Critical Thinking

Defining critical thinking is not an easy task. It has been widely held as a hallmark of excellent education since World War II and promoted by the progressive movement of educators. These connections gained great popularity with Dewey and his followers because they were strong proponents of critical thinking as a goal of public education. Dewey (1938) thought that education's supreme purpose was to prepare all citizens to participate in the democracy. From a different perspective, Bloom's (1956) taxonomy of cognitive process placed a premium emphasis on critical thinking to transition into higher-order thinking skills.

Although there is substantial unanimity in the need for critical thinking, while reviewing the literature on it again, it is evident there is no single definition for the term. Nonetheless, a consensus of understanding of the term is available. Across the educational literature, authors agree that critical thinking involves people using a systematic approach to evaluate information, develop viable solutions, and test them as they seek to solve many different types of structured and ill-structured problems (Laxman, 2010; Nosich, 2011; Shah, 2010; Winch, 2006).

Characteristics of critical thinkers have been studied in the literature, in part because describing the users' behavior and attributes sheds additional light on the complex skill set. Researchers describe learners who are adept with critical thinking as creative, curious about intellectual matters, not satisfied with simple answers, and ready to pursue multiple solutions (Jonassen et al., 2003; Thompson, 2011). Several different theories and models have posed the process of critical thinking; however, to create a universal model is problematic.

Critical thinking is a highly individualized, context-specific, multi-branching process. Therefore, it is very difficult to develop a comprehensive model that captures the many variations inherent in critical thinking and fits all situations. Bloom's (1956) taxonomy is probably one of the most familiar cognitive models that illuminate many of the discrete, but interconnected, steps of critical thinking. However, it does not capture the details of questioning, inquiring, and so on that are essential to the process.

The Foundation for Critical Thinking (2007) provides one model of understanding critical thinking that has drawn a substantial following. Originally based on the work of Richard Paul and Linda Elder (2007), this approach includes two strands and provides a platform for teaching people of all ages how to learn to be critical thinkers in a wide range of settings. The first strand is named “the elements and standards” (Foundation for Critical Thinking, 2007) and includes eight elements: generating purposes, raising questions, using information, using concepts, making inferences, making assumptions, generating implications, and embodying a point of view. The premise is that understanding, reflecting on, and practicing these functions in focused activities will contribute to cultivating a practice of critical thinking.

The second strand of this model is entitled the “universal intellectual standards” (Elder & Paul, 2010). These standards provide guidelines for evaluating information and situations. The standards include clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, and fairness.

This model of critical thinking appeals to people because it captures the necessary and dynamic interplay between both strands. For instance, as individuals determine whether or not to undergo radiation treatment of cancer they will progress through the first set of guidelines. However, whenever they evaluate information during this process, according to Elder and Paul's model (2010), they are taught to use the standards. This approach to critical thinking incorporates a great deal of reflection on learning to evaluate and improve one's skills.

From P–12 education (Jonassen et al., 2003) to higher education (Brookfield, 1991) there has been great emphasis on the need to incorporate critical thinking in the curriculum. Nonetheless, many faculty members still struggle to change their teaching style and incorporate critical thinking in their course work in meaningful ways (Paul & Elder, 2005, 2007, 2013; Thompson, 2011).

Traditional and recent educational theories have not provided consistent rationales for teaching critical thinking in public schools. The result is that American schools have consistently graduated students who are not successful problem-solvers. Thompson (2011) identified many reasons for this enduring shortfall. These complications range from teachers not being able to consistently define critical thinking ( Jones, 2004; Kennedy, Fisher, & Ennis, 1991), to the teachers' lack of confidence in guiding students through problem-solving stages and competencies (Goddard & Goddard, 2001; Wheatley, 2002), to students' lack of self-efficacy regarding their critical thinking abilities (Bandura, 1993; Caliskan, 2010; Zimmerman, 2000), students' inadequate information-searching skills (Laxman, 2010), and teachers' preference for more behaviorist than constructivist approaches to teaching. The approach provided in the research includes a strong interrelationship for building critical thinking and problem-solving.

