* Significant in surface 0.05
** Significant in surface 0.01
Based on the t-test and ANOVA, p-value of t and F, the mean of total score of critical thinking skills had only significant relationship with students’ major (p=0.020). Also a significant relationship was found between the major of students and gender with inference skill; semester of study with deductive reasoning skill, and ethnicity with 2 skills of inference and deductive reasoning (p<0.05).
Also regarding the relationship between age and the student academic performance with each of the critical thinking skills, the Pearson correlation coefficient results indicated a significant positive relationship but a negative relationship between age and analysis skill, i.e. with the increase of age, the score of analysis skill was reduced (p<0.05). Academic performance of the students had a direct significant relationship with critical thinking total score and inference skill; the more the score, the better the academic performance of students (p<0.05).
Table 3 shows the mean and standard deviation of learning styles score in the 4 groups of learning style. Using ANOVA one way ANOVA, the relationship between learning style and critical thinking skills and the comparison of the mean score for each skill in four styles are reported in the last column of the Table 3 .
The Relationship between critical thinking styles with learning styles
3.40±1.29 | 3.66±1.57 | 3.29±1.59 | 2.70±1.61 | 0.045 | |
1.91±1.24 | 1.88±1.07 | 1.69±1.11 | 1.43±0.96 | 0.185 | |
1.91±1.24 | 2.33±0.90 | 2.29±1.25 | 2.25±1.31 | 0.594 | |
3.59±1.59 | 3.83±1.50 | 3.53±1.61 | 2.81±1.59 | 0.028 | |
2.83±1.52 | 3.44±1.75 | 3.03±1.53 | 3.13±1.49 | 0.625 | |
7.33±2.10 | 7.88±2.56 | 7.30±2.44 | 6.41±2.52 | 0.032 |
Based on the p-value of ANOVA, the mean of evaluation skill and inductive reasoning skill had a significant difference and the relationship between these two skills with learning style was significant (p<0.05). Also the mean of critical thinking’s total score was significantly different in the four groups and the relationship between total score with learning style was significant, too (p<0.05).
The mean and confidence interval of university students’ performance in four learning styles
The mean and confidene interval of critical thinking skills
The study findings showed that the popular learning style among the students was the convergent style followed by the assimilating style which is consistent with Kolb's theory stating that medical science students usually have this learning style ( 8 ). This result was consistent with the results of other studies ( 9 , 10 ). In Yenice's study in which the student of training teacher were the target of the project, the most frequent learning styles were divergent and assimilating styles and these differences originate from the different target group of study in 2012 ( 11 ).
This study showed a significant relationship between learning style and gender, age, semester and employment. Meyari et al. did not find any significant relationship between learning style, age and gender of the freshman but for the fifth semester students, a significant relationship with age and gender was found ( 10 ). Also in Yenice's study, no relationship with learning style, gender, semester and age was found.
Furthermore, in the first semester divergent style, in the second semester assimilating style and in the third and fourth semester divergent style were accounted for the highest percentage. Also in the group age of 17-20 years the assimilating style and the age of 21-24 years the divergent style were dominant styles ( 11 ).
In the present study, it was found a significant positive relationship between convergent learning style and academic performance. Also in the study of Pooladi et al. the majority of the students had convergent style and they also found a significant relationship between learning style, total mean score and the mean of practical courses ( 12 ). Nasrabadi et al. found that students with the highest achievement were those with convergent style with a significant difference with those with divergent style ( 4 ). But the results are inconsistent to Meyari et al.’s ( 10 ).
In this study, the obtained mean score from the critical thinking questionnaire was (7.15±2.41) that was compared with that in the study of Khalili and Hoseinzadeh which was to validate and make reliable the critical thinking skills questionnaire of California (form B) in the Iranian nursing students; the mean of total score was about the 11th percentile of this study ( 13 ).
In other words, the computed score for critical thinking of the students participating was lower than 11 score that is in the 50th percentile and of course is lower than normal range.
Hariri and Bagherinezhad had shown that the computed score for Bachelor and Master students of Health faculty was also lower than the norm in Iran ( 14 ). Also Mayer and Dayer came to a similar conclusion in critical thinking skill in the Agricultural university of Florida’s students in 2006 ( 15 ).
