daniellecoughlinwm.wmwikis.netdaniellecoughlinwm.wmwikis.net/file/view/Critical... · Web viewResearch indicated positive outcomes for cognitive and metacognitive thinking when

Running head: CRITICAL THINKING: METHODS AND APPLICATIONS 1

Critical Thinking: Methods and Applications in the Classroom

Aimee Stright, Morgan McNally, Danielle Coughlin, and Kyle Guzik

The College of William and Mary

November 25, 2012

Dr. Kyung-Hee Kim

EDUC F65: Educational Research Methods, Fall 2012

Literature Review

CRITICAL THINKING: METHODS AND APPLICATIONS 2

Abstract

Effective critical thinkers implement both divergent and convergent thinking to creatively

generate new and powerful ideas. Critical thinking, a higher order cognitive process, is directly

related to an individual’s success both in the classroom and in life beyond academia. Research

indicates that sexes do not significantly differ in critical thinking ability, therefor all individuals

may benefit from improved critical thinking. Methods toward improving critical thinking

include: enhancing metacognition, inquiry-based learning, authentic instruction, and through

awareness of learning styles and the implementation of technology. A synthesis of research

demonstrates how to appropriately apply these methods of critical thinking in the classroom

through concrete skills and techniques. Advanced training of educational professionals would

result in positive gains in students’ critical thinking abilities. Implications derived from research

can be applied to the entire academic spectrum.

Keywords: critical thinking, metacognition, inquiry-based learning, authentic instruction,

learning styles


Critical Thinking: Methods and Applications in the Classroom

Creativity is a major topic of concern in contemporary education research because current

focus resides on the individual’s academic development and contributions (Yang & Lin, 2004).

Utilizing higher order cognitive skills facilitates critical thinking and enables creative thinking as

critical thinking is a key component of both divergent and convergent thinking (Barak, Ben-

Chaim , & Zoller, 2007; Cropley, 2006). Many models have been constructed to conceptualize

the process of thinking, define characteristics prevalent in different ways of thinking, and

identify connections between ways of thinking (Demir, Bacalin, Tarhan, & Dombayci, 2011). A

model of thinking as a two-dimensional construct is composed of the cognitive-affective and

convergent-divergent dimensions (Demir et al., 2011). Critical thinking and creative thinking

both utilize the cognitive dimension; however, critical thinking is a convergent process where as

creative thinking is a divergent process (Demir et al. , 2011).

Creative and Critical Thinking

Convergent thinking involves manipulation of existing knowledge by means of existing

procedures; its main result is production of increased knowledge (Cropley, 2006). Divergent

thinking involves producing multiple or alternative answers from available information (Cropley,

2006). Divergent thinking has many of the properties of flexibility, such as unconventionality,

originality, and inventiveness (Cropley, 2006). The phrase divergent thinking has become almost

synonymous with the phrase creative thinking (White, 1990). Convergent thinking requires

logic, accuracy, and an understanding of the facts (Cropley, 2006). Creativity utilizes both

divergent and convergent thinking; convergent thinking is a necessary component for success in

creativity. Without strong grounding in content knowledge, creative thinking is limited.

Combination and reorganization of existing knowledge enables generation of new ideas, which is


the basis of creativity (Mumford, Medeiros, & Parlow, 2012). Critical thinking is necessary for

both convergent and divergent thinking to occur and therefore it is necessary for effective

creative thinking (Cropley, 2006; White, 1990).

Creative thinking is linked to critical thinking in three ways: the ability to identify

different interpretations retrieved from data or observations, identifying novel information in

relation to supporting or rejecting hypotheses, and the exploration of how novel solutions can

alter previous problems (Stein & Haynes, 2011). It has been argued that it is unrealistic to

distinguish between creative and critical thinking and that it is more valuable to focus on

thinking in the context of rules, methods, and criteria of specific aspects (Yang & Lin, 2004).

Therefore, critical thinking engages not only logical processes but also creative facets.

Critical thinking and creative thinking are both higher order thinking skills (Magno,

2009). Higher order thinking is a non-algorithmic form of complex thinking that requires

analysis, evaluation, and synthesis of content and often results in multiple solutions (Barak et al.,

2007). These types of thinking are deeply interrelated. For example, when problem solving, one

should specifically target originality and flexibility, both aspects of creative (divergent) thinking.

Additionally, divergent thoughts must be streamlined with realistic planning using aspects of

critical thinking (convergent thinking) in order to find the best solution (Matthews, 2011).

Consequently, if a student is thinking creatively, then that student is thinking critically

(Gruenfield, 2010). Critical thinking will be defined as follows: a higher order cognitive function

of logic and rational thinking to utilize the skills of problem identification, analysis, judgment,

and problem solving in adjunct to an individual's disposition toward open-mindedness, and

cognitive maturity (Abu-Dabat, 2011; Azar, 2010; Ben-Chaim et al., 2000; Demir et al., 2007;

Ernst & Monroe, 2006; Hatcher, 2011; Li, 2010; McMahon, 2009; Mulix, 2012; Rudd, 2007).


