Summary Notes on Critical Thinking(C.

T)
@ article: C.T- What is it en Why it counts
-

how failing to anticipate the consequences of ones decisions often leads to disastrous
results not only for the decision maker, but for many other people as well.

Teach people to make good decisions and you equip them to improve their own futures
and become contributing members of society, rather than burdens on society.
We humans learn better when we stop frequently to reflect, rather than just plowing from
the top of the page to the bottom without coming up for air.

Critical thinking is thinking that has a purpose (proving a point, interpreting what
something means, solving a problem), but critical thinking can be a collaborative,
noncompetitive endeavor. And, by the way, even lawyers collaborate. They can work
together on a common defense or a joint prosecution, and they can also cooperate with
each other to get at the truth so that justice is done.

Core Critical Thinking Skills

-

There are mental skills and habits of mind, including cognitive skills and dispositions. As
to the cognitive skills here is what the experts include as being at the very core of critical
thinking: interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, explanation, and selfregulation.

cognitive skills are the mental abilities involved in critical thinking

interpretation is to comprehend and express the meaning or significance of a wide variety of

experiences, situations, data, events, judgments, conventions, beliefs, rules, procedures, or
criteria.3 Interpretation includes the sub-skills of categorization, decoding significance, and
clarifying meaning. examples of interpretation? How about recognizing a problem and
describing it without bias? How about reading a persons intentions in the expression on her
face; distinguishing a main idea from subordinate ideas in a text; constructing a tentative
categorization or way of organizing something you are studying; paraphrasing someones ideas
in your own words; or, clarifying what a sign, chart or graph means? What about identifying an
authors purpose, theme, or point of view?
analysis is to identify the intended and actual inferential relationships among statements,
questions, concepts, descriptions, or other forms of representation intended to express belief,
judgment, experiences, reasons, information, or opinions. The experts include examining ideas,
detecting arguments, and analyzing arguments as sub-skills of analysis. Some examples of
analysis? What about identifying the similarities and differences between two approaches to the
solution of a given problem? What about picking out the main claim made in a newspaper
editorial and tracing back the various reasons the editor offers in support of that claim? Or, what
about identifying unstated assumptions; constructing a way to represent a main conclusion and
the various reasons given to support or criticize it; sketching the relationship of sentences or
paragraphs to each other and to the main purpose of the passage?
evaluation as meaning to assess the credibility of statements or other representations which
are accounts or descriptions of a persons perception, experience, situation, judgment, belief, or
opinion; and to assess the logical strength of the actual or intended inferential relationships
among statements, descriptions, questions or other forms of representation. examples? How
about judging an authors or speakers credibility, comparing the strengths and weaknesses of
alternative interpretations, determining the credibility of a source of information, judging if two
statements contradict each other, or judging if the evidence at hand supports the conclusion
being drawn? Among the examples the experts propose are these: recognizing the factors
which make a person a credible witness regarding a given event or a credible authority with
regard to a given topic, judging if an arguments conclusion follows either with certainty or with
a high level of confidence from its premises, judging the logical strength of arguments based
on hypothetical situations, judging if a given argument is relevant or applicable or has
implications for the situation at hand.
inference means to identify and secure elements needed to draw reasonable conclusions; to
form conjectures and hypotheses; to consider relevant information and to educe the
consequences flowing from data, statements, principles, evidence, judgments, beliefs, opinions,
concepts, descriptions, questions, or other forms of representation. As sub-skills of inference
the experts list querying evidence, conjecturing alternatives, and drawing conclusions.

