Yüksel - critical thinking and learning-teaching styles

A k a d e m i k A r a ç t i r m a l a r D e r g i s i 2 0 0 8 , S a y í 3 8 , S a y f a l a r 5 4 - 7 3

CRITICAL THINKING AND LEARNING /TEACHING STYLES

Güiru Yüksel"

Introduction

Educational philosophers define teaching as "an action actively de-signed to promote learning". In this definition we see that like most human ac-tions teaching is defined by reference to its purpose, that's learning. Any activ-ity, which is done in a classroom ur by a teacher, is not teaching if the action isnot taken in service of learning. Thus, at this point we need to be clear aboutwhat we mean by "learning".

Learning, as we all know, is the acquisition of capacities or tendenciesthrough action or experience. The capacities involved in formal education in-clude concepts, knowledge, understanding and skills. The tendencies may in-clude attitudes, values and ways of behaving.

So, teaching is the activity teachers do to promote action and experi-ence whereby learners are likely to make such gains. This is of course in gen-eral terms and teaching can and should take particular forms and styles accord-ing to other elements in the interaction. When we move further we find ot;herelements of interaction like teacher, learner, intended learning outcome, learn-ing / teaching process, context and resources. These elements interact with and

" H. GUlru Ytiksel, Yardinici Doçent, Trakya Üniversitesi Egitim FakUltesi IngilizceÖgretmenligi BölümU, EDÍRNE. [email protected]

54AkademikAraçtirmaiarDergisi

Güiru Yül<sel Yil: 10, Sayí: 38 Agustos 2008 - Ekim 2008

influence each other. Teaching, then, becomes a purposeful form of social in-teraction in which teachers relate with learners so as to get them to do what willtend to achieve the intended learning outcomes.

It should be made clear that this interactive view of teaching does notimply any sort of mechanistic, one-way arrangement in which teachers put pas-sive pupils through their paces to produce learning outcomes. Just the opposite,it highlights the presence of pupils, and the possibility that whilst pupil learningmay be the goal, pupils have their own goals and motives (Tomlinson, 1998).

Today's democratic societies place a very high value on rationalityand autonomy. Accordingly today's educational world promotes these two val-ues as educational ideas and aims. The development of these values takes timeand needs practice in reasoning skills. Traditional product oriented educationalapproaches are far away from addressing this need. Generating new possibili-ties for the development of educational practices calls for new approaches.Within this framework, to facilitate and foster rationality and reflection criticalthinking should be amalgamated with the process.

Existing literature on critical thinking is confusing in its description ofthe process. In this presentation we will try to explore the following questions:

1. What is critical thinking?2. What are the learning styles?3. What are the teaching styles?4. What can be done to address the educational needs of the learners?

Critical Thinking (CT)

CT has become a key word, a concept, widely addressed in educationafter 8O's. In its roots, there lie the studies of the Frankfurt School philosopherslike Max Horkheimer, Theodor Adorno and Jürgen Habermas who were look-ing into a new pathway for social development to identify and challenge the as-sumptions of oppression existing within social structures (Duchscher, 1999;578). They criticized rational thought strictly governed by scientific objectivityand saw human subjectivity as a knowledge generating force (Duchscher,1999). Later on in 8O's this social critical theory was developed by various phi-losophers. Reflection became a key word and the facilitation of self-understanding in order to become aware of institutionally, culturally and so-cially embedded ideologies that have been unconsciously internalized was em-phasized (Duchscher, 1999). Parallel to this movement in philosophy, the 8O'switnessed a growing paradigm shift in the heart of education emphasizing the

55Akademil<AraftirmaiarDergisi

Critical Thinking and Learning/Teaching Styles

process of inquiry, learning and thinking rather than the accumulation of dis-jointed skills and information. By the decade's end the movement to infuseprimary, secondary and post-secondary curricula with critical thinking hadgained remarkable momentum. Today, in most part of the world, there are edu-cationalists seem to come to an agreement that a relationship between educa-tion and CT exists, and that CT is essential as a tool of inquiry. What is more,CT is seen as "a liberating force in education and powerful resource in one'spersonal and civic life" (Facione, 1990; 2).