But in Gharib et al.’s study, the total score of critical thinking test among the freshman and senior of Health-care management was in normal range ( 16 ). Wangensteen et al., found that the critical thinking skills of the newest graduate nursing students were relatively high in Sweden in 2010 ( 17 ).
In this study, students of all levels (Associate, Bachelor and PhD) with various fields of study participated but other studies have been limited to certain graduate courses that may explain the differences in levels of special critical thinking skills score in this study. In this study we found a significant relationship between total score of critical thinking and major of the students. This result is consistent with Serin et al. ( 18 ).
It was found a significant relationship between major of participants, gender and inference skill, semester and deductive reasoning skill, ethnicity and both inference and deductive reasoning skills.
In the Yenice's study significant relationship between critical thinking, group of age, gender and semester was seen ( 11 ). In Wangensteen et al.’s ( 17 ) study in the older age group, the level of critical thinking score increased. In Serin et al.’s ( 18 ) study the level of communication skills in girls was better than that in boys. And also a significant relationship was found between critical thinking and academic semester, but in Mayer and Dayer’s study no significant relationship between critical thinking levels and gender was found ( 4 , 15 ).
The results also showed that the total score of critical thinking and analytical skills of students and their performance had a significant relationship. Nasrabady et al.’s study also showed that there was a positive relationship between critical thinking reflection attitude and academic achievement ( 4 ). This is contradictory with what Demirhan, Bosluk and Ander found ( 6 , 15 ).
The results of the relationship between learning style and critical thinking indicated that the relationship between evaluation and inductive reasoning was significant to learning style (p<0.05). The relationship of critical thinking total score with learning style was also significant (p<0.05). Thus the total score for those with the conforming style of critical skills was more than that with other styles. But in the subgroup of inference skills, those with the convergent style had a higher mean than those with other styles.
Yenice found a negative relationship between critical thinking score and divergent learning style and a positive relation between critical thinking score and accommodating style ( 11 ).
Siriopoulos and Pomonis in their study compared the learning style and critical thinking skills of students in two phases: at the beginning and end of education and came to this conclusion that the learning style of students changed in the second phase.
For example, the divergent, convergent and accommodating styles languished and the assimilating style (combination of abstract thinking and reflective observation) was noticeably strengthened. However, those with converging learning style had higher levels of critical thinking.
The level of students’ critical thinking was lower in all international standards styles. Perhaps it was because of widely used teacher-centered teaching methods (lectures) in that university ( 19 ).
The results in the study of Nasrabady et al. showed that there was a significant difference between the level of learners’ critical thinking and divergent and assimilating styles ( 4 ).
Those with converging, diverging, assimilating and accommodating styles had the highest level of critical thinking, respectively.
Also there was a positive significant relationship between the reflective observation method and critical thinking and also a negative significant relationship between the abstract conceptualization method and critical thinking ( 4 ). But in another study that Mahmud has done in 2012, he did not find any significant relationship between learning style, critical thinking and students’ performance ( 6 ).
The results of this study showed that the students’ critical thinking skills of this university aren't acceptable. Also learning styles, critical thinking and academic performance have significant relationship with each other. Due to the important role of critical thinking in enhancing professional competence, it is recommend using teaching methods which are consistent with the learning styles.
This study is based on a research project that was approved in Research Deputy of Alborz University of Medical sciences. We sincerely appreciate all in Research Deputy of Alborz University of Medical sciences who supported us financially and morally and all students and colleagues who participated in this study.
Conflict of Interest: None declared.
The role of critical thinking in research and academic writing.
In the modern world, where knowledge is easy to find, being able to think critically is becoming more and more important. Critical thinking is a mental skill that enables people to examine, evaluate, and make sense of knowledge in a rational way. It is an important part of both study and academic writing because it helps researchers dig deeper into complicated topics, come to useful conclusions, and explain their results well. In this article, we’ll talk about the role of critical thinking in research and academic writing. We’ll show how important it is and give you some tips on how to improve this important skill.
Table of Contents
Critical thinking means being able to look at facts, ideas, and opinions without being biased. It includes asking relevant questions, finding logical flaws, recognizing biases, and making well-informed decisions based on facts and thinking. Critical thinkers look at problems and ideas with an open mind and try to understand things from different points of view. They are good at reasonable thinking, making decisions based on facts, and fixing problems in a good way.