Examples of inference? You might suggest things like seeing the implications of the position
someone is advocating, or drawing out or constructing meaning from the elements in a reading.
You may suggest that predicting what will happen next based what is known about the forces at
work in a given situation, or formulating a synthesis of related ideas into a coherent perspective.
Beyond being able to interpret, analyze, evaluate and infer, strong critical thinkers can do two
more things. They can explain what they think and how they arrived at that judgment. And, they
can apply their powers of critical thinking to themselves and improve on their previous opinions.
These two skills are called explanation and self-regulation.
explanation as being able to present in a cogent and coherent way the results of ones
reasoning. This means to be able to give someone a full look at the big picture: both to state
and to justify that reasoning in terms of the evidential, conceptual, methodological,
criteriological, and contextual considerations upon which ones results were based; and to
present ones reasoning in the form of cogent arguments. The sub-skills under explanation are
describing methods and results, justifying procedures, proposing and defending with good
reasons ones causal and conceptual explanations of events or points of view, and presenting
full and well reasoned, arguments in the context of seeking the best understandings possible.
examples first, please... Here are some more: to construct a chart which organizes ones
findings, to write down for future reference your current thinking on some important and complex
matter, to cite the standards and contextual factors used to judge the quality of an interpretation
of a text, to state research results and describe the methods and criteria used to achieve those
results, to appeal to established criteria as a way of showing the reasonableness of a given
judgment, to design a graphic display which accurately represents the subordinate and
superordinate relationship among concepts or ideas, to cite the evidence that led you to accept
or reject an authors position on an issue, to list the factors that were considered in assigning a
final course grade.
the most remarkable cognitive skill of all, however, is this next one. This one is remarkable
because it allows strong critical thinkers to improve their own thinking. In a sense this is critical
thinking applied to itself. Because of that some people want to call this metacognition,
meaning it raises thinking to another level. But another level really does not fully capture it,
because at that next level up what self-regulation does is look back at all the dimensions of
critical thinking and double check itself.
Selfregulation
is like a recursive function in mathematical terms, which means it can apply to everything,
including itself. You can monitor and correct an interpretation you offered. You can examine and
correct an inference you have drawn. You can review and reformulate one of your own
explanations. You can even examine and correct your ability to examine and correct yourself!
How? It is as simple as stepping back and saying to yourself, How am I doing? Have I missed
anything important? Let me double check before I go further.
self-regulation to mean self-consciously to monitor ones cognitive activities, the elements
used in those activities, and the results educed, particularly by applying skills in analysis, and
evaluation to ones own inferential judgments with a view toward questioning, confirming,
validating, or correcting either ones reasoning or ones results. The two sub-skills here are selfexamination and self-correction. Examples? Easy to examine your views on a controversial
issue with sensitivity to the possible influences of your personal biases or self-interest, to check
yourself when listening to a speaker in order to be sure you are understanding

what the person is really saying without introducing your own ideas, to monitor how well you
seem to be understanding or comprehending what you are reading or experiencing, to remind
yourself to separate your personal opinions and assumptions from those of the author of a
passage or text, to double check yourself by recalculating the figures, to vary your reading
speed and method mindful of the type of material and your purpose for reading, to reconsider
your interpretation or judgment in view of further analysis of the facts of the case, to revise your
answers in view of the errors you discovered in your work, to change your conclusion in view of
the realization that you had misjudged the importance of certain factors when coming to your
earlier decision. 4
Important to Note:
4 The

California Critical Thinking Skills Test, and the Test of Everyday Reasoning, the Health Science Reasoning
Test, the Military and Defense Reasoning Profile, The Business Critical Thinking Skills Test, and the Legal Studies
Reasoning Profile along with other testing instruments authored by Dr. Facione and his research team for people in
K-12, college, and graduate / professional work target the core critical thinking skills identified here. These
instruments are published in English and several authorized translations exclusively by Insight Assessment.

