Integrating

Critical Thinking into the Curriculum

Meg Gorzycki, Ed.D.
Critical Thinking and the College Curriculum
The importance of integrating critical thinking into undergraduate curricula has
been underscored by executives in the corporate sector (Hart Research Associates,
2008), academic scholars (Arum & Roska, 2011), and government agencies
(Spellings, 2006).
Critical thinking is a multi-faceted concept that is valued in undergraduate
education in at least three cardinal ways:
1. The capacity to think critically is valued in traditional liberal arts education
as it helps individuals think broadly about the human condition, appreciate
the esthetic aspects of life, and cultivates civility, slowness to judgment, and
moral conduct (American Association of Colleges and Universities, 2013;
Ferrall, 2011).
2. Critical thinking is also valued in professional training wherein individuals
must make clinical decisions such as those in the fields of nursing and health
care (Benner, et. al. 2010; Higgs, 2008).
3. Critical thinking is valued as a form of formal logic that prepares individuals
for careers as philosophers and teachers of philosophy (Salmon, 2013).
This tutorial will explore:

Defining Critical Thinking

Can Critical Thinking Be Taught?
How to Integrate Critical Thinking into the Course
The Socratic Method

Defining Critical Thinking
While there are multiple definitions for critical thinking, there exists a consensus on
the idea that critical thinking is a willed, cognitive activity dedicated to making
reasoned judgments by conducting analysis and by monitoring our own thought
processes and emotional responses (Brookfield, 1987; Ennis, 1964). In a 1991
Delphi Study (Facione, 1991), experts concurred that good critical thinking included
the cognitive skills in 1) interpretation, 2) analysis, 3) evaluation, 4) inference, 5)
explanation, and 6) self-regulation. The study also declared:
There is a consensus that one might improve ones own critical thinking in several
ways. The experts agree that one could critically examine and evaluate ones own

reasoning process. One could learn how to think more objectively and logically. One
could expand ones repertoire of those more specialized procedures and criteria used
in different forms of human thought and inquiry. One could increase ones base of
information and life experiences.
Paul and Elder (2011) declare that critical thinkers routinely explore eight elements
of critical thinking:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

The purpose of assertions

The question at Issue
The Information required to assess the quality assertions
The interpretation of assertions and their inferences
The concepts involved in understanding assertions
The assumptions contained in assertions or their interpretations
The potential consequences of assertions
The point of view of those making assertions and their alternatives

Can Critical Thinking Be Taught?
Some have argued that there are general cognitive skills and strategies that can be
applied in various domains and that transfer readily from discipline to discipline
and subject to subject (Ennis, 1989), while other insist that others claim that critical
thinking can only be taught in the context of a particular subject as there are many
different ways to think critically and unique facets to discrete subjects (Peck, 1990).
For a century, research on the topic of knowledge transfer has embraced the idea
that knowledgeincluding procedural and conditional does not transfer
automatically from studies in one domain to the next, which suggests that if
knowledge is to transfer from one domain to the next, instructors must explicitly
prompt and guide students thinking (Perkins & Solomon, 1989).
Noteworthy is the fact that students who think critically in one subject often
perform the same cognitive tasks as they perform in other subjects, which indicates
that although each discipline might have its own unique approach to critical thought
with its unique benchmarks distinguishing high levels of scholarship and
proficiency from the low levels, some elements of critical thinking have defied the
gravity of subject specificity and orbit around many subjects (Paul & Elder, 2011).
The logic that at least some elements of critical thinking are rather universal is
reflected in the logic that educators expect that after they graduate, students will
apply critical thinking skills to problems they have never before faced (Association
of American Colleges and Universities, 2007; Halpern, 1998). In addition, critical
thinking is at the core of literacy and reading comprehension skills, and in turn,
these skills are at the heart of education at all levels (Cunningham & Stanovich,
2001; Beck & Carpenter, 1986).