Importance of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is a key component of the learning process and is widely recognized as

an essential goal of educators and essential skill of citizens (Abrami et al., 2008; Barak et al.,

2007; Krupat et al., 2011; Mulnix, 2012; Qing et al., 2007; Yang & Lin, 2004). World-wide and

across disciplines a shift of emphasis exists from the traditional lower-order skills to higher-order

thinking skills (Barak et al., 2007). The skills of analysis, evaluation, and problem solving

directly relate to an individual's success in the classroom (Ernst & Monroe, 2004). In addition to

being better students, critical thinkers are more successful as adults (Abrami et al., 2008; Mulnix,

2012). The quest of researchers and practitioners to shift the emphasis from lower-order to

higher-order critical thinking is appropriate as the benefits of proficient critical thinking are

valuable throughout life.

Critical thinking and the skill set it encompasses is applicable both in and out of the

classroom domain. For example, critical thinking supports one’s ability to reason, decipher true

from false, and problem solve (Mulnix, 2012). The ability to problem solve by critically

evaluating evidence is a skill essential within grade school content, interpersonal relationships

and in virtually all professional fields (Barak et al., 2007; Krupat et al., 2011). Critical thinking

supports the development of autonomy (Mulnix, 2012). As citizens, individuals must have the

ability to arrive at judgments independently and free from prejudices in order to preserve the

democratic state (Abrami et al., 2008). The evolving world continuously requires critical

thinking, supporting the necessity for instruction in classrooms worldwide (Barak et al., 2007).

Gender Differences

Educators need to know if evidence exists proving males and females differ in critical

thinking ability or disposition to engage in critical thinking as it would provide compelling


grounds for educational claims. Differentiated instruction for males and females would be

warranted if males and females learn in fundamentally differently ways. For example, teachers

would need to explore various methods of instruction that foster critical thinking for both males

and females.

Gender is defined as the physical sex of an individual. Different studies varied in how

critical thinking was defined and conceptualized, which resulted in minor differences regarding

the relationship between critical thinking and gender (Ai, 1999; Wu-jing, & Wong, 2011).

However, when synthesizing the broad spectrum of critical thinking, the majority of studies

found no unified trends demonstrating differences in skills or abilities for genders (Ai, 1999;

Dixon et al., 2005; Kawashima & Shiomi, 2007; Li, 2010; Stoltzfus et al., 2011; Thornton et al.,

2006; Yang & Lin, 2004). In light of the fact that males and females do not differ significantly in

critical thinking skills and dispositions, it should be stated that both sexes would benefit from

practices designed to increase critical thinking.

Improving Critical Thinking Skills

The current culture of instruction in many educational institutions is managerial and

consumer based; professors train students for future careers rather than in practicing the art of

thinking (Clegg, 2008). Students should be encouraged to question this established learning and

instead develop as critical academics (Clegg, 2008). A critical academic is an individual who

actively questions the world, who is comfortable with ambiguity, and who seeks to establish

better modes of thinking (Clegg, 2008). In thinking both critically and creatively students engage

creative methods to enhance critical thought; this challenges learning and improves low order

knowledge absorption to advanced high level thinking (Clegg, 2008; Nicholls, Charon, &

Hutkin, 2010). Critical thinking and creativity can be combined and utilized successfully in the


educational environment (Nicholls et al., 2010). Research suggests that educators should

promote critical thinking in the classroom while also directly teaching the skills of critical

thinking (Barak et al., 2007; Jones, 2012). What students need to become successful critical

thinkers is a classroom that is thinking centered, inquiry based, and promotes real-world,

authentic application (Jones, 2012).

Metacognition

Critical thinking ability is intricately entangled with metacognition in that metacognition

facilitates critical thinking. Improvement of metacognitive ability is required to improve critical

thinking ability (Hanley, 1995; Ku & Ho, 2010; Mango, 2010). An individuals’ self-awareness

of cognitive process (metacognition) would influence his or her approach to problem solving

(Hanley, 1995). Both critical thinking and metacognition are higher order thinking skills

(Coutinho, Wiemer Hastings, Skowronski & Britt, 2005; Ku & Ho, 2010). Metacognition

involves an individual’s ability to think about thinking: an individual’s ability to utilize higher

order thinking to monitor learning and understanding (Coutinho et al., 2005; Ku & Ho, 2010;

Magno, 2010). Critical thinking can be improved or obtained through the direct instruction of

various metacognitive strategies (Al-Edwan, 2011; Barak et al., 2007).

