Measuring critical thinking skills and dispositions in undergraduate students

This thesis investigates critical thinking with a particular focus on measurement in undergraduate students. A higher education context was chosen because many regard critical thinking development as a primary goal for third level education. Nine studies, both cross-sectional and longitudinal in design, were conducted with undergraduate psychology students (N=387), using the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) and the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST). Studies 1-3 revealed psychometric weaknesses in the CCTDI and revised the scale with factor analysis and reliability analysis to form the CCTDI United Kingdom revision (CCTDI-UK). Study 4 investigated convergent validity and showed significant inter-correlation between the sub-scales of the CCTDI-UK, and significant correlations with the Openness scale of the NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R). The study also provided evidence for improvement in scores on three of the six sub-scales in the CCTDI-UK (Truth-Seeking, Inquisitiveness, Open-Mindedness) during the course of an undergraduate degree. Study 5 explored a two factor structure for critical thinking dispositions. Study 6 used reliability analysis to revise the CCTST to produce the CCTST-UK. Study 7 showed that the CCTST-UK had a moderate correlation with degree attainment and a slightly higher correlation with a test of non-verbal intelligence (Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices short form); in addition, the study showed that scores on the CCTST-UK improved during the course of the degree. Studies 8 and 9 investigated the potential of critical thinking for predicting degree attainment. A-levels predicted approximately 10% of the variance of degree attainment while entry level scores on the CCTST-UK predicted an additional 5%. Exit level scores on the CCTST-UK and the Inquisitive sub-scale of the CCTDI-UK were found to be predictors of degree attainment The main conclusions of the thesis were that these tests had significant potential for predicting degree attainment and that they measured a substantial proportion of the theoretical constructs identified by the major authors in critical thinking.

Waiting for International Political Sociology: A Field Guide to Living In-Between

This paper explores the in-between positionality of International Political Sociology (IPS) and offers a field guide to help scholars, students and thinkers embrace this disposition more energetically. It makes the case for a more balanced transdisciplinarity that attends to the international, the political and the social at the same time and in equal measure. The power of this in-between approach is that it forces thinkers in IPS to constantly look at the horrors of our contemporary world without turning away. Through the ambivalent position of the ‘happy wreck’, the paper explores the need to do something about these horrors (e.g. diagnose, act, intervene) while fully acknowledging that such actions always produce new forms of violence and exclusion. To help thinkers in IPS inhabit this challenging space of inquiry more confidently, the paper makes four suggestions: (i) broadening our emotional responses to the horrors of the world; (ii) resisting resolution through non-cathartic dispositions; (iii) pursuing slow research to contest dominant rhetorics of crisis and emergency; and (iv) re-imagining shared conditions of vulnerability.

Does the European Union have a reverse gear? Policy dismantling in a hyperconsensual polity

The financial crisis has triggered demands to halt and even reverse the expansion of European Union (EU) policies. But have these and previous demands actually resulted in policy dismantling? The existing literature has charted the rise of dismantling discourses such as subsidiarity and better regulation, but has not examined the net effect on the acquis. For the first time, this contribution addresses this gap in the literature through an empirical study of policy change between 1992 and 2014. It is guided by a coding framework which captures the direction of policy change. It reveals that, despite its disposition towards consensualism, the EU has become a new locus of policy dismantling. However, not all policies targeted have been cut; many have stayed the same and some have even expanded. It concludes by identifying new directions for research on a topic that has continually fallen into the analytical blind spot of EU scholars.