Great idea, Achim -
If you can get even one of them up at 8 in the morning, we'll all have some food for thought(ful breakfast)!

	-----Original Message----- 
	From: Nepkie, Janet ([log in to unmask]) 
	Sent: Mon 9/22/2003 7:45 PM 
	To: [log in to unmask] 
	Cc: 
	Subject: Re: RETHINKING CRITICAL THINKING - VALUES AND ATTITUDES
	
	

	Yes, a nutshell presentation would be good -- would give us the chance for comparison and comment 
	Janet 

	Dr. Janet Nepkie 
	Professor of Music 
	and Music Industry 
	State University College 
	Oneonta, NY 13820 
	ph: (607) 436 3425 
	fax:  607 436 2718 

		---------- 
		From:   Koeddermann, Achim   ([log in to unmask]) 
		Reply To:       Teaching Breakfast List 
		Sent:   Monday, September 22, 2003 7:42 PM 
		To:     [log in to unmask] 
		Subject:             Re: RETHINKING CRITICAL THINKING - VALUES AND ATTITUDES 

		Maybe we could get a "in a anutshell" presentation from those who teach it as a topic (comp 100 and critical thinking in philosophy come to mind: Roda, Patrone, Green and Koch are our philosophical experts....)

		Neat Idea 
		Achim 

			-----Original Message----- 
			From: Greenberg, James ([log in to unmask]) 
			Sent: Mon 9/22/2003 1:33 PM 
			To: [log in to unmask] 
			Cc: 
			Subject: RETHINKING CRITICAL THINKING - VALUES AND ATTITUDES 



			I have often heard it said that one of our missions here at SUNY Oneonta is 
			to get students to think critically. As a topic for discussion at our next 
			Teaching Breakfast I would like to know what tips and techniques you think 
			work toward this goal. 

			Below is a recent posting about this to get your brains working on the 
			topic.  Please join us on Oct. 2 at 8AM for the next Teaching Breakfast 
			where we will discuss this important topic. 

			Jim Greenberg 

			                      RETHINKING CRITICAL THINKING - VALUES AND ATTITUDES 

			by Richard A. Lynch 

			Posted here with permission... 

			"What is the mark of a liberally educated person?" Many of the 
			answers to this question converge upon a common theme: critical 
			thinking.  One 1981 study, for example, notes that "Critical thinking 
			is perhaps the most general term for the intellectual abilities that 
			are supposed to be characteristic of the liberally educated person." 
			The problem, however, is that-like the term "liberal education" 
			itself-"critical thinking" is understood to mean a wide variety of 
			more or less closely related things.  Winter, McClelland and Stewart, 
			analyzing the different senses of the term in higher education 
			literature, identify seven distinct qualities that are characterized 
			as "critical thinking" (including "differentiation and discrimination 
			within a broad range of particular phenomena" and "articulation and 
			communication of abstract concepts"), that cluster around what they 
			describe as "the skill of advanced concept formation" (pp. 12, 27). 
			Another (undated, but post-1995) study employs a "mimimalist" concept 
			of critical thinking:  "The critical thinking tradition seeks ways of 
			understanding the mind and then training the intellect so that such 
			'errors', 'blunders', and 'distortions' of thought are minimized.Š 
			[T]hose who think critically characteristically strive, for such 
			intellectual ends as clarity, precision, accuracy, relevance, depth, 
			breadth, and logicalness." 

			Something is lost when "critical thinking"-which we so often claim is 
			one of the most important things students should learn-becomes 
			reduced to these kinds of cognitive, often more precisely logical, 
			functions.  (Most university courses on "critical thinking," for 
			example, are typically courses in informal logic.)  This is 
			unfortunate because, despite this tendency to reduce critical 
			thinking to such a least common denominator, the term remains-and the 
			activity is-both rich and provocative.  Critical thinking is, to put 
			it bluntly, much more than the ability to recognize a fallacy when 
			you see one.  But the hard part is to move beyond this and spell out 
			what that "something more" is.  I want to suggest two important 
			aspects of a fuller understanding of critical thinking, which may 
			inform how we approach our teaching:  Good critical thinking is not 
			value-neutral, nor is it merely instrumental; it is intimately 
			connected with both values and attitudes. 

