Surry Community College Choosing a Model of Critical Thinking

A Common Model of Critical Thinking is Necessary
Characteristics of a Good Model
Richard Paul's Model
Other Conceptualizations

A Common Model of Critical Thinking is Necessary

A college must adopt a model and use it consistently if it is to impact instruction and therefore improve student learning. Richard Paul argues that faculty need a comprehensive, common model to use as the “central organizer” in course design.

In his 2004 essay “The State of Critical Thinking Today,” Paul states that when a college’s understanding of critical thinking is “fuzzy or reduced to a single-discipline model . . . it lessens the faculty’s ability to identify ineffective, or develop more effective, teaching practices. It prevents the faculty from making the essential connections (both within subjects and across them), connections that give order and substance to teaching and learning.” He argues that we “must not rest content with a fuzzy concept of critical thinking or an overly narrow one. We need a rich, substantive concept with clear-cut implications for ensuring that students construct knowledge across the disciplines.”

A common model allows students to make connections between subjects and skill sets. If different models (different language, different definitions and frameworks) are used across campus, it is difficult for students to see those connections. In order for an institution to impact students’ thinking abilities college-wide, faculty must construct courses and design instruction around a common conceptualization of critical thinking, one that is precise and comprehensive, not vague, incomplete or narrowly defined. Paul (2004) elaborates:

If we understand critical thinking substantively, we can not only explain that idea intuitively to our students, we can also use it to give order and meaning to virtually everything we do as teachers and learners. As a result, we use it as the central organizer in the design of instruction. It informs our conception of the role of students in the classroom. It structures how we conceptualize our role as instructors. It enables us to explain the essential thinking that defines the content we teach.

See also A Shared Vocabulary is Important.

Picture This: Critical Thinking at Surry Community College
A student enters Surry Community College having never been taught to examine and evaluate her thinking. She lacks a basic awareness of her own thinking. She possesses few skills that help her examine and evaluate the thinking of others—yet daily she faces and is impacted by the results of others’ reasoning. Perhaps no one has shown her the crucial connection between thinking and learning.

As she attends her classes at SCC, she begins to hear a common refrain: The institution aims to improve her thinking. She hears the term critical thinking used repeatedly in her classes; she sees posters in classrooms that explain “Elements of Thought” and “Intellectual Standards.” The concepts represented on those posters are integrated into each class she attends. The elements of thought become more recognizable: She is becoming more aware of the purpose, question, assumptions, point of view, information, concepts, inferences, and implications in what she reads and hears—and in her own thinking. The intellectual standards sound more and more familiar: She begins to think more about clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance, and fairness. She hears instructors describing and sees them modeling intellectual traits such as intellectual humility, intellectual perseverance, confidence in reason, and intellectual courage.

Her instructors use this common language to explain course concepts, and they require her to think through concepts, not merely memorize facts. In English, for example, she is asked to examine and analyze information, to identify assumptions, and to make inferences that are logical. In Biology lab, she conducts experiments that yield information, and she is asked to draw accurate and logical conclusions from those experiments. Her Reading instructor talks about the logic of an author’s reasoning, and she is asked to explain an author’s conclusions, the information that led to them, and the assumptions that underlie them. In Math, she is asked to discuss the thought processes that are needed to solve a problem. She is asked to apply concepts in new contexts. She is often required to create or identify relevant, significant questions and problems rather than being given them.

In assignments for every class, she sees that her work will be evaluated using the intellectual standards of clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, and logic. In every class, she is required to think about her thinking, and she begins to understand that all learning and all thinking consist of “mental moves”or "intellectual actions"—processes of thought—and that these processes can be sharpened and refined to help improve her thinking. She can now define and assess good thinking and good communication using those intellectual standards.

She begins to transfer these skills to her everyday life—as she makes decisions, solves problems, and interacts with people, she becomes aware of the moves her mind makes and strives to analyze and improve those intellectual processes. In the process, she gains control over her life and begins to improve it. She seeks to be open-minded and fair while approaching new ideas and has confidence in her own reasoning to evaluate them.

When everyone speaks the same language, students’ learning is enhanced. A common language improves communication and facilitates learning. That’s why Surry Community College has chosen to build its initiative around one particular framework of critical thinking that has all the characteristics of a good model.

