Janet E. Kuebli et al.
142
Critical thinking abilities refer to the person’s thinking competencies. These abilities
correspond closely to what Bloom and others consider CT skills, although the order in
which we present them is not identical. Remembering refers to basic abilities of recognition
and recall memory. Comprehension goes beyond remembering since it entails summarizing
or restating others’ ideas in one’s own words, thus implying a deeper and more personal-
ized state of knowledge. As in most CT models, application ranges from simply using
existing knowledge in familiar situations to recognizing when prior knowledge can be used
in a novel situation. Analysis requires taking ideas or claims apart, examining the individ-
ual components, and understanding their relationship to each other and to other ideas. In
our model, we add the ability to infer, which entails reasoning in order to draw meaning
or conclusions from evidence. Evaluation means that claims or ideas are appraised in light
of evidence of some sort. Synthesizing is the highest ability in our framework, which
Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) refer to as the ability to “create.” When we synthesize, we
reorganize or refashion the knowledge we start with into something novel and fresh.
Instructional methodologies are the strategies, tools, and techniques that instructors use to
increase students’ capacities for critical thought. These are the tools and techniques that stu-
dents must be taught to use. They must be illustrated and modeled by instructors both during
lectures and in class discussions. Furthermore, students must be held accountable for using
them in both in-class and out-of-class assignments. Such methodologies should entail both
discipline-specific and more generic universal techniques. For example, encouraging students
to speculate on how dispositional and situational factors interact to determine behavior across
all theories would be an example of a more discipline-specific (i.e., social psychology) tech-
nique. Requiring students to produce argument analyses would be an example of a generic
universal technique that could be used regardless of course content. Some more generic uni-
versal examples are listed in Table 12.2, but certainly many more methods would qualify.
This framework illustrates the interdependencies between instructional methods, criti-
cal thinking, and skill assessments. At the classroom level, the framework can be used as a
pedagogical tool for the instructor and as a metacognitive “map” for the student. To use it
as a pedagogical tool requires the instructor to think first about the level of critical thinking
appropriate for the course. The instructor must then choose those instructional methods
and tools that will develop the students’ capacity for critical thinking at that level. Finally,
the instructor chooses course activities, assignments, and exam formats that will engage the
student in listening, reading, writing, and speaking, and also allow for assessment of the
desired level of critical thought demonstrated by these skills.
Table 12.2. The Critical Thinking Pedagogical Framework
Academic skills Critical thinking abilities Instructional methodologies
Listening Remembering Defining concepts
Reading Analysis Reasoning elements
Writing Comprehension Concept mapping
Speaking Application Systems thinking
Inferring
Evaluation
Synthesizing