The Evidence Matrix

THE DEBATE DEFINING THINKING, critical thinking, and higher-level thinking is expan sive. Geersteen (2003) provides an excellent review of this literature and suggests that one way to distinguish between lowerand higher-level thinking is based on the level of abstraction. In this article, we focus on analysis and synthesis or integration-that is, identifying parts and putting these parts together to form a coherent whole. We offer a simple heuristic device, the evidence ma trix, that helps students recognize the rela tionship between sources of evidence. Although analysis and synthesis are broad intellectual skills that transcend disciplinary boundaries, Grauerholz and Bouma-Holtrop (2003) and Geersteen (2003) argue that dif ferent types of higher-level thinking are more likely to be emphasized by some disci plines than others. Grauerholz and Bouma Holtrop (2003) conclude that there are two general types of higher-level thinking re quired by sociologists, conceptualizing and contextualizing. Contextualizing is most similar to C. Wright Mills's sociological imagination and emphasizes placing specific examples within larger contexts. Conceptu alizing involves the process of breaking concepts into their constituent parts, recog nizing commonalities and differences, and the ability to compare and contrast the com ponents of an argument. The evidence ma trix is a tool that is most helpful in develop ing conceptualizing skills. While the heuris tic device we suggest does tap broad cogni tive skills, these are a subset of skills that are especially relevant for sociologists. Analyzing evidence and recognizing the similarities and dissimilarities between sources is an example of a skill Geertsen (2003) calls referential thinking and Grauer holz and Bouma-Holtrop (2003) include as a part of sociological critical thinking. The evidence matrix is designed to foster critical sociological thinking by helping students integrate data and research findings from different modes of research and synthesize findings across multiple contexts. Using the evidence matrix helps students see the rela tionship among different sources of data and how to organize a more general argument around specific instances of evidence. Finding, reading, and evaluating the va lidity of research studies and synthesizing information from a variety of sources is sometimes referred to as information liter acy (Association of College and Research Libraries 2006; Grafstein 2002). Grafstein (2002:) explains, however, that instructors teach IL [information literacy] skills that are embedded within the research para digms and procedures of their disciplines (p. 202). Therefore, in this paper we con ceptualize certain information literacy skills, particularly synthesizing research evidence from multiple sources, as a component of sociological critical thinking more gener ally. *Please direct all correspondence to Maxine Atkinson, Department of Sociology and Anthro pology, North Carolina State University, Box 8107, Raleigh, NC 27695-8107; e-mail: Maxine_Atkinson@ncsu. edu. Editor's note: The reviewers were, in alpha betical order, Jill Bouma, Theodore D. Fuller, Kathy Rowell, and Stephen Sweet.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.