March 1999

In response to a survey last spring, several faculty expressed concern that their students were not reading critically enough. The writing assignments described here demonstrate ways some faculty have tried to address that need through writing assignments, and I would like to thank them for allowing me to share their ideas in the newsletter. Some of them were shared at WAC workshops this year, and others come from course syllabi. Some lead to a substantial paper, whereas others may lead to a single page or even less. They come from classes in different disciplines and at a variety of levels, but each can be readily transferred to most courses.

One informal exercise for getting students to read more carefully and more critically involves almost no writing at all. It comes from Henry Ruminski (Communications), who introduces the idea of critical reading on the very first day of class. Here is his description of the activity:

My strategy is to use the first day of my Writing to Communicate class to achieve at least two things--to start the students reading and thinking critically and to make sure they understand the course requirements.

I pass out the syllabus and ask the students to read it. After giving them a few minutes to read the syllabus I briefly go over it and highlight some of the requirements, being careful to state the requirements in exactly the language used in the syllabus. I then give the class a five-question true or false quiz orally and ask them to write down their answers. At the end of the quiz I ask for someone to give the answer to the first question and then ask how many students agree with the answer and their reasons for agreeing or disagreeing.

The questions vary from quarter to quarter but a standard one is "You must write a 1500-word paper for this course." Most students will answer true, but the careful readers and/or critical thinkers will answer false. In the discussion it will come out that obviously a 1521-word paper or even a 1600-word paper would be acceptable since the syllabus says "at least 1500 words." Another question often used is "Everything you turn in must be typed." Again many will answer true when in fact the syllabus specifies only that the outline, rough and final copy must be typed. Obviously, answers to quizzes in class are handwritten--including the one the students are taking now.

Usually by the third question students have gotten into the game and are looking at the precise meaning of statements in the syllabus. The exercise has helped reduce the misunderstandings of course requirements. Hopefully, it also prompts critical reading of other materials, though I have not tested that hypothesis empirically.

That hypothesis certainly warrants further investigation.

Other approaches to teaching critical reading lead to a paper of some length. Book reviews are frequently assigned for this purpose, but faculty are sometimes unhappy with the results, especially when the review turns out to be largely summary. That can be averted in large part with clear guidelines for writing the review.

Norma Wilcox (Sociology) gives her students an especially good set of directions, including instructions for analyzing the book as they read (and re-read) it. In SOC 303 (Contemporary Sociological Theory) this winter, she asked students to complete their fourth hour projects by writing a ten-page critical analysis of a book they read independently. Students chose either Manning Marable's How Capitalism Underdeveloped Black America, or Dorothy E. Smith's The Conceptual Practices of Power: A Feminist Sociology of Knowledge. She provided them with the following guidelines for evaluating what they read and writing their analyses.

Instructions

Read the book in its entirety first so you get a sense of the book. Then read it again for detail.
In the introductory paragraph, state the name of the book, the year of publication, the thesis of the book or the sociological concept the book addresses, the purpose of the paper, and the organization of the paper.
The remainder of the text should answer the following questions by using examples from the book to illustrate and substantiate your response to the questions.

What devices does the author use to convince the reader he or she is correct?

Logical Reasoning--the if/then statement. Is there a logical relationship between what the author thinks is the cause and what the author thinks is the effect?

Anecdotes--stories used to make the book come alive and hold the reader's interest in order to make a point.

Appeal to authority--an "expert" whose knowledge of a subject qualifies him or her for respect, or an elite, whose social status or position makes that person believable.

Controlled study--research method designed according to the rules of the scientific method to answer a specific verifiable question.

Rhetorical virtuosity--writer's skill at using language to convince the reader; a well-turned phrase or metaphor that sounds good due to its selection of words.

Evaluation

Is the argument of the text clear? Is it clear what question the text is attempting to answer? Are the definitions precise and unambiguous? Are the conclusions explicitly expressed or scattered throughout?

