University of Virginia Teaching Resource Center

How often have you found students' comments such as these frustrating?

"What's this rigmarole about three theories of the economic cycle? Why doesn't she give us the right theory and forget these games? How can we study for the exam?"
"My roommate says his instructor really knows the causes of the Civil War; maybe I should go to that section."
"You said three to five pages. Does that mean four? Double-spaced or single?"
"Everyone has a right to his own opinion." (All adapted from Perry, 1985.)

Irritating and disturbing as such perspectives are, they are common to many young people who still believe what they learned as children: that knowledge comes from authority and if one memorizes and restates the "facts," one will receive good grades and be educated. Because these attitudes are, in fact, normal stages of cognitive development, faculty members and TAs need to know how to help students move to higher levels of understanding and graduate as people who reflect thoughtfully, or think critically, about the world around them.

Understanding Students' Perspectives
The prominence of "critical thinking" as a buzzword during the past two decades at times threatens to overshadow the value of this concept for teachers. Yet critical thinking refers to those cognitive processes through which one rationally responds to questions that cannot be answered definitively and integrates all relevant, available information to justify conclusions (Kurfiss, 1988, p. 2). People who think critically recognize that, in effect, little in the world is absolutely known but that we need to learn all we can and make reasoned judgments about what we believe and why. Also called "reflective thinking" (Dewey, 1910), such habits of mind value inquiry, ongoing questioning of one's assumptions, recognition of the need to know in order to think, and openness to new ideas. Depending on our academic disciplines and personal viewpoints, each of us defines critical thinking somewhat individually; yet thinking is essential to the academic world and to the life of the mind.

You can better encourage your students' progress to this level of intellectuality when you understand their different conceptions of knowledge. Through hundreds of interviews over many years in several different contexts, cognitive psychologists have documented young people's development through different stages, or levels, of understanding about what constitutes knowledge (see especially Perry, 1970, 1981; Belenky et al., 1986). Kurfiss (1988, pp. 52-56) offers a clear overview, integrating Perry's nine "positions" and Belenky and her colleagues' seven ways of knowing:

Stage 1: Knowledge as facts. As some of the comments above show, many students believe that knowledge is a collection of discrete facts that one simply acquires from the teacher or text and articulates on papers and exams. To them, teachers are authorities who should provide the right answers. For such students, the concept of interpretation is puzzling; furthermore, they have no awareness of the complexity of the world.

Stage 2: Knowledge as opinion. Students advance to Stage 2 when conflicting theories, points of view, and interpretations have convinced them that one cannot always know what is right. But since they do not yet truly understand the reasons behind different points of view, they attribute them solely to personal opinions, all of which they see as equal: as one student interviewed for Perry's study put it, "I mean if you read them [critics], that's the great thing about a book like Moby Dick. [Laughs] Nobody understands it!" (Perry, 1981, p. 84). Students at this level believe that giving one's opinion is enough and that teachers have no right to call students "wrong" on matters of "opinion" (Perry, 1970, p. 97).

Stage 3: Knowledge as reason. By dint of teachers' and peers' assertions, most students eventually realize that there are indeed reasons why some opinions are better than others and that people use logic and evidence to support their points of view. In studying people who have progressed this far cognitively, Perry (1970) and Belenky and associates (1986) find different ways of understanding another's way of thinking, probably because they interviewed different groups: Perry and colleagues interviewed Harvard University male undergrad-uates in the 1960s; in the 1980s, Belenky et al. interviewed women students and women parents not in school. In Perry's developmental scheme, reasoning is primarily objective analysis and argument, a perspective that reflects traditional academic values. In addition to this reasoning style, Belenky and her colleagues found that some women focus on trying to understand the reasons for another's way of thinking (hence, the term "connected knowledge"). In either case, a student at this level realizes that "you've got to have some facts under the opinion, I guess" (Perry, 1981, p. 86).

