Critical thinking coding for secondary and higher education students discussions

Individual Papers [3687063] Critical thinking coding for secondary and higher education students discussions Maree Davies [New Zealand]1 , Katharina Kiemer [Germany]2 , Adam Dalgleish [New Zealand]1 University of Auckland1, Universitat Augsburg2 Purpose of presentation The coding scheme, with examples from student group discussions, to be presented at BERA in 2017 attempts to address existing gaps in measuring empirical Critical Thinking (CT) data. The coding scheme has been written as a chapter in the new book, Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis to be published in 2018. Measurement tools of CT tend to be discipline specific, focusing on argument strength (philosophy), critical dispositions (education), or bias (sociology). What is missing from measurements on CT is the merging of these interpretations. This coding manual was developed to capture each aspect of CT, so that students can be taught to identify, practice all facets, and value group discussions as contributing to their learning. The coding manual was initially designed for a two year study in critical thinking across 30 classrooms in Auckland New Zealand at senior secondary level. Theory/Research Critical thinking (CT) is mostly described and researched from an individuals’ point of view; for example, the ability to engage in purposeful, self-regulatory judgement and based on a view that focuses on hierarchical models of thinking (Bloom et al., 1956) and deconstructing arguments for logic, for example (Zohar, Weinberger, and Tamir, 1994). CT is also commonly aligned with a market based approach to education; the Conference Board of Canada encouraged Canadians to improve their CT skills to strengthen Canada’s innovative and competitive advantage in the knowledge-based global economy (Bloom & Watt, 2003) and relates CT to measurements of CT in both dispositions and skills through psychometric testing (Ennis, 1962; Facione, 1990; Sternberg, 1987; Watson & Glaser, 1980). What seems to be missing from this literature is the view of CT as collective, dialogic exercise drawing on socio-political issues. More than concerned with how an individual is able to think logically, analytically, and with reason is the concern with the individual recognising the hierarchal structures in society and the consideration of wider perspectives and ethical consequences (Apple, 2010; Freire, 1970; hooks, 1994, 2010; Postman & Weigartner, 1969). Despite the American Philosophical Association Report of CT Skills and Dispositions including ‘flexibility in considering biases, prejudices, stereotype, egocentric or socio-centric tendencies’ (Facione, 1990, p.2) these skills have remained largely ignored in the assessment of CT. Goals of coding manual The coding scheme provides a framework of CT and offers concrete descriptions of desired interaction patterns (best-practice) for the generation of CT abilities in students and teachers. Individual Papers [3687063] Critical thinking coding for secondary and higher education students discussions Maree Davies [New Zealand]1 , Katharina Kiemer [Germany]2 , Adam Dalgleish [New Zealand]1 University of Auckland1, Universitat Augsburg2 Purpose of presentation The coding scheme, with examples from student group discussions, to be presented at BERA in 2017 attempts to address existing gaps in measuring empirical Critical Thinking (CT) data. The coding scheme has been written as a chapter in the new book, Cambridge Handbook of Group Interaction Analysis to be published in 2018. Measurement tools of CT tend to be discipline specific, focusing on argument strength (philosophy), critical dispositions (education), or bias (sociology). What is missing from measurements on CT is the merging of these interpretations. This coding manual was developed to capture each aspect of CT, so that students can be taught to identify, practice all facets, and value group discussions as contributing to their learning. The coding manual was initially designed for a two year study in critical thinking across 30 classrooms in Auckland New Zealand at senior secondary level. Theory/Research Critical thinking (CT) is mostly described and researched from an individuals’ point of view; for example, the ability to engage in purposeful, self-regulatory judgement and based on a view that focuses on hierarchical models of thinking (Bloom et al., 1956) and deconstructing arguments for logic, for example (Zohar, Weinberger, and Tamir, 1994). CT is also commonly aligned with a market based approach to education; the Conference Board of Canada encouraged Canadians to improve their CT skills to strengthen Canada’s innovative and competitive advantage in the knowledge-based global economy (Bloom & Watt, 2003) and relates CT to measurements of CT in both dispositions and skills through psychometric testing (Ennis, 1962; Facione, 1990; Sternberg, 1987; Watson & Glaser, 1980). What seems to be missing from this literature is the view of CT as collective, dialogic exercise drawing on socio-political issues. More than concerned with how an individual is able to think logically, analytically, and with reason is the concern with the individual recognising the hierarchal structures in society and the consideration of wider perspectives and ethical consequences (Apple, 2010; Freire, 1970; hooks, 1994, 2010; Postman & Weigartner, 1969). Despite the American Philosophical Association Report of CT Skills and Dispositions including ‘flexibility in considering biases, prejudices, stereotype, egocentric or socio-centric tendencies’ (Facione, 1990, p.2) these skills have remained largely ignored in the assessment of CT. Goals of coding manual The coding scheme provides a framework of CT and offers concrete descriptions of desired interaction patterns (best-practice) for the generation of CT abilities in students and teachers.

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.