Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines of Education

Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines of Education

University of the CumberlandsEducation Department

Susan R. Rose, Ph.D.Melanie Cardell, Ph.D.Karen Goldman, Ph.D.

Jennifer Woodruff, Ph.D.Elizabeth Lasley, Ph.D.

Universityof the

Cumberlands Department of Education

Department of Education





Department of EducationDepartment of

EducationUC

School Counseling Program

Reflective Constructors of Quality Learning Experiences Through Critical Thinking

University of the Cumberland’s Quality Enhancement Plan, 2003-2013Critical thinking was targeted because it is consistent with our mission statement’s commitment to encourage students to think critically and creativelyFirst Cadre was in 2005-2006

This presentation represents years of program review and enhancement as we are in the 6th Cadre.

Universityof the








EducationUC



COOL 530, Introduction to School Counseling, was selectedas a course in which to implement the Quality Enhancement Plan during the Fall semester of 2011, because critical

thinkingis naturally inherent to both

education and counseling. As this is the introductory course, the thought structure wasto begin the program on a good footing of critical thinking.

The basic concept in this introductory course is to operationalize the concept of combining the candidate’s background in education or mental health with the more unique role of counseling through the University's Quality Enhancement model of critical thinking as well as the Education Department’s theme of Reflective Constructors of Quality Learning Experiences through Critical Thinking.

Course Selection

Universityof the








EducationUC



Activities that are already included as core componentsin COOL 530, Introduction to School Counseling, are:

1.Discussion Forums. Discussion Forum 1 will serve as the Pretest measure for critical thinking, critical reading and critical writing.

Other Discussion Forum activities will serve as learning/practice of critical thinking, critical reading and critical writing.

2. Research-Based Discussion Paper. The Research-Based Discussion Paper will serve as a learning/practice of critical thinking, critical reading and critical writing.

3. Philosophy of Counseling. The Philosophy of Counseling will serve as the Post-test measure for

critical thinking, critical reading and critical writing.

Implementation of Cadre Measures

Universityof the








EducationUC



Syllabus ReviewThe following components were added to the syllabus to draw attention to the concepts of the QEP/CATC initiative:

Within the Course Requirement section of the syllabus, the following sections were inserted to identify which activities/assignments were part of the QEP/CATC measurements:

Discussion Forum 1 will serve as the Pretest measure for critical thinking, critical reading and critical writing, so be sure to address all three as discussed in the QEP/CATC Information section as well as provide a thorough reflection/answer to the response question.

The Research-based Discussion Paper will serve as a learning/practice of critical thinking, critical reading and critical writing, so be sure to address all three as discussed in the QEP/CATC Information section as well as provide a thorough philosophy as guided by the rubric. (No formal scores will be reported as this is a practice/feedback piece.)

Your Philosophy of Counseling will serve as the Post-test measure for critical thinking, critical reading and critical writing, so be sure to address all three as discussed in the QEP/CATC Information section as well as provide a thorough philosophy as guided by the rubric.

The QEP Plan provides explanation of the QEP as well as definitions of the essential elements that serve as the foundation for critical thinking.

Universityof the








EducationUC



MethodologyResearch Design

The purpose of this study as defined by the QEP/CATCwas to explore students’ progress and “changes in students’ critical thinking skills as measured …. (through) embedded and formative assessments” (QEPCadre Information Booklet, 2011).

As expected by the cadre parameters, this study utilized pre and post assignments to measure critical thinking in the areas of reading, writing and information literacy.

These assignments were evaluated with the common rubrics devised by the cadre.

In order to address critical thinking across the curriculum, specifically the school counseling curriculum in this case, this study will:

Score and record the skill level of all candidates on the pre-test activity, Discussion Forum 1, in order to provide a baseline score before studying and discussing critical thinking;

Provide instruction, opportunities for discussion, and practice in critical thinking; Score and record the skill level of all candidates on the post-test activity, Philosophy of

Counseling, in order to provide a final score after studying and discussing critical thinking; and

Report the findings.