TOP

Characteristics of a Good Model of Critical Thinking

What are the components of a good critical thinking model?

A good critical thinking model will be comprehensive. The model will offer a clear, precise, and in-depth conceptualization of critical thinking that is free of jargon and accessible to students, faculty, and staff. It will be straightforward enough to be applied immediately yet substantive enough to withstand a lifetime of study and application.

A good model will be applicable to all disciplines (not narrowly defined within one or two disciplines).

A good model will be readily applicable in and out of the classroom, easily applied to all campus jobs.

A good model will define the specific cognitive skills (including metacognition) and affective dispositions agreed upon by scholars as necessary to critical thinking.

A good model will offer high-quality resources for students, faculty, and staff.

TOP

Richard Paul’s Model of Critical Thinking

Richard Paul is regarded as one of the foremost scholars of critical thinking. Surry Community College uses the critical thinking model originally developed by Richard Paul, expanded by Paul and Linda Elder, and promoted by the Foundation for Critical Thinking and the Center for Critical Thinking (www.criticalthinking.org).

Three Fundamental Components
This model of critical thinking is built on a foundation of three concepts: elements of reasoning, intellectual standards, and intellectual traits.

All thinking consists of parts, or can be divided into elements: purpose, point of view, assumptions, implications and consequences, data and information, inferences and interpretations, concepts, question at issue. Paul and Elder explain in Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life, “Whenever you are reasoning you are trying to accomplish some purpose, within a point of view, using concepts or ideas. You are focused on some issue or question, issue, or problem, using information to come to conclusions, based on assumptions, all of which has implications.” Critical thinkers analyze their thinking--and that of others--by identifying these elements of reasoning.

All thinking can be measured against intellectual standards such as clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance, and fairness. Paul and Elder note, “These are not the only intellectual standards a person might use. They are simply among those that are the most fundamental. . . . Thinking critically requires command of [these] fundamental intellectual standards.” Critical thinkers assess their thinking--and that of others--by applying these standards of reasoning.

Paul and Elder also note, “As we are learning the basic intellectual skills that critical thinking entails, we can begin to use those skills in a selfish or a fair-minded way.” All thinkers should cultivate positive intellectual traits such as intellectual humility, intellectual perseverance, intellectual integrity, intellectual courage, confidence in reason, intellectual empathy, etc. These are the inter-related characteristics of fair-minded thinking, what has been described as the “spirit” of critical thinking (Facione, 1998). Critical thinkers use their thinking skills in an ethical manner.

These three components--elements, standards, and traits--form the backbone of Richard Paul’s model of critical thinking. Read Surry's list of cognitive skills that underlie critical thinking. The list is based on the three fundamental concepts of this model.

Read introductory definitions from Paul and Elder and view a list of specific cognitive skills and affective dispositions the Foundation for Critical Thinking labels the “35 Dimensions of Critical Thought.” These definitions and cognitive skills are built on the three fundamental components of the model. Look for them as you read.

Critical Thinking Definitions from Paul and Elder
The following definitions are gathered from various publications and are meant to give the reader a brief introduction to the model.

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking—about any subject, content, or problem—in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them.

A well cultivated critical thinker:

raises vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely;
gathers and assesses relevant information, using abstract ideas to interpret it effectively;
comes to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards;
thinks openmindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and
communicates effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems.

Critical thinking is, in short, self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored, and self-corrective thinking. It presupposes assent to rigorous standards of excellence and mindful command of their use. It entails effective communication and problem solving abilities and a commitment to overcome our native egocentrism and sociocentrism.

--Richard Paul and Linda Elder, The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools (2001)

Critical thinking is the art of thinking about thinking in an intellectually disciplined manner. Critical thinkers are explicitly focused on thinking, in three inter-related phases. They analyze thinking. They assess thinking. And they improve thinking (as a result).

--Richard Paul, “The Nature and Function of Critical and Creative Thinking”

There is nothing more practical than sound thinking. No matter what your circumstances or goals, no matter where you are or what problems you face, you are better off if your thinking is skilled. As a student, shopper, employee, citizen, lover, friend, parent—in every realm and situation of your life—good thinking pays off. Poor thinking, in contrast, inevitably causes problems, wastes time and energy, and engenders frustration and pain.

