Discipline Based Panel for Critical Thinking

1
Discipline Based Panel forCritical Thinking

• Syracuse April 28, 2005

2
Who we are

• Professor Andrew Costa
• Philosophy and Ethics
• Adirondack Community College
• Professor Gwen Crane
• English
• SUNY Oneonta
• Professor Shir Filler
• English
• North Country Community College
• Professor Clyde Herreid
• Biological Sciences
• University at Buffalo

• Professor David Hunter (Chair)
• Philosophy and Religious Studies
• Buffalo State College
• Professor Dorothy Laffin
• Business Administration
• Suffolk County Community College
• Professor Hedva Lewittes
• Psychology
• SUNY Old Westbury
• Professor James Schofield
• Social Science
• Onondaga Community College

3
The Critical Thinking Competency

• Students will
• Identify, analyze and evaluate arguments as they
  occur in their own and others work and
• Develop well-reasoned arguments.

4
First Task

• Flesh out the key elements
• Identifying arguments
• Analyzing arguments
• Evaluating arguments
• Developing well-reasoned arguments

5
Identify Arguments

• What is an argument?

6
Identify Arguments

• What is an argument?
• A connected series of statements intended to
  establish a proposition.
• Monty Pythons Flying Circus

7
Identify Arguments

• The Logic 101 Model
• All men are mortal. Premises Are
  they true?
• Socrates is a man.
• Socrates is mortal. Conclusion Does it follow?
• All As are Bs.
• X is an A. Logical Form Is it valid?
• X is a B.

8
Identify Arguments

• Can this model apply across the curriculum?
• What about reasoning in biology, sociology,
  history or fine arts?

9
Identify Arguments

• These should count as arguments
• Designing an experiment to test an hypothesis.
• Predicting the outcome of some process.
• Deciding on the best measurement technique.
• Explaining the causes of some historical event.
• Evaluating a work of art or performance.

10
Identify Arguments

• A better conception of argument
• Any reasoning aimed at deciding what to believe
  or to do.
• Students should be able to identify the
  characteristic features of such reasoning.

11
Analyze Arguments

• Identify an arguments premises, definitions and
  assumptions
• What evidence is put forward?
• What results are reported?

12
Analyze Arguments

• Identify an arguments premises, definitions and
  assumptions
• What do the key words and terms mean?
• How might we define them?

13
Analyze Arguments

• Identify an arguments premises, definitions and
  assumptions
• What is being left unsaid?
• Can we make it explicit?

14
Analyze Arguments

• Identify the arguments conclusion
• What is the take home message?
• What is the reports recommendation?
• What is the experiment claimed to show?
• Isolate it from the premises.

15
Evaluate Arguments

• Judge whether an arguments premises support the
  conclusion, independently of whether they are
  true.

16
Evaluate Arguments

• Judge whether an arguments premises support the
  conclusion, independently of whether they are
  true.
• If the premises were true, would that be
  sufficient reason to believe the conclusion?

17
Evaluate Arguments

• Judge whether an arguments premises are
  reasonable to believe, independently of whether
  they support the conclusion

18
Evaluate Arguments

• What is the source of the premises and is it
  credible?
• When is an experiment well-designed?
• When is measurement accurate and precise?
• When is testimony trustworthy?
• When can we rely on observation?

19
Develop Well-Reasoned Arguments

• Develop an argument for some conclusion.
• E.g.,
• Proposing an experiment to test some hypothesis
• Evaluating a work of art
• Predicting the impact of some public policy
• Explaining the decline of rust-belt cities
• Arguing that we have no free will

20
Develop Well-Reasoned Arguments

• Students should identify
• Relevant qualifications and distinctions
• Objections and respond to them
• Questions about source credibility
• Alternative conclusions and address them

21
Develop Well-Reasoned Arguments

• Describe the broader context
• Why does it matter whether the conclusion is
  true?
• What follows from it?
• What would its truth show?

22
Develop Well-Reasoned Arguments

• Apply similar reasoning in another case
• Where else can we use this
• Experimental design
• Measuring instrument
• How can we generalize the lessons of this case?

23
Levels of Competence

• We established levels of competence for each
  outcome.

24
Students will identify, analyze, and evaluate
arguments as they occur in their own and others
work

• Exceeding The students work
• Identifies the target argument(s) and clearly
  distinguishes it from any extraneous elements
  such as expressions of opinion and descriptions
  of events.

25
Students will identify, analyze, and evaluate
arguments as they occur in their own and others
work

• Exceeding The students work
• Carefully articulates the arguments conclusion,
  clearly distinguishes it from its premises and
  identifies most relevant definitions and/or
  hidden assumptions.

26
Students will identify, analyze, and evaluate
arguments as they occur in their own and others
work

• Exceeding The students work
• Clearly and correctly assesses whether the
  arguments premises provide sufficient logical
  support for the conclusion, independently of
  whether the premises are true.

27
Students will identify, analyze, and evaluate
arguments as they occur in their own and others
work

• Exceeding The students work
• Clearly and correctly assesses the reasonableness
  of the premises, including the credibility of
  their sources, independently of whether the
  premises support the conclusion.

28
Students will develop well-reasoned arguments

• Exceeding The students work
• Develops a clearly articulated argument, using
  evidence and/or systematic logical reasoning in
  support of a conclusion or point of view.

29
Students will develop well-reasoned arguments

• Exceeding The students work
• Identifies relevant qualifications or objections
  or alternative points of view and prioritizes
  evidence and/or reasons in support of the
  conclusion.

30
Students will develop well-reasoned arguments

• Exceeding The students work
• Describes the broader relevance, significance or
  context of the issue and/or applies it to a novel
  problem.

31
Remaining Questions

• Have we captured Critical Thinking across the
  curriculum?
• Skills or kinds of arguments left out?

32
Remaining Questions

• Have we correctly identified the levels of
  competence?
• Are we expecting too much/little?

33
Remaining Questions

• Can we use this rubric to assess ?
• Does it require student essays?
• Could a multiple choice test suffice?
• What about the in-betweens?

34
Remaining Questions

• Have we captured Critical Thinking across the
  curriculum?
• Have we correctly identified the levels of
  competence?
• How can we use this rubric to assess ?