Critical Thinking Research

Read the following information and understand the content, as you are going to be required to apply this information to three different passages:

Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking – about any subject, content, or problem — in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them. (Paul and Elder, 2001). The Paul-Elder framework has three components; two of which we will cover this semester:

The elements of thought (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

The intellectual standards (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

According to Paul and Elder (1997), there are two essential dimensions of thinking that students need to master in order to learn how to upgrade their thinking. They need to be able to identify the "parts" of their thinking, and they need to be able to assess their use of these parts of thinking.

Elements of Thought (reasoning)

The "parts" or elements of thinking are as follows:

All reasoning has a purpose

All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some question, to solve some problem

All reasoning is based on assumptions

All reasoning is done from some point of view

All reasoning is based on data, information and evidence

All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas

All reasoning contains inferences or interpretations by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data

All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequences

Universal Intellectual Standards

The intellectual standards applied to these elements are used to determine the quality of reasoning. Good critical thinking requires having a command of these standards. According to Paul and Elder (1997 ,2006), the ultimate goal is for the standards of reasoning to become infused in all thinking so as to become the guide to better and better reasoning. The intellectual standards include:

Clarity

Could you elaborate?

Could you illustrate what you mean?

Could you give me an example?

Accuracy

How could we check on that?

How could we find out if that is true?

How could we verify or test that?

Precision

Could you be more specific?

Could you give me more details?

Could you be more exact?

Relevance

How does that relate to the problem?

How does that bear on the question?

How does that help us with the issue?

Depth

What factors make this difficult?

What are some of the complexities of this question?

What are some of the difficulties we need to deal with?

Breadth

Do we need to look at this from another perspective?

Do we need to consider another point of view?

Do we need to look at this in other ways?

Logic

Does all of this make sense together?

Does your first paragraph fit in with your last one?

Does what you say follow from the evidence?

Significance

Is this the most important problem to consider?

Is this the central idea to focus on?

Which of these facts are most important?

Fairness

Is my thinking justifiable in context?

Am I taking into account the thinking of others?

Is my purpose fair given the situation?

Am I using my concepts in keeping with educated usage, or am I distorting them to get what I want?