I was stunned to see the recent online presentation sponsored by a respected US conservative organization (AEI). (Note: when they say “think deeply” that is a synonym for “critical thinking”.) Here is one direct quote that I take issue with, from the K-12 education expert at AEI (my emphasis):
“…many curricula in recent decades have emphasized skill acquisition over building content knowledge. But ‘thinking deeply’ is not a skill that can be taught.”
Unpacking the irrationality behind this will be a future column. Today, I’ll simply outline my case that Critical Thinking IS a skill that can be taught.
How to Teach Critical Thinking —
Like many other activities (e.g., playing baseball), Critical Thinking is not just one ability. Instead, the skill of being a Critical Thinker is comprised of several attributes.
For example, to be a successful baseball player, an individual needs to be able to run well, throw well, catch well, hit well, and think well. If they do poorly on any of those, they do not make the grade of being a quality baseball player.
Another point about this analogy is that each of these individual attributes (run, hit, throw, catch, and think) is teachable.
Lastly, each of those abilities generally has broad applicability — e.g., being a good runner applies to numerous sports and activities.
So it is with the skill of Critical Thinking: a) it is made up of multiple attributes, b) each of them is teachable, and c) all of them have broad applicability.
Of course, as with any skill, there are variations in the qualities of Critical Thinkers. How well an individual masters the individual components will determine how successful they will be as a Critical Thinker.
The Core Ingredients —
Exactly what are all of the essential attributes that all Critical Thinkers have, is a subject open for some debate. (Of course these presuppose that an individual has a good grasp of the 3Rs.) My suggested list is:
1- They are skeptical individuals who take pride in thinking for themselves,
2- They pay attention to perspective and pertinent details (i.e., look at issues from both macro and micro levels),
3- They think logically and creatively: linearly and laterally,
4- They are comfortable asking questions (which are probing and insightful), [see my prior commentary on this fundamental asset]
5- When they get answers, they have the interest and ability to separate the wheat from the chaff,
6- When communicating with others they often make connections that are not obvious, and
7- They are confident and have no qualms in taking minority positions.
Back to the analogy: if a specialty school advertises that they will teach your child to be a good baseball player, you trust that they very well know the individual attributes that are needed (run, hit, throw, catch, think, etc.), and that the school will do a quality job at training your child on all of them.
However, when a K-12 school (or school system) says that your child will graduate being a Critical Thinker (e.g., like here), should you trust that they are fully aware of the individual attributes that are needed, and that they will do a quality job at training your child on all of them?
Regretfully, I don't think so.
However, it’s easy enough to check out: ask!
If you asked such a question at a baseball school, they would have no problem saying: “Yes, we will teach your child to run, hit, throw, catch, and think very well.” And then they will show you equipment, exercises, etc. that will improve those attributes.
So, when a school says that they are “teaching Critical Thinking,” it sounds good but it is too amorphous a statement to be practical. The question is: exactly how?
The answer is to teach children (or adults) to be Critical Thinkers, by focusing on the essential attributes, one at a time. Each of these is teachable and learnable. However, they can not be taught if they are not specifically identified.
Note also that each of these attributes is transferable to multiple fields and situations — from choosing a romantic partner to voting for a political representative. The benefits are extraordinary — which is why this is so important to get right.
So What’s the Problem?
With all those benefits, why isn’t this happening in every K-12 school? The answer is disturbingly simple: because US K-12 schools have been purposefully hijacked by Left ideologists over the last several decades.
In doing this, Progressives have four primary anti-American education objectives, and all of them are extremely problematic: a) focus on K-12 schools, b) emphasize content, not skills (like Critical Thinking), c) make sure that the content reflects Left ideology (e.g., fossil fuels are bad, etc.), and d) assure that K-12 teacher certification colleges are on the same page.
These are at the core of why US K-12 schools are in a steady decline. Their efforts have been very successful, as almost no one (e.g., US conservative organizations) is paying adequate attention to these profound changes.
Here is other information from this scientist that you might find interesting:
I am now offering incentives for you to sign up new subscribers!
I also consider reader submissions on Critical Thinking on my topics of interest.
Check out the Archives of this Critical Thinking substack.
WiseEnergy.org: discusses the Science (or lack thereof) behind our energy options.
C19Science.info: covers the lack of genuine Science behind our COVID-19 policies.
Election-Integrity.info: multiple major reports on the election integrity issue.
Media Balance Newsletter: a free, twice-a-month newsletter that covers what the mainstream media does not do, on issues from COVID to climate, elections to education, renewables to religion, etc. Here are the Newsletter’s 2024 Archives. Please send me an email to get your free copy. When emailing me, please make sure to include your full name and the state where you live. (Of course, you can cancel the Media Balance Newsletter at any time - but why would you?
Thanks for reading Critically Thinking About Select Societal Issues! Please pass a link to this article on to other associates who might benefit. They can subscribe for FREE to receive new posts (typically about once a week).
Excellent article and will be in Monday's edition of P&D. One of the things I would love to see instituted in public education is the study of logical fallacies, starting in their freshmen year of high school, and I would love to see it made mandatory through out the four years of college, and making a passing grade mandatory for graduation for both high school and college, along with a good civics course.
Kids are so inherently curious, I think the teachers (and parents who are actively engaged with raising their children) are key to children keeping their innate ability to think critically and expanding it exponentially. Questions should be encouraged. Children should also be encouraged to think outside the box, and teachers should make that kind of thinking fun and challenging. Debate class...another great way to get kids looking at subjects from all angles and also a way to get kids to learn respectful ways to make an argument for their case. I was very shy and introverted all through high school. In college I majored in microbiology. There was a lab exam where the students were given a pathogen and three days to run the lab tests to identify what was making their "patient" sick. I came up with my answer in one day by thinking outside the box and cutting to the chase. The professor called me into his office to accuse me of cheating on the lab exam. I was horrified but I explained my rationale of using several shortcuts (mine, not his) to eliminate common possibilities and find the pathogen quickly. I argued that if a patient was sick and needed the correct antibiotic, the faster they got it, the faster the patient would recover. My actions were logical. I properly identified the pathogen, staph aureus. He couldn't argue with me, and granted me the grade I deserved. But he was angry that I bypassed his standard procedures, which take forever, IMO. When teachers get stuck in their own comfortable grooves, students can suffer and be stifled. Not sure this has anything to do with critical thinking, but a mind that can't be free to create is one that is wasted.