Chapter 5 – Learning to Think
Intro
Most professors place high value on critical thinking, but few do much to act on that belief.
Teaching Critical Thinking
Students have many opportunities to engage in critical thinking in college, and their ability increases somewhat from freshman to senior. They are hampered in their progress by a general lack of effort, as they are not forced to do enough homework or engage the course content sufficiently. They are also held back by lack of epistemic development, from ignorant certainty to intelligent confusion and beyond, but may reach only the stage of naïve relativism. Students rely on rote learning and fail to learn basic concepts because of the faculty teaching style, that of lecturing. We must use active learning styles in the classroom. Structuring the course to reflect the goal of fostering critical thinking in the field, we must worry less about covering material and more about engaging the students; and our methods of evaluating students must also reflect these priorities. Several reasons are presented and rejected for using the standard lecture format: inspiring outstanding scholars, class sizes, need for coverage, familiarity, fear, lack of student response. Professional schools have shown us how to use active learning by way of case studies and discussion-based teaching.
Quantitative Reasoning
People in all professions and all walks of life also need some basic quantitative analytical tools. The NCED defines quantitative literacy in terms of Arithmetic, Data, Computers, Modeling, Statistics, Chance and Reasoning. All undergraduates should learn these skills, but they are not well-served by standard math and science course in this regard. Once again, active learning methods are known to work better but are seldom used. Quantitative skills must be taught and encouraged in a wider variety of courses. At the same time, this kind of teaching must not be relegated to graduate students or junior faculty.
The Concentration (Major)
The major developed as a way to make students explore a subject in greater depth. Students acquire a body of knowledge, learn methods of inquiry, and test their abilities as they achieve mastery of the subject. Higher levels of sophistication can be achieved, whether the major is in a standard discipline or is an interdisciplinary construct. But at present the major is not contributing substantially to students’ development of critical thinking skills; in fact, some skills even deteriorate depending on the major field. Majors must not take up too much of a student’s academic program, and they must serve well the purpose that created them, to use in-depth exploration of a field as a way to develop critical thinking skills.
A Matter of Perspective
Teachers talk about critical thinking but they don’t teach accordingly. We should rely on education research to guide pedagogy and program evaluation, not professors’ teaching experience and opinions.
QUESTIONS
a) How do we define “critical thinking”? Are there various definitions?
b) How does one teach a student to engage in critical thinking, especially when the student is reluctant to do so?
c) Should all Gen Ed courses actively teach critical thinking, or is it all right if some do not?
d) How much quantitative reasoning can be expected to take place in social science courses? In humanities courses? Is there enough already going on in our science courses, or are they also lacking?
e) What role does SCI play in all this?
f) Is the NCED list necessary and/or sufficient?
g) Do we really need to rethink our majors as Bok suggests? Can every major serve the purpose equally well, to develop critical thinking?
h) Are we the faculty really as bad as Bok paints us?
Monday, October 27, 2008
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Chapter 4 Summary and Discussion Questions - Fletcher Winston
Chapter 4 - Learning to Communicate
In chapter four, Bok discusses the first purpose of higher education, which is learning to communicate. Teaching students to write effectively is the aspect of communication he deals with the most and he argues this is deserved; writing is among the most important goals of college. Not only is this skill demanded by employers, but few students or faculty would disagree with its importance. However, Bok observes that it is “hard, time-consuming work” to improve the organization, clarity, and persuasiveness of student writing. For this reason, it is often neglected.
Bok provides six suggestions for improving writing programs:
1. clearly define goals of the writing program
2. assemble a competent staff of instructors for the basic course
3. repeated practice by the students should be encouraged by faculty in courses beyond introductory composition
4. professors should provide ample, timely feedback on the substance and quality of papers
5. colleges should reward faculty who expend the effort on improving student writing with extra salary or added teaching credit
6. evaluate the writing program on a regular basis
Discussion Questions
1. Bok suggests that clearly defining the goals of the writing program is important enough to warrant a faculty-wide forum. Should the Gen Ed committee organize this type of discussion for CLA faculty?
2. Given the importance of repetition to the development of writing skills, how much emphasis should Gen Ed place on incorporating writing in courses beyond FYS?
3. How does the university’s emphasis on attracting pre-professional students impact our realization of this goal? For instance, a pre-pharmacy student in my UNV class this semester was appalled that her FYS instructor asked students to complete a writing assignment the first class. She duly switched sections. Perhaps, she was not convinced that writing would be relevant to her ambitions. Along these same lines, do Mercer students, in general, appreciate writing? (This relates to the “differing perspectives” discussion question for chapter three.) If they do not believe writing is an important goal, how much effort should we spend with students to examine its significance as an educational purpose?
4. To what extent does Mercer reward its faculty and provide incentives for spending the extensive time required to sufficiently help students with their writing? For instance, Bok argues that individual faculty meetings with students are a necessary component of writing pedagogy; how are faculty rewarded for these types of efforts? If this is among the most important goals of a university, how might Mercer increase its investment in the faculty? Should we raise this issue with the faculty welfare committee?
5. Bok emphasizes the importance of program evaluation. What assessment tools are the most useful for the writing program? How might we improve the evaluation of our writing program?
6. Towards the end of chapter four, Bok discusses the importance of oral communication to our educational aims, even though it is often afforded a more lowly status than writing. How do we treat oral communication in Gen Ed? In what ways might we improve the development of this skill among our students?
