988; Morgan, 1995).
The most common approaches to teaching students to use evidence-based, contextually
nuanced judgment often focus on core sets of skills required to make such judgments.
These thinking skills usually include the abilities: (a) to interpret texts and other forms of
communication, (b) to analyze the issues and arguments presented in those texts, (c) to
evaluate those arguments in the light of contextually and methodologically appropriate
criteria, (d) to discern the implications of the arguments and presuppositions upon which
the arguments are based, and (e) to regulate and evaluate one’s own thinking processes
while doing this thinking (American Philosophical Association, 1990; Ennis, 1987).
Certainly these are essential abilities for our students in a complex, information-rich
world. Spelling out these abilities helps instructors and institutions to specify educational
goals more clearly for students and better plan pedagogical and assessment strategies for
reaching those rather ambitious and elusive goals.
Dispositional Theories
Skills-based approaches to teaching critical thinking now have a long history and litera-
ture, but what has become clear through more than 25 years of work on critical thinking
theory and pedagogy is that teaching students a set of thinking skills does not seem to be
enough (Halpern, 1998; Kuhn, 1999). Students may learn to write an adequate article
critique in one class, but fail to use those skills in another. They may learn how to evaluate
research methodology in other students’ research designs, but completely miss the flaws in
their own. They may learn to recognize thinking biases in the classroom, but still use badly
flawed reasoning in their own decision making. Too often students think our courses are
either about memorizing a great deal of material, or about learning the rules for and play-
ing one more idiosyncratic academic game. Students regularly fail to understand what we
are trying to teach them or they fail to transfer and generalize thinking skills across con-
texts and classes.
The inadequacy of purely skills-based approaches to teaching thinking has led to the
development of dispositional theories of critical thinking (Facione & Facione, 1995;
Perkins, Jay, & Tishman, 1993). These theories posit that it is not enough for students to
learn how to use interpretive or analytic or evaluative thinking skills; students must also
learn to value these skills. It is not enough to learn how to find flaws in the arguments
and positions with which one already disagrees; good thinking requires one to use those
analytic and evaluative skills on one’s own thinking, ideologies, and opinions (Paul,
1995). To become good critical thinkers, students must develop several essential thinking