			How is critical thinking connected with values?  In at least two 
			ways.  First of all, critical thinking presupposes values at the 
			heart of its activity.  How can one make a good judgment or 
			assessment of virtually any of the problems and dilemmas that call 
			for critical thinking, without an evaluative basis for that decision? 
			But by itself, that is not enough:  good critical thinking does not 
			just accept a set of values "uncritically."  So the second important 
			way in which critical thinking is connected to values-without which, 
			the first connection becomes a sham-is in challenging and 
			reevaluating the very values that it takes as its basis for judgment. 
			One important component of critical thinking, then, is some 
			understanding of one's starting points-who one is, what one believes, 
			and why.  Critical thinking is thus both reflective and 
			evaluative-and raises the possibility that both the critical thinker 
			and her milieu will be challenged, unsettled, and perhaps changed. 

			This reflexive-and potentially disruptive-feature reveals how 
			critical thinking is intimately connected with attitudes.  For 
			Immanuel Kant, "Enlightenment," or "emergence from a self-incurred 
			immaturity," meant the willingness to think for oneself, to think 
			critically.   This willingness is an attitude that opens things up to 
			challenge.  Perhaps most fundamentally, good critical thinking 
			entails what we might describe as an attitude of "reflective openness 
			and challenge."  What I mean here is a willingness to genuinely 
			consider new perspectives-to try to understand them from the 
			inside-and, at least for a little while, to step outside of one's own 
			views and acknowledge that one's perspectives, assumptions, and 
			outlook are vulnerable, perhaps even mistaken or incomplete.  A 
			critical thinker is willing to turn that criticism upon both these 
			new approaches and herself, and sometimes even to change what she's 
			doing or what she believes in light of these critical insights.  This 
			core attitude may in fact be what makes critical thinking 
			"critical"-without it, critical thinking becomes a hollow shell, a 
			mere analytic tool applied to externally determined ends. 

			Warren Nord offers a compelling redefinition of critical thinking, 
			that moves it, I think, closer to these deepening relationships with 
			values and attitudes:  " Critical thinking is not just a matter of 
			applying the rules of logic (much less scientific method).  It is a 
			matter of thinking and feeling empathetically with others, of 
			engaging one's imagination, of having access to a wealth of facts 
			about the possible effects of alternative actions, of discerning 
			patterns of meaning in experience, of looking at the world from 
			different perspectives."   Scientific method and logical reasoning 
			can be good examples of critical thinking, and are important aspects 
			of it, but are not adequate in themselves-both can be done in rote, 
			unreflective ways, ways that aren't really open.  For students to 
			develop as critical thinkers, they must be willing to reflect upon 
			and articulate their own starting beliefs and assumptions (whether 
			these are scientific, moral, cultural, etc.), genuinely open 
			themselves to other approaches or worldviews, to new ways of 
			understanding what they took for granted, and then carefully consider 
			the consequences of this reflection. 

			Critical thinking, then, is not a merely logical exercise, but is a 
			practice richly imbued with a set of values and attitudes.  Nord 
			notes that, "Of course, all of this makes critical moral thinking 
			difficult and controversial."  It also underscores the need to begin 
			rethinking, and deepening, the ways in which we teach "critical 
			thinking."  We should not be content to teach logical reasoning 
			skills but must also work to encourage self-reflective, challenging, 
			yet open attitudes on the part of our students.  Helping students to 
			develop these attitudes ought not be the province of "critical 
			thinking" courses, but should be an aim of just about any course in 
			the undergraduate curriculum.  "Teaching attitudes" like this must 
			not be confused with "indoctrination."  For we will not be telling 
			our students that they must subscribe to any particular outcome or 
			belief; rather we will help them to develop a full set of tools for 
			drawing their own conclusions, for what Kant called "Enlightenment." 
			The task may be difficult and controversial, but in a diverse and 
			complex society, it seems essential. 

			(1)  D. Winter, D. McClelland, and A. Stewart, A New Case for the 
			Liberal Arts (Jossey-Bass, 1981), p. 27 
			(2) R. Paul, L. Elder, T. Bartell, " Study of 38 Public Universities 
			and 28 Private Universities To Determine Faculty   Emphasis on 
			Critical Thinking In Instruction: Executive Summary" 
			http://www.criticalthinking.org/schoolstudy.htm 
			(3) I. Kant, "What is Enlightenment?" (1784) 
			(4) W. Nord, Religion & American Education (University of North 
			Carolina Press, 1995), p. 346.