Report on a Critical Thinking Research finding to download at:

http://www.insightassessment.com

The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking

What kind of a person would be apt to use their critical thinking skills? The experts poetically
describe such a person as having a critical spirit. Having a critical spirit does not mean that the
person is always negative and hypercritical of everyone and everything.
The experts use the metaphorical phrase critical spirit in a positive sense. By it they mean a
probing inquisitiveness, a keenness of mind, a zealous dedication to reason, and a
hunger or eagerness for reliable information.
Almost sounds like Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day OConnor or Sherlock Holmes The kind
of person being described here is the kind that always wants to ask Why? or How? or What
happens if?.
Critical thinking is about how you approach problems, questions, issues. It is the best way we
know of to get to the truth. But! There still are no guarantees no answers in the back of the
book of real life.
Considered as a form of thoughtful judgment or reflective decision-making, in a very real sense
critical thinking is pervasive. There is hardly a time or a place where it would not seem to be of
potential value. As long as people have purposes in mind and wish to judge how to accomplish
them, as long as people wonder what is true and what is not, what to believe and what to reject,
strong critical thinking is going to be necessary. Human beings are more than thinking
machines. And this brings us back to those all-important attitudes which the experts called
dispositions. The experts were persuaded that critical thinking is a pervasive and purposeful
human phenomenon. The ideal critical thinker can be characterized not merely by her or his
cognitive skills but also by how she or he approaches life and living in general. This is a bold
claim.

Critical thinking came before schooling was ever invented, it lies at the very roots of civilization.
It is a corner stone in the journey human kind is taking from beastly savagery to global
sensitivity. Consider what life would be like without the things on this list and we think you will
understand. The approaches to life and living which characterize critical thinking include:
* inquisitiveness with regard to a wide range of issues,
* concern to become and remain well-informed,
* alertness to opportunities to use critical thinking,
* trust in the processes of reasoned inquiry,
* self-confidence in ones own abilities to reason,
* open-mindedness regarding divergent world views,
* flexibility in considering alternatives and opinions
* understanding of the opinions of other people,
* fair-mindedness in appraising reasoning,
* honesty in facing ones own biases, prejudices, stereotypes, or egocentric tendencies,
* prudence in suspending, making or altering judgments,
* willingness to reconsider and revise views where honest reflection suggests that change is warranted.

What would someone be like who lacked those dispositions? It might be someone who does not
care about much of anything, is not interested in the facts, prefers not to think, mistrusts
reasoning as a way of finding things out or solving problems, holds his or her own reasoning
abilities in low esteem, is close-minded, inflexible, insensitive, cannot understand what others
think, is unfair when it comes to judging the quality of arguments, denies his or her own biases,
jumps to conclusions or delays too long in making judgments, and never is willing to reconsider
an opinion. Not someone prudent people would want to ask to manage their investments!
The experts went beyond approaches to life and living in general to emphasize that strong
critical thinkers can also be described in terms of how they approach specific issues, questions,
or problems. The experts said you would find these sorts of characteristics:
* clarity in stating the question or concern,
* orderliness in working with complexity,
* diligence in seeking relevant information,
* reasonableness in selecting and applying criteria,
* care in focusing attention on the concern at hand,
* persistence though difficulties are encountered,
* precision to the degree permitted by the subject and the circumstances.

So, how would a weak critical thinker approach specific problems or issues? Obviously, by
being muddle-headed about what he or she is doing, disorganized and overly simplistic, spotty
about getting the facts, apt to apply unreasonable criteria, easily distracted, ready to give up at
the least hint of difficulty, intent on a solution that is more detailed than is possible, or being
satisfied with an overly generalized and uselessly vague response. Remind you of anyone you
know? Someone positively disposed toward using critical thinking would probably agree with
statements like these:
I hate talk shows where people shout their opinions but never give any reasons at all.
Figuring out what people really mean by what they say is important to me."
I always do better in jobs where I'm expected to think things out for myself.
I hold off making decisions until I have thought through my options.
Rather than relying on someone else's notes, I prefer to read the material myself.
I try to see the merit in anothers opinion, even if I reject it later.

Even if a problem is to ugher than I expected, I will keep working on it.