Critical thinking is the disciplined art of ensuring that you use the best thinking you are capable of in any set of circumstances. The general goal of thinking is to figure out the “lay of the land.” We all have multiple choices to make. We need the best information to make the best choices.

What is really going on in this or that situation? Does so-and-so really care about me? Am I deceiving myself when I believe that. . .? What are the likely consequences of failing to. . .? If I want to do . . ., what is the best way to prepare? How can I be more successful in doing . . .? Is this my biggest problem, or do I need to focus my attention on that? Responding to questions such as these successfully is the daily work of thinking. That’s why we are thinkers.

Excellence in thought and skill in thinking are real possibilities. To maximize the quality of your thinking, however, you must learn how to become an effective critic of your thinking. And to become an effective critic of your thinking, you have to make learning about thinking a priority.

--Paul and Elder, Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life (2001)

Critical thinking is (1) Disciplined, self-directed thinking that exemplifies the perfections of thinking appropriate to a specific mode or domain of thinking; (2) thinking that displays mastery of intellectual skills and abilities; (3) the art of thinking about one’s thinking while thinking, to make one’s thinking better: more clear, more accurate, or more defensible; (4) thinking that is fully aware of and continually guards against the natural human tendency to self-deceive and rationalize to selfishly get what it wants. Critical thinking can be distinguished into two forms: (1) “selfish” or “sophistic,” on the one hand, and (2) “fair-minded,” on the other. In thinking critically, we use our command of the elements of thinking and the universal intellectual standards to adjust our thinking successfully to the logical demands of a type or mode of thinking.

--Paul and Elder, Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life (2001)

35 Dimensions of Critical Thought
What does critical thinking actually look like? What are the mental moves that a critical thinker makes? How do you describe the intellectual actions involved in thinking critically? The following dimensions of critical thought are based on the Paul and Elder model and offer precise descriptions of cognitive skills and affective dispositions associated with critical thinking. The strategies are explained in depth at: http://www.criticalthinking.org/resources/TRK12-strategy-list.shtml

TOP

A. Affective Strategies

thinking independently
developing insight into egocentricity or sociocentricity
exercising fairmindedness
exploring thoughts underlying feelings and feelings underlying thoughts
developing intellectual humility and suspending judgment
developing intellectual courage
developing intellectual good faith or integrity
developing intellectual perseverance
developing confidence in reason

B. Cognitive Strategies - Macro-Abilities

refining generalizations and avoiding oversimplifications
comparing analogous situations: transferring insights to new contexts
developing one’s perspective: creating or exploring beliefs, arguments, or theories
clarifying issues, conclusions, or beliefs
clarifying and analyzing the meanings of words or phrases
developing criteria for evaluation: clarifying values and standards
evaluating the credibility of sources of information
questioning deeply: raising and pursuing root or significant questions
analyzing or evaluating arguments, interpretations, beliefs, or theories
generating or assessing solutions
analyzing or evaluating actions or policies
reading critically: clarifying or critiquing texts
listening critically: the art of silent dialogue
making interdisciplinary connections
practicing Socratic discussion: clarifying and questioning beliefs, theories, or perspectives
reasoning dialogically: comparing perspectives, interpretations, or theories
reasoning dialectically: evaluating perspectives, interpretations, or theories

C. Cognitive Strategies - Micro-Skills

comparing and contrasting ideals with actual practice
thinking precisely about thinking: using critical vocabulary
noting significant similarities and differences
examining or evaluating assumptions
distinguishing relevant from irrelevant facts
making plausible inferences, predictions, or interpretations
giving reasons and evaluating evidence and alleged facts
recognizing contradictions
exploring implications and consequences

TOP

Other Conceptualizations of Critical Thinking

Read other definitions of critical thinking (CT) from John Dewey to John Chaffee as they complete the sentence: “Critical thinking is. . . .” Also review a collection of scholars’ ideas about critical thinking competencies as they answer the question: “What, specifically, does critical thinking look like? How will we know it when we see it?” What are the specific intellectual actions and attitudes associated with thinking critically?

