Interpreting Critical Thinking Pedagogically

As I started reading up on and working with critical thinking skills as an educator, I realized that critical thinking is a very nebulous concept. Different people construe it in different ways.  Now, after years of  researching  and teaching these sets of skills, I can identify two major strands in interpreting this ‘topic’ pedagogically.

One strand equates critical thinking predominantly with how to improve one’s reasoning skills. This is the predominant way of teaching critical thinking, as can be seen from the numerous courses and books on the subject. The focus in these courses and books is on how to improve one’s reasoning.  The key areas of interest are how to make a reasoned argument and how to assess arguments.  A lot of emphasis is placed on how to critique someone’s reasoning --  how to find flaws and fallacies in an argument, how to pick out underlying assumptions in an argument, how to identify ways that would strengthen or weaken an argument, and so on. The methodology is predominantly exercise based, where students are exposed to numerous arguments to hone-in their reasoning skills. Many of these exercises are so structured that there can be only one right answer. Such courses lend themselves very well to large classes, online courses and self-study books.

The other strand takes a much broader perspective. It is based on the view that critical thinking goes beyond mere reasoning skills, and hence looking only at reasoning and arguments is very limiting. Critical thinking involves examining our own thought process, questioning our own thinking, appreciating multiple perspectives and adopting a balanced view of the world. This strand looks at critical thinking as a disposition, as a way of life.  

I would not call these strands mutually exclusive. The first strand focuses on the cognitive processes which form the base of critical thinking. The second strand connects critical thinking to the world around us --- brings in context to hone in those processes learned. Doing one without the other is futile. Learning how to detect a flawed argument is a basic critical thinking skill. It is, however, just a steppingstone and not the destination.  In our professional, social and personal lives, we will find that not all arguments are flawed. We may encounter a flawlessly made argument, however the perspective taken by that person on the issue discussed may be totally opposite to ours. Most of the time, solving major problems or taking crucial decisions depend on negotiating between these myriad perspectives. Critical thinking helps us evaluate these myriad arguments so as to arrive at our own informed decision in an issue or problem.  It then goes full circle and gives us the skill to communicate our own informed judgement to others convincingly.  These are the core skills of any thinking person and any good leader. Thinking in a well-rounded and balanced manner is the ultimate purpose of critical thinking.  

It is this combined view of critical thinking that this blog is about.  It is about how we as teachers can get our students to think for themselves --- analyze and create arguments, find connections, evaluate the perspectives they represent, synthesize ideas and then form their own independent opinion. These are skills imperative to problem solving and making sound decisions. That are also skills that help interpersonal relations --- skills that any good leader or team player needs to have.