Many strategies can be utilized to facilitate a student’s critical thinking, such as the think-

aloud technique (Jones, 2012; Ku & Ho, 2010). Thinking aloud involves saying everything that a

participant is thinking out loud as that participant completes a task (Ku & Ho, 2010). The method

provides an opportunity to obtain rich information about the thinking process, which would

otherwise be unobtainable (Ku & Ho, 2010). The process of thinking aloud is considered by

researchers to be very reliable because the thinking aloud component exists simultaneously with

the thought process without the risk of losing a significant amount of information (Schellings,


Aarnoutse, & van Leeuwe, 2006). Individuals skilled in thinking-aloud are better able to plan the

steps that guide thinking and revise these steps after evaluation (Ku & Ho, 2010).

Argument mapping is another strategy to enhance critical thinking. Argument mapping is

conducted by composing a hierarchical series of reasoning and evidence (Mulnix, 2012). Some

of the listed components will support others and all will lend support to the conclusion. A

diagram is then constructed from the list of evidence and reasoning thus mapping the argument

(Mulnix, 2012). The strategy of argument mapping improved students’ critical thinking skills

more quickly than students in the control classes (van Gelder, 2005). Research indicated positive

outcomes for cognitive and metacognitive thinking when utilizing diagramming and components

of concept mapping, both of which are essential for argument mapping. (Askell-Williams,

Lawson, & Skrzypiec, 2011; van Gelder, 2005)

The development of metacognition results not just from what is taught, but how it is

taught. Specific teaching strategies increase students’ metacognitive ability and thus also

students’ critical thinking ability (Coutinho et al., 2005; Jones, 2012). Providing feedback about

performance can result in long-term improvement in students’ metacognitive abilities (Coutinho

et al., 2005). Feedback should be explicit and provided immediately to the student (Li, 2010;

Miller & Geraci, 2011). To improve metacognitive thinking educators should also encourage

student questioning and foster student interaction through discussion (Al-Edwan, 2011; Smith,

1977). All skills intended to improve metacognitive thinking should be taught explicitly and

modeled by the instructor (Mulnix, 2012). Students should also practice the skills frequently and

in varied ways to ensure competence in the student’s abilities (Mulnix, 2012).

Inquiry-Based Learning

Inquiry-based learning is a process in which students investigate the scientific method


and conduct research (Apedoe, Walker, & Reeves, 2006). Problem-based learning is a form of

inquiry-based learning that develops critical thinking and is centered on the acquisition of

knowledge from a problem (Akçay, 2009). Learners are inspired to conduct research, incorporate

theories and practice, and utilize knowledge and skills to develop a solution to the problem at

hand (Savery, 2006). This is best achieved with scientific inquiry experiments where the

instructor is both the facilitator of learning and provider of information (Savery, 2006). Teachers

utilizing problem-based learning engage students as stakeholders in the problem situation,

organize instruction around this holistic problem, and create a learning environment in which the

teachers coach student thinking and guide student learning (Akçay, 2009).

Five challenges exist in engaging students in inquiry-based learning: motivation,

accessibility of investigation techniques, background knowledge, management of extended

activities, and the practical constraints of the learning context (Edelson, Gordin, & Pea, 2012).

Educators implement five strategies in order to eliminate some of the challenges that may inhibit

inquiry processes. One strategy is to increase the number of meaningful problems and

demonstrate implications to students in order to plant the motivation needed for genuine inquiry.

A second strategy that can be utilized by educators is staging activities, which are pre-planned

activities that aid in increasing motivation and background knowledge (Edelson et al., 2012). A

third strategy that can help in overcoming challenges preventing learning is to use bridge

activities. Bridge activities make student work more meaningful by modeling it upon the

activities of a scientist. These activities employ familiar student practices as well as unfamiliar

scientific practices in order to mediate the process of inquiry and learning (Edelson et al., 2012).

Another strategy for educators is the use of embedded information sources, a library of resources

that can be used for students to access resources that empower inquiry and background


knowledge. The final strategy that can be implemented by educators is record-keeping tools to

permit students to keep records of the process and any information, thoughts, questions, or

feelings relating to the experience (Edelson, et al., 2012).

Authentic Instruction

Authentic learning experiences engage students to produce high quality work through

real-world activities that are of immediate value beyond school (Akçay, 2009; Barak et al., 2007;

Chang, Lee, Wang & Chen, 2010; Rose’Meyer & Rose’Meyer, 2009, Walker, 2011). Instruction

that incorporates authentic learning experiences is a potent technique for improving student

performance (Akçay, 2009; Barak et al., 2007; Chang et al., 2010; Jones, 2012; McNaught, Lam

& Cheng, 2007; Palaniappan, 2010; Preus, 2012, Rose’Meyer & Rose’Meyer, 2009). Examples

of authentic instruction include publishing of articles in the popular press, problem-based

learning, interpretation of diverse and varied authentic source material, and original research

(Akçay, 2009; Barak et al., 2007; Chang et al., 2010; Rose’Meyer & Rose’Meyer, 2009, Walker,

2011).