Problem-Solving

Employers no longer want to have to train their employee for every imaginable special case and contingency for at least three major reasons: (1) The low cost of technology makes it easier to automate routine tasks. (2) Because of the great number of customizations available through technology, production of small alterations is possible. (3) Employers want staff members to be able to troubleshoot (problem-solve) automated systems, client situations, project management, and so on. Therefore, educators and educational institutions have been under increased pressure to incorporate the attainment of problem-solving skills into learning outcomes (Enriquez, 2001; Fink, 2014; Friedman, 2005; Jonassen et al., 2003; Partnership for 21st Century Skills, 2015).

Teaching problem-solving skills (referred to in the literature as problem-based learning [PBL]) for application has been the subject of much research, discussion, and publication in recent years (Barber, King, & Buchanan, 2015; Fink, 2014; Jonassen et al., 2003). Although there are several models for teaching problem-solving, in this chapter, the selected division is between critical thinking and problem-solving. More important, there are many definitions of problem-solving. Beginning with the very basics, this section discusses the definition of problem-solving and explores effective strategies for teaching this important skill set.

Stages of Problem-Solving

Discussing the stages of problem-solving is an enlightening experience for many adults. Although adults engage in problem-solving daily, many do not explicitly contemplate or analyze their approaches, alternative techniques, assessment, or ways to overcome obstacles. Incorporating time to reflect on prior problem-solving techniques, mental models of problem-solving, and additional applied strategies opens new worlds of possibilities (Jonassen et al., 2003).

Figure 7.1 is a common problem-solving model that is seen in the literature. It was developed from a review of many familiar theoretical and practical models to represent the commonly understood stages. It is critical to note that the graphic represents an ongoing cycle that under ideal conditions would repeat all stages until achieving the optimum solution. Problem-solving is a powerful strategy indeed.

Building on this foundation, Figure 7.2 provides a more in-depth vantage point to understand problem-solving. The thinking actively in a social context (TASC) problem-solving model is based on Wallace's (2002) work in P–12 schools, and yet the vital community-integration component makes it invaluable for adult learners. In this model, the white hub, labeled TASC, represents social context. Whether pursuing self-development, informal learning, or teaching adults in formal educational or workplace settings, whether working with ABE, undergraduates, graduate students, or workplace training, this model demonstrates that the context and community are critical players and stakeholders in the real-life problem-solving process. For adults, a problem-solving model that includes constituencies in multiple phases can be an important paradigm and skill set to change their future problem-solving approaches.

Discovery Learning: Problem-Based Learning and Project-Based Learning (PBL and PjBL)

Although at first, the terms sound and seem conceptually very similar, there are important distinctions between these two important learning constructs that people use daily: problem-based learning (PBL) and project-based learning (PjBL). In this discussion, I propose the phrase discovery learning as a descriptive term to encompass both types of learning because it emphasizes their common constructivist experiences. In addition, in PBL and (PjBL), learning is self-regulated, which means the learner is in control of all the action (English & Kitsantas, 2013). Discovery learning modes of PBL and PjBL are active learning, learner-centered, context-specific models.

In the preparation of doctors, nurses, engineers, and managers, PBL has been demonstrated to be more effective than traditional (lecture) formats (Carriger, 2016; Fink, 2013; Stefanou, Stolk, Prince, Chen, & Lord, 2013). PjBL has been studied and found effective among the same population (Carriger, 2016; Fink, 2013; Stefanou et al., 2013; Stolk & Harari, 2014).

Table 7.1 illustrates some of the important similarities and differences between PBL and PjBL. Overall, an important, major difference between the two approaches is that PBL is more focused on generalizable skills and theory building, whereas PjBL explores solutions for a specific context and problem. This difference is one of the critical reasons of how and why people choose either of the strategies over the other.

Source: Some elements derived from Brundiers and Wiek (2013).

In general, PBL is more often used in formal educational settings, because it tends to be more associated with learning theory and application across nonspecific or varied contexts. By contrast, PjBL tends to be better suited for learning that fits specific situations. Familiar examples of PjBL contexts include workforce development, continuing education, and independent, informal learning.