Critical thinking plays a vital role in the research, ensuring its effectiveness in conveying research findings. Critical thinkers engage in thorough literature reviews, identifying gaps and inconsistencies in existing research. By examining the existing body of knowledge, researchers can structure their papers better. Following the appropriate format of a research paper is vital in organizing the content. It provides a framework that helps to present findings. This allows readers to navigate through the information effortless.
For academic writing, you need to be able to think critically. Scholars must carefully analyze, synthesize, and evaluate what they already know in order to come up with well-reasoned points and add to the sum of knowledge in their field. Here are some important critical thinking skills that academic writing requires:
Critical minds look at the information they find and examine it carefully. They figure out how credible and reliable sources are, look for biases and assumptions, and look at the facts in a critical way. This skill is important for academic writing because it makes sure that writers back up their points with reliable and relevant information.
One of the most important goals of writing is to make a case that is clear and makes sense. Critical thinking helps writers order their ideas, figure out what’s most important, and set up their cases in a way that makes sense. By analyzing different points of view and pieces of data closely, writers can make strong claims that are backed up by good thinking.
The validity of a case can be hurt by logical errors. Critical minds are very good at spotting and avoiding bad arguments. They know how to spot common mistakes in reasoning, like ad hominem attacks, fake dichotomies, and rushed assumptions. By avoiding these mistakes, academic writers can make their points stronger and make their case more convincing.
The standard of study and academic work can be hurt by biases and assumptions in a big way. Critical thinkers are aware of their own biases and try to identify and fight them. They also look for flaws in the study they do, which helps them make sure their work is more objective and fair.
Critical thinking includes being able to solve problems and make good decisions. Scholars often face problems, contradictory proof, and ethics questions when they do study. Researchers can handle these problems in an organized way by using critical thinking. They can weigh their choices and make decisions based on evidence and social concerns.
Creativity and creation go hand in hand with being able to think critically. Critical thinkers can come up with new ideas and new ways to solve hard problems by questioning accepted rules, looking at things from different points of view, and thinking outside the box. When you can think artistically, you can add depth and creativity to your academic work.
Even though critical thought is an important skill, it is not easy. To get good at critical thought, you need time, work, and practice. Some of the most common problems are:
Overreliance on personal biases and beliefs.
Difficulty in recognizing and challenging assumptions.
Limited exposure to diverse perspectives and ideas.
Lack of information literacy and critical evaluation skills.
Emotional and cognitive biases cloud judgment.
Strategies to Improve Critical Thinking
Critical thought is a skill that can be learned and improved with practice. Here are some ways to improve your ability to think critically:
Engage in active reading and reflection.
Seek out diverse viewpoints and perspectives.
Practice questioning and challenging assumptions.
Develop information literacy and research skills.
Engage in debates and discussions with others.
Solve puzzles and engage in logical reasoning exercises.
Take courses or workshops on critical thinking.
Incorporating Critical Thinking in Research
Scholars can follow these rules to bring critical thinking into their research:
Set clear goals and questions for your study.
Do a thorough study of the literature.
Think about the sources’ reliability and usefulness.
Use critical thought to look at facts and figure out what it means.
Use strict methods and plans for study.
During the study process, you should question beliefs and biases.
Make it clear what the limits are and what the results mean.
Research and academic writing both need people who can think critically. It gives researchers the tools they need to dig deeper, think more critically, and explain their results well. By getting better at critical thought, experts and writers can make high-quality work that makes important contributions to their areas. Getting better at critical thinking takes work, but it pays off in the form of brain growth, better problem-solving skills, and more creativity.
Answers AWS Best Build certification Configuration Devops DevOpsSchool Docker Google Guide How Interview Interview Questions & Answers Jenkins LARAVEL Linux list Online Perforce Php Process Questions SEO software Tools Top Training Tutorial Tutorials
Discover the world's research
By completing this form, you agree to Turnitin's Privacy Policy . Turnitin uses the information you provide to contact you with relevant information. You may unsubscribe from these communications at any time.
In the age of digital transformation, where generative AI and AI paraphrasing are prevalent, the ability to think critically has never been more important.
