In the mid-1980s, when the Community College of Aurora, Colorado (CCA) tapped me to lead its cutting-edge critical thinking initiative, called the Integrated Thinking Skills Project, I was enthusiastic and deeply hopeful that, somehow, I could coalesce our faculty into scholar-practitioners who would serve as catalysts for substantively changing not only what we taught but how we taught.As I think back now, more than a decade later, I ponder the efforts of the first group of faculty engaged in the Integrated Thinking Skills Project. As we struggled through Bruce Tuckman's model (1965) whereby groups first "form" politely, then "storm" through differences of opinion in order to normalize relationships, and ultimately "perform" as a cohesive group, we initially maintained our stance that, of course, we were "doing" critical thinking. Eventually we found out that we, as faculty, were indeed doing critical thinking, but our students were doing something else: transferring the instructors' notes into their own, without putting too much thought into any of it.We discovered along our difficult journey that although we might have actually been doing some critical thinking in our disciplines, our students were doing little more than continuing their trek through what I have dubbed the "teacher as God syndrome." What our students were doing, in effect, was guessing what faculty wanted so they could successfully regurgitate it on Scantron tests, only to leave our classroom untaught, and more important unlearned.