THIS IS AN OVERVIEW FOR YOU TO GET AN UNDERSTANDING OF THE CONTEXT
My research aims to explore how social science undergraduates in the UAE develop their critical thinking skills. The definition of what critical thinking is or consists of is immensely debated, and therefore its development, teaching, and assessment are contested (Banning, 2006; Halpern, 2001; Ennis, 1996; Fisher and Scriven, 1997; Paul, 1992; Dewey, 1909, Facione, 1990; Glaser, 1941; Sternberg, 1986). The literature on critical thinking in higher education is built around the fundamental assumption that, while regarded as essential, critical thinking is neither clearly nor commonly understood (Niu, Behar-Horenstein, Garvan, Cyndi, 2013; Mathias, 2015; Verburgh, 2019). This paper aims to run a small-scale scholarly investigation of the definitions and develop understandings of critical thinking through the lens of academics and students in political science. More specifically, this study explores the consistencies and disconnections assumed to exist between academic staff and students’ perceptions of attainment and definition of critical thinking. The hypothesis is that academics and students perceive crucial thinking in different ways and that this may limit its achievement as a critical graduate attribute, claimed by many higher education institutions and demanded by the labor market (Burbach, Matkin, & Fritz, 2004; Reinststein & Lander, 2008; Bok, 2006).
This study aims to contribute to the existing gap in the literature on the development of critical thinking skills in higher education, specifically looking at political science students and academics in the UAE and the underrepresented context in higher education literature. The study does not attempt to measure students’ critical thinking skills using standardized tests. Instead, it focuses on students’ understandings and definitions of critical thinking within the contextualized teaching and learning experiences throughout an introductory political science course. The study also investigates the academics’ accounts of their practice of developing critical thinking skills in order to provide a context for the students’ responses and reactions. Both narratives – from students and academics – are used to explore the potential consistencies and disconnections between academics’ and students’ understandings and definitions of critical thinking.
Findings Chapter Draft
This research is an exploratory case study on the development of critical thinking in higher education. I start by presenting the findings on how participants define critical thinking, highlighting the differences between students and academics. This follows the analysis of participants’ perceptions of how higher education develops critical thinking. The evidence details the following four domains of higher education that contribute to the development of critical thinking: course and curriculum design, modes of teaching and learning, assessments, and socialization. The findings bring together points of conformity and disconnect among participants.
Defining critical thinking
Critical thinking is defined as the process of synthesizing, interpreting, applying, and analyzing information intellectually, which was gathered from observation, among other gathering skills. As per the literature, this is a contentious and highly debated definition; therefore, understanding the perceptions of critical thinking from the perspective of participants is crucial. When asked to define critical thinking, similar terminology was used by both students and academics. Academics referred to critical thinking as a state of consistently questioning and commenting on what you are engaging in.
“We are always questioning what we are reading and not accepting anything at face value. Furthermore, we engage in a critique of the materials you know by asking these questions: you know. What does this book or article contribute? How does it contribute, and what are its limitations? Therefore, I think that this encourages the student or anyone really to develop a position on the material rather than, you know, just regurgitate or, you know, or reproduce the information,” said Academic M.
All these academics used the term ‘analysis’ to define critical thinking. “I think there’s like, no well-defined term that we use all the time. It’s just the ability to question and analyze something, rather than just take it at face value,” opined Academic J.
Students mostly used the term “digging deeper” as a way to describe critical thinking:
“Critical thinking really kind of forces you to dig deeper, sit down and really like, think about what you’re learning, and kind of make sure you actually understand it … Whereas in other classes, I actually put in an effort to really understand the content and kind of, like, challenge myself to, to question things, which is a lot harder (laughs),” suggested Student MI.
Students also described critical thinking as a process that includes analysing. One student described their critical thinking:
“Critical thinking entails these steps, the reading part, the analysis, and the thinking part. I feel like critical analysis is, like, unfolding the uh the topic or the issue deeper until you understand its core and everything from this topic,” said Student M
The academics brought up that formulating an opinion or a position on a topic requires critical thinking. Academic J said, “Critical thinking is bringing a lot of things together and meld your argument out of that, or your analysis out of that,” while Student H stated that “I would define critical thinking as may be looking at a piece of work or like hearing someone’s opinion or whatever it may be and understanding, the different points of view, and how you would position yourself knowing all of that.” This definition was useful when examining the findings on assessments and essays (see below).