Definitions: Critical Thinking is. . .
Compare the following definitions to Paul and Elder’s conceptualization of critical thinking. Note the similarities and differences in their explanations and areas of emphasis. As Paul and Elder explain in Tools for Taking Charge of Your Learning and Your Life (2001), “No one definition of critical thinking will do. Given the complexity of critical thinking—its rootedness in 2,400 years of intellectual history, as well as the wide range of its application—it is unwise to put too much weight on any one definition. Any brief formulation of critical thinking is bound to have important limitations.” For those interested in further research, in an appendix in the above-referenced text Paul and Elder offer additional definitions as well as a brief history of the idea of critical thinking from Socrates to the present. We offer a few definitions here.

Critical Thinking is...

Active, persistent, and careful consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds which support it and the further conclusions to which it tends. (John Dewey, 1909)

(1) An attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one’s experience; (2) knowledge of the methods of logical enquiry and reasoning; (3) some skill in applying those methods. Critical thinking calls for a persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports it and the further conclusions to which it tends. (Edward Glaser, 1941)

[T]he process of evaluation or categorization in terms of some previously accepted standards . . . this seems to involve attitude plus knowledge of facts plus some thinking skills. (Russell, cited in d’Angelo, 1971)

Skillful, responsible thinking that is conducive to judgment because it relies on criteria, is self-correcting and is sensitive to context. (Matthew Lipman, 1988)

[R]easonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do. (Robert Ennis, 1989)

[P]urposeful, self-regulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. CT is essential as a tool of inquiry. As such, CT is a liberating force in education and a powerful resource in one’s personal and civic life. While not synonymous with good thinking, CT is a pervasive and self-rectifying human phenomenon. The ideal critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit. Thus, educating good critical thinkers means working toward this ideal. It combines developing CT skills with nurturing those dispositions which consistently yield useful insights and which are the basis of a rational and democratic society. (Peter Facione, The Delphi Research Group, 1990)

[G]enerally thought to consist of two main general components, a disposition to think critically and a cognitive component. (Elizabeth Jones, et al., 1994)

[T]he use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desired outcome. . . . [and] thinking that is purposeful, reasoned, and goal-directed—the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions when the thinker is using skills that are thoughtful and effective for the particular context and type of thinking task. (Diane Halpern, 1996)

[T]hose diverse cognitive processes and associated attitudes critical to intelligent action in diverse situations and fields that can be improved by instruction and conscious effort. (Glock, 1987)

[S]killed and active interpretation and evaluation of observations and communications, information, and argumentation. (Michael Scriven, 1997)

[B]eing able to interpret, analyze, evaluate, and infer. [G]ood critical thinkers can do two more things. They can explain what they think and how they arrived at that judgment. And, they can apply their powers of critical thinking to themselves and improve on their previous opinions [self-regulation]. . . . The ideal critical thinker can be characterized not merely by her or his cognitive skills but also by how she or he approaches life and living in general. (Peter Facione, 1998)

[C]ognitive skills [that] determine how well someone gathers, processes, and applies information in order to identify the best way to reach a particular goal or navigate a complex situation. (Justin Menkes, 2005)

[I]s different from just thinking. It is metacognitive—it involves thinking about your thinking. . . . Full-fledged critical thinking involves three parts. First, critical thinking involves asking questions. It involves asking questions that need to be asked, asking good questions, questions that go to the heart of the matter. Critical thinking involves noticing that there are questions that need to be addressed. Second, critical thinking involves trying to answer those questions by reasoning them out. . . . Third, critical thinking involves believing the results of our reasoning. . . . [W]e actually believe the results because we have done our best to reason the issue out and we know that reasoning things out is the best way to get reliable answers. (Nosich, 2005)

A purposeful, organized cognitive process that we use to understand the world and make informed decisions. . . . A critical thinker is someone who has developed a knowledgeable understanding of our complex world, a thoughtful perspective on important ideas and timely issues, the capacity for penetrating insight and intelligent judgment, and sophisticated thinking and language abilities. (John Chaffee, 2006)

An awareness of a set of interrelated critical questions; an ability to ask and answer critical questions at appropriate times; and the desire to actively use the critical questions. The interrelated critical questions:

What are the issues and conclusions?
What are the reasons?
Which words or phrases are ambiguous?
What are the value conflicts and assumptions?
What are the descriptive assumptions?
Are there any fallacies in the reasoning?
How good is the evidence?
Are there rival causes?
Are the statistics deceptive?
What significant information is omitted?
What reasonable conclusions are possible?

(M. Neil Browne and Stuart M. Keeley, 2007).

