Critical Thinking and the Argument
From LiteracyTentWiki
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2230] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Bonnie Odiorne bonniesophia at sbcglobal.net
Date: Wed Jul 9 14:42:53 EDT 2008
I'm very interested in writing and critical thinking at the moment. Stay with me here: this may get a little convoluted. Don't get me wrong: I don't for a heartbeat think that most ESOL students, even fairly "advanced" ones who might be taking college courses, have the language capacity to express clearly and concisely the critical thinking that may be going on in their heads but they just can't express. I'm thinking of agency and writing, and got into a bit of a conundrum in an English class recently. I'd always though an "argument" paper was one in which one stated a position and supported it with evidence, documented, or from personal experience. It turns out that the author of our text thought the argumentative paper is one that seeks to convince someone to change a thought or value or to do something, and the writer can use many strategies to effect this task.
So I'm wondering whether critical thinking is taught in how I used the argument, the abiity to connect thoughts, support them, and come to a sustainable conclusion: could be called expository, the presentation of information, that could demonstrate many levels of critical thinking. The argumentative or persuasive paper, on the other hand, would be to convince, and therein lies agency, I think, the "active" part of "activism": actually doing something to change a situation.
I'd relate these ideas in writing/thinking to Bloom's Taxonomy, and the verbs that are associated with various positions on the pyramid. For a good link to that, go to
http://social.chass.ncsu.edu/slatta/hi216/learning/bloom.htm
Just thinking out loud, critically or not.... :-)
Bonnie Odiorne
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2231] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Steve Kaufmann steve at thelinguist.com
Date: Wed Jul 9 15:03:34 EDT 2008
With regard to Bonnie's post, I feel that critical thinking is not the same
as the ability to present an argument. The former exists to some extent in
all of us, and I doubt that it can be deliberately taught as a skill without
getting pretty condescending. It is dependent on our personality, culture,
and exposure to a variety of experience and points of view.
The ability to carry an argument requires good language skills, first and
foremost. I do not mean getting the article, tenses and prepositions right,
I mean control of a wide vocabulary. In an academic setting it means being
able to look at both sides of an argument, to describe competing points of
view, and then explain convincingly why one is superior or truer than
others. Even ancient Roman rhetoric had the Refutatio where the orator at
least pretended to present a view contrary to his own, only to then take it
apart.
Steve
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2234] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Wrigley, Heide heide at literacywork.com
Date: Wed Jul 9 17:11:29 EDT 2008
Hi, Steve and Bonnie and others
I'm not sure that the ability to carry an argument requires good language skills first and foremost - native speakers often are at a loss of how to set up an argument, defute an argument, or recognize faulty thinking or manipuation. Certainly, being able to articulate once thoughts requires strong language skills - so these skills may be necessary but by no means sufficient .
In terms of schooling, I come from the tradition that Bonnie describes where there was great value attached to "logical reasoning" and setting up a dialogical essay (thesis, antithesis, synthesis). However, while this is a great skill to have in debates and makes it possilbe to trounce others in bar conversations as you punch holes in their assertions, it does leave out "other ways of knowing" (and if only ever the twain could meet).
So on to "critical literacies" then and the possibilities for teaching and learning these notions present?
All the best
Heide Spruck Wrigley
Mesilla, NM
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2255] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Bonnie Odiorne bonniesophia at sbcglobal.net
Date: Thu Jul 10 16:47:30 EDT 2008
Absolutely: how quickly I forgot my wonderful multiple intelligences course from Windy Quinones. How to discern and provoke critical thinking in different ways of being "smart."
Best, Bonnie
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2242] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Steve Kaufmann steve at thelinguist.com
Date: Thu Jul 10 00:11:36 EDT 2008
Hi Heide and others,
I must say I am enjoying this exchange of views and I apologize if I am at
times a little blunt, but then maybe that comes with the years.
