BECOMING CRITICAL THINKERS: Four strategies to use in the classroom

STRATEGY #1: THE RULE OF THREES Ways to Apply This Strategy:  Find three alternative courses of action when trying to decide what to do.  Look for three objections to a view you hold or are defending.  Think about a problem from three different perspectives before trying to solve it.  Look for three examples when trying to define a concept.  Looking for three — or, even better, five! — will help you become more reflective in your thinking by forcing you to think “ outside the box. ” (Hunter, 2010, p. 245)

INCORPORATION INTO EVERY DAY LESSONS:  When discussing a concept in class, the lesson could begin with built in time for personal reflection on the topic.  Then have the class share out varying perspectives or, if appropriate, solutions to the problem.

INTEGRATION INTO THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT: This strategy requires looking at something from three different angles, which creates room for deeper reflection. This is a critical thinking tool that should become second nature to students. In order to incorporate it into the classroom environment, teachers must build in thinking and discussion time.

HOW IT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY COLLABORATION:  Students could share their perspective with a team of 3 students so that way students quickly get 3 different ways of looking at a particular topic or idea.  Then they could evaluate all three ideas through questioning and discussion.  Following that, the group could research any more necessary areas of thought and then present their findings to the class.

HOW IT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING: During an Inquiry-Based Learning project students would be required to confer with 2 other students on a new ideas or concept before moving forward with it to clarify, confirm, and deepen their logic.

STRATEGY #2: THINK TWICE, DECIDE ONCE Defining This Strategy:  We know from psychological experiments that people are reluctant to change their minds.  Once our opinions are set, it seems to take a lot of doing to revise them.. For one thing, people tend to privilege evidence that confirms their already existing beliefs over evidence that conflicts with it.  To protect against these built – in obstacles to critical thinking, it is better to make sure that one has enough of the right kind of evidence before one makes a decision.  It is better to think twice and decide once, than to have to go back and revise one’s decisions. (Hunter, 2010, p. 246)

INCORPORATION INTO EVERY DAY LESSONS:  Using this strategy to deepen students’ logic also requires built in think time to the lesson.  Students come up with an answer, think it over a second time (check their work), and then respond aloud or record their answer.

INTEGRATION INTO THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT: Students are encouraged not to form an opinion too quickly. They should get into the habit of gathering enough factual evidence before forming their own personal thoughts. This might mean that technology or other written resources are available for research as well as time for conversing.

HOW IT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY COLLABORATION:  In collaborative group work, students practice taking turns making a statement, the whole group reflects, and then one person paraphrases it back for everyone to hear again.  This would allow any miscommunication to be addressed, before getting too far along on the assignment, only to find faulty thinking behind some of their reasoning.

HOW IT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING: Thinking twice before forming an opinion is going to increase the likelihood that: epistemic reasoning is involved in the problem solving process. illogical conclusions are not formed prematurely.

STRATEGY #3: ASK OPEN-ENDED CLARIFYING QUESTIONS  When discussing topics with other people, ask them open - ended questions, not questions that allow a “ Yes ” or “ No ” answer.  This will reduce the risk that superficial agreement will mask interesting and deep differences.  Instead of asking: “ Do you think that … ” “ Do you agree that … ”  Ask: “ Why do you think that …. ” “ What do you mean by … ” “ What reasons are there for thinking that … ”

INCORPORATION INTO EVERY DAY LESSONS: I would teach and model this method of questioning all the time. It could be used during whole group and small group discussions. Students would learn to ask clarifying questions of their peers, expecting proof of the logic or reasoning used in their thinking.

Conversation Starters and Connectors Agree:Affirming: I agree with _______because…I see what you mean. My idea is the same as yours because…That’s an interesting idea. My idea builds on ________’s by…I hadn’t thought of that before. Clarifying:Disagree: So you are saying that…I don’t agree with you because… What I hear you saying is…I see it a different way because… In other words, you think…I got a different answer because… Questioning: What do you think? What answer did you get? What do you mean? I have a question about that.

INTEGRATION INTO THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT:  The learning environment needs to be set up in a way that is safe and free of negative criticism.  Students must understand that the questions are not judgmental, but meant to help them think more critically about their work.

HOW IT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY COLLABORATION: I would encourage students to individually brainstorm at the beginning of a collaborative group assignment and then use this questioning method to dissect the different ideas and evaluate which ones have merit for further investigation by the group.

HOW IT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING:  Asking clarifying questions would fit seamlessly into the inquiry-based learning model because essentially the goal in this model is to learn through questioning.  This would provide a forum where that questioning was peer generated in a safe capacity to bring about growth.

STRATEGY #4: LOOK FOR COUNTER-EXAMPLES Looking for counter-examples is an important step in constructing or evaluating a proposed definition or in assessing the truth of a conditional. A counter-example is a case that shows that the definition is either too broad (includes things that it should not) or too narrow (excludes things that it should include). The case could be an actual one, or it could simply be a fictional one. (Hunter, 2010, p. 248)

INCORPORATION INTO EVERY DAY LESSONS:  Take time after a new definition is introduced in class to discuss any counter-arguments that might prove the definition too broad or too narrow.  Give small group or partners a chance to talk and try to come up with any counter-examples.  Redefine or adjust the definition to include any new insight from the discussion.

INTEGRATION INTO THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT: The teacher should model for students an attitude of always being willing to learn and adjust his/her thinking to new evidence that is based on epistemic reasoning. Students should be given time to think and gather evidence when presented with a new concept so that they feel confident in their final analysis of a topic and conclusions or opinions they form.

HOW IT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY COLLABORATION: During group work students can be required to give 2-3 counter-examples they came up with to help narrow down or clarify any topics/terms they are defining through their research on a project.

HOW IT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY INQUIRY-BASED LEARNING: By asking clarifying questions and discussing topics surrounding their assignment, students will be able to explore any counter-examples that might go against any previous definitions or concepts they are working of off.

REFERENCES Hunter, D. A. (2010). A practical guide to critical thinking: Deciding what to do and believe. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.