Does the author make valid assumptions? Identify the author's assumptions (the nature of human beings or the causes of sexism and racism or the remedies necessary to eliminate them) to see how plausible they are.

How well does the text use evidence? Is the study done well? If not, what is the problem? Does the evidence support the conclusions reached?

Are the conclusions and implications supported by other works? Are the findings in line with or contrary to other research on the topic? If different from, how and why? Does the difference undermine the validity of the findings? Why or why not?

Is the craftsmanship of the writing sound? Do the parts fit into a coherent whole? Is the prose understandable? Do the ideas flow smoothly from one to another?

What theories studied throughout the quarter could be applied to the author's argument that would support and/or refute it?
Respond to each of the questions by illustrating specific material from the text that supports your position.
Write a concluding paragraph that briefly summarizes the text of the paper and reaches an overall general conclusion.
Include a title page and a bibliography. Make sure you have documented appropriately within the body of the text.
The paper will be graded on the strength of support illustrated for the positions taken on the above devices used and the evaluative criteria, as well as the organization and the mechanics of the paper (including appropriate internal documentation).

The questions Dr. Wilcox provided in section 3 seem especially helpful for students who feel overwhelmed by the sheer size of the text they need to respond to or who are unsure how to criticize a book. Certainly, the separate questions should help them break down the task as they begin to draft their reviews.

In addition, the clear language of these questions bypasses the sometimes arcane terminology associated with argumentation. As a result, these questions should lead students directly into a productive analysis of the author's argument. It is also worth noting her comments about documentation. Even in a 300-level class students are not always aware that it is required even in a single-source essay. Here, though, the expectation of appropriate internal documentation is made clear, as is the fact that it will affect the overall grade.

Another frequently used writing assignment that gets students to read more critically asks them to respond to a short magazine or newspaper article. At the Lake Campus, for instance, Joe Cavanaugh (Economics) has students in Economics 201 read current articles in U.S. News & World Report and type a one-page write-up of the article that relates its contents to topics covered in class. They complete five of these write-ups during the quarter. To keep students' writing focused on that relationship, he asks them to list the relevant key terms or concepts at the top of the page, a practice that also helps them avoid just summarizing the article.

Dr. Cavanaugh likes these assignments for several reasons. First, it affords them an opportunity to relate class materials to real-life events. Reading about real issues related to course materials also facilitates discussion in the classroom. In addition, since students are required to choose up-to-date articles, they must stay informed about current issues. Dr. Cavanaugh, who has been asking students to do this assignment for several years, has placed a portfolio of samples on reserve in the library that students use for guidance.

Two features of his assignment might be noted in particular. First, not many instructors giving this sort of assignment ask students to identify the key concepts at the beginning of the paper, but this simple requirement probably has an impact on the way students read. Knowing that they will need to identify those concepts in writing, they will read more purposefully than is sometimes the case. The portfolio of earlier write-ups is also a good idea because it makes expectations extremely clear. While some teachers worry that students will simply copy what is there, the requirement that the article be current effectively rules that out.

The range of possibilities for using writing to help students read more carefully and critically is practically limitless. The illustrations given here simply suggest a few ways in which faculty are already employing writing assignments to that end, and earlier issues of the WAC newsletter contain other illustrations as well. If you have developed other approaches, you're invited to share them with your colleagues in future issues.

The Center for Teaching and Learning (CTL) is offering the following workshops this quarter. Faculty attending the CTL CORE CURRICULUM offerings (Instructional Design and Applications and Writing Across the Curriculum programs are included) may request documentation of their participation for merit or promotion and tenure purposes. Upon completion of offerings from three of the five CORE CURRICULUM modules, faculty may also receive a Teaching Enhancement Certificate (TEC) for the current academic year.

To register or to obtain more information about any of these workshops, call the CTL at x3162. You can also register on the CTL Web page.

I. COURSE DESIGN

Developing Faculty Roles in Service Learning (Luncheon).
Led by Mary Clark, Service Learning Program Coordinator, CTL. Wednesday, April 28, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in W169B Student Union.