Critical thinking has been integrated across the college curricula in liberal arts and
vocational programs alike as research indicates:

Adams, M. H., Whitlow, J. F., Stover, L. M., & Johnson, K. W. (1996). Critical
thinking as an educational outcome: An evaluation of current tools of
measurement. Nurse Educator, 21(3), 23-32.
Brown, K., & Rutter, L. (2008). Critical thinking for social work. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Gorzycki, M. Elder, L. & Paul, R. (2013). Historical Thinking. Bringing critical
thinking explicitly into the heart of historical study. Dillon Beach, CA:
Foundation for Critical Thinking.
Siller, T. J. (2001). Sustainability and critical thinking in civil engineering
curriculum. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and
Practice, 127(3), 104-108.
Tanner, K. D. (2012). Promoting student metacognition. Life Science
Education, 11, 113-120.

How to Integrate Critical Thinking into the Course
1. Introduce students to scientific methods used in the discipline, the standards
against which the veracity of claims are assessed, and dedicate class time to
exercises during which students may rehearse their skills and critique their
work
2. Target specific cognitive tasks associated with thinking critically, such as:
1. Evaluating the strength of evidence offered for claims in various
reports, studies, or editorials
2. Identifying the implications of assertions or actions
3. Detecting the bias of assertions and evaluating the merit of
alternative points of view
4. Reviewing ones or ones peers composition to critique the clarity,
logic, and organization of text
5. Comparing and contrasting two or more sources addressing the same
idea, event, or issue
6. Identify and test the assumptions embedded in certain beliefs or
attitudes related to civic or personal life
3. Dedicate class time to address the differences between exemplary and
mediocre thinking and engage students in activities that will help them
improve their sensitivity to the quality of their own thinking
Table 1 illustrates how critical thinking tasks may be integrated into reading
assignments. As the table suggests, there are elements of critical thinking and
cognitive tasks that are associated with high level thinking that are common to
multiple disciplines.


Table 1: Integrating Critical Thinking Tasks into Reading Assignments in
History, Health Education, and Chemistry
Task

History

Health Education Chemistry

What was the
purpose of the
What was the
study of air quality
Suetonius' purpose
conducted by the Describe the purpose of
for composing the
Central Valley
the Intergovernmental
Identify
"Lives of the 12
Health Policy
Panel of Climate
author's
Caesars" and how
Institute, 2010?
Change's report (2013)
purpose
might his
What issue in
and how it might have
intentions have
particular
influenced its assertions
influenced his
motivated
work?
researchers to
examine air quality?
Identify the
Identify three key assertions made
conclusions drawn about smoking in Identify the central claim
by Barbara
Bartecchi and
regarding the chemical
Assess the
Tuckman in "The MacKenzie (1994) foundations of
quality of
Guns of August"
and determine
depression in Lebowirz,
evidence used and argue whether whether the
et. al. "Fixable or
to support
they are sufficiently evidence for them Fate?"(2013) and
claims
supported with
was based on
determine whether their
facts and thorough sufficient research conclusions are
analysis and
of sufficient
adequately supported
interpretation
numbers and types
of populations
Describe the
significance of
research conducted Describe the significance
Describe the
by Kim and Chang of Rosebaum & Leibel's
Describe the significance of
(2011) on the
conclusions in "Brain
significance of statements made relationship
Reorganization and
the author's
about China in
between obesity in Weight Loss" (2012)
assertions
the of the Treaty of children and sugar with special attention to
Nanjing, 1839
intake; what are the the weight management
short and long-term of children under age 18
implications of the
study?
Assess the
Assess the accuracy Identify the
Describe the accuracy of

accuracy of the of Falah's

author's
description of the
assertions
causes of Arab-
Israeli conflict as
presented in "The
1948 Israeli-
Palestinian War
and its aftermath"
(1996).

