141
Critical Thinking in Critical Courses
and collectively grapple with the concept of CT. Each of us is a better teacher when we
engage in a critically informed process of understanding different views of what consti-
tutes CT and how to teach it. The Critical Thinking Pedagogical Framework described
next is the product of such thinking by one of us (Harvey).
The CT Pedagogical Framework, shown in Table 12.2, illustrates the relationships
between three pedagogical elements: academic skills, critical thinking abilities, and instruc-
tional methodologies across the curriculum. Academic skills are listening, reading, writing,
and speaking. These skills coincide with the work output that is normally required for the
assessment of student learning (e.g., assignment, exams).
Table 12.1. Defining Critical Thinking
Many writers have proposed their own definitions of critical thinking (CT). A sampling includes
the following:
Smith (2002, p. 2): “a logical and rational process of avoiding one’s preconceptions by gathering
evidence, contemplating and evaluating alternatives, and coming to a conclusion.”
Bensley (1998, p. 5): “reflective thinking involving the evaluation of evidence relevant to some
claim so that a sound conclusion can be drawn about the claim.”
Ennis (1989, p. 4): “reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe
or do.”
Halpern (1996, p. 5): “the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability
of a desirable outcome. It is used to describe thinking that is purposeful, reasoned, and
goal-directed—the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences,
calculating likelihoods, and making decisions when the thinker is using skills that are
thoughtful and effective for the particular context and type of thinking tasks.”
Simon & Kaplan (as cited in Halpern, 1996, p. 5): “the formation of logical inferences.”
Stahl & Stahl (as cited in Halpern, 1996, p. 5): “the development of cohesive and logical
reasoning patterns.”
Moore & Parker (as cited in Halpern, 1996, p. 5): “the careful and deliberate determination of
whether to accept, reject or suspend judgment.”
McPeck (1981, p. 8): “a propensity and skill to engage in an activity with reflective skepticism.”
Jakoubek (1995, p. 57): “an active and systematic attempt to understand and validate arguments.”
Kurfiss (1988, p. 2): “an investigation whose purpose is to explore a situation, phenomenon,
question, or problem to arrive at a hypothesis or conclusion about it that integrates all
available information and that can therefore be convincingly justified. In critical thinking, all
assumptions are open to question, divergent views are aggressively sought, and the inquiry is
not biased in favor of a particular outcome.”
Brookfield (1987, p. 1): “calling into question the assumptions underlying our customary,
habitual ways of thinking and acting and then being ready to think and act differently on the
basis of this critical questioning.”
Apps (1985, p. 151): “emancipatory learning ... that which frees people for personal, institutional,
or environmental forces that prevent them from seeing new directions, from gaining control of
their lives, their society and their world.”