Heide, the ability to carry an argument requires good language skills or,
failing that, a loud voice. The fact that many native speakers cannot carry
an argument only means that native proficiency is not a sufficient condition
for carrying an argument. However, often those native speakers who cannot
carry an argument are merely some of the many native speakers who use their
own language poorly, or have a limited vocabulary in their own language.
I believe that poor language skills, whether for a native or non-native, are
a definite obstacle to carrying an argument or even expressing ideas. Goethe
once said "When ideas fail, words really come in handy." Often, when at a
loss for how to express yourself, if you have words, and start using them,
the structure and arguments will come. Without enough words, you are lost.
The thesis, antithesis, synthesis formula is but one of many useful
structures to enable people to organize their thoughts quickly for an oral
or written expose. They are good tools, and useful in exams, or any
situation where one has to organize one's thoughts in a hurry. They are
certainly artificial and superficial, but useful. However, without enough
words, they can become empty and sterile.
I believe that it is difficult to teach critical thinking. In a language
learning context, the discussion of critical thinking should, in my view, be
limited to the most advanced students, bearing in mind that the expression
of that critical thinking in a style that will be appreciated, is very
culturally sensitive.
It is possible to encourage learners to enrich their vocabulary, and
knowledge, and range of perspectives , through wide reading and listening in
a given language. With that will come an improved ability to express views
in that language. That will be perceived as an expression of critical
thinking.
Steve
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2243] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Janet Isserlis Janet_Isserlis at brown.edu
Date: Thu Jul 10 08:31:03 EDT 2008
I think we're also losing (or maybe teasing apart?) some of the finer
distinctions between critical thinking and persuasive arguing.
Sometimes saying it again, saying it more loudly may sway a listener. But
it's easy to be loud, and even sequential , and yet still not think critically.
Think of some politician whose views you don't share. S/he may be clear,
have a beginning, middle and end of her/his oration, and yet, at the end of
the day, hasn't problematized anything, hasn't asked him/herself to think
about something differently and/or imagine different outcomes and certainly
hasn't moved his/her audience beyond the thing they were thinking about the
candidate or the issue before they came to the rally, the speech, the
demonstration.
In other words, it feels like some of this thread is parsing out the things
people need to be able to do to articulate ideas, but we're not (entirely)
quite digging into what has to happen to think critically.
Maybe it's a continuum of sorts ‹ to engage in a project, we analyze what
we'll do, what the goals are, what the outcomes might be, etc. But to then
push ourselves a bit more critically, we might ask why the project is
important, who gains or loses / in whose interest are we undertaking the
project...?
It is fascinating.
Janet
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2245] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Louise Wiener lwiener at llfinc.org
Date: Thu Jul 10 10:54:53 EDT 2008
Seems to me critical thinking follows a clear structure and includes deductive reasoning. Just insisting on your perspective in louder and louder tones has little to do with critical thinking. Louise
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2246] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Kearney Lykins kearney_lykins at yahoo.com
Date: Thu Jul 10 11:19:11 EDT 2008
I would proffer that critical thinking is not so much a skill as it is an attitude; at least it starts there.
Because critical thinking exposes oneself to the possibility of being shown that he is wrong, it is more about being open to ambiguity and change. These are not skills per se; it is really about overcoming the will. Montaigne's essays come to mind as exemplars of critical examinations about how one initially thinks the world and oneself "is", and after honest reflection and observation, revising one's opinion's about things. Critical thinking is concerned with growth and change and these always carry risk. A willingness to accept risk is paramount.
Any attempt to “teach critical thinking” will be lost on those who are not ready to accept its consequences.
I have never heard a teacher say, "today we are going to learn about critical thinking."
Kearney
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2247] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Andrea Wilder andreawilder at comcast.net
Date: Thu Jul 10 11:42:09 EDT 2008
Kearney--
I agree with your statement. It accords with my experience in the
martial arts, where one thanks the teacher for corrections. The
possibility of "being wrong" is a tremendous hurdle to overcome.