Making intelligent decisions is more important than winning arguments.

the commitment one makes as a strong critical thinker is to always seek the truth with
objectivity, integrity, and fair-mindedness.
critical thinking and good thinking mean the same thing. But that is not what the experts said.
They see critical thinking as making up part of what we mean by good thinking, but not as being
the only kind of good thinking. For example, they would have included creative thinking as part
of good thinking. Creative or innovative thinking is the kind of thinking that leads to new insights,
novel approaches, fresh perspectives, wh ole new ways of understanding and conceiving of
things. The products of creative thought include some obvious things like music, poetry, dance,
dramatic literature, inventions, and technical innovations.
The experts working on the concept of critical thinking wisely left open the entire question of
what the other forms good thinking might take. Creative thinking is only one example. There is a
kind of purposive, kinetic thinking that instantly coordinates movement and intention as, for
example, when an athlete dribbles a soccer ball down the field during a match. There is a kind
of meditative thinking which may lead to a sense of inner peace or to insights about human
existence. In contrast, there is a kind of hyper-alert, instinctive thinking needed by soldiers in
battle. In the context of popular culture one finds people proposing all kinds of thinking or thiskind of intelligence or that-kind of intelligence. Sometimes it is hard to sort out the science from
the pseudo-science the kernel of enduring truth from the latest cocktail party banter.

Learning, Critical Thinking, and Our Nations Future

The future now belongs to societies that organize themselves for learning... nations that want
high incomes and full employment must develop policies that emphasize the acquisition of
knowledge and skills by everyone, not just a select few.
Ray Marshall & Marc Tucker, Thinking For A Living:
Education And The Wealth of Nations, Basic Books. New
York. 1992.

The APA Delphi Report, Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational
Assessment and Instruction 1990 ERIC Doc. NO.: ED 315 423

Liberal education is about learning to learn, which means learning to think for yourself on your
own and in collaboration with others.
Liberal education leads us away from naive acceptance of authority, above self-defeating
relativism, and beyond ambiguous contextualism. It culminates in principled reflective judgment.
Learning critical thinking, cultivating the critical spirit, is not just a means to this end, it is part of
the goal itself. Yes, there is much more to a liberal education, than critical thinking. There is an
understanding of the methods, principles, theories and ways of achieving knowledge which are
proper to the different intellectual realms. There is an encounter with the cultural, artistic and
spiritual dimensions of life. There is the evolution of ones decision making to the level of
principled integrity and concern for the common good and social justice. There is the realization
of the ways all our lives are shaped by global as well as local political, social, psychological,
economic, environmental, and physical forces. There is the growth that comes from the
interaction with cultures, languages, ethnic groups, religions, nationalities, and social classes
other than ones own. There is the refinement of ones humane sensibilities through reflection on
the recurring questions of human existence, meaning, love, life and death. There is the
sensitivity, appreciation and critical appraisal of all that is good and all that is bad in the human
condition. As the mind awakens and matures, and the proper nurturing and educational
nourishment is provided, these others central parts of a liberal education develop as well.
Critical thinking plays an essential role in achieving these purposes.
The experts say critical thinking is fundamental to, if not essential for, a rational and democratic
society. What might the experts mean by this? Well, how wise would democracy be if people
abandoned critical thinking? Imagine an electorate that cared not for the facts, that did not wish
to consider the pros and cons of the issues, or if they did, had not the brain power to do so.
Imagine your life and the lives of your friends and family placed in the hands of juries and
judges who let their biases and stereotypes govern their decisions, who do not attend to the
evidence, who are not interested in reasoned inquiry, who do not know how to draw an
inference or evaluate one. Without critical thinking people would be more easily exploited not
only politically but economically. The impact of abandoning critical thinking would not be