Stage 4: Knowledge as commitment. At this final stage, individuals recognize the complexity and uncertainty of knowledge while realizing their need to make commitments to reasoned positions. Perry's imaginary student sums up this stage: "I must be wholehearted while tentative, fight for my values yet respect others, believe my deepest values right yet be ready to learn" (1981, p. 79). Also described by Belenky and colleagues as "constructed knowledge," this stage for some people consists of integrating knowledge they learn from others with knowledge they feel intuitively is personally important: "Once knowers assume the general relativity of knowledge, that their frame of reference matters and that they can construct and reconstruct frames of reference, they feel responsible for examining, questioning, and developing the systems that they will use for constructing knowledge" (Belenky et al., 1986, pp. 138-39). In the end, critical thinkers continually question received knowledge and their own assumptions, approaching life with a spirit of inquiry.

Although our understanding of critical thinking depends to some extent on our academic disciplines, we can generally agree on several aspects of it, including many, if not all, of the following:

it requires open-mindedness
it proceeds from a sense of curiosity and/or inquiry
it is self-reflective, recognizing the need to examine one's own assumptions
it takes evidence into account
it is logical, or ordered
it is purposeful
it is individual and independent
it is tenacious, persevering in asking questions and seeking answers
it is not averse to taking some risks
it proceeds to develop a clear argument meant to persuade
in fact, because critical thinking is difficult, it requires that people be willing to make the effort to do it.

Giving students insights into how you and your colleagues think critically about your discipline broadens their outlook and develops their own skills. Moreover, since Perry's (1970) study shows that students often progress at different rates in different academic disciplines, what they learn to understand in your course may well help them better grapple with new ideas in another.

Teaching Students to Think Critically
So, how can you help your students develop such habits of mind as to make them reflective, engaged citizens? First, recognize that you are not alone; advisors, academic deans, and students' peers (who are often at different stages of cognitive development) engage your students in situations that provoke puzzlement and growth. And know that intellectual growth is usually unsettling and upsetting, although we tend to forget that fact once we've arrived. Since some students resist or are angered by activities that make them question their assumptions and previous understandings, telling them the purpose of such exercises is usually helpful. Finally, as our knowledge base grows larger daily, it seems ever more difficult to find time to help students think effectively about what they know. Simply being aware that you are modeling thinking is productive; to do more, consider how to incorporate some of the recommended activities below, or create your own (for more ideas, see Angelo and Cross, 1993; Bean, 1996; Nelson, 1994; Meyers, 1986; Paul, 1993; Rubin, 1995).

Encourage students' interest and their awareness of complexity by highlighting problems, issues, and topics that experts wonder about. By showing them that all is not known, you invite students to engage their minds; their own questions will open new avenues of thought to them (Meyers, 1986).

Design assignments that require students to argue positions not their own. Those who have difficulty understanding others' positions gain new understanding. Students who are cautiously considering embracing a position can "try it on" without taking the responsibility inherent in actual commitment.

Create activities that enable students to juxtapose their current model of understanding with a better one. For instance, students who have learned an Aristotelian view of the universe will not forego it for a Newtonian model until they see their theory fail (see A Private Universe).

Emphasize change as inherent to the learning process. For instance, ask students to write briefly about how and why their perceptions about a certain issue have changed since the beginning of the course.
Model the critical thinking process explicitly.

You might describe how you modified your position on an issue, emphasizing changes attributable to students' comments and ideas.
Highlight discrepancies in different texts and explain how you came to be at ease with them.
Ask your students to point out assumptions in your thinking that you may not perceive.

Once you have shown students that thinking people work toward recognizing their own assumptions and rethink positions, encourage them to identify and examine their own preconceptions (Paul, 1993; Rubin, 1995).

You can promote this process during discussions by "mirroring" back to students the general principles behind their comments, allowing them to ask, "Is that what I really believe?" and to reconsider. You could say, for example, "So you think moral principles differ in war time and peacetime?"
Ask students to list and then compare the pros and cons of an issue. By juxtaposing their ideas with those of peers, they are prone to perceive some of their assumptions and might begin questioning them. At the same time, you learn how they understand the issue (Angelo and Cross, 1993).
You can demonstrate the value of inquiry by asking students to bring their questions about the reading and analyze them in pairs or groups to find the most provocative ones, which then form the basis for discussion (Barnett, 1999).
Peer editing, described below, can also help because peers' challenges often provoke students' own inquiry about preconceptions.

Remind students that embracing a position is not a lifelong commitment. With more information, they will reevaluate and change positions accordingly. Moreover, even wrong positions can lead to positive outcomes when wholeheartedly pursued.

Respect and encourage each student. Students considering abandoning their family's world view may consider you a role model and need to know that you will stand by them, even if they lose familial support. Students who do not yet trust their own thinking process (and would prefer indisputable external evidence about "truth") are heartened by knowing that someone they respect trusts them to embrace the right position. In contrast, attacking students' positions (no matter how narrow-minded these seem) may make them cling to biases even more tightly, impeding their intellectual development.

Show students that writing is, in effect, thinking: that in writing they clarify and refine their thoughts to communicate with others.

Give writing assignments that call for progressively more difficult critical thinking. For instance, students might first summarize, identifying main points. They then evaluate others' positions or compare two positions, and finally formulate their own. The first stage might require only a few sentences or a paragraph, and later stages could be submitted as outlines. You can promote these skills by commenting on (and grading, if you like) each section separately. More advanced students might simply structure a paper in this way.
Peer editing, in which students read and comment on each others' papers in small groups, both focuses students' attention on the importance of clarity and communication in writing and shows them how difficult it can be to explain ideas that seem obvious to oneself. Peer editing works best if you provide guidelines to focus students on the aspects you deem most important: for instance, clarity of thesis statement, strength or logic of supporting arguments, pertinence of evidence.

Whether you define this issue as one of intellectual growth, cognitive development, reflective habits of mind, critical thinking, or thinking "like a mathematician, historian, economist, attorney, or nurse," you and your courses are essential to helping our students achieve an advanced level of understanding and thought. Consciously teaching them how to think about your discipline along with what to know about it will help them develop into reflective, engaged members of society.

I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of Marjorie Lindner Gunnoe (PhD, Psychology '93, a former TRC Graduate Student Associate) in gathering many of the pedagogical suggestions.

Works Cited

Angelo, Thomas and Patricia K. Cross. Classroom Assessment Techniques: A Handbook for College Teachers. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.

Barnett, Marva A. "Whose Course Is It? Students as Course Co-Creators." Language Learners of Tomorrow: Process and Promise. Report of the Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Ed. Margaret-Ann Kassen. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook, 1999.

Bean, John C. Engaging Ideas: The Professor's Guide to Integrating Writing, Critical Thinking, and Active Learning in the Classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1996.

Belenky, Mary Field, Blythe McVicker Clinchy, Nancy Rule Goldberger, and Jill Mattuck Tarule. Women's Ways of Knowing: The Development of Self, Voice, and Mind. 1986. 10th Anniversary Ed. New York: Basic Books, 1997.

Dewey, John. How We Think. Boston: D.C. Heath, 1910.

Kurfiss, Joanne G. Critical Thinking: Theory, Research, Practice, and Possibilities. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report 2. Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education, 1988.

Meyers, Chet. Teaching Students to Think Critically. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986.

Nelson, Craig E. "Critical Thinking and Collaborative Learning." Collaborative Learning: Underlying Processes and Effective Techniques. New Directions for Teaching and Learning 59. Ed. Kris Bosworth and Sharon J. Hamilton. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994.

Paul, Richard. 7-Part Series on Teaching Critical Thinking. Videocassette. Foundation for Critical Thinking, 1993.

Perry, William A. "Cognitive and Ethical Growth: The Making of Meaning." The American College: Responding to the New Realities of Diverse Students and a Changing Society. Ed. A.M. Chickering, et al. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1981. 76-116.

---. "Different Worlds in the Same Classroom: Students' Evolution in Their Vision of Knowledge and Their Expectations of Teachers." On Teaching and Learning (May 1985): 1-17.

---. Forms of Intellectual and Ethical Development in the College Years: A Scheme. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1970. Introd. L. Lee Knefelkamp. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999.

A Private Universe. Videocassette. Pyramid Film and Video.

Rubin, David Lee. "Group Inquiry Handouts." January 1995 (available in TRC library).