A study by Stefanou et al. (2013), funded by the National Science Foundation, compared PBL and PjBL in course work across several universities. The results revealed that the context focus and specificity of PjBL made a difference in the learning outcomes and experience. In this study, PjBL resulted in the participants engaging in more advanced critical thinking, elaboration, and understanding of their own self-regulation. As such, the findings confirm what the field has experienced for many years, although some educators might shortchange PjBL because it is context-specific. It is this very parameter that affords PjBL greater cultivation of higher-order thinking skills. By contrast, PBL efforts also facilitate such skill development, but to a lesser degree.

Figure 7.3 provides a different visual analysis of the similarities and differences between PBL and PjBL. Brundiers and Wiek (2013) point out that when both PBL and PjBL are used together, it becomes a hybrid format of instruction that offers multiple benefits.

Brundiers and Wiek's (2013) work is one example of using the collective term to refer to both modes: problem- and project-based learning (PPBL). Rather than just making a compound term, discovery learning may provide a more descriptive name. Discovery learning communicates several of the key principles that PBL and PjBL include.

PBL and PjBL methods incorporate strong adult learning principles. By incorporating learning that is tied to professional application and real-world situations, participants not only are motivated but also see connections for using the learning in their lives. These situations also require participants to cope, prioritize, and evaluate several streams of information that sometimes conflict with each other. Finally, learners adapt to functioning with leaders or instructors as facilitators. These experiences create complex but relevant learning environments through which adult learners advance their essential 21st-century learning skills.

Chain Reactions and Daily Applications

I have observed a chain reaction effect that occurs once educators shift their philosophy and practice of teaching from dispensing to facilitating learning. As learners exercise their critical thinking skills, they gain confidence in different perspectives of questioning and analysis. With problem-solving, learners apply their critical thinking to real-life situations. Context-based learning increases focus and motivation for most learners (Walinga, 2010); therefore, it is not surprising that many times they develop multiple, innovative solutions. In turn, these experiences highlight the open-ended aspect of problem-solving rather than simple dichotomous solutions. In these ways, problem-solving provides multiple contexts for students to practice critical thinking with purpose.

Problem-solving also leads to more advanced skill development (Stefanou et al., 2013). Thompson (2011) also explains this understanding: “As teachers facilitate the development of problem-solving skills, students must be taught more advanced information-gathering skills that will equip them to unearth the correct resources that are needed to solve complex problems” (p. 2). Therefore, educators may discover that as they employ more problem-solving and critical thinking–related activities in their teaching, learners reach beyond prior expectations of learning, achievement, and extensions. The following examples and strategies may jumpstart and support your efforts for instructional innovation.

Know-Want-How-Learn-Action-Questions Method (KWHLAQ)

The Know-Want-Learn Method (KWL) is a popular and effective strategy for organizing problem-based learning activities. The KWL premise is that learners become primary agents in determining the focus and means trajectory of their learning effort. These goals are accomplished by learners using a streamlined learning plan of action as identified by the acronym KWL. Participants identify what they already know about the topic, isolate what they want to learn, and, when finished, review what they learned. This section briefly explains the original KWL model and then introduces a powerful 21st-century variation, KWHLAQ.

In the brief preparation stage for the KWL, most often participants will use a simple three-column chart to facilitate and organize their work, as well as provide a comprehensive record and perspective of the process. These columns are labelled at the top, from left to right, KWL. (A simple search of KWL images on the web provides many variations of these charts for participants to consider.) As learners proceed through the three stages of this process, they write their observations or findings in the appropriate column.

The power of the KWL cycle is the streamlined, realistic model it provides to develop better research and critical thinking skills. It also affords a common foundation for collaborative problem-solving, which can be applied to other settings. (See Ogle, 1986, for more step by step guidance for the KWL.)

