Andres Rengifo
LET MASTER OULU- APRIL 2014
My main intention with this research is to analyze how team based working
(collaborative learning) can hinder or promote critical thinking and at the same
time how this critical thinking manifested.
Several authors have described collaboration as a key aspect to enhance certain
processes. However, collaboration has different aspects and faces, and it is highly
complex. According to Dillenbourg (1999), one aspect of Collaboration involves the
interactions which take place between group members (e.g negotiation). This thesis
research project intends to address the importance of interactions in order for
individuals to engage in meaningful conversations which lead to critical thinking
strategies and arguments to solve a common problem.
Cohen (1994) and Salomon & Globerson (1989) in Van Boxtel (2000), suggest that,
“to stimulate conceptual understanding, a free exchange of ideas is needed”. In
this context, this study acknowledges the importance that discussions and debates
can bring to our classrooms and in our society in general as we are able to freely
discuss our points of views.
Previous researches have shown that indeed collaborative
environments can increase critical thinking in the students as noted by Gokhale (1995), other
researches such as Klein (1993) found out how collaborative environments can
promote critical thinking while learning a second language due to the fact that
students were able to share their discoveries, to be challenge to contrast and
compare and to take decisions.
As this is an artificial/experimental environment, many things can be different
because the rewards are not tangible as there is not a grade or a contest, for
instance. This is free will exercise in which participants discuss about a topic, are
able to use papers, computers, legos and present a final conclusion. People were
not obliged to participate and they could leave if they wanted; although no one left
until the end.
Previous researches have shown that indeed collaborative environments can
increase critical thinking in the students as noted by Gokhale (1995), other
researches such as Klein (1993) found out how collaborative environments can
promote critical thinking while learning a second language due to the fact that
students were able to share their discoveries, to be challenge to contrast and
compare and to take decisions.
CRITICAL THINKING
As for my research, I will focus more on a sub entry of Collaborative learning, as
Collaborative learning can be so broad, for purposes of this research, I have
chosen Team based learning: Team based learning can be useful because the
teams for this experimental exercise were formed randomly and without any pre
conception such as friendly or age background. Fink (2002) declares that “when
used
appropriately
Team
Learning
has
several
characteristics
such
as:
Transforming small groups into Teams, transforms a technique into a strategy, it
transforms the quality of student learning and for many teachers it transforms (or
restores) the joy of teaching”.
As for critical thinking which is main purpose of the research I found some
reflections:
Halpern (1998) Students who have limited critical thinking and problem-solving
skills often have problems in applying what they have learned at school to the real
world, since the complexity of a real-world environment is usually time-sensitive
and contextualized
Boss (2010) states that critical thinking requires learning how to think rather than
simply what to think, moreover, Boss adds that critical thinking provides us with
the tools to identify and resolve issues in our lives. Critical thinking is not simply a
matter of asserting our opinions on issues. Ennis (1991) in Zhou (2010) defined
critical thinking as “reasonable reflective thinking focused on deciding what to
believe or do”. Ennis (2011) states that “critical thinking is reasonable and
reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do”. Brookfield (1987)
categorizes critical thinking into s three inter-related phases:-
1. Discovering the assumptions that guide our decisions, actions and choices
2. Checking the accuracy of these assumptions by exploring as many different
perspectives, viewpoints and sources as possible
3. Taking informed decisions that are based on these researched assumptions
It is not easy to measure how individuals engage in critical thinking as it varies from person to
person, and from topic to topic Brookfield (1987) admits that the state of critical thinking means that
an individual is continually questioning assumptions, considering context, creating and exploring
alternatives and engaging in reflective skepticism. Fortunately, there are tests that have been designed
to measure the most important characteristics of critical thinking in an individual. Jones . (1995)
provides that critical thinking is defined in seven major categories: 1) Interpretation, 2) Analysis,
3)Evaluation, 4)Inference, 5)Presenting Arguments, 6) Reflection, and 7)Dispositions. Within each
of these categories are skills and sub-skills that concretely define critical thinking. Another test is
the California Critical Thinking Skills Test--College Level (CCTST) The CCTST aims to measure the
cognitive skills of interpretation, analysis, evaluation, explanation, and inference, The CCTST is
based on the consensus conceptualization of critical thinking (CT) which emerged from a two-yew
Delphi research project sponsored by the American Philosophical Association. Facione (1990)
summarizes Delphi finding as follows : We understand CT to be purposeful, self-regulatory
judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation
of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criterio-logical, or contextual considerations upon
which that judgment is based. The panel also admits that critical thinking should be accompanied
with a measure of a Critical skills dispositional dimension, as a result . The Delphi panel include
these categories to evaluate Critical thinking: 1) Interpretation, 2) analysis, 3) Evaluation , 4)
Inference, 5) Explanation and 6). Self-regulation.
As it is quite complicated and not so practical to count the actions of turns and
participation from each individual because there are also different ways to express
their critical thinking (e.g lego, graphics, even a physical shape or body action) can
be used to give an opinion and come to terms in the group and reach a conclusion.
This paper will intend to address the critical thinking qualities in a more
qualitative approach and so there will be characteristics that should be analyzed in
order to get a deeper understanding of the turns and processes of interaction
within the teams.
Critical Thinking Categories
Characteristics
Understanding of the
Identifies the problem, sub-problem and the importance of them.
problem
Demonstrate clear understanding of the purpose of the task.
Development of the task
Draws a clear strategy to reach a conclusion, seeks the opinion of
others. Uses multiple strategies: Brainstorming, analogies.
Evaluation of the Task
Gives the corresponding judgment to the different opinions in order to
reach a goal. Engages in ideas for further discussion and debate.
Presentation of arguments Is able to present the arguments in a clear way and share the different
within the group
findings and premises.
Reflection of Arguments
Combines different opinions and information empathetically, Is able to
within the group
reason with members who disagree.
Coming to terms in the
Final product shows mastery of creativity and self-confidence, Uses
group (final product)
different resources available.
Any other category that has not been written here will come upon completion of
the data transcription as this is more a discovery process of understanding rather
than a scientifically explanation of a phenomena to produce intake of
quantification and stratification of data.
.
For this purpose of research, I won’t be able to finish this thesis so it was a great
exercise and overall it would be a nice experience to study this phenomena maybe
in future years back home or elsewhere.
REFERENCES
Boss, Judith A. Think: Critical thinking and logic skills for everyday life. McGraw-Hill,
2010
Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers. Milton Keynes: Open University
Press.
Cohen, L. Manion. "L.(1989) Research Methods in Education." New York: Routledge
Dillenbourg, P. (1999). What do you mean by collaborative learning?.Collaborativelearning: Cognitive and computational approaches., 1-19.
Ennis, R. (2011). Critical Thinking. Inquiry: Critical Thinking across the Disciplines, 26(2),
5-19.
Klein, C. E. (1993). More Than a Required Skill in Today's Curriculum: Critical Thinking
and Collaborative Learning in Foreign Languages. Mid-Atlantic Journal of Foreign
Language Pedagogy, 1, 91-96.
Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking.
Van Boxtel, C., Van der Linden, J., & Kanselaar, G. (2000). Collaborative learning tasks
and the elaboration of conceptual knowledge. Learning and instruction, 10(4), 311-330.
Zhou, Q., Shen, N., & Tian, H. (2010). Developing critical thinking disposition by task-based learning in
chemistry experiment teaching. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 4561-4570.