Thinking critically to become a high achieving practitioner

Introduction

Critical thinking (CT) is a key component of your personal, professional and academic development. It features prominently in the some of the UK's teachers' standards as well as being explicitly highlighted in the QAA's definition of undergraduate education studies courses:

Essentially, education studies is concerned with understanding how people develop and learn throughout their lives, and the nature of knowledge and critical engagement with ways of knowing and understanding.

(QAA, 2015, p 6)

Moon (2008), however, highlights numerous contrasting definitions of the term within academia with Moore (2013) finding seven differing interpretations within one HE institution alone. Furthermore, Higgins (2014) questions its importance in relation to other thinking skills such as creativity, as well as how it should be developed and applied. This chapter outlines key definitions, approaches and limitations of CT while also highlighting expectations within professional and academic standards. Your ability to develop a consistently critical stance towards information has a major influence on your professional career and personal journey through life.

Principles of critical thinking

The importance of critical thinking

Recently, phrases such as 'post-truth' and 'fake news' have risen to prominence following the Brexit and American presidential campaigns, where demonstrably false claims were repeatedly made for electoral gain (Peters, 2017). When challenged over these, responses related to having rights to voice differing opinions, oxymoronically defined as 'alternative facts', or representing the true voice of the people over educated elites. Thus Michael Gove dismissed the evaluations of numerous renowned authorities by declaring: I think the people of this country have had enough of experts (Sky News, 2016), a casual dismissal of evidence and expertise that raises the question of what value he saw in his previous role as Secretary of State for Education. Indeed, reflecting on the rising popularity of anti-intellectual culture, Hoffman (2016) cites several surveys demonstrating declining public awareness of key scientific issues as evidence of a breakdown in informed public policy discourse. Peters argues in-depth research and analysis therefore face direct threats from the speed and reach of social media:

It's not so much that facts are futile, it's just that they take a while to collect and marshal into a knock-down argument. By the time the facts are gathered the media moment has passed, the headline has been grabbed, and the lie can be modified, apologised for or replaced by another.

(Peters, 2017, p 3)

Regardless of the extent to which current affairs genuinely represent a new paradigm, such events illustrate the importance of CT as a necessary means of examining, substantiating or challenging the basis of decisions that affect our everyday lives. Challenging lies, ignorant, ill-informed or maliciously twisted information is not being part of an 'intellectual elite', but a crucial part of being an academic (Hoffman, 2016), professional employee and constructive citizen within society (Facione, 2015). It is important to remember that the point of researching evidence should not be to unwaveringly support your personal viewpoints or predispositions, but to challenge, and in all likelihood change, your own opinions and understandings. By being better informed, you can unearth your own prejudices and misunderstandings, thereby improving your own comprehension of, and contribution to, the world.

Moore's (2013) study of literature and academics' understandings of CT found a consensus regarding its importance, but no such agreement regarding its definition or implementation approaches. There is even dispute regarding whether it should be considered an unchanging set of principles, context-dependent or limited within subject areas. Regarding the first view of CT, the American Philosophical Association formed an expert consensus that has been subsequently frequently cited:

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.

(American Philosophical Association, 1990, cited in Facione, 2015, p 27)

Although recognising differing approaches to CT, Elder and Paul (2010) take the idea of defining underlying principles further, developing Universal Intellectual Standards: clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, significance and fairness, which underpin thought processes and intellectual traits or virtues. Vaughn (2015) further advocates the value of a systematic, process-based approach with distinct procedures and methods, although Mulnix (2012) warns that this alone is insufficient, urging repeated practice to embed and continually develop CT ability. Countering the above viewpoints, Willingham's research (2008) emphasises the importance of in-depth subject knowledge as a precursor to CT, arguing that limited outcomes of generic skills development programmes evidence his view that CT skills are discipline specific and lack transferability. Clinchy (1993, cited in Moore, 2013), considers that CT depends on the context that it will be applied in, requiring either separate knowing, a dispassionate approach to evaluating evidence, or connected knowing, where the focus is on insight from individuals and groups. Barnett (1997, cited in Moore, 2013) also favours differing modes depending on its purpose: subject competence, practical knowledge, political engagement and strategic thinking.

While there is disagreement regarding whether and how CT should be defined and taught, there are some common aspects that can help us to identify CT and how we may apply it to our personal and professional lives.

Sourcing and analysing information

* Having a clear focus to your investigation.

* Acquiring relevant information from multiple sources.

* Systematically organising evidence.

* Identifying key themes and inferring meaningful connections.

* Comparing and...