Teaching Critical Thinking in Psychology: A Handbook of Best Practices

(ff) #1

155


Statistics & Research Methods


Because students rarely hand-calculate statistics once they complete these courses, taking


a more conceptual approach will likely get them to think critically about the course


material they encounter in their statistics and research methods courses.


Using Alternative Teaching Methods

Another potential way to increase the likelihood that your students will think critically


about course material is to use alternative teaching methods that force students to examine


the material in a fashion that deviates from more traditional teaching methods. Although


there are numerous alternative teaching methods that statistics and research methods


instructors can use in their classrooms, the following methods seems especially promising


in their ability to promote enhanced learning as well as critical thinking.


Interteaching. Interteaching is a new method of classroom instruction that has its roots


in B. F. Skinner’s operant psychology (Boyce & Hineline, 2002). Although earlier


behavioral teaching methods (e.g., Keller, 1968), which focused on modifying the teaching


environment and increasing reinforcement for desired behaviors, have produced outcomes


superior to more traditional methods of instruction, college and university instructors have


failed to adopt these methods for a number of reasons (see Buskist, Cush, & DeGrandpre,


1991). Interteaching is based on the same tenets as earlier behavioral teaching methods


but is more amenable to classroom adoption. In essence, interteaching entails a “mutually


probing, mutually informing conversation between two people” (Boyce & Hineline, 2002,


p. 220) that allows both students and teacher continually to interact with one another and


reinforce some of the behaviors that teachers hope to see in their students (e.g., discussion


of course material, asking questions when material is confusing). Because others have


described interteaching in more detail elsewhere (see Barron, Benedict, Saville, Serdikoff,


& Zinn, 2007; Boyce & Hineline, 2002; Saville, Zinn, Neef, Van Norman, & Ferreri,


2006), we will not discuss the particulars of the method here. Instead, we will focus on


how the use of interteaching seems to have a positive effect on critical thinking.


Although interteaching is relatively new, a mounting number of studies suggest that it


may lead to higher exam scores than more traditional methods of classroom instruction


(see Barron et al., 2007; Saville, Zinn, & Elliott, 2005; Saville et al., 2006). In addition,


evidence from our classrooms suggests that interteaching may lead to increases in the


behaviors associated with critical thinking. Saville and Zinn conducted a study in which


they alternated interteaching and lecture several times throughout the course of a semes-


ter. To provide partial controls for possible confounds, they counterbalanced the order of


teaching method across two sections of an undergraduate research methods course (i.e.,


one class participated in interteaching while the other class heard a lecture over the same


material; see Saville et al., 2006, Study 2, for a description of this method). At the end of


the semester, students completed Ferrett’s (1997) “attributes of a critical thinker”


inventory, which asks respondents to self-report how often they engaged in certain


behaviors that are associated with critical thinking (e.g., asks relevant questions, admits


lack of understanding, changes one’s mind when learning new facts). Specifically, students


reported whether they were more likely to engage in each of these behaviors with


interteaching or with lecture.

Free download pdf