Basic Critical Thinking Competencies (Cognitive Skills and Affective Dispositions)
In the sections that follow, scholars offer lists and explanations of specific intellectual skills and behaviors that underpin critical thinking. Remember, the Paul and Elder model suggests “35 Dimensions of Critical Thought”; the following information represents other views on the dimensions of critical thinking. As you read, recognize the specific vocabulary of the Paul and Elder model (elements, standards, traits) in these competencies and note the commonalities.

Edward Glaser (1941):

recognizing problems
finding workable means for meeting those problems
gathering and marshaling pertinent information
recognizing unstated assumptions and values
comprehending and using language with accuracy, clarity, and discrimination
interpreting data
appraising evidence and evaluating statements
recognizing the existence of logical relationships between propositions
drawing warranted conclusions and generalizations
putting to test the generalizations and conclusions at which one arrives
reconstructing one’s patterns of beliefs on the basis of wider experience
rendering accurate judgments about specific things and qualities in everyday life

Elizabeth A. Jones et al. (1994):

Interpretation Skills
Certain interpretation skills are important. College graduates should be able to detect indirect persuasion including the use of leading questions that are biased towards eliciting a preferred response, the use of misleading language that exaggerates or downplays the importance of something, the use of slanted definitions or comparisons which express a bias for or against a position and detect instances where irrelevant topics or considerations are brought into an argument to divert attention from the original issue.

A key component of interpretation is the ability to categorize information. College graduates should be able to make comparisons, formulate frameworks or categories, classify data, and translate information from one medium to another. An equally important interpretation skill is the ability to clarify meaning. In order to make clear the meaning of words, issues, conclusions, or beliefs, college graduates need to recognize confusing, vague language; ask relevant or penetrating questions; identify and seek additional resources; develop analogies or other forms of comparisons; and provide examples to explain ideas.

Analysis Skills
The ability to identify the explicit and implicit features of a communication, especially in arguments that put forth conclusions, is an essential skill. Students should be able to examine ideas and purposes by assessing the constraints on the practical applications and by assessing the interests, attitudes, or views contained in those ideas.

Evaluation Skills
College graduates should be able to assess the credibility of a communication and evaluate the strengths of claims and arguments. Specifically, students need to determine if arguments rest on false, biased, or doubtful assumptions; evaluate the credibility, accuracy, and reliability of sources of information; assess the importance of an argument and determine if it merits attention; evaluate an argument in terms of reasonability and practicality; assess statistical information; determine how new data may lead to further confirmation or questioning of a conclusion; determine if conclusions are derived from sufficiently large and representative samples; and evaluate analogies.

Inference Skills
The ability to collect and question evidence is an important critical thinking skill: This skill involves the formulation of a plan for locating information, the combination of disparate pieces of information, determination of sufficient evidence to form a conclusion and the judgment of what background information would be useful. Equally important is the ability to develop alternatives and hypotheses. College graduates should be able to seek evidence to confirm or disconfirm alternatives; seek opinions of others; assess the risks and benefits of each option; and develop new alternatives when appropriate. The ability to draw conclusions is also important. College graduates should be able to develop informed, well-reasoned conclusions which draw on the views of others but which represent an individual’s own independent analysis/synthesis and their own summaries.

Presenting Argument Skills
Another important skill is the ability to present arguments. This skill involves clearly communicating and justifying the results of one’s reasoning. College graduates should be able to present supporting reasons and evidence for their conclusions, present the crucial point of an issue, evaluate key assumptions, and formulate accurately alternative positions.

Reflection Skills
Reflection skills are considered to be necessary in order to monitor one’s comprehension and correct one’s process of thinking. College graduates should be able to make revisions in their arguments when their own self-examination reveals inadequacies. They should also apply the skills of their own analysis to their own arguments to confirm and/or correct their reasoning and results.

Dispositions
Dispositions are behavioral tendencies or traits of mind that concern how college graduates are inclined to use their thinking skills. College students should be curious, organized, fair-minded, open-minded, flexible, creative, and should persevere, apply insights from other cultures, find ways to collaborate, value the application of reason, and willingly self-correct and learn from errors.