Students also perceive critical thinking as a tool to distinguish the right from the wrong:
“I see critical thinking as the ability to objectively look at things and critically decide based on information, based on unbiased information. Alternatively, sometimes, it is even biased what is right, what is wrong, and looks at different sides of the same points,” suggested Student V.
Critical thinking here entailed dealing with diverse opinions, and balancing multiple sources of information was also commonly brought up by students.
“My definition of what it means to be a critical thinker is to receive information and not to just take it for granted, and to be able to balance multiple sources. Especially, like, in a world where we have Fox News and CNN, like in the context of the USA, and… If you are not a critical thinker, you end up infiltrated by some ideologies that you assume is the truth even though they are not. Therefore, I think filtering out your truth, your kind of truth, when there is so much bias,” said Student Hu.
With academics, this diversity meant that students had varying levels of confidence in voicing their opinion, commanding the English language, and finding comfort in the classroom. “In particular with freshmen, people are often not confident, and so [I’m] still trying to adjust the best way to deal with that,” explained Academic J.
On the other hand, some students found it hard to distinguish between thinking and critical thinking mainly because both are related, as they stated it has just become second nature to them, especially in the higher education environment:
“I think because we’re always kind of forced to be critical thinkers, especially in the environment of higher education, it becomes second nature that you no longer go like, “Okay, let me switch on critical thinking lenses and look into this,” it just becomes the way you think, right? It becomes second nature,” suggested student Hu.
Two students brought up how critical thinking, which they equated to questioning everything, also has a downside. One mentioned how it could make them “annoying to be around” (student Y), and the other gave an example of how if you subscribe to a specific political party. You suddenly start to question some of the positions they have, that it is not favored in his community (Student V).
When asked if and why critical thinking is important, no participant denied its importance. Many brought up how it is crucial to our current world, as new information can be thrown at you from every direction. A student highlighted how critical thinking makes you aware and added, “I know this might sound bad, but like how you really shouldn’t trust everything you read, even if it’s from a reputable academic source,” suggested Student H.
Both academics and students brought up that critical thinking is now a required life skill as you have an overwhelming production of information that is not necessarily true. Building on that, critical thinking can give you a new perspective, unique to you and your experiences.
“I think like, with like, how much information we constantly have in front of us, around us, uh, I believe critical thinking is important in that section. I also think critical thinking sometimes makes you enjoy things more like when you’re reading a book and like sometimes if you read specific things or watch specific things a few years after like if you watch it in intervals- of who you are and how you think, you notice that you receive it differently. Even if, like, the medium is the same, it is just as if your view on the world has changed, and you, you see this differently,” explained Student Y.
When asking students about critical thinking, many of them brought up the fact that to engage in critical thinking, one must have prior knowledge in the field. However, academics’ views on having foundational expertise in life skills to engage in critical thinking varied, as some of them thought one does not need to understand something to be able to question it. In contrast, others thought to be able to question you need an understanding.
“I guess if you know more about a subject, then it is going to be much easier for you to apply critical thinking… the content of the class or I just happened to know more, or maybe like, I just felt more comfortable with the teacher,” suggested Student MI.
This shows that as the students progressed throughout the course, they felt either more comfortable or knowledgeable enough to apply critical thinking, linking to the finding below, where academics observed heightened levels of critical thinking throughout the course. Student V thought that critical thinking did not give him/her any particular skills but rather knowledge of economic political, social development. Building on that, I dug deeper to ask students if they observed any development in their critical thinking skills had taken the course, to which they stated that they learned more of independent learning rather than hard skills. The academics stated that they observed a heightened level of critical thinking throughout the course, using both formal and informal ways of assessing students.