In chapter four, Bok discusses the first purpose of higher education, which is learning to communicate. Teaching students to write effectively is the aspect of communication he deals with the most and he argues this is deserved; writing is among the most important goals of college. Not only is this skill demanded by employers, but few students or faculty would disagree with its importance. However, Bok observes that it is “hard, time-consuming work” to improve the organization, clarity, and persuasiveness of student writing. For this reason, it is often neglected.
Bok provides six suggestions for improving writing programs:
1. clearly define goals of the writing program
2. assemble a competent staff of instructors for the basic course
3. repeated practice by the students should be encouraged by faculty in courses beyond introductory composition
4. professors should provide ample, timely feedback on the substance and quality of papers
5. colleges should reward faculty who expend the effort on improving student writing with extra salary or added teaching credit
6. evaluate the writing program on a regular basis
Discussion Questions
1. Bok suggests that clearly defining the goals of the writing program is important enough to warrant a faculty-wide forum. Should the Gen Ed committee organize this type of discussion for CLA faculty?
2. Given the importance of repetition to the development of writing skills, how much emphasis should Gen Ed place on incorporating writing in courses beyond FYS?
3. How does the university’s emphasis on attracting pre-professional students impact our realization of this goal? For instance, a pre-pharmacy student in my UNV class this semester was appalled that her FYS instructor asked students to complete a writing assignment the first class. She duly switched sections. Perhaps, she was not convinced that writing would be relevant to her ambitions. Along these same lines, do Mercer students, in general, appreciate writing? (This relates to the “differing perspectives” discussion question for chapter three.) If they do not believe writing is an important goal, how much effort should we spend with students to examine its significance as an educational purpose?
4. To what extent does Mercer reward its faculty and provide incentives for spending the extensive time required to sufficiently help students with their writing? For instance, Bok argues that individual faculty meetings with students are a necessary component of writing pedagogy; how are faculty rewarded for these types of efforts? If this is among the most important goals of a university, how might Mercer increase its investment in the faculty? Should we raise this issue with the faculty welfare committee?
5. Bok emphasizes the importance of program evaluation. What assessment tools are the most useful for the writing program? How might we improve the evaluation of our writing program?
6. Towards the end of chapter four, Bok discusses the importance of oral communication to our educational aims, even though it is often afforded a more lowly status than writing. How do we treat oral communication in Gen Ed? In what ways might we improve the development of this skill among our students?
Chapter 3 Summary and Discussion Questions - Fletcher Winston
Chapter 3 - Purposes
In chapter three, Bok suggests that there are seven purposes of higher education:
1. the ability to communicate
• in writing and orally
2. critical thinking
• this includes quantitative methods
3. moral reasoning
• to develop a clearer, stronger set of ethical principals
4. preparing citizens
• this is an effort to help students become informed and active participants in a democracy
5. living with diversity
• students should learn to live and work effectively with other people and enter into fulfilling personal relationships
• for example, students should be sensitive to issues of gender, race, and sexuality
6. living in a more global society
• students should gain knowledge about international affairs, other countries, and cultures
7. breadth of interests
• colleges should encourage students to engage a variety of interests
• this will expand their capabilities and knowledge
• it will help them enjoy full and varied lives
• for example, students should explore various intellectual, artistic, and athletic pursuits
Discussion Questions
1. Do you agree with Bok that these are the most important goals of higher education? Are other important purposes missing from his assessment? In consideration of limited resources, should some goals receive more emphasis than others? If so, which ones are the most important?
2. To what extent does our Gen Ed program already subscribe to these goals?
3. To what extent does the university’s strategic plan facilitate or inhibit the development of these goals? (http://www2.mercer.edu/UPC/Future/default.htm)
4. In what ways might our heritage as a Baptist university facilitate or inhibit the development these goals?
5. In the previous chapter Bok discusses the differing perspectives of students and faculty. With this in mind, is there systematic evidence regarding the aims of Mercer students regarding their college experience? How might we incorporate student concerns into the development of our general education goals?
In chapter three, Bok suggests that there are seven purposes of higher education:
1. the ability to communicate
• in writing and orally
2. critical thinking
• this includes quantitative methods
3. moral reasoning
• to develop a clearer, stronger set of ethical principals
4. preparing citizens
• this is an effort to help students become informed and active participants in a democracy
5. living with diversity
• students should learn to live and work effectively with other people and enter into fulfilling personal relationships
• for example, students should be sensitive to issues of gender, race, and sexuality
6. living in a more global society
• students should gain knowledge about international affairs, other countries, and cultures
7. breadth of interests
• colleges should encourage students to engage a variety of interests
• this will expand their capabilities and knowledge
• it will help them enjoy full and varied lives
• for example, students should explore various intellectual, artistic, and athletic pursuits
Discussion Questions
1. Do you agree with Bok that these are the most important goals of higher education? Are other important purposes missing from his assessment? In consideration of limited resources, should some goals receive more emphasis than others? If so, which ones are the most important?
2. To what extent does our Gen Ed program already subscribe to these goals?
3. To what extent does the university’s strategic plan facilitate or inhibit the development of these goals? (http://www2.mercer.edu/UPC/Future/default.htm)
4. In what ways might our heritage as a Baptist university facilitate or inhibit the development these goals?
5. In the previous chapter Bok discusses the differing perspectives of students and faculty. With this in mind, is there systematic evidence regarding the aims of Mercer students regarding their college experience? How might we incorporate student concerns into the development of our general education goals?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