evidence offered to claims made in Bostrom,

support the
et. al. (2012) Oxadiazoles
accuracy of the
in medicinal chemistry
Centers for Disease and identify the steps
Control's 2010
required to verify
study of the
findings
prevention of
Hepatitis B and
compare it to three
other studies
Compare and
contrast the
assertions in
Compare Posner's
Identify Barron's (2012,
Baggett, et. al
thesis (1993) about
Ecological impacts of
(2010) regarding
the assassination of
deep water horizon oil
Identify
the unmet health
John F. Kennedy
spill: implications for
alternative
care needs of the
with those
immunotoxicity)
perspectives to
homeless with the
of Crenshaw
perspective and
those offered
assertions in
(1992), Lane
assertions regarding
by the author
Samuels (2011) and
(2011), and
toxicity resulting from oil
and explain
Kulik (2011);
McBride (2013)
spills in oceanic
why these may
identify the
and and determine
environments
be credible
elements that make
which author has
and alternative
assertions credible
made a more
perspectives and
and which cause the
credible argument
conclusions
reader to question
the potential bias of
reporting
Identify the
Identify the
implications of
implications of the Identify the implications
McNamara's
findings of Meridith, fo findings in Zhang, et.
Identify the
observations and et. al, (2013)
al. (2012) A review of
implications of
assertions in "The regarding caffeine sample preparation
assertions
Fog of War" (2004) use as they regard methods for the pesticide
on the current war public policy, child- residue analysis in foods.
on terrorism
rearing and schools

The Socratic Method
The Socratic Method is:

Predicated on the belief that humanity has a moral purpose and is endowed
with reason that makes discernment and scientific inquiry into the good
possible (Chesters, 2012).
A form of dialogue that aims to expose faulty logic and reasoning made weak
by emotions and impulsiveness According to Robert Reich, Professor of
Philosophy at Stanford University, (1998), there are four fundamental
principles embodied in the Socratic Method:

1. The Socratic method is open-ended; it is not a conversation that is steered in

a particular direction to arrive upon a single conclusion or consensus, it
fostered respect for ambiguity and complexity, and its direction was organic,
following whatever line of thought occurred to participants
2. Teachers and students are participants in the Socratic Method; both raise
questions, both are challenged to clarify and justify their assertions
3. As used by Socrates and many of his protg, the Socratic method was first
concerned with the moral life and with exploring what it meant to live rightly
and abide by goodness
4. The Socratic Method regarded the classroom as an environment in which
conflict was inevitable and in which students expected that the instructor
would argue with students and perhaps routinely shame them by exposing
flaws in their perception, judgment, or reasoning, for the purpose of
replacing cluttered and reactionary thinking with sound habits of
deliberation, inquiry, and reasoning
The Socratic Method can be adapted to promote critical thinking, oral
communication skills, and writing skills. Here are some examples:

When explicitly taught and modeled by instructors and students, Socratic

questioning in asynchronous discussion forums in online courses improves
the quality of critical thinking represented in forum postings (Yang, Newby,
Bill, 2005).
Case studies in online courses and traditional courses stimulate students
interest by using actual events to prompt analysis and problem-solving. By
cross examining solutions, students and instructors may explore the depth of
students; understanding of stakeholders and their interests, the law, ethics,
and alternative solutions (Brooke, 2006).
The online forum presents an opportunity to foster more in-depth discussion
than traditional class time as the conversation online may continue beyond
the limits of class meetings and may simultaneously involve multiple
participants. As a guide in discussions, the instructor may direct and re-
direct students thinking and corral their reasoning in ways that target the
higher level cognitive skills as represented by Blooms taxonomy (Whitely,
2006).
Being prepared to participate in lessons wherein the Socratic Method is used
requires students to learn to think as does the master, which means that they
must learn to raise questions as they read and prepare themselves for class

(Heeren, 1990). By prompting students to generate questions based on their

reading or other activities, instructors may explicitly direct students
attention to the fact that scholars routinely consider the assumptions
embedded in assertions, the potential biases and lacunae of statements,
inferences, accuracy of claims, and alternative views.