More recently, scholars and instructors have built on the strengths and success of the KWL to include and address critical 21st-century learning needs. The KWHLAQ model includes the essential additional elements of how, analysis (action), and question (Barell, 2006) (see Table 7.2).

In the first stage of the KWHLAQ process, individually or as a group, learners brainstorm what they already Know (K) about a subject or issue in order to clarify their prior thinking. KWL learners engage in an active process of prereading (scanning) information, exploring and extending their body of knowledge on the subject. Instructors facilitate and circulate and check in and hear brief status reports to extend questions and recommend resources.

Learners organize their plan of action for learning in the KWHLAQ Want (W) stage. They identify what information they will seek, specific gaps from the K stage, and the division of tasks among group members. Again, instructors offer different questions or negotiate dialogue as teams potentially encounter different opinions or preferences. During the How (H) stage, learners explore and determine what means of gathering information are available and which they will use. It is an essential stage to introduce new sources and types of publications, data, and information as well how they will access the information.

During the Learn (L) stage, participants complete their information acquisition and also document what they have learned. The Action (A) stage identifies whether additional data and information are needed or implementation of action is on the horizon. This separate stage guards against research and information overload. It is an explicit call to action. The final stage, Question (Q), has participants determine what additional questions are raised and the issues that need to be studied. This documentation will ultimately provide the beginning point of another KWHLAQ cycle.

In the original KWL model, the LAQ stages were in the final L stage. With the 21st-century model, these discrete stages are effective in focusing greater attention on the need and role of each element. The separation of the stages enables more thorough investigation and use of the entire inquiry process, a benefit much needed in our rapidly changing world.

Strategy 7.1: 21st-Century KWHLAQ Model Applied

There are many ways that the KWHLAQ method may be integrated in teaching adults in different contexts and with delivery methods. This section illustrates strategies to incorporate it with technology and is designed for large- or small-group instruction. Table 7.3 provides details for both examples: a traditional face-to-face and a hybrid or fully online learning experience.

In planning to use the KWHLAQ model, faculty members are encouraged to consider their learners' prior experience, interests, and current and future needs. However, as instructors gain more experience, ideally they will invite participants to collaborate in the instructional planning of the activities. Instructors and learners alike will learn more about (1) advanced content areas, (2) their own about learning, (3) interpersonal communication dynamics and strategies, and (4) the social construction of knowledge.

As illustrated in Table 7.3, the face-to-face class employs KWHLAQ as a frame for a single lesson or unit of study. By contrast, the technology-based environments often afford more possibilities to incorporate, distribute, and repeat KWHLAQ steps. This table also lists multiple ways to use online platforms to implement the KWHLAQ model.

In traditional or online classes, polling software or cell phones can be used to enable participants to immediately share their initial “what do I know” insights. These questions would be posed prior to beginning the formal project, and again polling could be used in the final Question stage. Poll Everywhere and Kahoot are examples of polling platforms that are freely available and require no proprietary devices. In 100% online or blended (partially online) learning experiences, the KWHLAQ method can be an effective strategy to guide learner inquiry of content.

Regardless of delivery mode, when instructors and learners implement the KWHLAQ method in several different units of study, users begin to adopt the KWHLAQ as another learning paradigm. At this point, the model becomes an effective guide for their continued self-directed learning (SDL), a cornerstone of 21st-century and lifelong learning.

Strategy 7.2: Peer Learning

One of the most powerful techniques I have implemented in my instructional plans on a regular basis is peer learning. This approach is defined as learners working together to assist one another in the learning process; the focus is on interdependent rather than independent learning (Boud, 2014). There are many different forms peer learning may take. Consider the following variations as a sampling:

• All the participants might be at the same skill level for the task at hand, or they might be paired by different skill levels in order to learn and teach to one another.
• Peer learning might be formally arranged as course activities or informally pursued by students to resolve issues.
• Technology-facilitated peer learning online, via smartphones or e-mail, can be used, whereas in-person peer learning might be more effective in helping students solve difficult problems.