Universityof the








EducationUC



Sample As mentioned in the introduction, this particular portion of the QEP

study used the school counselor candidates from the Fall 2011, Session 1, course section of COOL 530, Introduction to School.

Rubric Earlier cadre members developed a rubric froman aggregation of earlier rubrics that measurescritical reading, critical writing and informationliteracy on individual rubrics

Section I of the rubric measures clarity across the critical thinking areas of reading comprehension, writing communication and information.

Section II measures discernment across the critical thinking areas of reading comprehension, writing communication and information.

Section III measures integration across the critical thinking areas of reading comprehension, writing communication and information.

Methodology

Universityof the








EducationUC



Critical Thinking: Reading and Writing, Information Literacy Rubric Student Learning Outcome Assessment Scale Absent or

Incorrect 0-2

Weak 3-4

Competent 5-6

Strong 7-8

Superior 9-10

CLARITY 1. Identify precisely the major points, e.g., key themes, content, issues, conclusions. (Reading Comprehension)

2. Write a clear, concise, and logical argument or purpose statement. (Written Communication)

3. Recognize need for external sources of information. (Information Literacy)

DISCERNMENT 1. Recognize the adequacy/credibility of supporting materials Outcome 2C. (Reading Comprehension)

2. Demonstrate cogent planning and organization in the writing process (Written Communication)

3. Uses appropriate sources (Information Literacy)

INTEGRATION 1. Evaluate points of convergence and divergence between different pieces of writing (Reading Comprehension)

2. Present a credible point of view based on evidence, established criteria, and contextual consideration (Written Communication)

3. Employ sources effectively to accomplish specific purpose (Information Literacy)

Universityof the








EducationUC



Integration of Critical Thinking StrategiesInstructions for Pre-Test

No instruction was provided regarding expectations for the assignment beyond the actual assignment within the discussionforum other than briefly mentioning it duringthe chat session as we reviewed the syllabus.

The aim of this approach was to gain an accuratebenchmark of where the students stand when thinking independently about how to complete a critical thinking assignment.

Instruction following Pre Test Following the Discussion Forum within week one for the pre test, the

professor provided an explanation of the University of the Cumberlands’ Quality Enhancement Plan: Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum. The Power Point titled How Do You Know You Know was presented to discuss

using correct sources of knowledge as well as to discuss the terms clarity, discernment, and integration. The rubric was also included on the Power Point and reviewed with the students to

explain how they were evaluated in terms of critical thinking.

HOW DO YOU KNOW?

YOU KNOW YOU KNOW, BUT THE REAL QUESTION IS....HOW

DO YOU KNOW YOU KNOW?

HOW CAN YOU BE SURE....

THERE IS NO “LITTLE MAN” INSIDE YOUR COMPUTER MAKING IT DO THE THINGS IT DOES?

HOW DO YOU KNOW....George Washington

was the first president of the United States?

You REALLY have a stomach?

WHAT MAKES YOU SO SURE....

THE SUN WILL RISE TOMORROW MORNING?

HOW DO YOU KNOW....

THE COLOR OF THE SHIRT I’M WEARING?

ARE YOU SURE.....

YOU DON’T HAVE A BIG HOLE IN THE BACK OF YOUR PANTS?

SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGELogic – There is no

way to absolutely refute the computer-creature hypothesis; but, it doesn’t seem logical and we can open up the computer and see the wires, etc.

SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGEAuthority – we

know (or believe) that Washington was the first president because we trust the authority of historians and history books.

Reasoning – Deductive: “All

humans have stomachs; I am human; therefore, I have a stomach.”

Inductive: “The sun rose today, yesterday, the day before and for as long as anyone can remember.”

SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE

The Scientific Pair

SOURCES OF SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE

All these ways of knowing –authority, reasoning, observation and inference – are used by scientists.

