References
Additional Readings
Online Resources
Major Assignment
In Class Activities
Return to Small Group Home
CRITICAL THINKING IN SMALL GROUPS
Most critical thinking courses take an individualistic approach to critical thinking, teaching students skills in identifying fallacies and types of reasoning. However, critical thinking does not occur in a vacuum. Small group members often fall prey to faulty decision making and problem solving due to lack of critical thinking.
The Student side of this website includes information on critical thinking skills for students working in small groups. Although the section on critical thinking addresses a few basics of critical thinking, such as inductive and deductive reasoning, for the most part the focus is on strategies for facilitating critical thinking in their small groups. This information is not meant to replace a course in critical thinking.
Below is an outline of "An Introduction to Critical Thinking in Small Groups."
AN INTRODUCTION TO CRITICAL THINKING IN SMALL GROUPS
I. Definition of Critical Thinking
A. Critical thinking involves analysis, critique, and evaluation of information so conclusions drawn are well founded.
B. Effective critical thinking in small groups is essential for avoiding common pitfalls often associated with poor reasoning, such as drawing inferences based on insufficient or faulty information.
II. Definition of Reasoning
A. Reasoning involves evaluating claims and drawing conclusions based on those claims. B. Arguments are the primary tool we use in reasoning.
1. Arguments always have a premise (or reason) and a conclusion (supported by the premise or reason).
2. Explanations used in reasoning must include at least one premise that supports a conclusion.
C. There are two broad categories of reasoning.
1. With inductive reasoning, we search for patterns and draw conclusions based on those patterns.
2. In deductive reasoning, we draw specific conclusions based on a general premise we assume is true.
III. The Importance of Critical Thinking
A. Critical thinking as fundamental to freedom
B. Critical thinking as essential to group decision making
C. Critical thinking as essential to professional decision-making
D. Critical thinking as essential to personal decision-making
IV. Developing Critical Thinking Skills
A. Asking relevant questions
B. Finding relevant information
C. Interpreting and evaluating information
D. Drawing and evaluating inferences
V. Elements of Critical Thinking
A. Questioning skills
B. Observation skills
C. Effective listening skills
D. Exploring written sources of information
E. Reading skills
F. Identifying underlying assumptions
G. Identifying underlying values
REFERENCES
Conway, D., & Munson, R. (1990). Elements of reasoning. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Groarke, L., Tindale, C., & Fisher, L. (1997). Good reasoning matters! A constructive
approach to critical thinking, 2nd ed. Toronto: Oxford University Press.
Kahane, H., & Cavender, N. (1998). Logic and contemporary rhetoric, 8th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Makau, J. (1990). Reasoning and communication: Thinking critically about arguments.
Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Bernthal, P., & Insko, C. (1993). Cohesiveness without groupthink: The interactive effects of social and task cohesion. Group & Organization Management, 18, 66-87.
Browne, M., & Keeley, S. (1997). Asking the right questions: A guide to critical thinking, 5e. Prentice Hall.
Cederblom, J., & Paulsen, D. (1997). Critical reasoning: Understanding and criticizing arguments and theories. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Chin, W., Salisbury, W., Pearson, A., & Stollak, M. (1999). Perceived cohesion in small groups: Adapting and testing the Perceived Cohesion Scale in a small-group setting. Small Group Research, 30, 751-766.
Damer, T. (1995). Attacking faulty reasoning: A practical guide to fallacy-free arguments. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Kelley, D. (1998). The art of reasoning, 3e. New York: Norton.
Langfred, C. (1998). Is group cohesiveness a double-edged sword? An investigation of cohesiveness on performance. Small Group Research, 29, 124-143.
Ruggiero, V. (1997). The art of thinking: A guide to critical and creative thought. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley.
Included on Student Site
Brian
Yoder's Fallacy Zoo
Yoder is the director of product development/director of product
architecture for Earthlink. Yoder's writing is engaging; he gives
humorous examples of many common fallacies and faulty reasoning.
Critical Thinking on the Web
This page lists a number of online resources where you can observe
the power of critical thinking skills in action.
Conducting the
Information Interview
A tutorial that assists students in conducting information
interviews.
Critical
Thinking Skills/Evaluating WWW sites
This Peru College Library page lists resources for information on
evaluating websites and developing critical thinking skills.
Fallacies in
the Workplace
Developed by Barry Eckhouse, professor of management communication at
St. Mary's College of California, Fallacies in the Workplace is part
of the larger Rhetor website.
Eckhouse includes many examples of fallacies that you've likely
encountered at work.
Find
It Fast: Pro and Con
Compiled by Jo Bell Whitlach, reference librarian at San José
State U, this site offers useful information on controversial topics,
as well as links to other resources. Includes descriptions for all
sources.
