Bridging critical thinking and transformative learning: The role of perspective-taking
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the literature on critical thinking and transformative learning has remained relatively distinct, they have both emphasized the importance of working through and resolving states of doubt. There has been less focus, however, on how we can bring ourselves from a confirmed belief to a position of doubt. This is a foundational skill. Without it, the possibility for intellectual and personal growth is limited. In part one, I focus on critical thinking to investigate what ability and/or disposition can help thinkers arouse a state of doubt. I first consider traditional dispositions of critical thinking, specifically reflection and open-mindedness, and argue that they are largely ineffective as they do not confront the problem of cognitive bias. I then propose perspective-taking as an essential tool to bring about a position of doubt. In part two, I examine leading theorists in transformative experience, transformative education, and transformative learning, who have also largely neglected perspective-taking. I illustrate that perspective-taking can initiate some instances of transformative learning and thereby provides a connecting point to critical thinking. Nevertheless, when engaging with perspective-taking exercises, I argue that instructors ought to prioritize the development of students’ critical thinking skills. In part three, I focus my discussion on incorporating nonfiction perspective-taking readings into university course syllabi as a way to develop students’ critical thinking while creating the conditions for transformative learning.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 it