Distributed Learning (Luncheon).
Led by George Frey, Associate Director, CTL. Tuesday, May 25, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in 104 Television Center.

II. PRESENTATION MODES: Improving Classroom Teaching

Teaching Assistants (TA) Luncheon.
Led by Tom Sudkamp, Professor, Computer Science and Engineering. Wednesday, April 14, 12:00 noon-1:30 p.m. in E157B Student Union.

Innovative Uses of the Web to Enhance Learning (Videoconference).
Presenters include Barbara Howard, Northern Virginia Community College; Ronald Oliver, Edith Cowan University (Australia); Chuck Schneebeck, California State University; and Fred Bail, University of Hawaii at Manoa. The moderator is Betty Collis of the University of Twente (The Netherlands). Friday, April 16, 1:30-3:00 p.m. in Studio B, TV Center.

Enhancing University Instruction: Web Sites and Educational Technology (Luncheon).
Led by Ronald Helms, Associate Professor, Education and Human Services. Tuesday, April 20, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in E157B Student Union.

Changing College Classrooms (Book Group Luncheon).
Led by Virginia Nehring, Associate Professor, Nursing. Call x3162 to make your reservation and to receive your complimentary copy of Diane Halpern's Changing College Classrooms. Tuesday, May 11, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in E156A Student Union.

Teaching to Types: Applying Type Theory in Your Classroom (Luncheon).
Led by Richard Baker, Department of Aerospace Studies, and Terri Limbert, University Division. Tuesday, May 18, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in E156B Student Union.

III. ASSESSMENT TECHNIQUES

Preparing Valid Written Tests for the Classroom (Luncheon).
Led by Glenn Graham, Professor, Education. Tuesday, April 13, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in W169C Student Union.

IV. POLICY ISSUES

Faculty on the Front Lines --Reclaiming Civility in the Classroom (Videoconference).
Presenters include Gerald Amanda, City College of San Francisco, and Michael Poindexter, Community College of Denver. Thursday, April 8, 2:30-4:00 p.m. in Studio B, TV Center.

How to Address Issues of Academic Dishonesty (Luncheon).
Led by Gary Dickstein, Assistant Director for Judicial Affairs, Residence Services, and Robert Adams, Associate Professor, Political Science. Thursday, May 27, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in E156A Student Union.

V. DIVERSITY ISSUES

The Improvised Woman: Single Women Reinventing Single Life (Book Group Luncheon).
Led by Patricia Renick, Assistant Professor, Education and Human Services. Call x3162 to make your reservation and to receive your complimentary copy of Marcelle Clements's book. Tuesday, April 27, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in E156C Student Union.

Resources for Teaching Diversity (Luncheon).
Led by Anne Runyan, Director, Women's Studies Program, and Dan DeStephen, Director, CTL. Tuesday, May 4, 11:00 a.m.-1:00 p.m. in W169C Student Union.

INSTRUCTIONAL DESIGN AND APPLICATIONS WORKSHOPS (IDA)
ALL IDA WORKSHOPS WILL BE HELD IN 215 LIBRARY

Multimedia Using Astound (MAC)
Wednesday, April 14, 2:00-4:00 p.m.

Multimedia Using Astound (WIN)
Friday, April 16, 10:00 a.m. -12:00 noon. Led by Terri Klaus, Associate Director, CTL.

Introduction to PowerPoint (WIN)
Monday, April 19, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 noon or Friday, May 14, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 noon. Led by Dara Bornstein-Tudor, Multimedia Consultant, CTL.

Advanced Features with Astound (WIN)
Wednesday, May 19, 2:00-4:00 p.m. Led by Terri Klaus, Associate Director, CTL.

Graphics and Information Design 101: Creating Effective and Engaging Presentations
Friday, May 28, 10:00 a.m.-12:00 noon. Led by Denise Tanka, Senior Produce/Director, CTL, and Bruce Stiver, Supervisor, Graphics Production and Photography, CTL (A comfortable, working knowledge of PowerPoint or similar presentation software required.)