Diane Halpern (1996):

recognition, identification, and control of variables (recognizing, controlling, or weighing multiple influences in solving problems)
awareness of gaps in knowledge or information (recognizing when you have failed to understand material because you can’t establish the meaning of a term or there is incomplete information provided)
understanding the need for operational definitions (recognizing when a concept has not been clearly defined and the need for using only words with prior definition in forming a new definition)
considering the strength of the reasons that support a conclusion (listing the reasons in an argument and considering how well they support a conclusion along with assumptions, qualifiers, and counterarguments that impact on the level of support)
drawing inferences from data and evidence, including correlational reasoning (considering sample size, measurement, and convergent validity when assessing empirical data)
using rational criteria when making decisions (listing and weighing alternatives and criteria that are important in reaching a decision)
systematically applying a plan for solving problems (being consciously aware of problem-solving strategies and applying them systematically when faced with a difficult decision)
reading for comprehension (monitoring comprehension of difficult texts, and knowing when to reread and when to skim; includes frequent use of paraphrase and summaries)
concern for accuracy (habitually checking work for accuracy and for comprehension)
trying creative approaches (making the effort to generate novel and useful responses to problems)
deliberately using multiple modes of thought (trying to think in spatial, verbal, and nonverbal modes)
working in a planful manner (looking ahead and anticipating difficulties when working on a problem)
communication skills (communicating clearly and effectively when speaking and writing)
recognizing propaganda (recognizing propagandistic techniques that are designed as emotional appeals)
maintaining an open attitude (willingness to suspend judgment and to accept a nonpreferred alternative if it is well reasoned)

Peter Facione (1998): Cognitive Skills
Interpretation: to comprehend and express the meaning or significance of a wide variety of experiences, situations, data, events, judgments, conventions, beliefs, rules, procedures or criteria.

recognizing a problem and describing it without bias
distinguishing a main idea from subordinate ideas in a text
constructing a tentative categorization or way of organizing something you are studying
paraphrasing someone’s ideas in your own words
clarifying what a sign, chart, or graph means
identifying an author’s purpose, theme, or point of view

Analysis: to identify the intended and actual inferential relationships among statements, questions, concepts, descriptions, or other forms of representation intended to express belief, judgment, experiences, reasons, information, or opinions.

examining ideas
detecting arguments
analyzing arguments
identifying the similarities and differences between two approaches to the solution of a given problem
picking out the main claim made in a newspaper editorial and tracing back the various reasons the editor offers in support of that claim
identifying unstated assumptions
constructing a way to represent a main conclusion and the various reasons given to support or criticize it
sketching the relationship of sentences or paragraphs to each other and to the main purpose of the passage
graphically organizing a chapter, knowing its purpose

Evaluation: to assess the credibility of statements or other representations which are accounts or descriptions of a person’s perception, experience, situation, judgment, belief, or opinion; and to assess the logical strength of the actual or intended relationships among inferential statements, descriptions, questions, or other forms of representation.

judging an author’s or speaker’s credibility
comparing the strengths and weaknesses of alternative interpretations determining the credibility of a source of information
judging if two statements contradict each other
judging if the evidence at hand supports the conclusion being drawn
recognizing the factors which make a person a credible witness regarding a given event or a credible authority with regard to a given topic
judging if an argument’s conclusion follows either with certainty or with a high level of confidence from its premises
judging the logical strength of arguments based on hypothetical situations
judging if a given argument is relevant or applicable or has implications for the situation at hand

Inference: to identify and secure elements needed to draw reasonable conclusions; to form conjectures and hypotheses; to consider relevant information and to educe the consequences flowing from data, statements, principles, evidence, judgments, beliefs, opinions, concepts, descriptions, questions, or other forms of representation.

querying evidence
conjecturing alternatives
drawing conclusions
seeing the implications of a position someone is advocating
drawing out or constructing meaning from the elements in a reading
identifying and securing the information needed to formulate a synthesis from multiple sources
after judging that it would be useful to resolving a given uncertainty if you knew certain facts, deciding on a plan which would yield clear knowledge regarding those facts
when faced with a problem, developing a set of options for addressing it
conducting a controlled experiment scientifically and applying the proper statistical methods to attempt to confirm or disconfirm an empirical hypothesis

Explanation: to state the results of one’s reasoning; to justify that reasoning in terms of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, and contextual considerations upon which one’s results were based; and to present one’s reasoning in the form of cogent arguments.