Though widely recognized to be an important educational phenome-non in the last three decades, what CT is taken to be varies somewhat. On theone hand we all know that CT "means almost the opposite of illogical, irra-tional thinking" (Facione, 2006; 2). On the other hand, when we are asked toexplain it further, we run into questions like, what are the characteristics of agood critical thinker, how do CT and mental capacity relate, is it teachable orinnate? The problem is that the term is so loosely used in many circumstances,and hence, can sometimes become vague and meaningless. For this reason, wefirst need to clarify what CT is and what its components are.

In literature it has been defined as: active, persistent, and careful con-sideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of thegrounds that support it (Dewey, 1910: 6), knowledge of the methods of logicalinquiry and reasoning (Glaser 1941, cited in Fisher 2001; 6), the ability tojudge the plausibility of specific assertions to construct counter-arguments and 'alternative hypotheses (Nickerson, Perkins & Smith, 1985: 4-5, cited in Shan-non, 1992), the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully con-ceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating informationgathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning,or communication (Scriven & Paul, 2006), reasonable, reflective, responsible,and skillful thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do (Schaf-ersman, 1991), the skilled and active interpretation and evaluation of observa-tions and communications, information and argumentation (Fisher & Scriven1997, cited in Fisher 2001; 13), self-directed, self-disciplined, self-monitored,and self-corrective thinking (Paul & Elder, 2004; 1), purposeful, self-regulatoryjudgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation and inference(Facione, 2006; 21). McCarthy, on the other hand, claims that it is "...notmerely logic, not merely problem-solving, not merely everyday reasoning, de-cision makirig, probabilistic reasoning, ,.., it must also include to feel deep, toempathize and to care" (1996; 231).

There seems little prospect of achieving a consensus on what it reallymeans. Though a clear-cut definition has not been made, a conceptual defini-

56Journal

of AcademicStudies

Gülru Yüksel Yil: 10, Sayi: 38 Adustos 2008 - Ekim 2008

tion of the ideal critical thinker was made by the American Philosophical Asso-ciation's Delphi Research Project. This collaborative effort by 46 cross-disciplinary theoreticians across North America culminated in a report that out-lined critical thinker as (Facione, 1990; 2):

habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personalbiases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear aboutissues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant infor-mation, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, per-sistent in seeking results.

These characteristics can be grouped under 2 headings; ability to engagein reflective thinking (a set of skills to process and generate information andbeliefsl), use of metacognitive strategies (the habit of using those skills toguide behavior2). At this point we should say that this is an ideal. It may bethat no person is fully adept at all the skills and sub-skills, and some CT skillsmight be more active and evident in some areas than in others. But what isclear is that it is contrasted with (Scriven & Paul, 2006):

• the mere acquisition of information alone,• the mere possession of a set of skills,• the mere use of those skills.

Experts found good critical thinking to include both a skill dimension

and a dispositional dimension. The cognitive skills and sub-skills reached by

consensus as follows.

1 o

' -^ Scriven, M. & R. Paul. (2006). Defining Critical Thinking. (A statement for

the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction)

57AkademikAraçtirmaiarDergisi


Table 1: Cognitive skills and Sub-skills (Facione, 1990; 6)

Skills

1. Interpretation

2. Analysis

3. Evaluation

4. Inference

5. Explanation

6. Self-regulation

Sub-skills

Categorization

Decoditig significance

Clarifying meaning

Examining ideas

Identifying arguments

Analyzing arguments

Assessitig claims

Assessing arguments

Querying evidence

Conjecturing alternatives

Drawing conclusions

Stating results

Justifying procedures

Presenting arguments

Self-examination

Self-correction

The dispositional dimension includes (Facione, 1990; 13):

58Journal

of AcademicStudies

Gülru Yüksel • Yii: 10, Sayí: 38 Adustos 2008 - Ekim 2008

1. Approaches to life and living in general:• inquisitiveness with regard to a wide range of issues,• concern to become and remain generally well-informed,• alertness to opportunities to use CT,• trust in the processes of reasoned inquiry,• self-confidence in one's own ability 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 one's own biases, prejudices,• stereotypes, egocentric or sociocentric tendencies,• prudence in suspending, making or altering judgments,• willingness to reconsider and revise views where honest reflection

suggests that change is warranted.

2. Approaches to specific issues, questions or problems:• 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

circumstance.

The cultivation of these dispositions is particularly important to insurethe use of CT skills outside the instructional setting. The usage, of course, re-quires a measure of maturity, and personal development is not found in pri-mary, secondary and lycee students, however, to delay the practice and trainingwill lead to a profound mistake. From early childhood people should be taughtto reason, seek relevant facts, consider options, and understand the views ofothers.

I think it's the duty of a good educational system to teach youngbrains the habits of mind, to reinforce those practices and to help them attainthose skills. When we examine the national standards set by the ministries ofeducation of various EU countries, we observe that CT is actually mentionedamong the educational goals. This means that good critical thinkers are the in-tended learning outcomes. This outcome could only be possible via teacher -learner interaction. At this point you might think we are automatically teaching

59AkademikAraçtirmalarDergisi

Critiçai Thinking and Learnlng/Teaching Styles

critical thinking when we teach our subjects. But it is often not the case. Mostof the times, we are not teaching them how to think, but instead what to think.

Where to start and How?

If we want to appeal all our students, and if the role of teachers in fos-tering students' critical thinking abilities is undeniable, I think, the startingpoint is knowing the learner and understanding the learner differences.

Students have different backgrounds, different levels of motivation,various attitudes about teaching and learning, and different responses to spe-cific instructional practices. As Felder and Brent state "the more thoroughly weunderstand the differences, the better chance we have of meeting the diverselearner needs" (2005; 57). We can start with collecting demographic informa-tion about them like; their socio-economic background, their cultural back-ground, their tendencies (likes-dislikes). Especially for good classroom prac-tices we should know their learning habits. We should be aware of the fact thatlearners are not tabula rasa; they do not come to classroom empty-handed.They bring with them an already well-established set of instincts, skills andcharacteristics which will help them to learn. As their characteristics, instinctsand skills vary, their ways of learning also vary.

Learning Styles

The ways in which an individual characteristically acquires, retainsand retrieves information are collectively termed the individual's learning style(Felder, 1995; 21). Over the last two decades learning styles have been dis-cussed specially in the language learning context. Negative consequences suchas poor test results, low motivation levels, dropouts, have been reported in thecase of learning styles and teaching styles mismatches (Felder & Silverman1988; Felder & Henriques 1995; Peacock 2001; Obdenakker & Van Damme2006; Zhang 2006). Teachers confronted with similar problems may either be-come over critical of their students or question their own teaching compe-tences.

Several learning style models and over 30 learning style assessmentinstruments have been developed in the last three decades. The best knownmodels are Jung's Theory of Psychological Type (operationalized by theMyers-Briggs Type Indicator), Kolb's Experiential Learning Model and theFelder-Silverman Model. In the field of language learning Oxford and her col-

60Journal

of AcademicStudies

Gülru Yüksel Yil: 10, Sayí: 38 Adustos 2008 - Ekim 2008

leagues studied language learning styles (Oxford 1993; Oxford & Ehrman1993). In these studies various learning style categorizations have been sug-gested. These categories are comprehensive since no definite number of dimen-sions could encompass the totality of student differences. Oxford (1993) classi-fies styles in three categories: 1) The way the learner use physical senses tostudy (visual/auditory/hands-on), 2) The way the learner deal with other people(extroverted/introverted), 3) Ways of processing or using information: handlingthe possibilities (intuitive/concrete-sequential); the approach to task (clo-sure/open); dealing with ideas (global/analytic).

Table 2: Classiflcation of styles (Oxford, 1993)

Style

Category

Ways of taking in

information through

the physical senses

Ways of relating to

the self and others

while learning

Ways of processing

or using

information

Style na-

me

Visual

Auditory

Hands-on

Extroverte

d

Introverted

Intuitive

In class

learns best through visual means

Prefers listening and speaking

activities,

Benefits from doing projects, working

with objects

enjoys a wide variety of social,

interactive learning tasks

likes to do more independent work, or

enjoys working with a person s/he

knows well

a future-oriented, able to see out major

prineiples of the topic, likes to

speculate about possibilities, enjoys


Critical Thinking and Leaming/Teaching Styles

Concrete-sequential

Closure-oriented

Open

Global

•

Analytic

abstract thinking, and avoids step by

step instruction

a present-oriented, prefers one step at

a time activities, want to know where

s/he is going in her/his learning

focuses carefully on all learning tasks.

meets deadlines, plans ahead for

assignments, wants explicit directions

enjoys discovery learning, prefers to

relax and enjoy learning without

concem for deadlines or rules

enjoys getting the main idea, guessing

meanings, and communicates even if

doesn't know all the concepts

focuses more on details, logical

analysis and contrasts

These categories nearly overlap with the five dimensions of Felder &Silverman model that may be defined by answers to the following questions(1988; 675):

1. What type of information does the student preferentially perceive:sensory, or intuitive?

2. Through which sensory channel is external information most ef-fectively perceived: visual, or auditory?

3. With which organization of information is the student most com-fortable with: inductive, or deductive?

62Journal

of AcademicStudies


4. How does the student prefer to process information: actively, orreflectively?

5. How does the student progress toward understanding: sequen-tially, or globally?

Students taught with methods constantly clashing with their ownlearning style may be made too uncomfortable to learn effectively. Studiesshow that matching teaching styles to learning styles can significantly enhanceacademic achievement and develop positive attitude towards learning (Opde-nakker & Van Damme, 2006; 2). This is because learning is an interaction inwhich "both parties (teachers-learners) are involved in attempts to mold eachother into mutually beneficial forms of relating" (Grasha, 2002; 41). Howmuch a given student learns in a class is governed in part by the learner's na-tive ability, but also by the compatibility of his/her characteristic approach tolearning and the instructor's characteristic approach to teaching. Furthermore,there is evidence that while learners generally prefer certain styles, this prefer-ence can change depending upon how the teacher structures the class. Effectiveinstruction is the one that reaches out all students. That is why recognition ofstudent styles is not enough to meet student needs. We have to know about ourown styles. Thus, the second step we should take is to reflect on our teachingstyle.

Teaching Styles

Like learning styles, teaching styles also vary. Some lecture, othersdemonstrate, some focus on rules, others emphasize memory and some othersunderstanding. According to Grasha (2002), the teaching style represents theenduring personal qualities and behaviors that appear in how we conduct ourclasses. Like in CT and learning styles, the literature shows variety in the defi-nition of teaching style approaches. Some of the approaches mentioned byGrasha include (2002; 38-39):

General modes of classroom behavior; here the ability to generateintellectual excitement, rapport with students appear as qualitiesof style.



2. Characteristics associated with a popular teacher; qualities varyamong individuals designated as models of good teaching.

3. Behaviors common to all teachers; categories of classroom behav-iors that occur in the behaviors of all teachers, such as ability toorganize information, display enthusiasm and providing the struc-ture that the students need, have been identified.

4. The teaching methods employed; the methods employed in theclassroom become synonymous with style.

5. The roles teachers play; to meet the demands of particular situa-tions teachers may assume different roles like facilitator, guide,moderator, personal model e.t.c.

6. Personality traits; personal dispositions are used to describe teach-ing style. One is an approach identifled by Carl Jung and devel-oped by Myers& Briggs.

7. Archetypal forms; the important aspect is not the method or theskills but the encounter with students. All teachers are assumed tobe representations of basic forms [student-centered / teacher-centered].

All these are descriptive in nature as they depend on the findings of ob-servations and qualitative research. But the teaching style should be more thanthese. If we are to modify our teaching style in order to appeal the needs of the21st century we should have a philosophy, or in other words a theory, that canguide us in goals determination, content selection, classroom behaviors and in-structional practices. At this point teaching-learning theories can help us. Al-though no single learning theory that will account for the complexity of learn-ing environment exits, we can mention three main teaching theories in brief(Brown, 2000):

1. Behavioral Theory: learning is seen as a habit formation. Theoryemphasizes the ways external stimuli influence learning. Learnersare viewed as incentive driven and thus teachers use externalrewards. Self-pacing is employed to accommodate individualdifferences. Mastery of information is stressed. Immediatefeedback and reinforcement of performance are provided.

2. Humanistic Theory: emphasizes the development of the wholeperson by integrating the cognitive and affective aspects oflearning experience. Instructors are concerned with helpinglearners learn how to learn. Teachers must nurture and helpdevelop the self-images of learners. Positive feedback is

64Journai

of AcademicStudies

Gülru Yüksel Yil: 10, Sayí: 38 Agustos 2008 - Ekim 2008

emphasized to keep learners motivated to learn. Finally,instructors must insure a safe environment for learners to expressideas and collaborate with the teacher and peers.

3. Cognitive Theory: deals with how information transformed,elaborated, stored and recalled to solve problems. Teachersprovide activities, tasks and projects to tap students' naturalability and interest to solve problems. Students must developconfidence in their ability to think and teachers help by providingstudents with success experiences and by not overwhelming themwith information.

Now the basic question is how we can develop a style which is sensi-tive to learning styles and which encourages students to think critically. Theanswer can be found in the integrated model offered by Grasha (2002) whichmight also help us to understand the nature of teacher-student encounters. Hepresents five teaching styles and four combinations (clusters) (2002; 154):

1. Expert: Possesses knowledge and expertise that students need. Strivesto maintain status as an expert among students by challenging studentsto enhance their competence. Concerned with transmitting informationand insuring that students are well prepared. Disadvantage: May notalways show the underlying thought processes that produced answers.

2. Formal Authority: Concerned with providing positive and negativefeedback, establishing learning goals, expectations, and rules ofconduct for students. Concerned with the correct, acceptable, andstandard ways to do things and with providing students with thestructure they need to learn. Disadvantage: Rigid, standardized andless flexible ways of managing students and their concerns

3. Personal Model: Believes in "teaching by personal example" andestablishes a prototype for how to think and behave. Oversees, guides,and directs by showing how to do things, and encouraging students toobserve and than emulate the instructor's approach. Disadvantage:Some teachers may believe their approach is the best way leadingsome students to feel inadequate if they cannot live up to suchexpectations.

4. Facilitator: Emphasizes the personal nature of student-teacherinteractions. Guides and directs students by asking questions,exploring options, suggesting alternatives, and encouraging them to

65AkademikAraçtirmalarOergisi


develop criteria to make informal choices. Overall goal is to developin students the capacity for independent action, initiative, andresponsibility. Works with students on projects in a consultativefashion and tries to provide as much support and encouragement aspossible. The focus is on students' needs and goals. Disadvantage:Style is time consuming and is sometimes employed when a moredirect approach is needed.

Delegator: Concerned with developing students' capacity to functionin an autonomous fashion. Students work independently on projects oras part of autonomous teams. The teacher is available at the request ofstudents as a resource person. Disadvantage: Some students maybecome anxious when given autonomy.

Table 3: Clusters and the requirements of teaching styles (Grasha, 2002)

Cluster

Cluster 1

Primary Styles

Expert/ Formal

Authority

Secondary Styles

Personal Model/

Facilitator

Delegator

Cluster 2

Prittinrv

Styles

General

classroom methods

Traditional teacher-

centered presentations

and discussion

techniques:• Lectures• Teacher-centered

questioning/discussions

Role-mudeling

and coaching students

on developing skills and

Control of

classroom tasks• [High] works best with

teachers who arewilling to control thecontent

• differences amongstudents are notconsidered

• [Moderate] importantfor teachers toperiodically empowerlearners to show whatthey can do

• sensitive to learningstyles; encourages

Teacher-

student interaction• relationship with

students notdeveloped

• students do notneed to displaywhat they know.nor takeresponsibility

• willingness tobuild relationshipwith the learners

• teacher is likedand respected bystudents

66

of AcademicStudies

Gülru Yüksel Yil: 10, Sayi:38 Agustos 2008 - Ekim 2008

Personal

Model/Expert/

Formal Authority

Secondar

y Style.s

Facilitato

r/

Delegator

Cluster 3

rriniciry

Styles

Facilitato

r/Personal Mo-

del/Expert

Secondar

y Styles

Formal

Authority/

Delegator

Cluster 4

Primary

Stvles

Delegator

knowledge:• Discussing

alternateapproaches

• Sharing thoughtprocesses

• Sharing personalexperiences

• Demonstratingways of thinkingdoing

Collaborative

learning and other

student-centered

learning processes

emphasized:

• Problem-basedlearning

• Cognitive mapdiscussion

• Critical thinkingdiscussion

• Guided readings• Key statement

discussion

Emphasis on

independent learning

activities for groups and

individuals:• Class symposium/

Debate formats

participation

• [Low-Moderate]teacher gets task going& then turns theprocess of runningthem over to students

• teacher often consultswith students, processesthe outcomes of groupwork, suggestsalternative approaches

• [Low] important forteacher to move intothe background andserve as a consultantand resource person

• teacher must know howto adopt independent.collaborative andparticipant styles

• teacher acts as aconsultant &students are morewilling to sharetheir ideas

• students needadequate level ofknowledge.initiative &willingness toacceptresponsibility forlearning

• students mustmahage theirowninterpersonalprocesses ingroups.

• Students needproficient levelsof knowledgeand skill, musttake


• V


/Facilitator

Personal Model

Secondar

y Styles

Formal

Authority/

Personal Model

• Independent study/research

• Learning pairs/Small group team

• Practieum

responsibility fortheir learning.

Conclusion

As can easily be inferred from the chart we have presented teachingstyles, learning styles and classroom practices are interdependent. Selection ofany one directly influences selection of the other two. Thus, for selecting ourinstructional method we should first examine our instructional goals and thelearning styles of our students. For managing these basic interdependent issues,the questions we must ask ourselves are;

1. How can I help my students acquire and retain information?

2. What can I do to motivate my students?

3. How can I encourage my students to think critically?

Offering a single answer to the last question is somewhat impossible,however, finding a way to solve this problem seems to be a must. It is a factthat students do not engage in critical thinking with the proficiency we want.Yet this does not show that they cannot think critically, but they lack the neces-sary practice and experience to do so" (Grasha, 2002; 216). This is mainly re-sulting from our classroom procedures. In class we offer few opportunities forour students to challenge our ideas, or any other kind of idea. By this way, ac-tually without being aware of it, we direct our students develop an idea that theteacher is always right. Instead we should encourage students to find their ownvoices. And this is impossible to accomplish when we do all and lecture all thetime.

68Journal

of AcademicStudies


Critical thinking skills can be taught in a variety of ways. The follow-ing recommendations are gathered from the works of various authors (Felder &Silverman 1988; Facione 1990; Grasha 2002):

make the procedure explicit,describe how they are to be applied,explain and model the correct use,justify their application,expose learners to situations to exercise procedures,judge their performance and provide feedback regardingproficiency and ways of improving,discuss alternative ways of interpreting and understanding issues,examine alternate points of view,ask students to explain their reasons,use activities that force the students to deal with complex issues,employ various teaching methods fostering collaborative worklike;

o guided reading,o key statement discussion,o role plays / simulations,o class symposium,o debates,o think-pair-share,

encourage student curiosity,encourage them to raise objections, ask questions,create a reason for doing things in a certain way,relate the material being presented to prior knowledge and to thestudents' personal experience,provide a balance of concrete information and abstract concepts,provide explicit illustrations of intuitive patterns (logicalinference, pattern recognition, generalization) and sensing patters(observation, empirical experimentation, attention to detail),use pictures, schematics, graphs and simple sketches before,during and after the presentation of verbal material,applaud creative solutions,talk to students about learning styles and strategies.

References

69AkademikAra?tirmalarDergisi


Brown, D. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. U.K:

Pearson Education.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. Lexington, Mass: D.C. Heath. Chapter 1,

Retrieved December, 10, 2006, from

http://spartan.ac.brocku.cay~lward/Dewey/Dewey_1910a/Dewey_191

O_a.html

Dickerson, P. S. (2005). Nurturing Critical Thinkers. The Journal of

Continuing Education in Nursing, 36(2), 68-72.

Duchscher, J. E. (1999). Catching the wave: understanding the concept of

critical thinking. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29(3), 577-583.

Duron, R., B. Limbach & Waugh, E. (2006). Critical thinking framework for

any discipline. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in

Higher Education, 17(2), 160-166.

Ennis, H. R. (2002). An Outline of Goals for a Critical Thinking Curriculum

and its Assessment. U.S.A: University of Illinois. Retrieved

November, 20,2006, from http://faculty.ed.uiuc.edu/rhennis

Facione, P. A. (1990). The Delphi Report. Critical Thinking: A Statement of

Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and

Instruction. The California Academic Press, Millbrae, California.

(ERIC Doc. No.: ED 315 423).

(2006). Critical Thinking: What it is and Why it Counts. U.S.A.:

California Academic Press. Retrieved November, 20, 2006, from

http://www.insightassessment.eom/t.html

Felder, R. M. & L. Silverman. (1988). Learning and teaching styles in

tngmttx'mg táucdXion. Engineering Education, 78(7), 674-681.

70Journal

of AcademicStudies

Gülru Yüksel Yil: 10, Sayí: 38 Adustos 2008 - Eklm 2008

Felder, R. IVI. & E. Henriques. (1995). Learning and teaching styles in foreign

and second languaige education. Foreign Language Annals, 28(1), 21-

31.

Felder, R. M. & R. Brent. (2005). Understanding student differences. Journal

of Engineering Education, 94(1), 57-72.

Fisher, A. (2001). Critical Thinking: An Introduction. U.K: CUP

Grasha, A. F. (2002). Teaching with Style. San Bernadino: Alliance Pub.

McCarthy, C. (1996). What is "Critical Thinking"? Is it Generalizable?.

Educational Theory, 46(2), 217-239.

Obdenakker, M.C. & J. Van Damme. (2006). Teacher characteristics and

teaching styles as effectiveness enhancing factors of classroom

practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 1-21.

Oxford, R. (1993). Style Analysis

Survey (SAS): Assessing your Own Learning and Working. Reprinted in J.

Reid (ed.), (1995), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 208-215).

Boston: Heinle & Heinle / Thomson International. Avaible at:

http://www.ccet.ua.edu/nihongoweb/sas/survev.html •>

Oxford, R. & IVI. E. Ehrman (1993). Second language research on individual

differences. Annual Reviews of Applied Linguistics, 13, 188-205.

Paul, R. & L. Elder. (2004). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking

Concepts and Tools. U.S.A: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Peacock, M. (2001). Match or mismatch? Learning styles and teaching styles in

EFL. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(1), 1-20.



Schafersman, S. D. (1991) An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Retrieved

November, 22, 2006, from http://www.freeinquirv.com/critical-

thinking.html

Scriven, M. & R. Paul. (2006). Defining Critical Thinking (A statement for theNational Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking Instruction) Re-trieved November, 20, 2006, fromhttp://www.criticalthinking.org/aboutCT/definingCT.shtml

Shannon, H. (1992). Critical Thinking in Community Colleges. (ERIC Doc.

No.:ED348128).

Tomlinson, P. (1998). Understanding Mentoring. U.S.A: Open University

Press.

Zhang, L. (2006). Preferred teaching styles and modes of thinking among

university students in mainland China. Thinking Skills and Creativity,

1, 95-107.

72Journal

of AcademicStudies

Gülru Yüksel Yil: 10, Sayí: 38 Agustos 2008 - Ekim 2008

ÖZET

Ele§tirel Dü§ünme Ve Ögrenme / Ögretme Stilleri

Ele^ürel dü^ünme 80'li y diarda ara§ttnna, ögrenme ve di'qünme siireç-lerine vttrgti yapan paradigma degi^ikUginin sonucti egitimde ele altnan bir

anahtar kavram haline geldi. Bu makale genel egitim çerçevesinde ele^ürel dií-{iinme ve ögrenme - ögretme stilleri arasindaki ili^kíyi incelemektedir. Saz ko-

nusu ili§ki iiç ana sorti dogrtdttisunda irdelemnektedir; 1) ele^tirel dü^iinmenadir? 2) ögrenme stilleri nelerdir?, 3) ögretme stilleri nelerdir? Üc kavramarasmdaki ili^kiyle ilintili çaltqmalardan bahsedilmesinin ardtndan ele^tirel

dü§iinme becerilerini geli^tinneye yöntemler üzerinde dtirulmaktadtr. Ögrenci-lerin ele^tirel dü^ünme becerilerini geli^tirmek için çe§itli diqiinürlerin eserle-

rinden derlenmi§ bazi önerilere de yer verilmi^tir.

Anahtar Sözcükler: elepirel diqünme, ögretme stilleri, ögrenme stilleri


Yüksel - critical thinking and learning-teaching styles

Documents

Transcript of Yüksel - critical thinking and learning-teaching styles