Research demonstrated that authentic learning experiences improve critical thinking

ability by developing higher order thinking skills (Barak et al., 2007; Preus, 2012; Walker,

2011). Researchers performed case studies, analyzed teaching strategies, and measured student

improvement on tests of critical thinking ability and student evaluation of courses. These

assessments demonstrated the value of authentic learning experiences for increasing critical

thinking ability.

There are many examples of how authentic instruction can be used in the classroom.

Incorporating scenes, characters (facilitators and local people), and learning events based on real

world situations helped students to learn English by interacting with a robotic visual interface


hybrid (Chang et al., 2010). In this activity, students felt the learning activities were authentic

and that the activities both engaged and motivated the students to want to study English (Chang

et al., 2010). In another classroom, teachers gave students real world examples of studies and

had them evaluate the material using graphs, charts, essays, and other critical thinking techniques

(Rose’Meyer & Rose’Meyer, 2009). Students provided very positive evaluations of the course

demonstrating that they believed the teaching methods helped them to learn (Rose’Meyer &

Rose’Meyer, 2009).

Research demonstrated that authentic instruction improves student critical thinking skills

and dispositions. Teaching strategies included presenting real-world cases and encouraging

student analysis, encouraging students to ask questions and present unique solutions to a

problem, and guiding inquiry oriented experiments in groups (Barak et al., 2007; Palaniappan,

2010). Students receiving teaching strategies focused on higher order thinking skills

demonstrated greater improvement in both critical thinking skills and dispositions as compared

to the control groups (Barak et al., 2007).

Learning Styles

Critical Thinking can be creatively applied by using the Myers Briggs typology indicator,

which defines personality types in terms of individual preferences (Nicholls et al., 2010). The

usage of critical and creative thinking skills has been compared to the Myers Brigg typologies,

specifically sensing and intuitive characteristics (Nicholls et al., 2010). Critical thinkers have

been shown to score higher on the sensing are more likely to lack some of the skills essential to

creativity ( Béres , Magyar, & Turcsanyi-Szabo, 2005; Nicholls et al., 2010). This type of learner

spent more time learning the content than the students identified as intuitive ( Béres et al., 2005).

Online learning lead to a higher percentage of productivity and learning for these individuals


because it spoke to the individual’s sensing strengths ( Béres et al., 2005). Open-ended questions

should also be used to encourage curiosity and creativity in brainstorming sessions (Nicholls et

al., 2010).

In contrast, individuals who favor intuition are often higher in creativity and lack the

focus to be able to think critically ( Béres et al., 2005; Nicholls et al., 2010). Methods to help

these students achieve critical thinking include focusing on structured solutions and utilizing

visualization techniques to show how the pieces of the solution fit together (Nicholls et al.,

2010). Additionally, creating situations where students have to evaluate options using facts will

help them develop the necessary skills of a critical thinker (Nicholls et al., 2010).

Teachers must structure assessments and teaching styles to account for the differences

between individuals in order to teach effectively (Nicholls et al., 2010). It would be more prudent

to switch between emphasizing the various Myers Briggs characteristics to account for the

different types of thinkers present in the classroom. Best practices for utilizing Myers Briggs and

critical thinking in online learning include identifying learning styles of students and then

discussing what these learning styles mean for students in the particular learning environment

( Béres et al., 2005). Structured learning goals and threaded discussions lead to greater student

satisfaction and increased learning (Butler & Pinto-Zipp, 2005). To accommodate the different

learning orientations of the students, the instructors offered both group/individual work, solely

online and part online/part in classroom options ( Béres et al., 2005).

These compromises allowed the individuals to customize the learning experience to the

best advantage ( Béres et al., 2005). Projects that the instructor provided to specifically increase

critical thinking include the critical evaluation of the major projects submitted during the

previous year (Béres et al., 2005). Assignments, reading, and case studies were also helpful for


students who scored high in critical thinking, using a mix of individual and group work (Butler

& Pinto-Zipp, 2005). Students also had opportunities to analyze the applicability of the visual

elements in different applications and discuss with the group ( Béres et al., 2005). Learning

activities that were not as beneficial to online learning, such as e-journals, group activities, and

video assignments, should not be used without further incorporating other methods of critical

thinking (Butler & Pinto-Zipp, 2005).

Technology

Technology has been shown to increase student’s critical thinking skills (McMahon,

2009). There is a significant correlation between students’ advanced computer skills and

increased critical thinking (McMahon, 2009). Critical thinking skills have not been directly

taught in the academic curriculum but technology helped development through programming

(McMahon, 2009). Students who completed web-based projects had minimal improvement in

critical thinking scores (Li, 2010). Best practices include starting web based assessments early,

providing timely feedback and comments to students on the assignment (blogs), incorporating

outdoor activities into the curriculum, creating a user-friendly interface for students to utilize,

and using relevant topics (Li, 2010). Male students who used computers to write during an exam

used significantly more paragraphs, sentences, and words then the males who did not get

assigned to use the computers (Dixon et al., 2005).

Conclusion

Critical thinking is a necessary component of creativity. In order to be an effective

critical thinker an individual must utilize both convergent thinking and divergent thinking.

Critical thinking supports one’s ability to reason, think autonomously, and problem solve by

critically evaluating evidence and by doing so creatively more successful results occur.


Critical thinking is an example of higher order thinking and is an essential goal of

educators. It supports the development of knowledge and is an indicator of achievement both in

and out of the classroom. Teachers face time constraints in the creation of lesson planning,

instructional time, budgetary restraints, and the selection of curriculum. These factors make

emphasizing critical thinking skills challenging for educational professionals. No consistent

significant difference has been found between genders, which implies that all individuals would

benefit from increased critical thinking ability.

Practitioners have seen the benefits of critical thinking throughout an individual’s life and

seek to improve critical thinking by employing such methods as inquiry based learning, authentic

experience, teaching for metacognition, differentiating by learning styles, and utilizing

technology. Metacognition can be improved by implementing strategies to organize thought

such as thinking aloud, argument mapping, and providing effective feedback. Five strategies that

can be implemented inside the classroom to insure successful inquiry based learning are the

application of meaningful problems, staging activities, bridging activities, embedded information

sources, and record keeping (Edelson et al., 2012). Authentic instruction improves student

engagement with real world materials and experiences.

Instructor’s teaching style should account for the differences between individual

typologies in order to teach effectively, specifically looking at sensing for critical thinkers.

Assignments, reading, and case studies using a mix of individual and group work, focusing on

structured solutions, and utilizing visualization techniques also help develop critical thinking

through sensing individuals. There is a significant correlation between students’ advanced

computer skills and increased critical thinking, through practices such as programming

(McMahon, 2009).


Implications

Critical thinking can be taught and enhanced in the classroom and other learning

communities. There are specific practices that can shape critical thinking in the classroom. This

suggests that educators need to be specifically educated, i.e. in professional development, so that

they can help students. This is important because it allows individuals to succeed in the current

world as students and into the evolving future. Teachers need to use these methods to adapt

teaching style to be inclusive to individual’s learning style so that everyone has an equal

opportunity to learn effectively. The usage of Myers Brigg typology or similar assessment tool

should be utilized in the classroom. This assessment tool will increase awareness of students’

ability to think critically and provide implications for areas of improvement. Teachers should

collaborate across disciplines and with experts within specific domains to enhance authentic

instruction to better serve students. Researchers could improve investigative practices by

focusing on feasible expectations for teachers with sensitivity to time, money, and resources.

Teaching practices and student achievement can be improved if teachers begin to emphasis how

to think rather than what to think. Explicitly teaching the thought process in conjunction with a

structure that encourages a student’s natural curiosity, educators are able to move beyond rote

lower level skills and into a higher means to thinking.

There are many areas in this field of study that require further exploration. First,

researchers must determine a concrete definition of critical thinking as it varies drastically

between studies. Implications from studies of critical thinking cannot be solidified if they are

measuring inexact constructs. Regarding gender, because both genders would benefit from

increasing critical thinking ability, researchers should focus more on the two sexes’ similarities

when attaining critical thinking skills, as opposed to inconclusive differences. When teaching for


critical thinking, further research is needed to determine the type and method of feedback in

metacognition. In addition, the role of the facilitator in inquiry-based thinking should be

researched further. Specifically, the level of involvement of the facilitator should be

standardized. A better understanding of student motivation is also needed to ascertain how

students develop critical thinking skills; particularly the effect motivation has on critical thinking

instruction, and the acquisition of critical thinking skills. Critical thinking is an essential skill for

success in the future, much must still be determined to effectively understand and enhance the

skills and dispositions associated with this higher order cognitive ability.


References

Abrami, P. C., Bernarb, R. M., Borokhobski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamim, R., & Zhang,

D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A

stage one meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research , 78 , 1102-1134. doi:

10.3102/0034654308326084

Abu-Dabat, Z. (2011). Critical thinking skills and habits. Journal of Education & Sociology, 2,

28-34. Retrieved from: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?

sid=1eef6ce6-bb6f-45b4-9442-cd986eda2efa%40sessionmgr113&vid=2&hid=125

Ai, X. (1999). Creativity and academic achievement: An investigation of gender differences.

Creativity Research Journal, 12, 329-337.

Akçay, B. (2009). Problem-based learning in science education. Journal of Turkish Science

Education, 6, 26-36.

Al-Edwan, Z. S. M. (2011). Effectiveness of a training program based on cognitive research trust

strategies to develop seventh grade students' critical thinking in history course. Journal of

Social Sciences, 7, 436-442.