Education is navigating a world increasingly influenced by artificial intelligence, and the way we process and interpret information is rapidly evolving. Critical thinking—the practice of analyzing and evaluating information to form a reasoned judgment—is a fundamental skill that empowers individuals to make informed decisions and solve complex problems.
Writing for Forbes, Ron Carucci notes that, “There’s a big difference between machine learning and ‘machine thinking’ … the minute we start looking at AI as machine thinking, we’re in trouble, because it means we’ve tried to outsource our own critical thinking and problem solving skills to a machine that is only replicating and regurgitating information it has gathered.” But AI paraphrasing tools are making it easier than ever to bypass this deeply important skill.
In this blog post, we’ll explore the importance of teaching critical thinking in an era dominated by AI, with strategies for educators to promote critical thinking and ethical AI use among students.
A key aspect of critical thinking in academic and professional writing is paraphrasing. Writers generally paraphrase to reference credible authors, which in turn, establishes their own credibility.
Traditional paraphrasing requires a deep understanding of the content at hand, plus an ability to express it in a new form without altering the original meaning. It’s an alternative to using a quote, when a writer wants to use their own words, their own voice, but someone else’s idea. When a writer paraphrases, they show that they understand the meaning of the text, and it’s a common technique used to present information more concisely or clearly while properly attributing the original source.
AI paraphrasing, on the other hand, refers to the process of using AI technology to rewrite text while retaining the original meaning, sometimes without proper attribution. These AI-powered tools analyze the input text and generate alternative versions that convey the same information using different words or sentence structures. When powered by Natural Language Processing (NLP), AI paraphrasing tools can be remarkably sophisticated (more so than traditional text spinners) which is cause for concern for academic integrity.
The internet provides a vast amount of information, often with varying degrees of reliability. It is our critical thinking skills that enable us to discern credible sources from unreliable ones , ensuring we only rely on accurate information. AI paraphrasing tools do not carry out this task for us, thus understanding their limitations is key to academic and research success.
While AI paraphrasing tools can produce text that is grammatically correct, in parallel, they can produce contextually inaccurate or misleading information. Critical thinking helps users recognize these limitations and verify the information provided by AI.
Moreover, an over-reliance on AI paraphrasing tools can impact original thought and creativity. Teaching critical thinking encourages intellectual independence among students, empowering them to form their own ideas and arguments rather than passively accepting AI-generated content as being factually correct.
The use of AI in content creation also raises ethical questions about plagiarism and intellectual property. Critical thinking fosters ethical awareness, helping individuals use AI responsibly and respect the original authorship of content.
As AI paraphrasing tools become increasingly sophisticated and accessible, it's tempting to use them as a crutch for generating content quickly, particularly during periods of academic pressure . While these tools offer convenience, over-reliance on them presents several significant risks to students, their institutions, and the wider society.
AI paraphrasing tools often work by reordering or substituting words and phrases to create new sentences. This can result in bland and uninspired content that lacks the unique voice and creativity of the original author. Over time, this dependency can stifle a writer's ability to produce original work and diminish their creative capabilities, resulting in the atrophy of essential skills such as critical analysis, vocabulary development, and grammatical precision.
For students and learners, the process of writing and paraphrasing by hand is an essential part of learning. It encourages deep engagement with the material and promotes a better understanding of the subject matter. By using AI to paraphrase, they miss out on the mental exercise of evaluating, analyzing, and synthesizing information. This can lead to a superficial understanding of the material, as users may accept AI-generated content without questioning its accuracy or depth.
AI paraphrasing tools are only as good as the data and algorithms behind them. If the original content contains errors or biases, these can be perpetuated and even amplified by paraphrasing tools. Students may unwittingly propagate misinformation or incorrect interpretations, leading to a cycle of inaccuracies that could result in awarding a degree or certificate to a student lacking crucial subject knowledge. This is particularly concerning when awarding high-stakes qualifications, such as law or medicine, raising ethical concerns. Students, for example, may use these tools to bypass the hard work of writing and learning, which can undermine the educational process and academic integrity standards of their institution.
To deter students from relying heavily on generative AI, educators can take steps to prepare their students for a world where generative AI and critical thinking coexist in harmony.
