What is the problem you are trying to solve? What does the evidence say? What assumptions are you making? Where would you most often find this problem? Where are there similar situations? Where would you go to get answers to this problem? Where can this be improved? Where can you get more information? When is this un acceptable? When does this become a problem? When will we be able to tell if it worked? When is it time to stop? Why did the character say …?
Why did the author decide to …? Why did that happen? Why do you think I he, she, they asked that question? How is this different from other situations? How is this similar to …? How would you use …? How could the story have ended differently?
How does this work? How could this be harmful? How else could this have been handled? How should they have responded? Throughout the course students will be asked to write questions on critical thinking drawing from information the Preface section B2. Below are some examples of critical thinking questions CTQ that are either superficial or don't use Socratic Questioning. What specifically is the product?
While this question could be a CTQ from the clarification category, it is not a good critical thinking question because it is superficial and the information is about the product and is not relevant to solving for the conversion and reactor volumes as well as critiquing the answers.
Is the reactor really tubular or does it have some bulges in it? This is not a good critical thinking question because we know in Chapter 1 that even if the reactor varies in cross sectional area the conversion-volume relationship is the same. Other not so good critical thinking questions Will this be on the exam? What's the correct answers? Why is there a "2" in this equation? What are the units of this symbol? While the last two questions are not CTQs, they may be valid questions 4. Is the rate law expected to hold at a lower temperature?
This question is not a good CTQ because it is superficial and not sufficiently penetrating. Better would be Under what conditions might the activation energy and reaction order change in temperature. This question is a good CTQ because it explores the assumptions under which the rate law might change, such as in Langmuir Hinschelwood kinetics.What did it mean when …? But we soon shut that curiosity down with glib answers, answers to fend off rather than to respond to the logic of the question. Collaborative thinking and inclusive staff recruitment allow for different opinions and perspectives of the same role and its requirements. If the role requires critical thinking around people customers or staff , focus on people skills. Other not so good critical thinking questions Will this be on the exam? It is only people who have little knowledge who take their knowledge to be complete and entire. Critical critical is about being question, but it still. Second, what is not assessed is thinking, on the should be created. They are the base of which every critical analysis and consequences. This is a good CTQ because it probes implications whole, taught.
Would you share your definition of critical thinking? Critical thinking requires questioning facts and the status quo. How else could this have been handled? Other not so good critical thinking questions Will this be on the exam? How is this similar to …? If we are trying to foster quality thinking, we don't want students simply to assert things; we want them to try to reason things out on the basis of evidence and good reasons.
That is, there is no point in our trying to model and encourage curiosity, if we are not willing to foster an environment in which the minds of our students can learn the value and pain of hard intellectual work. Education has never before had to prepare students for such dynamic flux, unpredictability, and complexity for such ferment, tumult, and disarray. What data, what experiences, what evidence are given? Paul: I don't think so. Are we willing to bring new rigor to our own thinking in order to help our students bring that same rigor to theirs? The "opposite" is also true.
Avoid leading questions Being a critical thinker is about escaping your bias and seeing things outside of your personal perspective. What can teachers do to "kindle" this spark and keep it alive in education? Question: National standards will result in national accountability. If there is no problem there is no point in thinking critically.
Paul: To flourish, curiosity must evolve into disciplined inquiry and reflection.
Leave a comment Your email address will not be published. We rarely join the quest with our children. See "Why Students-and Teachers-Don't Reason Well" The assessing teachers and testers did not notice that the student failed to respond to the directions, did not support his judgment with reasons and evidence, did not consider possible criteria on which to base his judgment, did not analyze the subject in the light of the criteria, and did not select evidence that clearly supported his judgment. With respect to intellectual standards, we are quite able to design prompts that require students to recognize clarity in contrast to unclarity; distinguish accurate from inaccurate accounts; decide when a statement is relevant or irrelevant to a given point; identify inconsistent positions as well as consistent ones; discriminate deep, complete, and significant accounts from those that are superficial, fragmentary, and trivial; evaluate responses with respect to their fairness; distinguish well-evidenced accounts from those unsupported by reasons and evidence; and tell good reasons from bad.
How would you use …? This question is a good CTQ because it explores the assumptions under which the rate law might change, such as in Langmuir Hinschelwood kinetics.
Basically the problem in the schools is that we separate things, treat them in isolation and mistreat them as a result. Teenagers, for example, sometimes think so well of themselves that they operate under the illusion that they can safely drive while drunk or safely take drugs. If we are trying to foster quality thinking, we don't want students simply to assert things; we want them to try to reason things out on the basis of evidence and good reasons. The present level of instruction for thinking is very low indeed. The end result is a new creation; the writer's thinking for the first time now exists within the reader's mind. Paul: Consider critical thinking first.