Apedoe, X. S., Walker, S. E., & Reeves, T. C. (2006). Integrating inquiry-based learning into

undergraduate geology. Journal of Geoscience Education, 54, 414-421. doi:

10.1.1.117.1751

Askell-Williams, H., Lawson, M. J., & Skrzypiec, G. (2010). Scaffolding cognitive and

metacognitive strategy instruction in regular class lessons. Instructional Science , 40 , 413-

443. doi: 10.1007/s11251-01109182-5

Azar, A. (2010). The effect of critical thinking dispositions on students achievement in selection

and placement exam for university in Turkey. Journal of Turkish Science Education, 7,

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=1eef6ce6-bb6f-45b4-9442-cd986eda2efa@sessionmgr113&vid=2&hid=125

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=1eef6ce6-bb6f-45b4-9442-cd986eda2efa@sessionmgr113&vid=2&hid=125


61-73.

Barak, M., Ben-Chaim, D., & Zoller, U. (2007). Purposely teaching for the promotion of higher-

order thinking skills: A case of critical thinking. Research in Science Education

(Australasian Science Education Research Association), 37 , 353-369. doi:10.1007/s1165-

006-9029-2

Ben-Chaim, D., Ron, S., & Zoller, U. (2000). The disposition of eleventh-grade science students

toward critical thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 9, 149-159.

Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/40188549.pdf?acceptTC=true

Béres, I., Magyar, T., & Turcsányi-Szabó, M. (2012). Towards a personalized, learning style

based collaborative blended learning model with individual assessment. Informatics in

Education , 12 , 1-28.

Butler , T. J., & Pinto-Zipp, G. (2006). Students’ learning styles and their preferences for online

instructional methods. J ournal of Educational Technology Systems , 34 , 199-221. doi:

10.2190/8UD2-BHFU-4PXV-7ALW

Chang, C., Lee, J., Wang, C., & Chen, G. (2010). Improving the authentic learning experience by

integrating robots into the mixed-reality environment. Computers and Education, 55,

1572-1578. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.06.23

Clegg, P. C. (2008). Creativity and critical thinking in the globalised university. Innovations in

Education & Teaching International , 45 , 219-226. doi: 10.1080/14703290802175982

Coutinho, S., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Skowronski, J. J., & Britt, M. A. (2005). Metacognition,

need for cognition and use of explanations during ongoing learning and problem solving.

Learning and Individual Differences , 15 , 321-337. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2005.06.001

Cropley, A. (2006). In praise of convergent thinking. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 391-404.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/40188549.pdf?acceptTC=true


doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1803_13

Demir, M., Bacanlı, H., Tarhan., S., & Dombaycı., M. A. (2011). Quadruple thinking: Critical

thinking. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 12 , 545-551 . doi:

10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.02.066

Dixon, F., Cassady, J., Cross, T., & Williams, D. (2005). Effects of technology on critical

thinking and essay writing among gifted adolescents. Journal of Secondary Gifted

Education, 16, 180-189. doi: 10.4219/jsge-2005-482

Edelson, D. C., Gordin, D. N., & Pea, R. D. (1999). Addressing the challenges of inquiry-based

learning through technology and curriculum design. Journal of Learning Sciences, 8, 391-

450.

Ernst, J., & Monroe., M. (2006). The effects of environment‐based education on students’

critical thinking skills and disposition toward critical thinking. Environmental Education

Research, 12, 429-443. doi: 10.1080/13504620600942998

Gruenfield, E. (2010). Thinking creatively is thinking critically. New Directions For Youth

Development , 125 , 71-83. doi:10.1002/yd.339

Hanley, G. L. (1995). Teaching critical thinking: Focusing on metacognitive skills and problem

solving. Teaching of Psychology , 22 , 68-71.

Hatcher, D. L. (2011). Which test? Whose scores? Comparing standardized critical thinking

tests. New Directions for Institutional Research, 149, 29-38. doi: 10.1002/ir.378

Jones, R. A. (2012). What were they thinking? Instructional strategies that encourage critical

thinking. Science Teacher, 79, 66-70.

Kawashima, N., & Shiomi, K. (2007). Factors of the thinking dispositions of Japanese high

school students. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 35, 187-193.


Krupat, E., Sprague, J., Wolpaw, D., Haidet, P., Hatem, D., & O’Brien, B. (2011). Thinking

critically about critical thinking: Ability, disposition, or both? Medical Education, 45,

625-635. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2010.03910.x

Ku, K. Y. L., & Ho, I. T. (2010). Metacognitive strategies that enhance critical thinking.

Metacognition Learning , 5 , 251-267. doi: 10.1007/s11409-010-9060-6

Li, K. (2010). Integrating weblogs in a pedagogy model for enhancing students’ critical thinking

skills. Research & Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 5, 35-49.

doi:10.1142/S1793206810000803

Magno, C. (2010). The role of metacognitive skills in critical thinking. Metacognition and

learning, 5 , 137-156. doi: 10.1007/s11409-010-9054-4

Matthews, M. L. (2011). Connecting creativity and critical thinking to the campaign planning

process. Communication Teacher , 25 , 61-67. doi: 10.1080/17404622.2010.527299

McMahon, G. (2009). Critical thinking and ICT integration in a Western Australian secondary

school. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 12, 269-281.

