Teaching Critical Thinking In Community Colleges
“Education encompasses more than just the facts and ideas that are taught in classrooms. It is a broadening experience that develops all aspects of the student’s life: social emotional, psychological, mental and physical” (Ginsberg, 1997, p.79). A problem inherent in educational programming at community colleges is the impartation and assessment of critical thinking skills.
Bers (2005) explains that one of the challenges of assessing critical thinking is the likelihood of a community college student to drop out or resist non-compulsory assessments, even when there is a monetary reward (p.23). Perhaps the problem is that the assessments are non-compulsory. If a community college administrator dedicates a course to an institutional—and, arguably, civic—goal, one would assume the odds of fulfilling and measuring this goal are improved.
A study by Fahr (2005) found that “highly educated people accumulate human capital through their specific leisure time use…this effect tends to widen the skill gap between more and less educated people.” The community college is uniquely positioned to encourage the kind of critical thinking skills that will cultivate an appetite for lifelong learning and empower students to “deal with ambiguity and negotiate the bewildering pace of social and technological change” (Brookfield, 2005 p.49).
That courses dedicated exclusively to critical thinking are uncommon is tragic (Bers, 2005, p.15). Futurist Richard Watson (2010) mocks self-conscious attempts to simulate intellectual environments (p.112), but instead recommends a more subtle approach to nurturing reluctant learners to be “intellectually promiscuous” (p.138). Learning should be fun, not filled with one of the many standardized instruments described by Bers (2005). Watson (2010) writes: “The link here is curiosity or, more specifically, a love of serendipitous experiences” (p.139).
Extensive assessments will only continue to exhaust institutional resources (Bers, 2005, p.23), and test validity/reliability only complicates the matter. However, by measuring the longitudinal effectiveness of a critical thinking course through students’ demonstrated initiative and pursuit of knowledge networks, there is opportunity to nurture systemic change. The challenge is whether a simple survey will provide the necessary data to determine success indicators, or whether the institution will yield to the temptation to administer yet another complex development assessment.
Ultimately, cultivating a hunger for learning is the job of the teacher—edifying learners to assimilate existing concepts and awaken themselves to new ideas. There are a number of knowledge networks that facilitate this pursuit including TED, NPR, RSA, OpenCourseWare, Meetup, museums, trade associations, and, of course, books. Sadly, many teachers are themselves unfamiliar with or indifferent towards many of these channels, and are thus unprepared to operate as integrators who truly encourage interdisciplinary, critical thinking.
***
Bers, T. (2005). Assessing critical thinking in community colleges. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2005(130), 15-25. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Brookfield, S. D. (2005). Overcoming impostorship, cultural suicide, and lost innocence: Implications for teaching critical thinking in the community college. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2005(130), 49-57. Retrieved from EBSCOhost.
Fahr, R. (2005). Loafing or learning? The demand for informal education. European Economic Review, 49(1), 75-98. Retrieved from ABI/INFORM Global
Ginsberg, B. (1997). Enrichments and enhancements for older adults beyond the classroom. Ageing International, 24(2/3), 75. Retrieved from Education Research Complete.
Watson, R. (2010). Future Minds. London, UK: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
