Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9... 20
81 |
Joint Reflection Promotes Students’ Use of Evidence in Argumentive Writing
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
82 |
Kritische Medienkompetenz und Community Medien
|
|
|
|
In: Graz : CONEDU – Verein für Bildungsforschung und -medien 2018, 59 S. - (Dossier erwachsenenbildung.at) (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
84 |
Multi-Purpose Peer Review to Support All Students ...
|
|
Weinstein, Aimee. - : Innovations in Teaching & Learning Conference Proceedings, 2018
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
86 |
Focus group to create a virtual case study model unit for the DMU e-Parasitology.
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
87 |
Critical thinking in English language teaching in the Vietnamese context: perceptions and university students' competence
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
88 |
Conversations on Critical Thinking: Can Critical Thinking Find Its Way Forward as the Skill Set and Mindset of the Century?
|
|
|
|
In: Education Sciences ; Volume 8 ; Issue 4 (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
89 |
Learning Skills That Transfer: Using Class Conferences to Teach Critical Thinking
|
|
|
|
In: The Journal of Student Success in Writing (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
90 |
Getting Students to Think Critically and Visibly
|
|
|
|
In: Becoming: Journal of the Georgia Association for Middle Level Education (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
91 |
Teachers’ written formative feedback on students’ critical thinking: A case study
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
92 |
A State Between: A Caring-Virtuosic Argument Considering Decision-Making Before Wartime
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
93 |
Use of online asynchronous discussion boards to engage students, enhance critical thinking, and foster staff-student/student-student collaboration: a mixed method study
|
|
|
|
In: School of Health and Human Sciences (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
94 |
EFL teachers' conceptualizations and instructional practices of critical thinking
|
|
|
|
In: International Online Journal of Education and Teaching ; 4 ; 418-433 (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
95 |
The use of argument mapping in improving critical thinking
|
|
|
|
Abstract:
© 2018 Dr. Eva van der Brugge ; Critical thinking is not defined clearly enough to guide teachers in practice. Even within the broad definitional categories that can be discerned, individual definitions are rarely specific enough to allow for clear educational or assessment frameworks. Purpose-built critical thinking tests mostly fail to meet psychometrical standards. Where existing tests do measure a skill reliably, it is as of yet unclear to what extent this is more than intelligence or critical reading. This failure in definition and measurement is especially problematic given the proliferation of attempts to improve critical thinking. Methodological objections often cloud claims of effective teaching. Argument mapping is the method with the clearest case for efficacy. In 2011-2012, the Melbourne Critical Thinking Project tested the hypothesis that courses in argument mapping could dramatically improve critical thinking when combined with proven teaching techniques. Methodological considerations made the mixed results of the Melbourne Critical Thinking Project harder to interpret, further demonstrating challenges of teaching an ill-defined concept. After reviewing new evidence from this project, I conclude that the source of argument mapping's success is likely its use as a mediator in pedagogy. From 2013, I partook in a study at Princeton University. We were able to pre-empt some of the methodological challenges, thus providing further clarity into the efficacy of argument mapping. We found that teaching philosophy with argument maps was successful in a clearly delineated application. I conclude that there is so much room for improvement even among the brightest students in improving skills prerequisite to full-blown critical thinking, that it is likely worthwhile abandoning this muddled concept and focus on good teaching of these basic skills, aided by pedagogical tools like argument mapping. These skills are simply: good reading and understanding the basic structure of arguments.
|
|
Keyword:
argument mapping; critical reasoning; critical thinking; educational measurement
|
|
URL: http://hdl.handle.net/11343/214519
|
|
BASE
|
|
Hide details
|
|
96 |
Dialectical Teaching Strategies for First and Second-Year Students
|
|
|
|
In: UNLV Best Teaching Practices Expo (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
97 |
Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) Approach through REACT strategies on improving the students' critical thinking in writing
|
|
|
|
In: http://ijmas.iraj.in/paper_detail.php?paper_id=12944&name=Contextual_Teaching_and_Learning_(CTL)_Approach_through_React_Strategies_on_Improving_the_Students%E2%80%99_Critical_Thinking_in_Writing (2018)
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
98 |
Concurrent versus Post-Encounter Hypothesis-Driven Precepting
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
99 |
Use of online asynchronous discussion boards to engage students, enhance critical thinking, and foster staff-student/student-student collaboration: A mixed method study
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
100 |
The importance of academic literacy for undergraduate nursing students and its relationship to future professional clinical practice : a systematic review
|
|
|
|
BASE
|
|
Show details
|
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9... 20
|
|