Critical thinking is a higher-order skill and arguably one of the most valuable in academia. It significantly impacts problem-solving and decision-making and is transferable across many disciplines and domains. Developing critical thinking takes practice, beginning at the earliest possible level and evolving to proficiency over time. Transferring critical thinking from one domain to another involves explicit and deliberate instruction.
While there is ongoing debate about whether critical thinking can be taught directly or merely encouraged, we believe it’s prudent to provide a set of tips designed to help students develop critical thinking skills.
Active learning—sometimes referred to as authentic learning —involves engaging students directly in the learning process, putting them at the center of the learning experience. To engage students in active learning, educators can encourage students to participate in discussions, debates, and problem-solving activities. These activities require students to analyze information, form arguments, and critically evaluate different perspectives. Techniques such as case studies, group projects, and hands-on experiments can also facilitate active learning.
A study by Deslauriers et al. ( 2019 ) sought to measure actual learning vs. feeling of learning in response to being actively engaged in the classroom. The results indicated that although students felt that they learned more in the traditional lecture setting—rendered by an inherent student bias against active learning—they actually learned more when taking part in active learning strategies.
Foster a classroom environment where questioning is not only allowed but encouraged. Teach students to ask probing questions about the material they read, write, and the outputs of any generative AI tools they may have adopted to produce their work. Questions that challenge assumptions, explore alternative viewpoints, and dig deeper into the subject matter can significantly enhance students’ critical thinking skills. Questions can also help you, as an educator, to uncover misconceptions among students, which provides a means of formative assessment data that can be leveraged to improve future teaching and learning.
Presenting students with real-world problems can enhance their critical thinking skills by providing a practical and engaging context for applying knowledge. Students are asked to identify, analyze, and prioritize multiple variables, helping them to develop well-reasoned, evidence-based solutions. Real-world problems are also inherently engaging and relevant, increasing student motivation and enthusiasm for learning.
By integrating project-based learning in the form of real-world problems into the curriculum, educators create a dynamic learning environment that teaches critical thinking and prepares students for the complexities of real-world situations. Zhang and Ma ( 2023 ) found that “project-based learning significantly improved students’ learning outcomes and positively contributed to academic achievement, affective attitudes, and thinking skills, especially academic achievement.”
AI writing doesn’t have to mean academic misconduct. With practical strategies for embracing the challenge and also the potential that comes along with AI technology and writing, teachers can use AI as supplementary aids to enhance critical thinking and writing skills rather than replacements for traditional learning. For instance, students can use generative AI and AI paraphrasing tools to understand complex texts better, but they should also be encouraged to analyze and critique the AI's output. Writing for the Times Higher Education, science faculty member at Colorado State University, Urbi Ghosh , notes that, “AI technology helps to connect ideas, merging them to create stronger concepts and produce a wide range of ideas quickly.”
While the use of AI paraphrasing tools poses challenges to academic integrity, there are situations where they can be employed ethically. For instance, these tools can be valuable aids for students and researchers in rephrasing complex ideas or improving the readability of their writing. When used appropriately, AI paraphrasing can complement original thought and enhance the overall quality of academic work.
However, it's crucial for users to understand the limitations and risks associated with AI paraphrasing. Simply relying on automated tools without a deep understanding of the content can lead to unintentional plagiarism or distortion of the original ideas. Therefore, it's essential for individuals to use AI paraphrasing tools responsibly, ensuring that they maintain transparency about the sources they are paraphrasing and accurately attribute ideas to their original authors .
Educators play a vital role in guiding students on the ethical use of AI paraphrasing and promoting a culture of academic integrity. By providing clear guidelines, offering resources for proper paraphrasing techniques , and encouraging critical thinking skills, educators can empower students to use AI paraphrasing tools effectively while upholding academic standards.
In an era where generative AI can effortlessly generate text and AI paraphrasing tools can manipulate it, reinforcing the importance of critical thinking has become more crucial than ever in the education space.
Critical thinking is a cornerstone of effective decision-making, problem-solving, and ethical conduct and equips individuals with the ability to discern credible sources from unreliable ones, have a deeper understanding of complex information, and maintain intellectual independence. These skills are indispensable for ensuring the accuracy, originality, and integrity of our work. And educators play a pivotal role in this dynamic.
By promoting AI as a responsible learning resource rather than a crutch, teachers can cultivate an environment that prioritizes and develops critical thinking in the digital world. This not only prepares students for academic success but also for the complexities of real-world challenges, including their next steps into the workforce.