However, I have found it possible to transfer the skill of acceptance
for being wrong to other areas. I think this skill goes against the
American grain.
Andrea
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2249] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Alpha Computer Training and COnsulting alphact at eastlink.ca
Date: Thu Jul 10 13:25:38 EDT 2008
Hi Kearney,
Excellent points everyone. Learning is like placing a ladder against a
building and climbing it. Critical thinking (1) gets us to examine why we
are placing our ladder against that building and (2) helps us remain open so
that we can reposition our ladder as new information and thoughts become
available. It is a shame to finally get to the top of the ladder and
realize that we are on the wrong roof. As we remain open to new thoughts
and ideas, we can make sure that we end up on the right roof top.
Excellent discussion everyone.
Jeff Brown
Alpha Computer Training and Consulting
(902)956-2600
E-mail: info at alphacomputer.ca
www.alphacomputer.ca
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2251] Re: What do we mean bystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Andrea Wilder andreawilder at comcast.net
Date: Thu Jul 10 14:12:40 EDT 2008
Even more stunning is the experience of following through in a way of
thinking or acting that instinctively feels wrong--actually, it may
be right, but because the way of thinking / behaving is so new, it
feels wrong.
Just because something "feels right" doesn't mean it is, and just
because something "feels wrong" doesn't mean it is wrong. Think of
learning a new sport--EVERYTHING will feel wrong, yet that is
probably the only way to learn.
Andrea
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2250] Re: What do we meanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Anderson, Philip Philip.Anderson at fldoe.org
Date: Thu Jul 10 14:16:16 EDT 2008
Jeff,
Thanks for your ladder story! It reminded me of an Aha! moment I had
after my Peace Corps stint in the Dominican Republic. I did projects
with farmers' groups that wanted to raise pigs and chickens for an extra
source of income. During those days, the saying "Give someone a fish
and they will eat for today. Teach them how to fish and they will eat
forever." I enthusiastically gave every ounce I had to doing all I
could to be a "teacher," not a "giver." But the day came about 5 years
later that I shared the saying with a wise elder; his response was, "But
what if the person doesn't like to eat fish?" When I finished reading
your story, I realized how often it happens that we need to change
rooftops in our role as learning educators.
Phil
CONTACT INFORMATION Philip Anderson Adult ESOL Program Florida Department of Education Tel (850) 245-9450
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2261] Re: Whatdo wemeanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Andrea Wilder andreawilder at comcast.net
Date: Fri Jul 11 13:06:34 EDT 2008
Everyone--
Have we defined "critical thinking?" I've gone over most of the
posts, and the authors cover a wide range of behaviors that they are
calling "critical thinking."
I, too, sometimes swallow an argument hook line and sinker. I can
get swept away by someone else's argument unless I have thought
through the problem or issue very carefully--anticipating the
questions or assertions from others.
Andrea
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2262] Re: Whatdo wemeanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Bonnie Odiorne bonniesophia at sbcglobal.net
Date: Fri Jul 11 13:25:16 EDT 2008
Andrea,
You're right. I don't think anyone has. Does anyone know of anything in the literature that comes close, except Bloom's taxonomy, which addresses levels of understanding and logical manipulation, and some say creativity, as being the highest level rather than (I think) synthesis. I think Gardner does in multiple intelligences, since he talks about the intellligences as ways of making meaning in the world. What about Brookfield? I've read some but not all of that. I certainly think critical thinking can occur in all situations, not just those one would label as linguistic or academic. In fact Quinnipiac University in CT is having a conference this fall in Writing across the disciplines and critical thinking, since writing is rarely mentioned as a factor that builds thinking, when in fact it does, or can. The keynote speaker's topic is critical thinking as poetry, and I can see the point. A certain kind of "out of the box" association of different domains
to create something new, whether it's actually a poem, or a paper, or a language behavior, or surviving in the world.... Any thoughts, anyone?