The only basis for scientific knowledge, however, is observation and inference.

Science puts greater emphasis on evidence produced by the senses than on the authority of others or on reasoning.

Essential elements that serve as the foundation for critical thinking

Clarity – Critical thinking includes the ability to identify information specifically and accurately. Critical thinkers learn to recognize the major points of whatever they read or hear. When writing about what they have read or heard, students formulate clear, concise, and logical arguments. To fully understand a work, students recognize the need for secondary sources. A key question for clarity is, “Do I understand the basic information supplied by the author?”

Discernment – Critical thinking includes the ability to analyze information with insight and judgment. This type of analysis requires that students recognize the adequacy and credibility of primary and secondary sources, demonstrate cogent planning and organization in the writing process, and use appropriate sources. A key question for discernment is, “How can I express my interpretation in a coherent manner and choose secondary sources to enhance my own analysis?”

Essential elements that serve as the foundation for critical thinking

Essential elements that serve as the foundation for critical thinkingIntegration – Critical thinking includes the ability to evaluate and synthesize information efficiently and effectively. That means students must be able to extrapolate credible information to use in a different setting, to present fairly another’s point of view based upon the facts and analysis of the secondary source, and to have a purpose for integrating the researched information. A key question regarding integration is, “How can I incorporate appropriate secondary sources in an effective and reasonable way into my own critical analysis?”

Universityof the








EducationUC



ResultsResultant Sample

• The demographics of the school counselor candidates was quantified using data from MyUC. Of the 31 school counselor candidates within the course, 90.32% (n = 28) identified themselves as Caucasian or European American. 3.23% (n = 1) identified themselves as African American, while 6.45% percent (n = 2) chose not to disclose their ethnicity. Of the 31 candidates, 77.42% (n = 24) were female, while 22.58% (n = 7) were male.

The score reports were divided into all component parts on both pre-tests and post-tests for analysis:

• Clarity Discernment Integration Reading Comprehension Written Communication Information Literacy

As this is an ongoing study, culminating October 21, 2011, final results aren’t available, but I have been impressed with the increased caliber of work from this group given the Critical Thinking component.

Universityof the








EducationUC



COOL 530Score Report: Pre-test, Clarity

Reading Comprehension

Written Communication

Information Literacy

Clarity Average

Student Names8 9 2 6.33

7 5 2 4.67

8 8 2 6.00

8 8 2 6.00

5 6 2 4.33

5 6 2 4.33

7 6 2 5.00

4 2 2 2.67

4 4 2 3.33

8 6 2 5.33

8 8 2 6.00

6 6 2 4.67

5 4 2 3.67

8 8 2 6.00

6 5 2 4.33

8 7 2 5.67

6 5 2 4.33

5 5 2 4.00

8 8 2 6.00

6 4 2 4.00

8 8 2 6.00

6 6 2 4.67

4 2 0 2.00

5 4 2 3.67

6 6 2 4.67

8 8 2 6.007 6 4 5.67

8 8 2 6.00

76 2

5.00

8 8 2 6.00

Average 6.57 6.07 2 4.88

Missing a pre or post test:

COOL 530Score Report: Pre-test, Discernment




DiscernmentAverage

Student Names8 9 6 7.676 5 6 5.678 9 6 7.678 8 6 7.335 6 6 5.675 7 6 6.007 7 6 6.674 5 3 4.004 4 4 4.008 8 6 7.338 8 6 7.336 6 5 5.675 4 5 4.678 8 6 7.336 6 6 6.008 7 6 7.006 6 6 6.004 5 4 4.338 8 6 7.334 5 6 5.008 8 6 7.336 6 6 6.004 5 0 3.005 4 4 4.336 6 6 6.00