Developing Critical Thinking
To understand the perceptions of how higher education develops critical thinking, students and academics participated in semi-structured interviews. The data and document analyses revealed that the following four domains of higher education contribute to the development of critical thinking: course and curriculum design, modes of teaching and learning, assessments, and socialization. I begin by discussing the course and curriculum design, aided by document analysis. Then I continue to the academics’ experiences with teaching juxtaposed with students’ reflections on learning. This follows explaining the role of assessments. I finish by focusing on students’ insights into the socialization process within higher education as a critical contributor to the development of their critical thinking.
Course design
The university website mentions critical thinking multiple times, as it is “essential to the liberal arts education.” Critical thinking is listed as a skill, along with reading, writing, and oral expression, which is developed in the required first-year writing seminar. The core curriculum required of all students encompasses a variety of courses that combines different fields. To describe the core curriculum, the university states that it “fosters critical thinking” within those courses. The university states that students learn how ideas have been developed, altered, and refuted overtime looking specifically at the social science academic program page. In addition, each discipline emphasizes the development of critical analytical skills; students learn to use empirical methods to test their ideas and theories with data”. While it may not specifically use the word critical thinking, one can interpret the learning of how ideas have been developed, altered, and refuted as the ability to think critically. In addition, students in their definitions of critical thinking have used the second part of the description, the ability to evaluate multiple sources of evidence.
Two of the three-class syllabi use the word ‘critical ‘in their description of critical thinking. The one course that does not lists the intended learning outcomes of the course as mainly an understanding of economic and political theories and an emphasis placed on understanding and identifying the role of economic incentives and political institutions in underpinning economic and social development. The two that do use the word ‘critical’ first as a description for the assignments should provide a brief critical analysis of the readings (i.e., NOT a summary). Academics also defined critical thinking as not regurgitating information; therefore, this assumed to encourage the use of essential skills of thinking when tackling assignments. The second syllabus uses the word critical to define a class-learning outcome: ‘Critically examine spatial frameworks and scales of analysis such as civilization, nation-state, ocean systems, continents, networks, Diasporas, and transnationalism.’ The word critical is used again to describe class discussions and how the students must critically read the texts prior to the class to be engaged in the lecture. A student discussed this as the ability to objectively look at things and critically decide based on unbiased information.
One academic highlighted how the curriculum as a whole must build on the students’ experiences and engage them with critical thinking throughout their four years, not just in a specific classroom:
“I don’t think I can teach this entirely in one semester only if you are with the undergraduates, whose part of their year is to try and lay seeds, which I hope then to sort of, as they take more courses these kinds of things will come up again and again. In addition, that is kind of the aim of the curriculum and the social sciences,” opined Academic J.
Teaching
When asked to describe the course and its learning outcomes, academics’ responses varied. However, the writing was a common theme that came up in all interviews with academics. As one of them explained:
“We wanted them, students to be able to understand how globalization and global history evolved as interconnected concepts … I want students to learn how to write. That is where I think a lot of the teaching of critical thinking happens. You know, I want students to be able to express themselves clearly,” suggested Academic M.
Writing from the academic’s perspective seemed to be the most important skill to gain from their classes, as it allowed the students to express themselves without reacting negatively to defend themselves during discussions. We observe later in the findings that the students’ reactions to writing varied.
“Writing is the best way to teach students critical thinking. You know, as if three people dominate in class discussion the way it often happens in the classroom. So that’s why I think it’s the shyer students that get the opportunity to be, you know, confident and be, like the most protected space, right? It is just you on the page and, and you do not get the kind of social pressure of, you know, of the classroom. Therefore, I think that is where a lot of learning can happen. Moreover, for me, that is just a very important side of teaching critical thinking,” said Academic M.
This was also the preferred method of teaching for one of the academics—so many weird dynamics in the classroom. There is a way, you know, just in terms of who is shy or not, there’s, you know, different levels of comfort with English, shared Academic M. To help create an environment that encourages writing, she additionally offered individualized writing workshops that encouraged students to take advantage of her readily available feedback to improve their writing. Student interviews (see below) show that they really valued this experience. Academic M shared further details about the writing support she provided:
“Moreover, I had the new writing workshops where the first one did not work so well because it was collective. Then I individualized that I rather listened to their feedback…They said they felt too much pressure from their peers, and like maybe they were afraid of giving away their ideas. So I individualized them and, and I had individual conferences with them, and I worked with them on the writing that way. I continued to do that even outside of those workshops. However, I think the seminar like created a set of precedents that I am available to do that. Then, later on, a lot of them would, like I, I spent a ton of time conferencing individually with them, you know, and talking to them about writing and how to express them, their ideas through writing,” suggested Academic M.