McNaught, C., Lam, P., & Cheng, K. F. (2007). Using the design phase of e-learning in higher

education as an authentic learning experience for students. International Journal of

Learning, 13, 101-109.

Miller, T. M. & Geraci, L. (2011). Training metacognition in the classroom: The influence of

incentives and feedback on exam predictions. Metacognition and Learning , 6 , 303-314.

doi: 10.1007/s11409-011-9083-7

Mumford, M. D., Medeiros, K. E., & Partlow, P. J. (2012). Creative thinking: Processes,

strategies, and knowledge. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 46, 30-47. doi:

10.1002/jocb.003


Mulnix, J. W. (2012). Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educational Philosophy and

Theory, 44, 464-479. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Nicholls, D., De Charon, L., & Hutkin, R. (2010). Development of critical thinking and

creativity: Practical guidelines for the postsecondary classroom. ATEA Journal , 38 , 12-

15.

Palaniappan, A. P. (2010). Learning centered educational practices and creative teaching in

Malaysian schools. International Journal of Learning, 17, 545-557.

Preus, B. (2012). Authentic instruction for 21 st century learning: Higher order thinking in an

inclusive school. American Secondary Education, 40, 59-79.

Qing, Z., Xiang, W., & Linna, Y. (2007). A preliminary investigation into critical thinking of

urban Xi'an high school students. Frontiers of Education in China, 2, 447-468. doi:

10.1007/s11516-007-0036-5

Rose’Meyer, R., & Rose’Meyer, G. (2009). Real world problems in developing a critical

thinking approach to learning in pharmacology. International Journal of Learning, 16,

679-687. doi: 1447-9494

Rudd, R. (2007). Defining critical thinking. Techniques: Connecting Education & Careers.

82 (7), 46-49. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/pdfplus/40188549.pdf?

acceptTC=true

Savery, J. R. (2006). Overview of problem based learning: Definition and distinctions.

Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-based Learning, 1 , 9-20. doi: 10.7771/1541-

5015.1002

Schellings, G., Aarnoutse, C., & van Leeuwe, J. (2006). Third-grader’s think-aloud protocols:

Types of reading activities in reading an expository text. Learning and Instruction, 16 ,


549–568. doi: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2006.10.004

Smith, D. G. (1977). College classroom interactions and critical thinking. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 69, 180-190.

Stein, B., & Haynes, A. (2011). Engaging faculty in the assessment and improvement of

students' critical thinking using the critical thinking assessment test. Change, 43, 44-49.

doi:10.1080/00091383.2011.550254

Stoltzfus, G., Nibbelink, B.L., Vredenburg, D., & Thyrum, T. (2011). Gender, gender role, and

creativity. Social Behavior & Personality: An International Journal, 39 , 425-432. doi:

10.2224/sbp.2011.39.3.425

Thornton, B., Haskell, H., & Libby, L. (2006). A comparison of learning styles between gifted

and non-gifted high school students. Individual Differences Research, 4(2), 106-110.

van Gelder, T. (2005). Teaching critical thinking: Some lessons from cognitive science. College

Teaching , 53 , 41-46. doi: 10.3200/CTCH.53.1.41-48

Walker, E. L. (2011). Engaging agriculture students in the publication process through popular

press magazines. North American Colleges and Teachers of Agriculture Journal, 55, 53-

58.

White, W. (1990). Divergent thinking vs. convergent thinking: A GT anomaly . Education

(Chula Vista), 111 , 208-213.

Wu-jing, H., & Wong, W. (2011). Gender differences in creative thinking revisited: Findings

from analysis of variability. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 807-811.

doi:10.1016/j.paid.2011.06.027

Yang, S., & Lin, W. (2004). The relationship among creativity, creative thinking, and thinking

styles in Taiwan high school students. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 31, 33-45.


Who Did What

Group Roles:

Kyle Guzik: reporter- researches for and reads sources, writes and edits literature review,documents meetings and communication, reports group work

Aimee Stright: leader- researches for and reads sources, writes and edits literature review,monitors deadlines

Morgan McNally: recorder- researches for and reads sources, types out and edits lit. review

Danielle Coughlin: monitor- researches for and reads sources, writes and edits lit. review, checks final document for internal consistency, call minutes, keeps track of deadlines

Writing/Editing:

Kyle:Contributed to: introduction section, creative and critical thinking section, importance of critical thinking section, gender section, improving important thinking section, authentic instruction section, conclusions section, and implications section. Contributed to editing, revision process.