confined to the micro-economics of the household checking account. Suppose the people
involved in international commerce were lacking in critical thinking skills, they would be unable
to analyze and interpret the market trends, evaluate the implications of interest fluctuations, or
explain the potential impact of those factors which influence large scale production and
distribution of goods and materials. Suppose these people were unable to draw the proper
inferences from the economic facts, or unable to properly evaluate the claims made by the
unscrupulous and misinformed. In such a situation serious economic mistakes would be made.
Whole sectors of the economy would become unpredictable and large scale economic disaster
would become extremely likely. So, given a society that does not value and cultivate critical
thinking, we might reasonably expect that in time the judicial system and the economic system
would collapse. And, in such a society, one that does not liberate its citizens by teaching them to
think critically for themselves, it would be madness to advocate democratic forms of
government. Is it any wonder that business and civic leaders are maybe even more interested in
critical thinking than educators? Critical thinking employed by an informed citizenry is a
necessary condition for the success of democratic institutions and for competitive free-market
economic enterprise. These values are so important that it is in the national interest that we
should try to educate all citizens so that they can learn to think critically. Not just for their
personal good, but for the good of the rest of us too.

EXPERT CONSENSUS STATEMENT REGARDING CRITICAL THINKING

AND THE IDEAL CRITICAL THINKER
We understand critical thinking to be purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which
results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as
explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or

contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. CT is essential as

a tool of inquiry. As such, CT is a liberating force in education and a powerful
resource in ones personal and civic life. While not synonymous with good
thinking, CT is a pervasive and self-rectifying human phenomenon. The ideal
critical thinker is habitually inquisitive, well informed, trustful of reason, openminded, 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. Thus,
educating strong critical thinkers means working toward this ideal. It combines
developing CT skills with nurturing those dispositions which consistently yield
useful insights and which are the basis of a rational and democratic society.
READINGS and REFERENCES
American Philosophical Association, Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment
and Instruction. "The Delphi Report," Committee on Pre-College Philosophy. (ERIC Doc. No. ED 315 423). 1990
Brookfield, Stephen D.: Developing Critical Thinkers: Challenging Adults to Explore Alternative Ways of Thinking and Acting. JoseyBass Publishers. San-Francisco, CA. 1987.
Browne, M. Neil, and Keeley, Stuart M.: Asking the Right Questions. Prentice-Hall Publishers. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. 2003.
Costa, Arthur L., & Lowery, l Lawrence F.: Techniques for Teaching Thinking. Critical Thinking Press and Software. Pacific Grove,
CA. 1989.
Facione, Noreen C, and Facione Peter A.: Critical Thinking and Clinical Judgment in the Health Sciences - An International
Teaching Anthology. The California Academic Press, Millbrae CA. 2008.
Facione, Noreen C. and Facione, Peter A. : Critical Thinking Assessment and Nursing Education Programs: An Aggregate Data
Analysis. The California Academic Press. Millbrae, CA 1997.
Facione, Noreen. C., and Facione, Peter A., Analyzing Explanations for Seemingly Irrational Choices, International Journal of
Applied Philosophy, Vol. 15 No. 2 (2001) 267-86.
Facione, Peter A and Noreen C,: Thinking and Reasoning in Human Decision Making. The California Academic Press. Millbrae CA,
2007
Facione, Peter A, Think Critically, Pearson Education: Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 2011.
Facione, P.A., Facione, N.C., Talking Critical Thinking, Change: The Magazine of Higher Education, March-April, 2007.
Facione, P.A., Facione N. C., and Giancarlo, C: The Disposition Toward Critical Thinking: Its Character, Measurement, and
Relationship to Critical Thinking Skills, Journal of Informal Logic, Vol. 20 No. 1 (2000) 61-84.
Facione, PA, Critical Thinking: What It is and Why it Counts 2013 update Page 27
Gilovich, Thomas; Griffin, Dale; and Kahneman, Daniel: Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment. Cambridge
University Press. 2002.
Goldstein, William, and Hogarth, Robin M. (Eds.): Research on Judgment and Decision Making. Cambridge University Press. 1997.
Esterle, John, and Clurman, Dan: Conversations with Critical Thinkers. The Whitman Institute. San Francisco, CA. 1993.
Janis, I.L. and Mann, L: Decision-Making. The Free Press, New York. 1977.
Kahneman, Daniel; Slovic, Paul; and Tversky, Amos: Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University
Press. 1982.
Kahneman Daniel: Knetsch, J.L.; and Thaler, R.H.: The endowment effect, loss aversion, and status quo bias. Journal of Economic
Perspectives. 1991, 5;193-206.
King, Patricia M. & Kitchener, Karen Strohm: Developing Reflective Judgment. Josey-Bass Publishers. San Francisco, CA. 1994
Kurfiss, Joanne G., Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice and Possibilities, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report # 2,
Washington DC, 1988.
Marshall, Ray, and Tucker, Marc, Thinking for a Living: Education and the Wealth of Nations, Basic Books. New York, NY. 1992.
Resnick, L. W., Education and Learning to Think, National Academy Press, 1987.
Rubenfeld, M. Gaie, & Scheffer, Barbara K., Critical Thinking in Nursing: An Interactive Approach. J. B. Lippincott Company.
Philadelphia PA, 1995.
Siegel, Harvey: Educating Reason: Rationality, CT and Education. Routledge Publishing. New York. 1989.
Sternberg, Robert J.: Critical Thinking: Its Nature, Measurement, and Improvement. National Institute of Education, Washington DC,
1986.
Toulmin, Stephen: The Uses of Argument. Cambridge University Press, 1969.
Wade, Carole, and Tavris, Carol: Critical & Creative Thinking: The Case of Love and War. Harper Collins College Publisher. New
York. NY 1993.