References
Association of American colleges and Universities. (2007). College learning in the
new global century. Washington, D. C.: Association of American Colleges and
universities Retrieved from:
http://www.aacu.org/leap/documents/GlobalCentury_final.pdf.
American Association of Colleges and Universities. (2013). What is a 21st century
liberal education? American Association of Colleges and Universities. Retrieved
from: http://www.aacu.org/leap/what_is_liberal_education.cfm.
Arum, R. & Roska, J. (2011). Academically adrift Limited learning on college
campuses. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Beck, I. L. & Carpenter, P. A. (1986). Cognitive approaches to understanding reading.
American Psychologist, 41(10): 1098-1105.
Benner, P., Sutphen, M., Leonard, V., & Day, L. (2010). Educating nurses. A call for
radical transformation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Brooke, S. L. (2006). Using the case method to teach online classes: promoting
Socratic dialogue and critical thinking skills. International Journal of Teaching and
Learning in Higher Education, 18(2), 142-149.
Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers challenging young adults to
explore alternative ways of thinking and acting. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Chesters, S. D. (2012). Developing the Socratic Classroom. In The Socratic Classroom
(pp. 75-94). SensePublishers.
Cunningham, A. E. & Stanovich, K. E. (2001). What reading does for the mind. Journal
of Direct Instruction, 1(2), 137-149.
Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago
Press.
Elder, L. (1999). Critical Thinking: Teaching the Foundations of Ethical Reasoning.
Journal of Developmental Education, 22(3), 30-31.

Ennis, R. (1964). A definition of critical thinking. The Reading Teacher, 17 (8), 599-
612.
Ennis, R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and
research needed. Educational Researcher, 18(3), 4-10.
Facione, P. A. (1991). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes
of educational assessment and instruction. Milbrae, CA: The California Academic
Press.
Ferrall, V. E. Jr. (2011). Liberal arts at the brink. Cambridge, MA: the President and
Fellows of Harvard College.
Hart, P. D. & Associates. (2008). How should colleges prepare students to succeed in
todays global economy? Retrieved from American Association of Colleges and
Universities at: www.aacu.org/leap/documents/2008_Business_Leader_Poll.pdf.
Heeren, J. K. (1990). Teaching chemistry by the Socratic Method. Journal of Chemical
Education 67 (4), 330-331.
Higgs, J. (Ed.). (2008). Clinical reasoning in the health professions. Amsterdam:
Elsevier Health Sciences.
Lehmann, N. (2000). The big test: The secret history of the American meritocracy.
New York, NY: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux.
Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2011). Critical thinking tools for taking charge of your learning
and your life. 3rd edition. Upper Saddle River, NJ: prentice Hall.
Peck, J. E. (1990). Critical thinking and subject specificity: A reply to Ennis.
Educational Researcher, 19(4), 10-12.
Perkins, D. N. & Solomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context-bound? Educational
Researcher, 18(1), 16-25.
Reich, R. (1998). Confusion about the Socratic method: Socratic paradoxes and
contemporary invocations of Socrates. Philosophy of Education Archive, 68-78.
Ruggiero, V. V. (2004). Thinking critically about ethical issues, 6th edition. New York,
NY: McGraw-Hill.
Salmon, M. H. (2013). Introduction to logic and critical thinking, 6th edition. Boston,
MA: Wadsworth.
Spellings, M. (2006). A test of leadership charting the future of U. S. higher education.
Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Education.

Whiteley, T. R. (2006). Using the Socratic method and bloom's taxonomy of the
cognitive domain to enhance online discussion, critical thinking, and student
learning. Developments in Business Simulation and Experiential Learning, 33(1), 65-
70.
Yang, Y. T. C., Newby, T. J., & Bill, R. L. (2005). Using Socratic questioning to promote
critical thinking skills through asynchronous discussion forums in distance learning
environments. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 163-181.