Besides writing, academics adopted a style of teaching that allowed students to discover inconsistencies. An example shared below by an academic is their response to students asking if there is a right answer is that the one-way students find themselves trying to impose critical thinking in the class is the number of times every single semester that they have to answer a question like, “What’s the answer?” In addition, they go, “There’s never a right answer. You need to go and research. Students also mention how this form of teaching is actually effective in allowing them to reach rewarding eureka moments in the course. Below is a quote that elaborates on the example above.
“One thing I have tried to get better at is you have to leave some gaps for students to fill in, in a sense, right. In addition, in a big class, it is difficult because you cannot do any discussion… Moreover, I suppose what I was trying to say to you earlier is I try to use the assignments partly to do that. Like, and that is why I always have to give them answers like, “I don’t know the answer.”… I guess what I am trying to say is you can leave small gaps for people to engage in this, right. This is what builds confidence. It is like, oh, there is a small thing. Yeah, yeah. That is a gap. In addition, that, I guess, that is what I would like to try to do,” said Academic J.
In my findings, students really emphasized how this style of teaching helped them develop their thought process and gave them a sense of autonomy in their learning experience.
“Instead of giving us the answer immediately, he really stretched it out and gave us all these other readings on why it was accurate two hundred years ago so that we could think about it ourselves, why it is no longer accurate today. Then only in like the second half of the semester, we could to read why it is no longer accurate today, and by that time, we already rather knew ourselves,” suggested Student Hu.
Learning
Students’ learning experiences, and where they found themselves engaging with critical thinking, differed in some aspects but also aligned with the findings shared earlier regarding the academics’ experiences. The main difference is that students valued class discussion. It allowed them to engage with diverse perspectives on the same text, which helped them develop a better understanding of the topics discussed:
“In addition, academics would like put us in breakout rooms, and she would tell us to review a part of the book or article, whatever we are reading, and we would engage with the other students, and then we would present our ideas and what we have discussed in, like the entire class. Therefore, that is also critical thinking, in my opinion, because you are also engaging with how other people interpreted the text,” said Student H.
Not only do students bring different perspectives on the reading, but they also feel that their diverse backgrounds are valued and allow them to engage in fruitful discussions on global topics that the course entails.
“At NYU, we are very exposed to different cultures and approaches to many things. And innately brings a lot of room for discussion and a lot of room for critical thinking in terms of just us being in, you know, introduced to something we’ve never thought of, or having a, you know, someone else is talking about something new to us. Therefore, I think there are examples of critical thinking, especially here. They can happen on a global level, and they will be discussed at universities. Therefore, I think it is always interesting when there is a situation in the world; it is interesting to see how our community reacts,” explained Student V.
Students emphasize the important role that academics play in enabling discussions and creating an environment that is tolerant, safe, and engaging. “In my experiences, like, teachers play a big role in helping foster an environment that you feel comfortable, like, kind of growing your critical thinking skills, your debating,” shared Student MI.
Students and academics shared some limitations to the formal teaching and learning for developing critical thinking. Academics discussed the class size and how it can be limited to facilitate discussions with classes that have 15+ students. As introductory courses, they tend to fill up quickly.
“I think when students are motivated, they would work hard and smart without being pushed to do the task. They would not see work as a burden unto them, and would not feel overworked or stressed out. So, you know, we were dealing with some constraints,” explained Academic M.
Another limiting aspect brought up by both students and academics is the willingness to learn and engage. “On the university level, like it has to be a matter of, I’d say almost willingness, to be honest,” said Student Y. Because these courses are requirements, many students are forced to take the course rather than selecting to be in it themselves; this could affect how much they get out of it. ‘So, if I were actually more engaged in the course, I would probably do a lot more critical thinking than I am now just trying to write an essay and get the grade,’ explained Student V.