8 8 6 7.338 7 7 7.336 7 6 6.33

57 6

6.00

7 8 6 7.00

Average 6.3 6.57 5.47 6.11


Universityof the








EducationUC



COOL 530Score Report: Pre-test, Integration




Integration Average

Student Names8 9 6 7.675 6 6 5.678 9 7 8.008 8 6 7.335 5 5 5.006 6 5 5.677 7 6 6.674 4 3 3.674 4 4 4.006 8 6 6.678 8 6 7.335 5 5 5.004 4 4 4.008 8 6 7.336 6 6 6.008 8 6 7.336 6 6 6.005 5 4 4.678 8 6 7.338 5 8 7.008 8 6 7.336 6 6 6.004 4 0 2.674 4 4 4.006 6 6 6.00

8 8 6 7.337 7 7 7.007 8 6 7.00

67 6

6.33

7 8 6 7.006.57 6.30 6.33 19.20


COOL 530Score Report: Pre-test, Reading Comprehension

Clarity Discernment IntegrationReading

Comprehension Average

Student Names8 8 8 7.677 6 5 6.008 8 8 8.008 8 8 8.005 5 5 5.005 5 6 5.337 7 7 7.004 4 4 4.004 4 4 4.008 8 6 7.338 8 8 8.006 6 5 5.675 5 4 4.678 8 8 8.006 6 6 6.008 8 8 8.006 6 6 6.005 4 5 4.678 8 8 8.006 4 8 6.008 8 8 8.006 6 6 6.004 4 4 4.005 5 4 4.676 6 6 6.00

8 8 8 8.007 8 7 7.338 6 7 7.00

7 5 6 6.00

8 7 7 7.33

Average 6.57 6.3 6.33 6.39


Universityof the








EducationUC



COOL 530Score Report: Pre-test, Written Communication

Clarity Discernment IntegrationWritten

Communication Average


5 5 6 5.33

8 9 9 8.67

8 8 8 8.00

6 6 5 5.67

6 7 6 6.33

6 7 7 6.67

2 5 4 3.67

4 4 4 4.00

6 8 8 7.33

8 8 8 8.00

6 6 5 5.67

4 4 4 4.00

8 8 8 8.00

5 6 6 5.67

7 7 8 7.33

5 6 6 5.67

5 5 5 5.00

8 8 8 8.00

4 5 5 4.67

8 8 8 8.00

6 6 6 6.00

2 5 4 3.67

4 4 4 4.00

6 6 6 6.00

8 8 8 8.006 7 7 6.67

8 7 8 7.67

6 7 76.67

8 8 8 8.00

Average


COOL 530Score Report: Pre-test, Information Literacy

Clarity Discernment Integration Information Literacy Average


2 6 6 4.67

2 6 7 5.00

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 5 4.33

2 6 5 4.33

2 6 6 4.67

2 3 3 2.67

2 4 4 3.33

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 6 4.67

2 5 5 4.00

2 5 4 3.67

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 6 4.67

2 4 4 3.33

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 8 5.33

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 6 4.67

0 0 0 0.00

2 4 4 3.33

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 6 4.674 7 7 6.00

2 6 6 4.67

2 6 64.67

2 6 6 4.67

Average 2 5.47 5.47 4.41 Missing a pre or post test:

Universityof the








EducationUC



DiscussionGeneral Impressions

As I scored the pre-test, I was impressed with the structure and time that just the introduction of theQEP parameters established for the candidates. When I taught this course previously, candidates wouldbarely produce even a short paragraph for this initialdiscussion even though the query asked for a reflection and I attempted to remind them to show insight, depth and detail as they responded to the discussion forum prompts. The candidates in this course, as shown on the samples, produced one to two page reflections showing that they put much more time and effort into their responses.

This reminds me of the motivation and/or expectation effect in counseling. Some highly motivated clients show improvement even before the first session. That is, they are ready to change and expect to improve and so they do – even before actually doing anything different. Lambert (1992) estimates 40% client changes due to motivation or severity of problem; 30% to quality of therapeutic relationship; 15% to expectancy (placebo) effects, and 15% to specific techniques. When combined, the motivation and the expectancy effect totals 55%. This numerical data supports the accepted notion that high expectations of students is

significant in their learning. In our critical thinking example, the instructor provided high expectations which then motivated the students. Thus, candidates delivered a better product even before instruction began.

Universityof the








EducationUC



ReferencesBowlin, Gina. (2009). Cadre IV Portfolio. Retrieved from http://ilearn.ucumberlands.edu/section/default.asp?id=2011%2DQEP%2D101. Lambert, M. (1992). Implications for outcome research for psychotherapy integration. In J. C. Norcross & M. R. Goldstein (Eds.), Handbook of psychotherapy integration (pp. 94–129). New York: Basic Books. Sharp, Jolly. (2010). Jolly Sharp Syllabus. Retrieved from http://ilearn.ucumberlands.edu/section/default.asp?id=2011%2DQEP%2D101. Sprick, R., Garrison, M., Howard, L. (2011). CHAMPS, 2nd Edition: A Proactive and Positive Approach to Classroom Management. Eugene, OR: Pacific Northwest Publishing.

Weaver, Susan. (2011). QEP Cadre Handbook. Retrieved from

http://ilearn.ucumberlands.edu/section/default.asp?id=2011%2DQEP%2D101.

http://ilearn.ucumberlands.edu/section/default.asp?id=2011-QEP-101


Universityof the








EducationUC



Contact InformationSusan R. Rose, Ph.D.

Director of School CounselingAssociate Professor


[email protected](502) 468-1480

mailto:[email protected]

QEP Cadre VIUniversity of the Cumberlands

Melanie Jessee Cardell, Ph. D.Coordinator of the Reading & Writing Program

ProfessorUniversity of the Cumberlands

Education Department

Critical Thinking in English Language Arts

Methods Classes

University of the Cumberland’s Quality Enhancement Plan, 2003-2013Critical thinking was targeted because it is consistent

with our mission statement’s commitment to encourage students to think critically and creatively

First Cadre was in 2005-2006This presentation represents five years of program

review and enhancement

Quality Enhancement Plan (QEP)

This semester, ENOL 532 will be a QEP (Quality Enhancement Plan) class and will specifically measure and analyze critical thinking, critical reading and critical reading and critical writing. Within University of the Cumberlands, QEP is part of the criteria for accreditation by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools; the University chose to focus upon critical thinking. As stated in the 2010 Cadre Handbook, “Critical thinking was targeted because it is consistent with our mission statement’s commitment to encourage students to think critically and creatively; it is intricately connected with well-developed communication skills that will serve students personally,

academically, and professionally; and it will enhance student’s ability to participate as citizens, workers, and family members in our rapidly changing world.” The University has identified three essential elements that serve as the foundation for critical thinking: clarity, discernment, and integration. The following definitions are based upon information in the handbook and the critical thinking rubric by which students will be assessed, dealing with reading comprehension, written communication, and information literacy. Clarity – Critical thinking includes the ability to identify information specifically and accurately. Critical thinkers learn to recognize the major points of whatever they read or hear. When writing about what they have read or heard, students formulate clear, concise, and logical arguments. To fully understand a work, students recognize the need for secondary sources. A key question for clarity is, “Do I understand the basic information supplied by the author?” Discernment – Critical thinking includes the ability to analyze information with insight and judgment. This type of analysis requires that students recognize the adequacy and credibility of primary and secondary sources, demonstrate cogent planning and organization in the writing process, and use appropriate sources. A key question for discernment is, “How can I express my interpretation in a coherent manner and choose secondary sources to enhance my own analysis?” Integration – Critical thinking includes the ability to evaluate and synthesize information efficiently and effectively. That means students must be able to extrapolate credible information to use in a different setting, to present fairly another’s point of view based upon the facts and analysis of the secondary source, and to have a purpose for integrating the researched information. A key question regarding integration is, “How can I incorporate appropriate secondary sources in an effective and reasonable way into my own critical analysis?”