Bonnie Odiorne, Post University
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2264] Re: Whatdo wemeanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Kearney Lykins kearney_lykins at yahoo.com
Date: Fri Jul 11 14:06:50 EDT 2008
"Critical thinking" is a new term for an old idea.
Before it became disparaged by the modernists, "rhetoric" was not a bad word; it was the counterpart of dialectic and, in noble hands, was synonymous with "reason." In other words, rhetoric, defined as the ability to speak and write more effectively, also trains one to think more effectively. The best literature I could recommend on the topic comes from the rhetoricians and philosophers who explain how the ability to present a persuasive case to others makes one a better thinker (and a better person) for himself.
Three classic texts to start with would be:
Isocrates, "Against the Sophists"
Aristotle, "The Rhetoric"
Cicero (perhaps) Ad Herennium
Again, the classic rhetoric I am recommending here should not be confused with the word's modern negative connotation. But mounds of wisdom have been dispensed on the topic of critical thinking, under a different name.
Kearney
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2266] Re: Whatdo wemeanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Steve Kaufmann steve at thelinguist.com
Date: Fri Jul 11 14:52:42 EDT 2008
Bonnie,
I agree with you. Rhetoric as practiced by the ancients is a good
discipline. It helps you to organize your thoughts in order to persuade
others. This forces you to think about logical connections between ideas. It
does not make you more open minded. Most of us arrive at our points of view
emotionally, rather than through some clear "critical thinking" path. The
skills of rhetoric are useful tools for persuading others of our beliefs. I
do not think that most English teachers, myself included, can teach our
learners to think, critically or otherwise, nor is it our mandate.
Here is what I said recently in reply to a questioner at one of my youtubes.
1) You can teach methods of organizing your thoughts in order to express
them convincingly. I don't believe ESL teachers can teach how to think, how
to be open to new ideas, how to question assumptions, without imposing their
own assumptions. We arrive at our views based more on emotion than logic,
and use logic to justify these views.
2)Language is part of your culture and affects your world view. Each successive language you learn opens your mind to new perspectives.
<http://ca.youtube.com/video_response_upload?v=to9asMOReyY>
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2268] Re: Whatdo wemeanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Catherine B. King cb.king at verizon.net
Date: Fri Jul 11 15:06:13 EDT 2008
Hello Kearney and all:
Also, a standard text on Logic is Copi's Introductory work, where logical or informal fallacies are covered clearly.
Knowledge of the logical fallacies is a beginning of critical thinking--necessary but not sufficient--to grasp what it means to think critically, but where we still need to understand assumptions, implications, and how to apply our thinking in the concrete universe where, as Aristotle noted a long time ago, there are "no fixed data." Also, duplicity takes many forms; and both sophists and philosophers who are interested in truth-telling can use logic well.
A Google of either Irving Copi or logical (or informal) fallacies will find several takes. In his work, Copi distinguishes two basic fallacies--of relevance and of ambiguity--each having several kinds. The following is an example of one of each, drawn from Copi's 6th edition (I belief there is at least one more newer edition).
Of relevance:
"Petitio Principii (begging the question): In attempting to establish the truth of a proposition, one often casts about for acceptable premisses from which the proposition in question can be deduced as conclusion. If one assumes as a premiss for an argument the very conclusion it is intended to prove, the fallacy committed is that of petitio principii, or begging the question. If the proposition to be established is formulated in exactly the same words both as premiss and as conclusion, the mistake would be so glaring as to deceive no one. Often, however, two formulations can be sufficiently different to obscure the fact that one and the same proposition occurs both as premiss and conclusion. This situation is illustrated by the following argument reported by Whately: 'To allow every man unbounded freedom of speech must always be, on the whole, advantageous to the state for it is highly conducive to the interests of the community that each individual should enjoy a liberty, perfectly unlimited, of expressing his sentiments" (p. 108).
