Jane S. Halonen
64
sophisticated professional performance. Such careful analysis helps me clarify my some-
times unspoken expectations about what I want students to know and do. At the same
time, this focus encourages me to be patient with learners who choose to make this disci-
plinary journey. This observation leads naturally to ...
Big Idea #4: Critical thinking is contextual: Both the discipline and developmental level contribute.
Disciplines define critical thinking in unique and sometimes mystifying ways (Halonen,
1995). And yet there is value in defining critical thinking in generic ways. Consequently,
there is practical value added to the curriculum when an institution finds some common
language to capture their critical thinking expectations. Common language defining criti-
cal thinking across disciplines can foster some important outcomes:
●
A coherent curriculum: When a faculty articulates a common vision, the elementsof the student’s program hang together in a logical manner and guide reasonable
decisions in curriculum design.
Figure 6.1. A model for teaching critical thinking proposed by the FIPSE Network, in Halonen,
J. (Ed.), (1986), Teaching Critical Thinking in Psychology, Milwaukee, WI: Alverno College
Productions, p. 7.