University of the CumberlandsReflective Constructors of Quality Learning Experiences Through Critical Thinking

ENOL 532 Materials & Methods for Teaching English Language Arts

Course Syllabus

Fall 2011, Session 1 Tuesday, 8:00-9:30 pm

MethodologyResearch Design The purpose of this study as defined by the QEP/CATC was to explore students’ progress and “changes in students’ critical thinking skills as measured …. (through) embedded and formative assessments” (QEP

Cadre Information Booklet, 2011).

MethodologyResearch Design As expected by the cadre parameters, this study utilized pre- and post- assignments to measure critical thinking in the areas of reading, writing and information literacy.

These assignments were evaluated with the common rubrics devised by the cadre.

MethodologyResearch Design Two science essays published in Time

magazine were used as content for the students to write an analysis of the logic of the author.

To allow for both pre and post writing assignments and to control for any difficult between the two essays , the class was divided into two groups, and each group was assigned one essay. At the end of the term, the essays will be switched between the two groups. Therefore, each group will respond to each essay .

MethodologyResearch Design To control for researcher bias, the

initial essays were scored the first week of class before personalities and names were well known.

The second essay will have the student’s number on it rather than a name, for anonymity to control for bias toward or against an individual student.

MethodologyResearch Design Discussion of critical thinking will be part of online chats during the term as applied to the major assignment of constructing a 10-day unit.

Units are analyzed for Bloom’s, for Gardner’s Multiple Intelligences, and other structures that require complex cognitive processing

Sample Materials & Methods in the English Language

Arts class, ENOL 532, is a required course for several degrees at University of the Cumberlands and an elective for the Reading & Writing Program Masters’ degree.

Fall I 2011 Section27 students: 2 males and 25 females20 are in the Masters of Arts in Teaching

program, an initial certification program7 are in the Masters of Arts in Education program

Methodology

Sample Materials & Methods in the English Language Arts class,

ENOL 532, a required course for several degrees at University of the Cumberlands and an elective for the Reading & Writing Program Masters’ degree.

27 students: 2 males and 25 females 20 are in the Masters of Arts in Teaching program, an

initial certification program 7 are in the Masters of Arts in Education program

Methodology

MeasuresEarlier cadre members developed a rubric from an aggregation of earlierrubrics that measures critical reading, critical writing and information literacy on individualSection I of the rubric measures clarity across the critical

thinking areas of reading comprehension, writing communication and information.

Section II measures discernment across the critical thinking areas of reading comprehension, writing communication and information.

Section III measures integration across the critical thinking areas of reading comprehension, writing communication and information.

“Guth came to the idea of creating new universes from his influential work on "inflationary" cosmology, which was considered dubious when he proposed it in the early 1980s but is accepted in modified form by most physicists today. The notion is that in the first fraction of a second after the Big Bang, the universe, though expanding, was still far smaller than the smallest particle now known, and made of a peculiar stuff known as "false vacuum." Among other odd attributes, a false vacuum generates negative gravity; it inflates itself rapidly and enormously -- ending up as big as a universe. Odder still, but likely nonetheless, is that everything in our cosmos could have come from a subatomic bubble of false vacuum with a mass of only 20 lbs. or so.”

Lemonick Essay on Strings

“But of all the strange ideas in physics, perhaps the strangest is the wormhole. It comes perilously close to science fiction: a wormhole is a hole in the fabric of space and time, a tunnel to a distant part of the universe. While no one has proved that wormholes exist, that does not for a moment keep the more adventurous of thinkers from trying to figure how they might behave. Last fall, for example, three researchers from Caltech floated the notion that in theory at least, wormholes could be time machines.”

Lemonick Essay on Wormholes

DiscussionGeneral ImpressionsTo get at their reading comprehension,

writing, and information literacy, I used the science article so that they were in an unfamiliar content area. They would have to rely on their strategies and skills in these three areas in order to complete the assignment successfully.