Skip to Content
We are proud of our faculty and students who completed and worked on research in the 2023-2024 academic year. As our department values civic engagement and critical thinking, research is just one important way we see our faculty and students affect the world around them.
Student Research
This year, we had many students get involved with PRAXIS , the academic journal of the Department of Political Science. Our student editors, Jem Aspen and Chloe Ragsdale, worked with professor Jim Walsh to review many student submissions and work with 5 student authors on completing the editing cycle for publication. In the fall, students co-authored an article with professor Sasha Breger-Bush , assisted in the unveiling of the Irish Miners Memorial in Leadville with professor Jim Walsh , and in the spring, students presented at the student research symposium. Throughout the academic year, we had three research assistants studying the reintroduction of wolves to Colorado, and disinformation in the international arena with professor Christoph Stefes and professor Betcy Jose, and two fellows working on research on homelessness and hunger . Additionally, the Romero Theater Troupe performed skits and plays for the Colorado AFL-CIO, Adams 14 School District, Casa de Paz, and Service Employees International Union about labor history, police brutality, and welcoming migrants and refugees.
Faculty Research
This fall, Karen Sugar gave a guest lecture at GSU, Betcy Jose wrote a memorandum helping nearly 100 Afghan asylum-seekers, Christoph Stefes co-authored an article on policy feedback and international wildlife treaties in Germany, Martin Widzer published an article on the Palestinian divide, Betcy Jose was interviewed on the Israel-Palestine Conflict, and Sasha Breger-Bush was interviewed about the global debt crisis on The Free Mind Podcast.
This spring, Turan Kayaolgu published on Turkey's NHRI and Human Rights, Steve DelCastillo was a principle investigator for a research project examining barriers and opportunities for Latino students, parents and staff within Denver Public Schools, and Sasha Breger-Bush wrote an article on shared governance in higher education.
There are so many talks, articles, and events our faculty and students produce, and we recognize we may not be able to capture them all. This article is but an overview of the research and community engagement endeavors of political science students and faculty this academic year. We are so proud of our students and faculty for doing this important work, and we look forward to what the next academic year will bring!
© 2021 The Regents of the University of Colorado , a body corporate. All rights reserved.
Accredited by the Higher Learning Commission . All trademarks are registered property of the University. Used by permission only.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
The authors of this text use culturally-relevant examples and inclusive language. The chapter on Barriers to Critical Thinking works directly to break down bias and preconceived notions. Comments. Overall, Critical Thinking in Academic Research is an excellent general textbook for teaching the whys and hows of academic research to undergraduates.
Research on academic composition has increasingly questioned the nature and value of critical thinking in anglophone academic practices, much of it focussing on the challenges which international students face in developing and implementing a critical dimension in their writing (see Zamel 1993, 1995, Fox 1994, Casanave 2004).
Critical thinking is the disciplined art of analysing and evaluating information or situations by applying a range of intellectual skills. It goes beyond mere memorisation or blind acceptance of information, demanding a deeper understanding and assessment of evidence, context, and implications. Moreover, paraphrasing in sources is an essential ...
In recent decades, approaches to critical thinking have generally taken a practical turn, pivoting away from more abstract accounts - such as emphasizing the logical relations that hold between statements (Ennis, 1964) - and moving toward an emphasis on belief and action.According to the definition that Robert Ennis (2018) has been advocating for the last few decades, critical thinking is ...
The answer is critical thinking skills. The more that academic research becomes governed by policies outside of the research process, the less opportunity there will be for researchers to exercise such skills. True research demands new ideas, perspectives, and arguments based on willingness and confidence to revisit and directly challenge ...
Critical thinking is important in all disciplines and throughout all stages of the research process. The types of evidence used in the sciences and in the humanities may differ, but critical thinking skills are relevant to both. In academic writing, critical thinking can help you to determine whether a source: Is free from research bias ...
Browne and Keeley (2013) go on to say that the term "critical. thinking" refers to: 1) awareness of a set of interrelated critical questions; 2) ability to ask. and answer critical questions ...