The
Internet Detective
A tutorial that assists students in evaluating Internet
resources.
Media Analysis and Critical Thinking
Mission
Critical
A project of San José State U's Institute for Teaching and
Learning, "Mission: Critical is an interactive tutorial for critical
thinking, in which you will be introduced to basic concepts through
sets of instructions and exercises."
MORE ONLINE RESOURCES
For Instructors
Anatomy
of a Lesson Plan: Critical Thinking (Bloom's Taxonomy)
Part of Huntington College's Department of Education website, this
page provides a lesson plan outline on critical thinking using
Bloom's Taxonomy.
Critical
thinking is . . .
Includes activities, a bibliography, and other on-site critical
thinking resources.
Critical
Thinking Across the Curriculum
Documents Longview Community College's efforts to integrate critical
thinking instruction and application in all courses. Includes on-site
and off-site resources.
The Critical Thinking
Community
Sponsored by several non-profit educational organizations, this site
includes a library, instructional resources, and a list of
events.
Critical
Thinking and Internet Resources: Lesson Plans, Activities, Teachers'
Guides, etc.:<>
Part of the McREL (Mid-continent
Research for Education and Learning, Aurora, CO) website, this page
lists online resources for instructors and includes a description of
each site.
"Critical
Thinking in an Online World"
Written by Debra Jones, Internet Librarian, Cabrillo College, Aptos,
CA, this article focuses on the key issues facing instructors
teaching critical thinking skills for application in an online
environment. Although targeted for librarians, Jones includes
practical tips for teaching critical thinking skills.
Media
Analysis and Critical Thinking
Strategies for facilitating the discussion of controversial issues in
the classroom.
Standard Agenda Assignment: This is a group project assignment. However, there are many variations on this assignment, such as assigning students a particular problem to research and presenting students with information you've gathered on a topic and having them apply Standard Agenda.
A major assignment in this course is a report researched and written by each group on a significant problem facing people living in this town or city. This includes, but is not limited to, problems facing students on this campus. This is an opportunity for you to apply your critical thinking skills in making decisions in a small group.
- Each group must select a problem, research the problem, complete the Standard Agenda, and facilitate class discussion on the problem.
- You must phrase your problem as a question of policy.
DIFFERENTIATING AMONG TYPES OF QUESTIONS
Questions of fact ask whether something is true and to what extent,
as with "Are the Bay Area's highways and freeways too congested?"
Questions of fact can usually be verified through experience or
observation.
Questions of value ask for a judgment; the degree to which something is good or bad, right or wrong, beautiful or ugly, and so on. Questions of value may express an ethical judgment, as with, "Is it wrong for individuals to commute by themselves in their automobiles?" Questions of value may express an aesthetic judgment, as with, "Is Interstate 280 the most beautiful highway in the Bay Area?".
Questions of policy ask if a particular course of action should be followed in order to solve a problem, as with, "What changes should be made to address impending gridlock in the Bay Area?" Policy questions always include the word "should."
- Each group member must fully participate in researching the problem, completing the Standard Agenda, preparing the presentation, and facilitating discussion leadership.
- Your question or problem MUST be approved by me before you begin in-depth research.
REQUIREMENTS
I. STANDARD AGENDA: I am asking you to use Standard Agenda to arrive at solutions to the problem your are investigating. You will use your completed Standard Agenda as the basis for your Discussion Leadership.
Your completed Standard Agenda must be typed and include an annotated bibliography. For the annotated bibliography, include a 3-4-sentence description of each source used in completing the Standard Agenda, identifying the specific information you gained from each source relevant to the problem you investigated. For Internet sources, include the site address and title as well as a 3-4-sentence description of the site.
Your bibliography must include at least 2 sources outside the course text from each group member. So, if you have 4 group members, you need to have 8 different sources.
II. ABSTRACTS: These are 500-word summaries and critiques of sources used in investigating your topic. Each group member must submit 2 abstracts using the format outlined below.
1. Citation. Include the complete citation for the source (this is all identifying information, such as author, date, title, publisher, page numbers, URL).
2. Overview. One or two sentences, which convey the essence of the information, presented.
3. Arguments. Summarize the author's main arguments.
4. Critique. What assumptions is the author making? What seem to be the values underlying the arguments? How useful is this information? To what extent do you agree with the author? Disagree?
III. DISCUSSION LEADERSHIP: You will lead the class in discussion based on the investigation of your topic.
BELOW ARE GUIDELINES TO ASSIST YOU IN LEADING CLASS DISCUSSION:
1. While some lecture may be necessary, the majority of your presentation time must involve audience members participating in discussion concerning your topic.
2. In introducing your topic you need to indicate why your topic area is an important one. Also, at some point in your presentation, you want to demonstrate how concepts from the course are useful in discussing and evaluating the problem you choose to investigate.
