83
Programmatic Assessment of Critical Thinking
●
Positive – “I really think JMU always kept you thinking. There were so many timeswhen you had to present your own ideas. I think the research projects in 211 are a
great example. I also loved my 400 level classes! My 497 really allowed me to think
outside the norm, and share my ideas with the rest of the class.”
● Negative – “These issues didn’t come up very often in the curriculum I chose.
I didn’t have very many classes where there was a need to think creatively, and I don’t
feel that criticizing arguments was ever encouraged.”
● Mixed – “Some classes were helpful with this and some required me to do very little
critical thinking (it was more straight memorization to get a good grade).”
To provide a measure of effect size for qualitative data, we examined the frequency for the
three categories of responses. In 2004, 67% of the responses were positive, 9% were nega-
tive, and 24% were mixed. In 2005, this breakdown remained unchanged with 66% of the
responses positive, 10% negative, and 24% mixed.
Next, we looked at the more detailed list of codes and overarching themes for the
qualitative data. A clear pattern of seven overarching themes emerged from students’ open-
ended responses revealing when critical thinking was likely and not likely to occur in our
major and at JMU. These themes were specific psychology classes (e.g., research methods),
specific class formats (e.g., discussion), specific class assignments/activities (e.g., writing/
lab projects), specific professors, psychology classes in general, other nonpsychology classes
(e.g., philosophy), or lack of opportunities. The frequency with which each of these themes
occurred in our 2004 and 2005 samples appears in Table 7.1. The most frequently cited
themes linked to promoting critical thinking were specific classes and specific class assign-
ments. In terms of specific psychology classes that promoted critical thinking, it is helpful
to know that JMU’s psychology curriculum is based on the St. Mary’s Model (Brewer
et al., 1993), where students progress through the curriculum starting with foundational
coursework in introductory psychology, followed by methodology coursework in statistics
and research design, followed by specific content coursework, and ending with a senior
capstone experience. Although students mentioned that faculty promoted critical thinking
at all levels of our curriculum, the two areas that stood out were methodology courses and
capstone courses (see Table 7.2). Also noteworthy, but not surprising, was the mention of
Table 7.1. Coding Frequency of Overarching Themes Linked
to Critical Thinking in Open-Ended Data
2004 2005
Specific psychology classes 28% 26%
Specific class formats 12% 13%
Specific assignments/activities 17% 27%
Specific professors 9% 10%
Psychology classes in general 14% 15%
Other nonpsychology classes 12% 2%
Lack of opportunities 9% 6%