Race, space and politics in Mid-Victorian Ireland: the ethnologies of Abraham Hume and John McElheran

There has been much scholarly debate about the significance and influence of racialist thinking in the political and cultural history of nineteenth-century Ireland. With reference to that ongoing historiographical discussion, this paper considers the racial geographies and opposing political motivations of two Irish ethnologists, Abraham Hume and John McElheran, using their racialist regimes to query some of the common assumptions that have informed disagreements over the role and reach of racial typecasting in mid-nineteenth-century Ireland. As well as examining in detail the racial imaginaries promulgated by Hume and McElheran, the paper also argues for the importance of situating racialist discourse in the spaces in which it was communicated and contested. Further, in highlighting the ways in which Hume and McElheran collapsed together race, class and religion, the paper troubles the utility of a crisp analytical distinction between those disputed categories.

An experiment in group learning technology: evaluating critical thinking in face-to-face and computer-supported seminars

Can learning quality be maintained in the face of increasing class size by the use of Computer Supported Co-operative Learning (CSCL) technologies? In particular, can Computer-Mediated Communication promote critical thinking in addition to surface information transfer? We compared face-to-face seminars with asynchronous computer conferencing in the same Information Management class. From Garrison's theory of critical thinking and Henri's critical reasoning skills, we developed two ways of evaluating critical thinking: a student questionnaire and a content analysis technique. We found evidence for critical thinking in both situations, with some subtle differences in learning style. This paper provides an overview of this work.

A content analysis method to measure critical thinking in face-to-face and computer supported group learning

This paper gives a detailed account of the content analysis method developed at Queen's University Belfast to measure critical thinking during group learning, as used in our controlled comparisons between learning in face-to-face and computer conference seminars. From Garrison's 5 stages of critical thinking, and Henri's cognitive skills needed in CMC, we have developed two research instruments: a student questionnaire and this content analysis method. The content analysis relies on identifying, within transcripts, examples of indicators of obviously critical and obviously uncritical thinking, from which several critical thinking ratios can be calculated.