The Critical Thinking Community
http://www.criticalthinking.org/

"Critical thinking" can be a slippery term. It appears regularly in pronouncements about education at all levels. At times it seems that everyone is endorsing it but not bothering to define it, let alone discussing how to make it happen. At other times, the amount of material seems overwhelming, though still short on suggestions for actual implementation. Recently I came across a Web site that I found especially useful in the way it balances background and application.

The Critical Thinking Community is sponsored jointly by the Center for Critical Thinking, Foundation for Critical Thinking, International Center for the Assessment of Higher Order Thinking, National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking, and Sonoma State University.

The college and university portion of the site has three main divisions. The Library is a collection of critical thinking articles focused on the background and theory of critical thinking; Resources contains guidelines and lessons for integrating critical thinking into the curriculum, including syllabi for individual courses; and Events lists critical thinking seminars, academies, inservices, and summer conferences. Here are the principal subdivisions within the first two categories:

LIBRARY
Fundamentals of Critical Thinking
A Brief History of the Idea of Critical Thinking
Recommended Readings in Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking: Basic Questions and Answers
Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms
Content is Thinking; Thinking is Content
Helping Students Assess Their Thinking
Universal Intellectual Standards
Valuable Intellectual Traits

The Role of Questioning
Socratic Teaching
Three Categories of Questions: Crucial Distinctions

Micropublications
Why Students--and Sometimes Teachers--Don't Reason Well
Pseudo Critical Thinking in the Educational Establishment

RESOURCES
An Overview of How to Design Instruction
Structures for Student Self-Assessment
Recommendations for Departmental Self-Evaluation
College-Wide Grading Standards
Critical Thinking Class: Student Understandings
Critical Thinking Class: Grading Policies
A Sample Assignment Format
Grade Profiles
The Role of Questions in Thinking, Teaching, & Learning
Defining Critical Thinking

To get an idea of the depth of treatment, consider this definition from a glossary of critical thinking terms:

assumption: A statement accepted or supposed as true without proof or demonstration; an unstated premise or belief. All human thought and experience is based on assumptions. Our thought must begin with something we take to be true in a particular context. We are typically unaware of what we assume and therefore rarely question our assumptions. Much of what is wrong with human thought can be found in the uncritical or unexamined assumptions that underlie it. For example, we often experience the world in such a way as to assume that we are observing things just as they are, as though we were seeing the world without the filter of a point of view. People we disagree with, of course, we recognize as having a point of view. One of the key dispositions of critical thinking is the on-going sense that as humans we always think within a perspective, that we virtually never experience things totally and absolutistically. There is a connection, therefore, between thinking so as to be aware of our assumptions and being intellectually humble.

Unlike many Web sites devoted to the topic, this one also addresses shortcomings of the critical thinking movement. Some educators are concerned that all the talk about critical thinking is largely sloganism, and it is encouraging to see such concerns addressed on this Web page. One of the "micropublications" on the site, called "Pseudo Critical Thinking in the Educational Establishment," warns against the sorts of abuses that can be associated with facile attempts to implement and assess critical thinking. Much of the article is devoted to a detailed critique of the California Assessment Program, particularly the 1993 English Language Arts Assessment. After demonstrating the problems with that attempt to assess critical thinking, the report reaches this conclusion: "To deal with the problem at its roots, we must own the fact that there are significant problems in education due to its wide-spread and large-scale bureaucratization. Large-scale bureaucratization entails, or at least makes highly probable, a high degree of narrow specialization--and specialization tends to bring fragmentation, narrowness of vision, politicization, and self-deception in its wake. The fragmentation and narrowness of vision makes it difficult to effect fundamental changes because the parts do not work together in a rational way and no one sees clearly that this is so, since each element in the structure becomes an end in itself, to itself."

In short, the site provides a good starting point for anyone wishing to investigate the subject, while also providing an unusually well-balanced approach.