Skip to main content

Abstract

The task of improving critical thinking skills in students at American universities has typically been addressed by offering a stand-alone course in critical thinking, often taught by philosophy or psychology departments. In this paper I argue that critical thinking courses of this type need to be substantially redesigned before they can meet the appropriate critical thinking learning goals for their students. I begin my argument by noting that students in American higher education are currently not improving their critical thinking skills. The solution, I argue, will not lie in better pedagogy; even in the best-taught classes students will not achieve the level of critical thinking that is necessary. Instead, we must redesign our courses to help students become lifelong learners who can then continue the task of improving their critical thinking skills long after the course ends. I discuss in some detail some of the more significant ways courses will need to be redesigned to achieve these student learning outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 149.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 199.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., and Norman, M. K. 2010. How Learning Works: Seven Research-Based Principle for Smart Teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arum, R., and Roksa, J. 2011. Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doyle, T. 2008. Helping Students Learn in a Learner-Centered Environment: A Guide to Facilitating Learning in Higher Education. Sterling, VA: Stylus Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R. H. 1962. “A Concept of Critical Thinking.” Harvard Educational Review 32 (1): 81–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ennis, R. H. 1991. “Critical Thinking: A Streamlined Conception.” Teaching Philosophy 14 (1): 5–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gladwell, M. 2005. Blink: The Power of Thinking without Thinking. New York: Back Bay Books/Little, Brown and Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatcher, D. 2013. Critical Thinking: A New Definition and Defense 2000 [Web Page 2013]. Available from http://www.bakeru.edu/crit/literature/dlh_ct_defense.htm.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hatcher, D., and Spencer, L. A. 2000. Reasoning and Writing: From Critical Thinking to Composition. Boston: American Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman, D. 2011. Thinking, Fast and Slow. London: Allen Lane.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepper, M. P., Greene, D., and Nisbett, R. E. 1973. “Undermining Children’s Intrinsic Interest with Extrinsic Reward: A Test of the ‘Overjustification’ Hypothesis.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 28 (1): 129–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipman, M. 1988. “Critical Thinking: What Can It Be?” Educational Leadership 46 (1): 38–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lipman, M. 2003. Thinking in Education. (second edition) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • London, M. 2011. “Introduction.” In The Oxford Handbook of Lifelong Learning, edited by M. London. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. 2001. Classroom Instruction That Works: Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marzano, R. What Is an Effect Size? nd. Available from http://www.marzanoresearch.com/media/documents/pdf/AppendixB_DTLGO.pdf.

  • McPeck, J. 1981. Critical Thinking and Education. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nilson, L. B. 2003. Teaching at Its Best: A Research-Based Resource for College Instructors. Vol. 2. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paul, R. 2004. The State of Critical Thinking Today: The Need for a Substantive Concept of Critical Thinking. Available from http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/the-state-of-critical-thinking-today/523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pink, D. H. 2009. Drive: The Surprising Truth about What Motivates Us. New York: Riverhead Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Possin, K. 2008. “A Field Guide to Critical Thinking Assessment.” Teaching Philosophy 31 (3): 201–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siegel, H. 1988. Educating Reason: Rationality, Critical Thinking, and Education. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J., and Chabris, C. F. 1999. “Gorillas in Our Midst: Sustained Inattentional Blindness for Dynamic Events.” Perception 28: 1059–1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simons, D. J. “Selective Attention Test.” Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJG698U2Mvo.

  • Willingham, D. T. 2009. Why Don’t Students Like School? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Martin Davies Ronald Barnett

Copyright information

© 2015 Martin Davies and Ronald Barnett

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Green, P. (2015). Teaching Critical Thinking for Lifelong Learning. In: Davies, M., Barnett, R. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics