Critical Thinking in Doctoral studies

This paper argues that Moore's specifist defence of critical thinking as ‘diverse modes of thought in the disciplines’, which appeared in Higher Education Research & Development, 30(3), 2011, is flawed as it entrenches relativist attitudes toward the important skill of critical thinking. The paper outlines the critical thinking debate, distinguishes between ‘top-down’, ‘bottom-up’ and ‘relativist’ approaches and locates Moore's account therein. It uses examples from one discipline-specific area, namely, the discipline of Literature, to show that the generalist approach to critical thinking does not ‘leave something out’ and outlines why teaching ‘generic’ critical thinking skills is central to tertiary education, teaching and learning, and employment opportunities for students. The paper also defends the assessment of critical thinking skills.

There has been no shortage of definitions of the concept of “critical thinking” over the years and the concept has been subject to much detailed scholarly work. In social and educational terms critical thinking is an important topic. Of late, critical thinking has also been widely discussed in the popular media, and the concept has been regarded as one of the most important graduate outcomes expected of a university education. However, despite this, scholars have yet to arrive at a holistic conception of critical thinking—a model of critical thinking as it were—that might usefully underpin the range of considerations about critical thinking that occur in the higher education literature. This paper: (1) reviews the various definitions and approaches to critical thinking, and (2) incorporates them into a single, coherent model. A number
of disagreements in critical thinking scholarship are outlined as ‘axis disputes’ arising from the proposed model.

This paper, which is related to my PhD work, looks at examination, the process that completes the experience of doing a PhD in Australia and transforms the candidate’s identity from student to autonomous researcher. As oral defences and vivas are rare, examination of the thesis is an extremely high stakes assessment: it will determine the outcome of the years spent planning and executing a project, organising and writing material, and generally beginning to learn what it means to do research.

AWEJ Volume.5 Number.2, 2014   
                                                                                                                                                      Pp.206-220

                                                                                                                                                                                                                     

Towards a Critical Thinking Classroom

Omnia Nabih Ahmed
Yanbu University College (YUC)
Yanbu, Saudi Arabia


Abstract
The major objective of the present study is to investigate the effectiveness of using Richard Paul’s “Elements and Standards of Reasoning (E&Ss)” on improving the Critical Thinking skills as well as writing skills of EFL Saudi students. Students were identified as high, mid and low-level students. The progress of each group was measured through a progressive series of rubric assessments of their writing, examining five key areas important in rhetorical composition: clarity of writing, analysis of author’s argument, use of supporting information, organization, and grammar and syntax. Through the introduction of this focused Critical Thinking training, student composition improved in all of the five key areas, among all the groups.
Keywords: critical thinking, writing skills, critical thinkers, passive learners, standards of reasoning

Most studies on economic discourse have focused on benchmarking and internationalization of business firms and their economic effects and have neglected their role in the education institutions. The general apathy and neglect of the concept of benchmarking to align PhD and Doctoral program requirements needs to be verified by focusing on clear differences of PhD and ED.D which can be accepted internationally. While using the bench-marking model, this paper discusses findings accumulated based on case study analyses of graduate schools adaptations of international specifications and major characteristics and differences between PhD and Doctoral programs especially for International Graduate Students (IGS).

How can we develop competence in research and professional practice? This essay tries to answer the question from the perspective of critical systems thinking, that is, through an approach that aims to promote reflective research and practice. The paper is written for research students and practitioners in different professional fields. It addresses them in a direct and personal way.

Note: This article is a considerably expanded version of the Lincoln School of Management Working Paper No. 22 of June 1998 (also available in this site).
A further-expanded and updated version was prepared for Ulrich's Bimonthly, July-August 2017 (Vol. 15, No. 4, 28 August 2017) and is equally available in the Academia.edu site, see Section "Philosophy for Professionals – on Good practice," entry "Ulrich, W. (2017)".

RESUMEN: En el presente proyecto, argumentamos sobre la problemática que se genera por la falta de desarrollo de competencias, que surge de la educación eminentemente memorística a la que son sometidos los estudiantes de distintos niveles. Para solucionar dicho problema, proponemos un programa de debate que mediante la preparación de tesis (análisis de perspectivas), argumentación y refutación de distintos puntos de vista, permitan al alumno desarrollar sus habilidades de razonamiento crítico, metacognición, innovación, liderazgo y otras habilidades blandas que surgen de la práctica del diálogo y el trabajo en equipo.
Parte importante del programa propuesto se compone de contenidos relacionados con aspectos de lógica, retórica y dialéctica, los que son aplicados mediante el debate, entendido como una metodología activa del aprendizaje donde los estudiantes participan voluntariamente, lo que permite dotar de contenido a materias filosóficas y de pensamiento abstracto, haciendo que el conocimiento sea significativo y permanente.
PALABRAS CLAVE: Debate educacional, debate competitivo, argumentación, pensamiento crítico, Educación del s. XXI, análisis discursivo.

ABSTRACT: This project addresses the prevalent educational issues intertwined with current teaching methodologies. It is argued that the inconsistency in the development of student’s capabilities is caused by focusing student’s attention, from all across educational levels, on mnemonic methods of retaining information. In order to deal with this problem, a debating programme is proposed as one plausible solution. Hereafter, the ability of critical thinking, metacognition, innovation and leadership, as well as other soft skills that result from the practice of dialogue and teamwork, will be understood to be fomented through the practice of debating. Concretely, the method is executed through the formulation of thesis (analysis of perspectives), argumentation and refutation from different points of view.
An important part of the proposed program consists of content related to aspects of logic, rhetoric, and dialect, which are applied through debate, understood as an active methodology of apprenticeship where the students participate voluntarily, allowing the content to provide philosophical subjects and abstract thinking, making the knowledge significant and permanent.
KEY WORDS: Educational debate, competitive debate, argumentation, critical thinking, education of century XXI, discourse analysis.

RESUMO: Neste projeto, argumentamos sobre a problemática que se gera pela falta de desenvolvimento de competências, que advém preponderantemente da educação por memorização à qual os estudantes de todos os níveis são submetidos. Para solucionar esse problema, propomos um programa de debate que mediante a preparação da tese (análise de perspectivas), argumentação e refutação de diferentes pontos de vista, permitam ao aluno desenvolver suas habilidades de pensamento crítico, metacognição, inovação, liderança e outras habilidades sociais que surgem da prática do diálogo e do trabalho em equipe.
Parte importante do programa proposto se compõe de conteúdos relacionados a aspectos de lógica, retórica e dialética, que são aplicados durante o debate, entendido como uma metodologia ativa da aprendizagem onde os estudantes participam voluntariamente, o que permite conferir conteúdo substancial a materiais filosóficos e de pensamento abstrato, fazendo com que o aprendizado seja significativo e permanente.
PALAVRAS CHAVE: Debate educacional, debate competitivo, argumentação, pensamento crítico, Educação no século XXI, análise do discurso.

This paper is a brief summary of my doctoral research thesis . My PhD research was a critical investigation of two externally and internally polarised occupations; entrepreneurs and PhD research students. Primary data was gathered and examined using critical narrative analysis (Langdridge, 2007) and social identity theory . It highlights the similarities in practical processes and challenges perceived differences in the social identities of both occupations. This explorative bottom up approach involved interviewing six entrepreneurs and six doctoral researchers from as varied backgrounds as was possible. Comparisons were conducted from a critical view of entrepreneurship speculation and mythology . An assertion is made as a result that repositions PhD research workers as having much of the creative destruction element in their work as is weaved into the entrepreneurship discourse. It shows that some PhDs create new knowledge in their very private and less celebrated role and that most of those we label entrepreneurs are in fact merely buying-a-job. This development positions PhDs alongside entrepreneurs in their similarly creative and risky endeavours and dismisses the "species" premise of both roles. The study focussed on the people in both these occupations and compared what they do and how they feel about their social identity as either an "entrepreneur" or as a PhD student. More differences were uncovered within each cohort than between them inviting new occupational typologies to be put forward which bridge the established divide. Implications for research include support for Cheng et al. appeal for studying quality, not quantity or more simply, value over volume in entrepreneurship research. The same can be seen as helpful to doctoral student research too suggesting that determining "what for" is more instructive than studying "why" people enter these and other challenging occupations. Implications for practice include raising questions such as whether academics will remain the most suitable people to supervise doctoral research students in the future when so few plan to be employed in academia or as professional researchers.

PhD by Portfolio aims to attract professionals (although not limited to) with a 'biography' of vocational applications / projects / initiatives which might be linked through a theme; education, health, engineering, design, law, etc. PhD by Portfolio invites candidates who can link 3 'linked but distinct' areas of their expertise and intellectual investments, in to one body of work-a PhD thesis for examination.

Portfolio Thesis: 80,000 words in total, constituted by 3 projects which are distinctive but linked, perhaps by a theme-synthesised and reported through a 15,000 word synopsis. The synopsis is the focus of the viva exam, however the whole portfolio is made available, the same as a tradition thesis.

EDITORIAL E-learning, Technology enhanced learning, blended e-learning and concepts like computer-mediated pedagogies are currently emerging fields in Education that is receiving widespread attention from educators, teachers and practitioners all over the world. E-learning(Virtual teaching) and Blended Education are used to describe a mix of various activities such as face to face classrooms, live e-learning, software sharing and self-paced learning. .org). The focus of the Conference is on the role of e-learning and open-education in the provision of high-quality higher education at an optimal economically feasible cost. It also aimed at meeting the surging demand for higher education and the challenge of making it more accessible without compromising its quality.

This paper is based on a qualitative study that investigated graduate student perspectives of online discussions in higher
education courses. The data are drawn primarily from interviews and student journal entries. The study examined student
experiences of online discussions from a “technorealist” perspective thereby taking into account not only the potential but also the limitations of online spaces for teaching and learning. This paper focuses on some of the popular claims of asynchronous
discussions as presented in the literature; along with findings from a study of student perspectives of the same. Finally, the
implications of the findings for online instructors are discussed.
Keywords: Online Education, Cognitive.

Recent and ongoing changes in university structures and desires, as well as alterations in doctoral
education, are shaping new spatialities and temporalities of academic work and identities. This paper
considers the spatialities of one set of researcher identities – those undertaking PhD degrees – and
specifically explores the material and socio-cultural affordances of the sites in which research is
practised. Based on a qualitative study (interviews with 30 PhD students and focus groups with 34
students) at two Australian metropolitan and research-intensive universities, we find students associate
different forms of researcher identities with the different spaces of research work. In particular, the
university campus and specifically the office and/or laboratory are sites where research is approached
as a form of work, and identification as both worker and researcher. Notably, social connections and
the power relations of the campus are woven through these identifications. Home, in contrast, can
serve as a place of respite or a quiet space to think, but more often disrupts identifications as
researcher or emergent academic. This research suggests the need first, to recognise the significance of
a physical workspace on campus for developing researchers and second, for a more nuanced
consideration of the notion of a neoliberalised university.

The Problem " It makes me sick when I see dissertation work completed by the advisor. I can name several scholars who do it. Faculty get overly involved in students' writing, " was a comment we heard recently from a colleague. This led us to wonder whether advisors have been generally too involved in their students' work. If so, this presents a problem because the dissertation is designed to be an independent project created by the student. The whole point of doctoral study is to bring about a transformation from dependent student to independent scholar. Obviously, if advisors have been writing for students the goal of the program will not be met. On the other hand, research indicates some advisors are too busy or unwilling to support doctoral students properly (Lovitts, 2008). Consider this quote from an interview of a doctoral advisor by Aitchison (2012): " [Students are] forced, they're facilitated and encouraged from Day 1 to write. We've no shortage of students and you want to cut your losses early if they're not going to perform, particularly in the current metrics. " So, the message here was students were on their own to learn scholarly writing; moreover, there was competition among students and those who could perform independently would move forward; those who needed support would be left behind. This approach is also flawed because doctoral work is a dynamic journey that transforms a dependent student into an independent scholar. This paper will help mentors strike the right balance. Journal of Higher Education Management, 32(2), xx-xx (ISSN-2640-7515).

This study investigated what strategies doctoral students could employ to ensure their competitiveness in higher education graduate program faculty searches. A total of 39 program coordinators, department heads, and deans were asked how graduates from non-ranked higher education programs could prepare themselves for faculty opportunities, including searches at top-ranked schools. The findings indicate that developing grantmanship, networking, presentation, and publishing skills will help students to become more competitive. Additionally, participants suggested that students collaborate with other scholars, show initiative in their own professional development, understand the expectations of different program types, and be willing to participate in post-doctoral fellowships. These findings will help students who desire to serve at top-ranked doctoral higher education programs upon graduation. A unique feature of this paper includes a discussion of the unwritten values, rules, expectations, and social mores that influence a search process, including the roles of institutional fit, previous academic preparation, tokenism, and race. This study is designed to inform the decision-making of higher education program faculty as they prepare their students for the professoriate.

The European Media and Communication Doctoral Summer School brings together a group of highly qualified doctoral students as well as lecturing senior researchers and professors from a diversity of European countries. The main objective of the fourteen-day summer school is to organise an innovative learning process at doctoral level, focusing primarily on enhancing the quality of individual dissertation projects through an intercultural and interdisciplinary exchange and networking programme. This said, the summer school is not merely based on traditional postgraduate teaching approaches like lectures and workshops. The summer school also integrates many group-centred and individual approaches, especially an individualised discussion of doctoral projects, peer-to-peer feedback - and a joint book production. The topic "Media Practice and Everyday Agency in Europe" is dedicated to the fundamental question: How is media change related to the everyday agency and sense making pr...

In this article, we share our use of poetry as a research supervision tool. We are not only colleagues but are also in a student–supervisor relationship. Early on in the PhD process, we began writing poems to each other on email as a way of communicating aspects of our research ideas that we felt were not able to be expressed in prose. We found that this use of poetry enabled a direct emotional engagement with the work and ideas we were forming. At the same time, we shaped our writing activities as a form of resistance, indulging in a form of anti-neoliberal critique. Crucially, however, we found that poetry also allowed us to form a closer relationship because it required both of us to be open and vulnerable. We didn’t allow time to write and edit the poems but emailed them as soon as they were written.

The European Media and Communication Doctoral Summer School brings together a group of highly qualified doctoral students as well as lecturing senior researchers and professors from a diversity of European countries. The main objective of the fourteen-day summer school is to organise an innovative learning process at doctoral level, focusing primarily on enhancing the quality of individual dissertation projects through an intercultural and interdisciplinary exchange and networking programme. This said, the summer school is not merely based on traditional postgraduate teaching approaches like lectures and workshops. The summer school also integrates many group-centred and individual approaches, especially an individualised discussion of doctoral projects, peer-to-peer feedback - and a joint book production. The topic "Media Practice and Everyday Agency in Europe" is dedicated to the fundamental question: How is media change related to the everyday agency and sense making pr...

It may come as a surprise to a neophyte PhD supervisor, an expert in their field, to understand that research supervision is not about supervising research directly. It is about teaching their student to become a researcher. There is a difference. The students are usually doing their own projects, which they alone have to defend. Therefore, it is the student’s activities, decisions, actions and writing towards that end that are being supervised and for which the traditional subject expert may be neither well attuned nor equipped. Research supervision is a function of teaching and learning at PhD level; this shifts the focus of the supervisor’s energies toward engagement and student experience and not necessarily towards groundbreaking discoveries in their field.

https://www.timeshighereducation.com/campus/fostering-freedom-phd-students-how-supervisors-can-shape-accessible-paths-doctoral-research

This paper is in two parts. Part I outlines three traditional approaches to the teaching of critical thinking: the normative, cognitive psychology, and educational approaches. Each of these approaches is discussed in relation to the influences of various methods of critical thinking instruction. The paper contrasts these approaches with what I call the “visualisation” approach. This approach is explained with reference to computer-aided argument mapping (CAAM) which uses dedicated computer software to represent inferences between premise and conclusions. The paper presents a detailed account of the CAAM methodology, and theoretical justification for its use, illustrating this with the argument mapping software Rationale™. A number of Rationale™ design conventions and logical principles are outlined including the principle of abstraction, the MECE principle, and the “Holding Hands” and “Rabbit Rule” heuristics. Part II of this paper outlines the growing empirical evidence for the effectiveness of CAAM as a method of teaching critical thinking.