DiscussionGeneral ImpressionsAs I scored the pre-test, I was impressed

with the quality of the writing, reading comprehension, and information literacy demonstrated. These are individuals who either want to become an English Language Arts teacher or already are teaching in this area. This fact alone would indicate an individual who is more focused on all aspects of communication, and therefore, should be able to excel in this assignment.

The rubric scores were divided into all component parts for analysis:

Clarity DiscernmentIntegrationReading ComprehensionWritten CompositionInformation Literacy

Tracking Scores

Excel Spreadsheet for tracking Scores

Excel Spreadsheet for tracking Scores

DiscussionGeneral ImpressionsSince this is an ongoing study,

culminating October 21, 2011, final results will not be available until later, but I believe the course is benefitting by a first week writing assignment that challenges the students to use their writing, reading comprehension, and information literacy . It set the stage for expectations of the course.

ReferencesBowlin, G. (2009). Cadre IV Portfolio. Retrieved from http://ilearn.ucumberlands.edu/section/default.asp?id=2011%2DQEP%2D101

Lemonick, M. D. (Nov 24, 1986). “Science: A Theory with Strings Attached.” Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,962896,00.html#ixzz1XD6wrBUT

Lemonick, M. D. (Jan 16, 1989). “Wormholes in the Heavens.” Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,956761,00.html Sharp, Jolly. (2010). Jolly Sharp Syllabus. Retrieved from http://ilearn.ucumberlands.edu/section/default.asp?id=2011%2DQEP%2D101. Weaver, S. (2011). QEP Cadre Handbook. Retrieved from http://ilearn.ucumberlands.edu/section/default.asp?id=2011%2DQEP%2D101



http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,962896,00.html#ixzz1XD6wrBUT

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,962896,00.html#ixzz1XD6wrBUT

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,956761,00.html





Contact InformationMelanie Jessee Cardell, Ph.D.

Coordinator of the Reading & Writing ProgramProfessor


[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

Middle School Course

ELMS 335Karen Goldman, Ph.D.

Cadre VI, University of the Cumberlands

Critical Thinking ResearchHow was the data

analyzed/interpreted?• Responses were collected over five weeks

in the fall of 2011. Over these five weeks, analysis began based on two different rubrics previously developed through Cadres at the University of the Cumberlands. Items employing a Likert Scale were reported using mean scores with standard deviations.

Explanation of Chart:• Series 1 result tabulated on the UC

rubrics for both reading and writing combined.

• Series 2 results used the likert scale from UC Berkley called, “The Essay+ Rating Scale: 1-5”.

• Series 3 results were tabulated using the UC rubrics for both written and oral communication.

1

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Series3

Series2

Series1

Critical Thinking Research • Explanation of Chart: Oral

• Series 1 shows the results of the pre-test. Students were asked to “think off the top of your head” and respond to this question, “How would you define a middle school? This questions served as a pre test seeking prior knowledge for the content of this course on middle schools.

• Series 2 reflects the continued improvement of every student.

Cotter

Martin

Reid

Stanfill

Steuer

Swope

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Series1Series2

Critical Thinking Research

• Average growth over time 1 – Pre test average 2.3– Qualitative average 4

• Individual Growth,

• 1 & 6 average Likert 4

2 & 5 average Likert 2

3 & 4 average Likert 3

123456

Critical Thinking within Special Education

Elizabeth (Betsy) Lasley, Ph.D.University of the Cumberlands

Critical Thinking Including Affective Domain

Skinner’s Teaching Machinehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EXR9Ft8rzhk

Ken Robinson – Changing Education Paradigmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

Learning Climate

Classroom Assessment & Reflections

Instructional Rigor & Student Engagement

Instructional Relevance

Knowledge of Content

Results - TBDContent Performance

Universityof the








EducationUC

Questions , Comments, Discussion

Documents

Critical Thinking Across the Disciplines of Education