Of ambiguity (or clearness):
"Amphiboly: The Fallacy of Amphiboly occurs in arguing from premisses whose formulations are ambiguous because of their grammatical construction. A statement is amphibolous when its meaning is indeterminate because of the loose or awkward way in which its words are combined. An amphibolous statement may be true on one interpretation and false on another. When it is stated as premiss with the interpretation which makes it true, and a conclusion is drawn from it on the interpretation which makes it false, then the Fallacy of Amphiboly has been committed" (p. 122).
(Copi uses the spelling "premiss" and "premisses.")
I hope this helps,
Catherine King
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2271] Re: Whatdo wemeanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Kearney Lykins kearney_lykins at yahoo.com
Date: Fri Jul 11 17:11:19 EDT 2008
Steve,
In defense of the study of rhetoric, it is precisely because it is the one field of study that openly acknowledges and examines the relationship between emotions and persuasion, that it is especially valuable in helping one to be a more critical (wiser) thinker. Yes, this knowledge can be used perniciously, but that is a question of ethics, and indeed is a concern for every field of study.
Anyone who has ever participated in forensic speech (debate club) can surely attest to how taking "the other side" of an argument improves one's critical thinking abilities.
Regards,
Kearney
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2274] Re: Whatdo wemeanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Steve Kaufmann steve at thelinguist.com
Date: Fri Jul 11 17:43:00 EDT 2008
Kearney,
I do not dispute that debating or the practice of rhetoric can improve one's
ability to reason. I also believe that all rhetorical techniques, include
hyperbole, allegory and even sarcasm have their place. Defending one's
position, countering these techniques, and using them, is a good exercize in
reasoning, even though the assumptions are usually arrived at before the
"critical thinking" begins.
Unfortunately, the recent trend in educational circles seems to favour
"dialoguing", whereby we pretend to agree with whatever is said, and look
for points that we have in common, and should avoid trying to persuade
anyone of one's point of view. This leads to a sterile discussion. It only
works if everyone actually does agree, or if contrary views can be
suppressed..
Here, on this forum, it has appeared to me that "critical thinking" has been
discussed in the sense that English teachers are looking for ways to help
their students to challenge basic their assumptions as part of their English
learning, and at a very early stage in their English learning. I feel that
this is unrealistic. Try persuading a religious person to challenge the
basic assumptions of their religion and see how far you get.
Rhetoric, is a valuable and an advanced skill, and can only be taught after
one has a sufficient range of vocabulary to use it effectively.
I am of the opinion that beginner ESL learners should be allowed to listen
to the language and try to enjoy it, with little requirement to state what
their assumptions are on anything.
Steve
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2272] Re: Whatdo wemeanbystudentinvolvement and critical thinking?
From: Bonnie Odiorne bonniesophia at sbcglobal.net
Date: Sat Jul 12 21:11:05 EDT 2008
Hi Kearney, and all,
Rhetoric, though I was not necessarily "defending" this discipline, is at the foundation of almost all composition courses, and thus important for those seeking post-secondary education, I was concerned at the moment of the post about the connection between language and activism, between language and action. Rhetoric is a "metacompetency" that gets students to think about language and how they think, metacognitiion, and thus is on the way to critical thinking. In addition to becoming more aware of their own language, it also sensitizes students to language strategies that can be effective, or manipulate, and so they could study their own lives, the media and consumerism that surrounds them, and not believe that just because something is in print (or on the Internet) makes it so. If they see their peers becoming victimized by such manipulation, like the advertisements of a certain phonics system on Hispanic tv, they will take action.