At one point, when I was beginning my graduate education studies, I remember thinking peer learning was not effective in some subject areas. I heartedly disagree with my previous opinion! Now, even in graduate and doctoral classes, I find that learners discover the power of peer learning when incorporated meaningfully into the instructional plan. Furthermore, such as in the following activity, I design peer learning activities because I know, and Boud, Cohen, and Sampson (2014) confirm, that professionals and students need to be adept at using peer learning in formal and informal settings.

Strategy 7.3: Virtual Think Tanks

An online learning management system (LMS) discussion board can be used as a space to share preliminary topics and abstracts for research projects, literature reviews, presentations, interviews, or instrument development. In such projects, participants develop a time line for the participants to submit their work and for their colleagues to provide formative feedback and recommended resources. In this manner, everyone gains many enriching ideas and several effective transferable 21st-century skills.

1. The learners post their ideas and materials and receive feedback that can be incorporated in the next stage of development and direction for follow-up research or an investigation.
2. The activity involves learning about multiple specialized topics rather than only their research topic area.
3. All learners gain experience in providing and receiving feedback in a professional context.
4. The learners discover and gain confidence in the benefits of peer feedback and collaborative development.

Overall, virtual think tanks are easy to set up and learning stretches beyond a sole assignment.

Strategy 7.4: Collaborative Learning

Online learning environments also provide powerful and unique opportunities for building, honing, and applying collaborative learning skills. Collaborative learning uses participants' communication skills to complete an activity, assignment, task, project, and so on (Barkley, Major, & Cross, 2014; Okada, Connolly, & Scott, 2012). In contrast to peer learning, collaborative learning is a collective effort for a unified goal. Peer learning usually applies to participants seeking assistance from one another as they work on their individual projects.

Many faculty members seem to struggle to develop collaborative learning activities in online environments. However, it is worth the effort to design and facilitate group projects for online spaces because they provide valuable and authentic contexts for developing and practicing 21st-century skills.

Similar to face-to-face group projects, clear goals and time lines provide essential direction for such learning activities. Although onsite groups sometimes informally discuss and list necessary standards, responsibilities, accountability, values, and time lines, the process has to be more purposeful in online environments. The following suggestions provide valuable techniques that help develop these essential components for group work and individual learning contracts:

• Provide a list of responsibilities and time lines that are prepopulated with examples and then completed by the groups.
• Recommend the group audio record their discussion and then review it for emergent goals.
• Request each team to write and submit short descriptions of individual roles and responsibilities and post them for discussion.

A critical player in collaborative groups is the facilitator. Again, online facilitation of teams requires some changes in the process. Although facilitators often see their role as being a resource to teamwork, they also need to be notified of team decisions in order to help support reaching those goals. A live, virtual consultation with the facilitator at least once during the process can be invaluable to answer questions, keep the team on track, and mediate to resolve any possible conflicts. Given group dynamics, teams sometimes have communication issues that can lead to conflict. The extent to which facilitators provide support for working through competing demands, agendas, and work styles may be dependent on the nature of the content area, learning setting, and level of instruction.

Strategy 7.5: Case Problems

When designed and facilitated well, case problems can provide compelling, dynamic applications of real-life PBL. There are many compilation volumes of case studies in different disciplines to draw on for instructional and professional development use. Solving case problems and case studies provide explicit opportunities to apply knowledge and critical thinking.

The “Analyzing the Logic of Problems” online model is one, appropriate Internet-based tool that serves as a structure guide for problem analysis (Foundation for Critical Thinking, 2007). It provides a series of questions related to eight elements of thought: (1) point of view, (2) purpose, (3) question at issue, (4) information, (5) interpretation and inference, (6) concepts, (7) assumptions, and (8) implications and consequences.

To use the tool, users or a team of users input their responses in the fields or dialogue boxes for each of the elements of thought questions. The inputs are analyzed and the system presents a complete analysis report. The responses and reports can be saved in the online database and reused or revised. Using such a vehicle to aid in case analysis makes the process more explicit, documents it, and provides a basis for additional insights into assumptions, values and benefits, and limitations.