3. As with any presentation, yours should be effectively organized and your pattern of organization should be identified at the beginning of your presentation (in other words, after you gain your audience's attention and introduce the members of your group and your topic, I would expect to hear a preview statement).
4. All members of your group MUST be active participants, both in preparation and presentation. I will monitor your participation and contributions outside of class. Failure to significantly participate in your group during the preparation stages will result in a "zero" for the assignment. No make-up work will be available. In addition, you should present yourselves as a "group" during the discussion leadership, NOT as a series of individuals.
5. The delivery of your presentation must be extemporaneous. You should not "read" to your audience. Doing so will result in a lower grade.
6. Most important, your presentation should reflect considerable effort and creativity on your part. If you need support equipment (i.e., overhead projector, flip chart stand, video, etc.), it is available. Also, you will be responsible for making copies of any handouts for the class.
ON THE DAY YOU ARE TO LEAD DISCUSSION, YOU MUST TURN IN:
1. A detailed outline of your presentation, clearly identifying whom is responsible for what part of the discussion.
2. Your list of discussion questions.
STANDARD AGENDA
Many small group communication theorists and researchers argue that small groups need an orderly procedure to follow in problem solving and decision-making processes so that the influences of personal biases, individual goals and groupthink on the quality of the group's work are lessened.
Standard Agenda is based on Dewey's reflective thinking model. To better understand how Standard Agenda works in the small group decision-making process, you will apply it to the problem your group chooses to investigate for the group project.
Working in your project group, follow each of the steps listed below, writing out your responses to each step. The issues in each step must be discussed and answered in order before the group can progress to the next step.
Steps in Standard Agenda
1. Problem Identification/Phrasing the Question: What is the problem the group faces? In this step, the group must achieve consensus on what the issue requiring a decision is or what the problem is that must be solved. The issue or problem must be phrased as a single question to guide all future discussions.
2. Problem Analysis and Fact-finding: In this step, the group should collect as much information as possible about the nature of the problem and inform each group member of these facts. Therefore, communication among group members should be concerned with:
a. presenting the facts related to the problem,
b. critically examining the quality and utility of the facts gathered and presented,
c. determining the effects of the facts gathered on the original question phrased by the group, or the ability to carry out the original task assigned, and
d. whether or not enough information has been gathered to warrant moving to the next step.
3. Establishing Solution Criteria: The goal of this step is to produce a set of statements to guide the group in selection of a final solution. These "statements of criteria" or "standards of evaluation" are designed to help the group use agreed-upon measures to arrive at a solution. In this step, identify which criteria are most important (must be met) and which criteria are not as important (ideal, but not essential).
4. Generating alternative solutions/decisions: The goal here is to generate and present to the group as many alternative solutions to the original problem as possible. During this step, the group should only attempt to generate alternatives, not evaluate and analyze them.
a. Brainstorm to discover real and imagined alternatives.
b. Record alternatives for later use.
5. Testing alternative solutions/decisions against the criteria: The goal of this step is to find, if possible, the best solution to the original problem (the question phrased in Step 1).
a. Identify and separate each one of the alternatives proposed.
b. Consider the merits and limitations (pros and cons) of each alternative by comparing it to the criteria developed in Step 3.
c. Rate each alternative based on its ability to meet the criteria.
d. Recommend how the final solution/decision should be constructed.
6. Solution Implementation: In this step, the group needs to present a convincing argument for the final solution/decision to the proper authority.
a. Review all the group's procedures and responses for each of the previous five steps in Standard Agenda.
b. Scrutinize the group's determination of a final solution/decision OR carefully construct a final recommended solution/decision based on consideration of other alternatives.
1. Have students use the Standard Agenda for a simple problem, such as a hypothetical situation in which they choose candidates for a job.
2. Use a hypothetical situation in which there are scarce resources that students must distribute (e.g., 10 worthy projects but funding for only 5). After completing the activity, ask students to identify points at which their critical thinking skills were compromised (lack of questions and information are typically the biggest problems; in addition, students typically do not identify underlying values and assumptions when making their decisions).
3. Tape an episode of ER, NYPD Blue, Voyager, or other television show that involves small group work. Divide the students into small groups and assign each group a specific aspect of critical thinking to examine (e.g., questioning skills, types of reasoning, observation skills). When processing, ask students to identify how small group communication influenced the application of critical thinking skills. For example, ask how conflict influenced the group's decision.
Copyright ©2000 The McGraw-Hill Companies. All rights reserved. Any use is subject to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy
For further information about this site contact communications@mcgraw-hill.com.
McGraw-Hill Higher Education is one of the many fine businesses of The McGraw-Hill Companies.
