Using interactive management to facilitate a student-centred conceptualisation of critical thinking: a case study
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Christopher P. Dwyer (1)
Michael J. Hogan (1)
Owen M. Harney (1)
John O’Reilly (2) - 关键词：Critical thinking ; Interactive management ; Disposition towards thinking ; Collective intelligence
- 刊名：Educational Technology Research and Development
- 出版年：2014
- 出版时间：December 2014
- 年：2014
- 卷：62
- 期：6
- 页码：687-709
- 全文大小：434 KB
- 参考文献：1. Ackoff, R. L. (1981). / Creating the corporate future: Plan or be planned for. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
2. Alberts, H. (1992). Acquisition: Past, present and future. Paper presented at the meeting of the Institute of Management Sciences and Operations Research Society. Orlando, FL, March.
3. Allen, R., Feezel, J., & Kauffeld, F. (1967). / A taxonomy of concepts and critical abilities related to the evaluation of verbal arguments (Occasional Paper No. 9). Madison, WI: Wisconsin Research and Development, Center for Cognitive Learning.
4. Argyris, C. (1982). / Reasoning, learning, and action: Individual and organizational. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5. Ashby, W. R. (1958). Requisite variety and its implications for the control of complex systems. / Cybernetica, / 1(2), 1-7.
6. Association of American Colleges & Universities. (2005). / Liberal education outcomes: A preliminary report on student achievement in college. Washington, DC: AAC&U.
7. Australian Council for Educational Research. (2002). / Graduate skills assessment: Stage one validity study. Australia: Department of Education, Science and Training.
8. Banich, M. T. (2009). Executive function: The search for an integrated account. / Current Directions in Psychological Science, / 18(2), 89-4. CrossRef
9. Baril, P. B., Cunningham, B. M., Fordham, D. R., Gardner, R. L., & Wolcott, S. K. (1998). Critical thinking in the public accounting profession: Aptitudes and attitudes. / Journal of Accounting Education, / 16(4), 381-06. CrossRef
10. Bensley, D. A. (1998). / Critical thinking in psychology: A unified skills approach. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks & Cole.
11. Bohm, D. (1990). A new theory of the relationship of mind and matter. / Philosophical psychology, / 3(2-), 271-86. CrossRef
12. Boomer, G. (1992). Negotiating the curriculum. In G. Boomer, N. Lester, C. Onore, & J. Cook (Eds.), / Negotiating the curriculum: Educating for the 21st century (pp. 4-3). London: Falmer.
13. Boulding, K. E. (1966). / The impact of the social sciences. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
14. Brabeck, M.M. (1981). The relationship between critical thinking skills and development of reflective judgment among adolescent and adult women. Paper presented at the 89th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, August 24-6.
15. Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (1999). / How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.
16. Broome, B. J. (1995a). Collective design of the future: Structural analysis of tribal vision statements. / American Indian Quarterly, / 19, 205-28. CrossRef
17. Broome, B. (1995b). The role of facilitated group process in community-based planning and design: Promoting greater participation in Comanche tribal governance. In L. R. Frey (Ed.), / Innovations in group facilitation: Applications in natural settings (pp. 27-2). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
18. Broome, B. J., & Chen, M. (1992). Guidelines for computer-assisted group problem-solving: Meeting the challenges of complex issues. / Small Group Research, / 23, 216-36. CrossRef
19. Broome, B. J., & Cromer, I. L. (1991). Strategic planning for tribal economic development: A culturally appropriate model for consensus building. / International Journal of Conflict Management, / 2, 217-34. CrossRef
20. Broome, B. J., & Fulbright, L. (1995). A multi-stage influence model of barriers to group problem solving. / Small Group Research, / 26, 25-5. CrossRef
21. Butchart, S., Bigelow, J., Oppy, G., Korb, K., & Gold, I. (2009). Improving critical thinking using web-based argument mapping exercises with automated feedback. / Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, / 25(2), 268-91.
22. Christakis, A. N. (1987). Systems profile: The Club of Rome revisited. / Systems Research, / 4, 53-8. CrossRef
23. Cleveland, H. (1973). / The decision makers. C - 作者单位：Christopher P. Dwyer (1)
Michael J. Hogan (1)
Owen M. Harney (1)
John O’Reilly (2)
1. School of Psychology, NUI, Galway, Ireland
2. University of Limerick, Limerick, Ireland - ISSN：1556-6501
文摘
Critical thinking (CT) is a metacognitive process, consisting of a number of sub-skills and dispositions, that, when used appropriately, increases the chances of producing a logical solution to a problem or a valid conclusion to an argument. CT has been identified as a fundamental learning objective of third-level education; however, students often report not being given the opportunity to adequately understand and cultivate CT skills. Though most CT interventions are designed based on academic or expert definitions of CT skills, students are rarely, if ever, asked to guide their instruction by describing their perspectives on what constitutes CT. The current case study investigated students-conceptualisations of what constitutes good CT using a collective intelligence methodology, interactive management. Interactive management (IM) is a computer-assisted process that allows a group to build a structural model describing relations between elements in a system. Though decades of research on group decision-making in educational and social psychology highlight the many limitations associated with group problem solving (e.g. as a result of an over-reliance on heuristics, cognitive biases and ‘groupthink-, a fundamental skill for making decisions and solving problems is the ability to collectively visualise the structure of a shared problem, and use this knowledge to design solutions and strategies for collective action. Results of IM group work from the current case study revealed five core CT skills (clarity of expression, conversational skill, inference, evaluation, and explanation), five CT dispositions (detachment, listening, systematicity, recognising uncertainty, and self-questioning) and fourteen structural relationships among them. The ability to detach, listen and engage in conversation with others, were seen as fundamental drivers of all other competencies in the system. Results are discussed in light of research and theory on CT and best practice for CT instruction.