(Abu-Dabat, 2011) (Akçay, B., 2009) (Apedoe, 2006) (Azar, 2010) (Ben-Chaim et al., 2000) Empirical (Chang et al., 2010) Empirical (Cropley, 2006) (Preus, 2012) (Qing et al. 2007) Empirical (Rose’Meyer & Rose’Meyer, 2009) (Rudd, 2007) (Walker, 2011)

Aimee:Contributed to: introduction section, creative and critical thinking section, improving important thinking section, importance of critical thinking section, gender section, learning styles section, conclusion section, and implications section. Extensively edited final product and compiled document.

(McMahon, 2009) Empirical (Zamudio, Rios, & Jaime, 2008) (Li, 2010) Empirical (Thornton, Haskell, & Libby, 2006) (Palaniappan, 2010) Empirical (Stein & Haynes, 2011) (Kawashima & Shiomi, 2007) Empirical


(Butler & Pinto-Zipp, 2006) Empirical (Beres et al., 2012) Empirical (Clegg, 2008) Empirical (Nicholls et al., 2010)

Morgan:Contributed to: introduction section, creative and critical thinking section, importance of critical thinking section, gender section, improving important thinking section, inquiry-based learning section, conclusion section, and implication section. Contributed to editing process. Compiled final binder.

(Ai, 1999) (Dixon, Cassady, Cross & Williams, 2005) Empirical (Yang &Lin, 2004) Empirical (Krupat, Sprague, Wolpaw, Haidet, Hatem &O’brien, 2011) Empirical (Wu-jing &Wong, 2011) Empirical (Schellings et al., 2006) Empirical (Askell-Williams et al.,2011) Empirical (Edelson et al, 2012) (Ackay, 2009) (Savery, 2006)

Danielle:Contributed to: introduction section, creative and critical thinking section, importance of critical thinking section, gender section, improving important thinking section, metacognition section, conclusion section, and implication section. Contributed to editing process.

(Miller & Geraci, 2011). Empirical (Demir et al., 2010) (Mulnix, 2012) (Hatcher, 2011) Empirical (Ernst & Monroe, 2006) Empirical (Barak et al., 2007) Empirical (Stoltzfus et al., 2011) Empirical (Hanley, 1995) Empirical (Mango, 2010) Empirical (Ku & Ho, 2010) Qualitative (Coutinho et al., 2005) Empirical (Al-Edwan, 2011) Empirical (Smith, 1977) Empirical (van Gelder, 2005) (Ambrami et al., 2008 )

List of Meetings and Attendance:

10/9


o 7:00-8:00o All members attended

10/16o 3:30-8:00o All members attended

10/21o 3:00-6:00o All members

10/22o 7:00-9:00o Danielleo Morgano Aimeeo Not present: Kyle

10/23o 7:00-10:30o All members

10/25o 7:00-8:30o All members attended.. Aimee late because of class

11/6

o 4:00-4:30o All members attended

11/11

o 5:00-8:45o Aimee, Danielle and Kyle attendedo Not present: Morgan- however she did work to make up

11/13

o 3:30-4:15o 7:00-11:00o All members attended

11/16o 4:00-8:45 p.m.


o All members in attendance

11/17

o 11:00 a.m. -8:00 p.m.o Aimee, Morgan, and Kyle were present; Danielle Skyped in for some of meeting

and did editing work to make up


Literature Review Rubric

Names of the Researchers: Danielle Coughlin

Criteria (Weight)

1 3 5 Total

Format, Title, & Abstract of the Study

Little evidence

Almost complete evidence

*Entire paper & format follow APA style.*Title & Abstract give a complete and clear idea of the contents.*Purpose, major variables, & outlines described.*Major results, & findings or conclusions described in brief.

5/5

Introduction, Purpose, & Justification of the Study

Little evidence


*Introduction presents the overall topic & draws the readers into the topic.*Purpose & educational /psychological significance of the study presented clearly.

5/5

Originality of Thought, Logic, & Conclusion

Little evidence


*Creativity & originality of the synthesis of the literature review presented.*Unique content & ideas presented in an interesting way.

5/5

Clarity; Content Accuracy & Completeness; Coherence & Sequencing of Information. (× 2)

Little evidence


*Gives a clear sense of the main idea & a broad conceptual understanding of the topic.*A variety of sources & significant facts are researched & interpreted accurately with supporting information.*Accurate & complete information presented in a concise & logical sequence.

10/10

References, Word Count, & Who Did What

Little evidence


*Sources of information properly cited so readers can determine the credibility & authority of the information.*References include more than minimum numbers of appropriate articles (with empirical studies) & contain all needed information that is not included in the text.*All sources are peer-reviewed, current (within 10 years), identified clearly, & credited using APA style.*Maximum number of words not exceeded.* Who Did What described for each member.

5/5

Contribution to Group

Little Some All of your group members appreciate your contribution.

5/5

Total Reading your final literature review paper renews my love of teaching!

30/30


Documents

daniellecoughlinwm.wmwikis.netdaniellecoughlinwm.wmwikis.net/file/view/Critical... · Web viewResearch indicated positive outcomes for cognitive and metacognitive thinking when