Bonnie Odiorne, Post University
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2275] On dialogue and critical thinking
From: Taylor, Jackie jataylor at utk.edu
Date: Sun Jul 13 19:29:42 EDT 2008
Hi Steve, (All)
You wrote:
- "Unfortunately, the recent trend in educational circles seems to favour "dialoguing", whereby we pretend to agree with whatever is said, and look for points that we have in common, and should avoid trying to persuade anyone of one's point of view. This leads to a sterile discussion. It only works if everyone actually does agree, or if contrary views can be suppressed.."
I disagree with how you are characterizing dialogue. Do you mean to equate dialogue with some type of cooperation or consensus, or group think..? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groupthink)
I believe dialogue is about presenting one's point of view, but then
looking for meaning, suspending assumptions (i.e. suspend as in to hold
out assumptions and examine them), being open to changing one's
position... Dialogue and the knowledge constructed as a result are
greater than the sum of its parts and what is constructed is only as
rich as the diverse perspectives brought to the table. It depends on
seeking authentic meaning and a 'safe space' so that individuals feel
comfortable expressing their views (thus eliciting more diverse
perspectives). It does include finding common ground, but I see it as
being more about constructing new knowledge, attitudes, and the group
dynamics needed for that construction.
And what does this have to do with critical thinking and student
involvement?
One uses critical thinking in dialogue. What does "the other" mean by
what she said? How is what I'm saying reflected in the other's position?
How is it not? How might I understand the other better? What are the
"right questions" I need to ask in order to do that? All too often I
think we are afraid to "ask back" for fear of appearing somehow "less
than" or as if one might "not know" what the other means.
It also levels the playing field and the instructor or facilitator is
not perceived as "the expert" with all the answers; both students and
instructors have expertise to contribute. It would be interesting, I
think, to explore strategies for facilitating dialogue vs. debate.
As always, I welcome others' thoughts.
Best, Jackie
Jackie Taylor
jataylor at utk.edu
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2280] Re: On dialogue and critical thinking
From: Steve Kaufmann steve at thelinguist.com
Date: Sun Jul 13 22:47:08 EDT 2008
Jacquie, Bonnie et al,
Everyone has a bias. It is not possible to not have a bias. When Bonnie says
- "they could study their own lives, the media and consumerism that surrounds them, and not believe that just because something is in print (or on the Internet) makes it so. If they see their peers becoming victimized by such manipulation, like the advertisements of a certain phonics system on Hispanic tv, they will take action."
she is expressing her biases:that the students cannot judge things by
themselves, that consumerism (however defined) is bad (compared to what
alternative), that the phonics system advertized on Hispanic TV is bad or
their ads misleading.
I once attended a one day seminar on "What it means to be Canadian" put on
by the Centre for Dialogue" of Simon Fraser University here in Vancouver.
We were lectured to at the beginning by a student who warned the audience,
half of whom were not students, not to try to convince people but to
"dialogue". We were encouraged to scribble down our random thoughts on
pieces of paper. At my table, 6 people, of varying origins (Greek, Israeli,
German, Pakistani) myself and our student host talked about
multiculturalism. Four of us said that it was a bad idea because it weakened
our sense of Canadian solidarity. The gentleman from Pakistan read a poem in
favour of multiculturalism. When it came for our student host to summarize
the discussion, she said that we all agreed on how wonderful Canada's policy
of official multiculturalism was- that was her "consensus"!
When I had a chance to chat with the student who lectured us on dialogue, he
immediately accused my of being a bigot because I told him that most
Canadians preferred to see immigrants assimilate, although it was, of
course, up to them.
It was obvious that these students only ever heard one side of most
arguments so I offered to go to the university to speak to their group. They
agreed on condition that I would just sit around and dialogue and not make a
presentation. I declined and they accepted my conditions.
University educated people, and especially university professors, are not
more open-minded than humbler people. I hvae to go to dinner and will
continue later.