stating results
justifying procedures
presenting arguments
constructing a chart which organizes one’s findings,
writing down for future reference your current thinking on some important and complex matter
citing the standards and contextual factors used to judge the quality of an interpretation of a text
stating research results and describing the methods and criteria used to achieve those results
appealing to established criteria as a way of showing the reasonableness of a given judgment
designing a graphic display which accurately represents the subordinate and super-ordinate relationship among concepts or ideas
citing the evidence that led you to accept or reject an author’s position on an issue
listing the factors that were considered in assigning a final course grade

Self-regulation: to self-consciously monitor one’s cognitive activities, the elements used in those activities, and the results educed, particularly by applying skills in analysis and evaluation to one’s own inferential judgments with a view toward questioning, confirming, validating, or correcting either one’s reasoning or one’s results.

monitoring and correcting an interpretation you have offered
examining and correcting an inference you have drawn
reviewing and reformulating one of your own explanations
examining and correcting your ability to examine and correct yourself
examining your views on a controversial issue with sensitivity to the possible influences on your personal biases or self-interest
monitoring how well you seem to be understanding or comprehending something
separating your personal opinions and assumptions from those of the author of a passage or text
double checking yourself by recalculating the figures
varying your reading speed and method according to the type of material and your purpose for reading
reconsidering your interpretation or judgment in view of further analysis of the facts of the case
revising your answers in view of the errors you discovered in your work
changing your conclusion in view of the realization that you had misjudged the importance of certain factors when coming to your earlier decision

Peter Facione (1998): Affective Dispositions

inquisitiveness with regard to a wide range of issues
concern to become and remain well-informed
alertness to opportunities to use critical thinking
trust in the processes of reasoned inquiry
self-confidence in one’s own abilities to reason
open-mindedness regarding divergent world views
flexibility in considering alternatives and opinions
understanding of the opinions of other people
fair-mindedness in appraising reasoning
honesty in facing one’s own biases, prejudices, stereotypes, or egocentric tendencies
prudence in suspending, making, or altering judgments
willingness to reconsider and revise views where honest reflection suggests that change is warranted
clarity in stating a question or concern
orderliness in working with complexity
diligence in seeking relevant information
reasonableness in selecting and applying criteria
care in focusing attention on the concern at hand
persistence though difficulties are encountered
precision to the degree permitted by the subject and the circumstances
an ethical approach to arguments and problems

TOP

Alec Fisher (2001):

identifying the elements in a reasoned case, especially reasons and conclusions
identifying and evaluating assumptions
clarifying and interpreting expressions and ideas
judging the acceptability, especially the credibility, of claims
evaluating arguments of different kinds
analyzing, evaluating, and making decisions
drawing inferences
producing arguments

TOP

Justin Menkes—“Executive Intelligence” (2005)

Regarding tasks, intelligent leaders:

appropriately define a problem and differentiate essential objectives from less-relevant concerns
anticipate obstacles to achieving their objectives and identify sensible means to circumvent them
critically examine the accuracy of underlying assumptions
articulate the strengths and weaknesses of the suggestions of arguments posed
recognize what is known about an issue, what more needs to be known, and how best to obtain the relevant and accurate information needed
use multiple perspectives to identify probable unintended consequences of various action plans

Regarding people, intelligent leaders:

recognize the conclusions that can be drawn from a particular exchange
recognize the underlying agendas and motivations of individuals and groups involved in a situation
anticipate the probable reaction of individuals to actions or communications
accurately identify the core issues and perspectives that are central to a conflict
appropriately consider the probable effects and possible unintended consequences that may result from taking a particular course of action
acknowledge and balance the different needs of all relevant stakeholders

Regarding themselves, intelligent leaders:

pursue feedback that may reveal errors in their judgments and make appropriate adjustments
recognize their personal biases or limitations in perspective and use this understanding to improve their thinking and their action plans
recognize when serious flaws in their ideas or actions require swift public acknowledgement of mistakes and a dramatic change in direction
appropriately articulate the essential flaws in others’ arguments and reiterate the strengths in their own positions
recognize when it is appropriate to resist others’ objections and remain committed to a sound course of action

TOP

John Chaffee (2006):

thinking actively
carefully exploring situations with questions
thinking independently
viewing situations from different perspectives
supporting diverse perspectives with reason and evidence
discussing ideas in an organized way

TOP

Check out a reference list of sources used in this section.