GOVERNMENT REPORTS
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, National Center for Educational
Statistics (NCES) Documents National Assessment of College Student Learning: Getting Started, A Summary of Beginning
Activities. NCES 93-116.
National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identification of the Skills to Be Taught, Learned, and Assessed, A

Report on the Proceedings of the Second Design Workshop, November 1992. NCES 94-286.
National Assessment of College Student Learning: Identifying College Graduates' Essential Skills in Writing, Speech and
Listening, and Critical Thinking. NCES 95-001.

About the Author

Dr. Peter A. Facione and his co-investigators have been engaged in research and teaching about reasoning,
decision-making, and effective individual and group thinking processes since 1967. Over the years they developed
instruments to measure the core skills and habits of mind of effective thinking, these instruments are now in use in
many different languages throughout the world. Since 1992 Dr. Facione has presented hundreds of workshops about
effective teaching for thinking and about leadership, decision-making, leadership development, planning and
budgeting, and learning outcomes assessment at national and international professional association meetings and on
college and university throughout the nation. Dr. Facione, is a principal of the research and consulting firm,
Measured Reasons, and a Senior Researcher with Insight Assessment. He earned his Ph.D. at Michigan State in
1971, and in subsequent years chaired the Department of Philosophy at Bowling Green State University, served as
Dean of the School of Human Development and Community Service at California State University Fullerton, Dean of
the College of Arts and Sciences at Santa Clara University, and Provost of Loyola University Chicago. In 1999-2000
Dr. Facione was Chair of the American Conference of Academic Deans. He has been on many boards and panels,
including the California Commission on Teacher Credentialing and the ACE Presidents Task Force on Education. He
Facione, PA, Critical Thinking: What It is and Why it Counts 2013 update Page 28

has contributed articles to The Chronicle of Higher Education, Change - The Magazine of Higher Education, and
Liberal Education. With Dr. Noreen Facione he co-authored Thinking and Reasoning in Human Decision Making
(2007) and Critical Thinking and Clinical Judgment in the Health Sciences (2008). From 1988 through 1990 Dr.
Facione was the principal investigator for the American Philosophical Association research project which culminated
in the Delphi Report An Expert Consensus Conceptualization of Critical Thinking. The executive summary of that
report is available free of charge from Insight Assessment. His email is [email protected] Visit his
website www.measuredreasons.com and the Insight Assessment website, www.insightassessment.com

From an HBR article: