Psychological Versus Generic Critical Thinking as Predictors and Outcome Measures in a Large Undergraduate Human Development Course

Williams, Robert L.; Oliver, Renee; Stockdale, Susan L.

doi:10.1353/jge.2004.0022

Cited by 51 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To a degree, this reveals a tendency to transfer the acquired domain-specific CT skills in solving domain-general CT tasks. This finding is consistent with previous psychology studies in which higher performance on a psychological CT test also predicted higher performance on a domain-general CT test (e.g., Williams et al 2004).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Systematic design of a learning environment for domain-specific and domain-general critical thinking skills

Tiruneh

Weldeslassie

Kassa

et al. 2015

Education Tech Research Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identifying effective instructional approaches that stimulate students' critical thinking (CT) has been the focus of a large body of empirical research. However, there is little agreement on the instructional principles and procedures that are theoretically sound and empirically valid to developing both domain-specific and domain-general CT skills. The purpose of this study was to examine the effectiveness of systematically designed subject matter instruction in stimulating the development of domain-specific and domaingeneral CT skills, and to investigate the relationship between the two. The study employed a pretest-posttest quasi-experimental design with two conditions: 45 students participated in an experimental condition and 44 students in a control condition. A learning environment, in the context of a freshman physics course, was designed according to the First Principles of Instruction model. The experimental condition followed the designed learning environment, while the control condition followed regular subject matter instruction that was not designed according to the First Principles of Instruction model. The experimental condition scored significantly higher than the control condition on a domain-specific CT test. The results also showed that better performance on a domain-specific CT test explained a significant proportion of the variance on a domain-general CT test. However, the experimental learning environment did not result in a significantly greater pretestposttest improvement in the acquisition of domain-general CT skills compared to the control learning environment. Instructional design principles that may contribute to the present understanding of the integration of CT skills within the regular subject matter instruction are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Systematic design of a learning environment for domain-specific and domain-general critical thinking skills

Tiruneh

Weldeslassie

Kassa

et al. 2015

Education Tech Research Dev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These findings partially support Hypothesis 1 and are consistent in general with the CT theoretical literature that argues for the effectiveness of a well-designed subject-matter instruction in enabling students solve domain-specific CT tasks (e.g. Glaser, 1984;Perkins & Salomon, 1989;Resnick, Michaels & O'Connor, 2010;Smith, 2002) and achieve better on course content measures (Beyer, 2008;Resnick, 1987;Williams et al, 2004).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 80%

“…Critical thinking (CT) is closely linked with students' in-depth understanding of specific subjectmatter content (Williams, Oliver & Stockdale, 2004), improved decision-making with regard to complex real-life problems (Dwyer, Hogan & Stewart, 2012;Halpern, 1993), and more generally with a tendency to become a more active and informed citizen (Halpern, 2014;Tsui, 1999). Various stakeholders in education, such as policy makers, educators, and employers have regarded the development of CT as an essential outcome of undergraduate education (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2005;Lin, 2014;National Research Council, 1996;Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Designing Learning Environments for Critical Thinking: Examining Effective Instructional Approaches

Tiruneh

Cock

Elen

2017

Int J of Sci and Math Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fostering the development of students' critical thinking (CT) is regarded as an essential outcome of higher education. However, despite the large body of research on this topic, there has been little consensus on how educators best support the development of CT. In view of some of the controversies surrounding the teaching of CT skills in higher education, this study examined the effects of embedding CT instruction systematically in domain-specific courses (Immersion vs. Infusion) on the acquisition of domain-specific and domain-general CT skills and course achievement. First-year university students (N = 143) enrolled in an introductory physics course were assigned to one of three instructional conditions: Immersion, Infusion, and control. The Immersion and Infusion conditions followed lessons designed systematically based on the First Principles of Instruction model, whereas the control condition followed a regular instruction. Results showed that participants in the Immersion and Infusion conditions significantly outperformed those in the control condition on domain-specific CT proficiency and course achievement. However, neither the Immersion nor the Infusion condition was helpful in fostering the acquisition of domain-general CT skills. The findings generally demonstrated that embedding CT instruction systematically in domain-specific courses requires greater clarity about what set of CT skills could be targeted in domain-specific instruction, how specific subject-matter instruction could be designed considering CT as an integral part of domain-specific instruction, and how best CT outcomes be assessed. Some considerations for the design of CT-supportive learning environments are discussed.

show abstract

“…These outcomes are important developmentally. Individuals who develop better critical thinking skills score higher on tests and quizzes (Williams, Oliver, & Stockdale 2004) The Four Quadrants…”

Section: The Thinking World Of the Mindmentioning

confidence: 99%

Jungian typology as a holistic teaching strategy in higher education

Montgomery¹,

Strunk²,

Steele³

2017

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With an eye to the application of principles of holistic education and integrated development to higher education, this discussion has as its aim to describe the work of a reflective teaching team in educational psychology. Using developmental issues within the Jungian psychological functions of sensing (physical), intuition (creative, spiritual), thinking (cognitive), and feeling (social and emotional), our team designed activities and discussions related to the holistic growth of college students. Results indicate a theoretical model that can offer practical applications to teaching and learning of college students

show abstract

Psychological Versus Generic Critical Thinking as Predictors and Outcome Measures in a Large Undergraduate Human Development Course

Cited by 51 publications

References 25 publications

Systematic design of a learning environment for domain-specific and domain-general critical thinking skills

Systematic design of a learning environment for domain-specific and domain-general critical thinking skills

Designing Learning Environments for Critical Thinking: Examining Effective Instructional Approaches

Jungian typology as a holistic teaching strategy in higher education

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About