Search

Paul (2018a, 2018b) discussed the concept of critical thinking in a series of "American Annals of the Deaf" editorials examining how critical thinking might serve as a "springboard" to deep knowledge or wisdom and wondering if critical thinking should be viewed as a noble endeavor or hopeless cause. Paul explored three questions in which he considered (a) types of critical thinkers, (b) teaching and evaluating critical thinking, and (c) empathy's role in critical thinking. Responding to Paul, the author focuses on the same questions by summarizing Paul's view, then following with his own. He also explores the question "What is critical thinking?" Mostly, the author's views resemble Paul's, but he elaborates on places where he thinks gaps or possible misunderstandings exist. The author concludes that critical thinking is indeed a noble endeavor because it is not just what you think that matters, but how you think.

Purpose: I respond to Kamhi's (2011) conclusion in his article "Balancing Certainty and Uncertainty in Clinical Practice" that rational or critical thinking is an essential complement to evidence-based practice (EBP). Method: I expand on Kamhi's conclusion and briefly describe what clinicians might need to know to think critically within an EBP profession. Specifically, I suggest how critical thinking is relevant to EBP, broadly summarize the relevant skills, indicate the importance of thinking dispositions, and outline the various ways our thinking can go wrong. Conclusion: I finish the commentary by suggesting that critical thinking skills should be considered a required outcome of our professional training programs.

Paul (2018a, 2018b) discussed the concept of critical thinking in a series of American Annals of the Deaf editorials examining how critical thinking might serve as a "springboard" to deep knowledge or wisdom and wondering if critical thinking should be viewed as a noble endeavor or hopeless cause. Paul explored three questions in which he considered (a) types of critical thinkers, (b) teaching and evaluating critical thinking, and (c) empathy's role in critical thinking. Responding to Paul, the author focuses on the same questions by summarizing Paul's view, then following with his own. He also explores the question What is critical thinking? Mostly, the author's views resemble Paul's, but he elaborates on places where he thinks gaps or possible misunderstandings exist. The author concludes that critical thinking is indeed a noble endeavor because it is not just what you think that matters, but how you think. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Critical thinking is increasingly recognized as an essential knowledge and skill for the helping professions. Yet, our pedagogical literature has provided infrequent guidance on how instructors can help students to understand what "critical thinking" means or how it might contribute to their professional lives. Therefore, the purpose of this tutorial is to provide guidelines on how instructors might teach future practitioners to become critical thinkers. The main topics address an instructional definition of critical thinking, the basic knowledge and skills that comprise critical thinking, a broad view of instructional approaches, and a summary of developmental milestones of adult critical thinkers. Specific teaching strategies from instructors who have hands-on experience with guiding their students to become critical thinkers are included. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: I respond to Kamhi's (2011) conclusion in his article "Balancing Certainty and Uncertainty in Clinical Practice" that rational or critical thinking is an essential complement to evidence-based practice (EBP). Method: I expand on Kamhi's conclusion and briefly describe what clinicians might need to know to think critically within an EBP profession. Specifically, I suggest how critical thinking is relevant to EBP, broadly summarize the relevant skills, indicate the importance of thinking dispositions, and outline the various ways our thinking can go wrong. Conclusion: I finish the commentary by suggesting that critical thinking skills should be considered a required outcome of our professional training programs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Collective intelligence methods conducted with students and educators for scale item generation. • Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis conducted across two independent samples for factor structure identification. • Convergent and predictive validity tests indicated relationships between CT dispositions and other constructs and outcomes, including conspiracy and paranormal beliefs. • The SENCTDS is a 21-item instrument, measuring six dispositions: reflection, attentiveness, open-mindedness, organisation, perseverance, and intrinsic goal motivation. Although many conceptualisations of critical thinking (CT) exist, the vast majority acknowledge the importance of both skill-based and disposition-based components. There is, however, a notable lack of agreement regarding what constitutes CT dispositions and how best to approach the measurement of CT dispositions. The current study reports on the development and validation of a new Student-Educator Negotiated CT Dispositions scale (SENCTDS). Using collective intelligence methods for scale item generation and both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis across two independent samples for factor structure identification, a six-factor CT disposition scale was developed. Convergent and predictive validity tests indicated relationships between CT dispositions and other constructs and outcomes, including Need for Cognition (NCS), Motivated Strategies for Learning (MSLQ), Real World Outcomes of Critical Thinking (RWO), and both conspiracy and paranormal beliefs. Given the limited availability of measures of CT dispositions, the development of the SENCTDS is a valuable contribution to the field, which may prove useful in future research that seeks to examine predictors and outcomes of both skill-based and disposition-based aspects of CT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]