Critical Thinking in Social Work Education: A Delphi Study of Faculty Understanding
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critical thinking is a topic that is important to both teaching and learning in higher education, yet the effectiveness of universities in producing graduates who have the capacity to think critically has been debated. For the profession of social work, dedicated to an agenda of social justice for marginalized populations, the ability to engage in critical thinking and reflective practice is paramount. In this light, a reconceptualization of what critical thinking is in social work education and how it can be fostered within the changing landscape of teaching and learning in the 21st century is essential. In a qualitative Delphi study conducted with 28 social work faculty members internationally, six themes emerged from a thematic analysis of the data. A qualitative research design was utilized to gain a rich understanding of what critical thinking is in social work education, specifically addressing the following: how do expert social work faculty understand critical thinking, how is critical thinking operationalized in the classroom, and how do social work educators know when students are thinking critically. After three iterations, consensus was achieved on several points, including the view that critical thinking is a multidimensional process. The emerging themes of critical thinking as a multidimensional process, epistemological influences and understanding, pedagogy, critical perspective and anti-oppressive lens, lack of a shared understanding, and assessment identified from this study are described as being interrelated and reciprocal. There is richness in the diversity of thought and pedagogy that informs social work education, which participants suggest is an asset in promoting the understanding and development of critical thinking in students. Findings from this study will aid in informing both curriculum development and a pedagogy to support the development of these skills for the next generation of social workers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.050 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".