Strategy 7.6: Simulations

How would you like to leverage one of the most enduring online pastimes into your instructional methods? Would it be worth it if the students became hungry to learn and you couldn't pull them away? It is happening already. In the world of education we call them simulations; however, among the general public, they are referred to as role-playing games (RPGs)! Yes, World of Warcraft, RPGs, and multiplayer RPGs—this class of computer games with huge followings and diehard aficionados can be captured and harnessed for educational purposes!

Educators have been working intensely to study the benefits of RPGs in learning and discovered that simulation, immersion, critical thinking, problem-solving, and gaming are a powerful combination (Aldrich, 2009a, 2009b; King & Cox, 2011). Therefore, short of learning programming and designing your own interface, how can we incorporate online simulations for group learning efforts? Existing educational simulations and simulation platforms are available for us to apply or customize for our instructional needs. The following lists share a few simulations with reviews regarding their roles and effectiveness as learning platforms:

• TLE TeachLivE (http://teachlive.org): This innovation is an extraordinary advancement in instructional technology's dedicated use of mixed-reality simulation. Developed by a team of professors at University of Central Florida in Orlando, TLE TeachLivE enables educators in training to teach a subject content to a classroom of virtual students (avatars) (Dieker, Hynes, Ludlow, & Whitten, 2012). Not only does the user have a safe environment but also, as the description mentions, no students are harmed by errors. Visit their website to learn more about this exceptional learning experience.
• Karma Tycoon (http://ecogamer.org/environmental-games/karma-tycoon-activism-game ): An online role-playing game in which the user experiences choices regarding personal wealth, profit, and philanthropy.
• 3rd World Farmer (http://3rdworldfarmer.com/): A business strategy simulation in which users manage agriculturally challenged desert area of sub-Saharan Africa. It incorporates survival role-playing with severe poverty, hardships, and moral dilemmas.
• Code Monkey Tycoon (http://www.learn4good.com/games/tycoon/gamedeveloper.htm): A very realistic simulation of the multitasking skills, pressures, technology, and human resource decisions facing the CEO of (in this case) a startup video game company.
• Romadoria (http://www.romadoria.us): One of many historical themed multiplayer RPGs that are online. Based in ancient Rome, it incorporates competition among other players while testing users' tactical abilities. Many twists and turns, discoveries, and decisions are included in the experience.
• Virtual Leader (VLeader) (http://www.simulearn.net): An intriguing simulation in which the user controls solving the day-to-day issues of leadership while transparently building more leadership, organizational, and interpersonal skills!

For descriptions and reviews of more online simulations and RPGs, Aldrich's book Learning Online with Games, Simulations, and Virtual Worlds (2009a) is an exceptional guide. The best online resource right now may be http://www.learn4good.com/games/index.htm. In the meantime, do not forget to explore how you can leverage the LMS, wikis, blogs, or e-mail to provide discussion, dialogue, problem-solving, reflection, and journaling as learners participate in these simulation experiences.

Strategy 7.7: e-Portfolios

In considering selections for technology-aided critical thinking strategies, e-portfolios made the final cut because they serve so many essential purposes and goals. Such projects can take many forms, but focusing them on authentic applications for the content area or career goals highlight motivating and relevant choices. Most US teacher education colleges now have an electronic system in which teacher candidates store their portfolio-related materials. By the end of their degree or certification programs, they have a presentable package that not only demonstrates their competencies by essential and marketable areas and standards but also serves as a valuable interview aid. However, designing and assembling e-portfolios is not the entire instructional experience. Instead, instructors need to incorporate reflective practice (Schön, 1983) and couple the experience with research into the objective(s) and reflection on students' achievement, goals, time lines, and continuing professional development.

Other examples I use with professionals are hard-copy or electronic portfolios. Such portfolios may be more familiar in some fields such as fine art, graphic art, engineering, photography, and so on. However, there are powerful opportunities for adults to create portfolios that demonstrate their learning competencies and readiness to work, serve, and study in their particular area. Professionals find it immensely helpful to create career, leadership, teaching, and administration portfolios for research depending on their interests and goals.