Assessments
When asked how they evaluated students’ critical thinking, the academics shared the approach explained by Academic J that essay is “the gold standard for critical thinking cause it makes you think things through more than talking.” This is the preferred form of assessment because it is individual; everyone had to participate, and it gave people time to work at their preferred pace and formulate their own opinions and arguments.
“Writing is in some ways, it is a different skill, but you have all the time in the world. You do not have the pressure of, you know, as if loud people talking over you, you know, can organize your thoughts. Can you write a thesis statement? Which the thesis is really the argument. Can you make your own argument and say something about the readings? In addition, can you make it interesting and new? In addition, and how do you engage with them? Therefore, that is where I think I put the stress in terms of assessment,” illustrated Academic M.
Academics described that the questions they assigned were open-ended and argumentative. This encouraged students to engage with the topic or theme of the essay critically. “Generally, I assign argumentative essays that are meant to set up that kind of critical thinking from it again. Essays that tell students that they should construct their analysis and not just literally, you know, regurgitating what their, the authors they’ve read said”, explained Academic J.
One academic acknowledged how essays could also be limiting because of the level of comfort students had with English, which was why he offered a variety of assignments, yet personally still held essays as the best way to evaluate students’ critical thinking. He also highlighted the language skills: “The other aspect is that maybe the language is more difficult for some people than others. So, you have to find a way around all of those issues, and that’s partly why I have such a range of different assignment types, to try and make it fairer for those different” (Academic J).
The majority of students agreed that essays came with a conclusion that they can analyze, apply and synthesize information critically through reasoning and observation to direct their actions; however, it all goes back to a willingness to learn. It is easy to write an essay that may seem like the student is engaging, but they are just trying to get a requirement out of the way. Student MI states the following:
I guess essays. You know. I feel like essays are a good example of critical thinking. Moreover, and I think they can kind of show your own way, like, show your academic, at least, like, “How am I thinking about this topic? And am I thinking critically about it, or am I just like, copying what I found on the internet and then writing it?” You know, it’s like- essays, academics say you need evidence. Then you need analysis. Therefore, it is like, “Okay, like, is this essay … Does it have more evidence or analysis?
Essays allowed students to analyze and evaluate evidence from multiple sources. This aligned with their definition of critical thinking.
While there was a consensus on the benefits of essays for evaluating critical thinking among participants, some students still acknowledged the value of discussions and the benefits they have to their learning. “I think the discussions were, like, a very big part of learning how to criticize and think better, but I feel like the response papers, not the essays, the response papers… helped me formulate better arguments and critically think and analyze much better,” said Student M.
Socialization
Students often brought up the setting of higher education as an environment that encouraged critical thinking in its day-to-day activities and engagements. “Higher education setting really promotes these things…- I don’t think that without higher education, at least the higher education I received, I could be as critical, or as knowledgeable as I am right now”, shared Student Hu.
Students stated that the freedom, and not feeling like you have to sound smart, allowed them to have thoughtful conversations outside the class and engage with critical thinking without feeling as if it was forced.
“Then it would lead to this whole conversation, this whole debate. In addition, honestly, sometimes, those, I feel like those discussions outside other classrooms are better because they do not feel as constrained as they are, you know, in the classroom. You feel a bit more, like, free to say what you want. In addition, you are not kind of like, under the supervision of, of an academic… However, in the classroom, I rather have to like, think before I say things. … In a classroom, you are always pressured to like, say something smart,” suggested Student MI.
One student even gave an example of how their current informal experience at university is more than their class experience. “Like just yesterday, I was talking to one of my friends about… In addition, why it happened, for example. Therefore, I would say there is a lot of room; there is a lot of room for discussion and critical thinking at NYU. But maybe not, at least from my current experience, not in, in a classroom”, said Student V. Academics acknowledged this as well and worried that if online teaching continued, students would miss out on the informal learning experiences that happened outside of the classroom like field trips and field excursions.