Steve
[ProfessionalDevelopment 2286] Re: On dialogue and critical thinking
Steve Kaufmann steve at thelinguist.com
Mon Jul 14 00:19:34 EDT 2008
Jackie,
To continue on dialogue, I do not like utopias. I do not like attempts to
make people better than they are. I have seen the results in the previous
century, whether under Hitler, Stalin or Mao. I prefer to let people just
behave they way are inclined to do. We are inclined to have biases. We are
inclined to defend these biases. We are not easily persuaded by logic that
our biases are not justified. And what is more we enjoy finding arguments
that support our biases. We are annoyed by well argued counter arguments to
our biases.
I do not like being in discussions where I am told how to express my views.
I do not think it is helpful to ESL learners to suggest that there are some
superior ways of thinking and arguing their points. My approach to language
learners is: Let them learn by enjoying the language however they can. Let
them learn words. Let them discover the language. Let them speak when they
want, however they want. Do not guide them to some superior way of
expressing themselves. They will figure it our for themselves.
If they are academic learners, by all means make them aware of some
established ways of organizing their thoughts. Let them know that in theory,
arguments need to be backed up with observations or references, that both
sides of the arguments should be evaluated, even though these rules are
regularly ignored by many activist academics. But let them keep their
passions and biases. They will anyway. And so will most people, and an
atmosphere which allows that is important to our freedom of expression.
Steve
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2279] Re: On dialogue and critical thinking
From: Ochieng kh ochykheyr at yahoo.com
Date: Mon Jul 14 03:36:23 EDT 2008
I share immensely in Jackie' views. In my view, dialogue is about enriching and braodening horizons. It reconciles perspectives through shared understanding. It also generates clarity and objectivity in so far as issues and arguments are concerned.
Best wishes,
Ochieng M. Khairalla
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2284] Re: On dialogue and critical thinking
From: Bonnie Odiorne bonniesophia at sbcglobal.net
Date: Mon Jul 14 11:06:56 EDT 2008
I don't understand from what perspective Steve is coming. I don't deny that there is without doubt a subtext of both hegemony and power in these discussions, as Brookfield would put it. Hegemony, i.e. what we "believe to be so" without consciously questioning it, and power, the unspoken presence of institutions, employers, funders, regulatory agencies.
So are we reduced to saying that this listerve and all like it is a sham, a pretense of dialogue, of true inquiry? My believe is that it is not. I, being aware of these forces, do try to navigate among them when they might impact my self interest, but other that that, and perhaps that's bigger than I'd like to acknowledge, I think I sincerely play with ideas, think out loud, take input from others and file it for future use,or use it immediately in my professional practice.
I believe that many of the results of these dialogues might not be seen on the screen, but in our classrooms, offices: where, as PDs so often bemoan, we try to put our learning into practice. Of course we find common ground: isn't that what "best practices" is all about? Of course we disagree: don't we have our own particular perspectives, backgrounds, assumptions? But we do, and must, on a moderated listserve, maintain a degree of collegiality that is the essence of professional discourse, and if we attempt, as Jackie says, to "suspend our assumption," and be open to being convinced of a contrary point of view, or perhaps, find that that "contrary" really isn't..... This is how we all, students or instructors, learn and grow in critical thinking.
And, btw, I believe that low-level language learners are practicing critical thinking with every language decision they make. And, as linguistics know, each language decision in a given sentence limits the choices of what can follow, and so decisions cannot be made lightly.
Best,
Bonnie Odiorne, Ph.D. Professor, Writing Center, Post University
Subject: [ProfessionalDevelopment 2302] Re: On dialogue and critical thinking
From: Andrea Wilder andreawilder at comcast.net
Date: Mon Jul 14 21:21:54 EDT 2008
Steve--
You are a breath of fresh air. I rent out rooms to faculty. grad
students, often from other countries. Itsuko, a teacher of Japanese,
lived with me for 2 years. She told me about an American (can't
remember his name) who landed in Tokyo knowing no japanese, and by
following some principles he had used in other countries, mastered
the language. I'll try to get the principles from Itsuko and post here.
Andrea