4. Critical Thinking as an Applied Model for Intelligence. One definition of intelligence that directly addresses the question about intelligence and real-world problem solving comes from Nickerson (2020, p. 205): "the ability to learn, to reason well, to solve novel problems, and to deal effectively with novel problems—often unpredictable—that confront one in daily life."
Critical Thinking and Academic Research. Academic research focuses on the creation of new ideas, perspectives, and arguments. The researcher seeks relevant information in articles, books, and other sources, then develops an informed point of view within this ongoing "conversation" among researchers. The research process is not simply collecting ...
Critical thinking is inherent to the research process. Critical thinking starts with a curious and open mind, and a willingness to look deeper and wider than those who explored this topic before. We look deeply at sources, and the questions at the heart of those sources. We look widely to cross established boundaries of field, discipline, and ...
Critical thinking was also considered important for high school and 2-year college graduates as well. The importance of critical thinking is further confirmed in a recent research study conducted by Educational Testing Service (ETS, 2013). In this research, provosts or vice presidents of academic affairs from more than 200 institutions were ...
The findings support the important role of the critical-thinking skill of inference in scientific reasoning in writing, while also highlighting ways in which other aspects of science reasoning (epistemological considerations, writing conventions, etc.) are not significantly related to critical thinking. Future research into the impact of ...
Research involves applying critical thinking to information, whether it comes from an encyclopedia entry, a journal article, a website, or a documentary. A researcher analyzes the material and develops a perspective on it. The goal is to think critically about the information, not simply repeat its ideas. The purpose of your research and the ...
Other studies have also recognised the importance of analysis and evaluation as higher-order thinking skills, with school instructors using 'analyse' activities to support the development of critical thinking in their students (Cáceres, Nussbaum, & Ortiz, 2020) and academic researchers reporting that analysis is the most important critical ...
Critical thinking is the art of making clear, reasoned judgements based on interpreting, understanding, applying and synthesising evidence gathered from observation, reading and experimentation. Essential Study Skills: The Complete Guide to Success at University (4th ed.) London: SAGE, p94. Being critical does not just mean finding fault.
Some studies argue that these new demands also require new skills. Critical thinking (CT) involves a set of skills that are entirely relevant to today's adaptive needs. In this study, we explore ...
4 The importance of critical thinking and analysis in academic studies. The aim of critical thinking is to try to maintain an objective position. When you think critically, you weigh up all sides of an argument and evaluate its strengths and weaknesses. So, critical thinking entails: actively seeking all sides of an argument, testing the ...
Influence on Claims or Conclusions. The research questions you write will reflect whether your research is intended to describe a group or situation, to explain or predict outcomes, or to demonstrate a cause-and-effect relationship (s) among variables. It's those intentions and how well you carry out the study, including whether you used ...
The importance placed on critical thinking has led to a substantial amount of research on critical thinking skills (for a more comprehensive review, see Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Despite this, however, as previously mentioned, little is known about what impact critical thinking has on students' academic performance, in general.
The current world needs people with a lot of capabilities such as understanding and using different ways of thinking, research, problem solving, critical thinking and creativity. Critical thinking is one of the aspects of thinking that has been accepted as a way to overcome the difficulties and to facilitate the access to information in life .
It develops students' ability to think critically in an academic context right from the start of their language learning. Critical thinking is at the heart of Unlock, fostering the skills and strategies students need to tackle academic tasks when gathering and evaluating information, organizing and presenting their ideas, and then reflecting ...
Critical thinking is a mental skill that enables people to examine, evaluate, and make sense of knowledge in a rational way. It is an important part of both study and academic writing because it helps researchers dig deeper into complicated topics, come to useful conclusions, and explain their results well. In this article, we'll talk about ...
Critical thinking occurs when students are. analyzing, evaluating, in terpreting, or synthesizing information and applying. creative thought to form an argument, solve a problem, or reach a ...
A key aspect of critical thinking in academic and professional writing is paraphrasing. Writers generally paraphrase to reference credible authors, which in turn, establishes their own credibility. Traditional paraphrasing requires a deep understanding of the content at hand, plus an ability to express it in a new form without altering the ...
We are proud of our faculty and students who completed and worked on research in the 2023-2024 academic year. As our department values civic engagement and critical thinking, research is just one important way we see our faculty and students affect the world around them. Student Research This year, we had many students get involved with PRAXIS, the academic journal of the