Thinking critically about critical thinking in higher education

The literature on critical thinking in higher education is constructed around the fundamental assumption that, while regarded as essential, is neither clearly or commonly understood. There is elsewhere evidence that academics and students have differing perceptions of what happens in university classrooms, particularly in regard to higher order thinking. This paper reports on a small-scale investigation in a Faculty of Education at an Australian University into academic and student definitions and understandings of critical thinking. Our particular interest lay in the consistencies and disconnections assumed to exist between academic staff and students. The presumption might therefore be that staff and students perceive critical thinking in different ways and that this may limit its achievement as a critical graduate attribute. The key finding from this study, contrary to extant findings, is that academics and students did share substantively similar definitions and understandings of critical thinking.

The Development of a Critical Thinking Conceptual Model to Enhance Critical Thinking Skills in Middle-Eastern Nurses: A Middle-Eastern Experience

This paper aims to describe the development of a critical thinking conceptual model which was constructed to guide the teaching and evaluation of critical thinking skills to Middle-Eastern nurses.

Making use of pedagogic models as reflective catalysts for investigating pedagogic practice

The notion of pedagogy for anyone in the teaching profession is innocuous. The term itself, is steeped in history but the details of the practice can be elusive. What does it mean for an academic to be embracing pedagogy? The problem is not limited to academics; most teachers baulk at the introduction of a pedagogic agenda and resist attempts to have them reflect on their classroom teaching practice, where ever that classroom might be constituted. This paper explores the application of a pedagogic model (Education Queensland, 2001) which was developed in the context of primary and secondary teaching and was part of a schooling agenda to improve pedagogy. As a teacher educator I introduced the model to classroom teachers (Hill, 2002) using an Appreciative Inquiry (Cooperrider and Srivastva 1987) model and at the same time applied the model to my own pedagogy as an academic. Despite being instigated as a model for classroom teachers, I found through my own practitioner investigation that the model was useful for exploring my own pedagogy as a university academic (Hill, 2007, 2008). Cooperrider, D.L. and Srivastva, S. (1987) Appreciative inquiry in organisational life, in Passmore, W. and Woodman, R. (Eds) Research in Organisational Changes and Development (Vol 1) Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Pp 129-69 Education Queensland (2001) School Reform Longitudinal Study (QSRLS), Brisbane, Queensland Government. Hill, G. (2002, December ) Reflecting on professional practice with a cracked mirror: Productive Pedagogy experiences. Australian Association for Research in Education Conference. Brisbane, Australia. Hill, G. (2007) Making the assessment criteria explicit through writing feedback: A pedagogical approach to developing academic writing. International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning 3(1), 59-66. Hill, G. (2008) Supervising Practice Based Research. Studies in Learning, Evaluation, Innovation and Development, 5(4), 78-87

Re-thinking home economics : from modern to postmodern accounts of pedagogical bodies

Two perceptions of the marginality of home economics are widespread across educational and other contexts. One is that home economics and those who engage in its pedagogy are inevitably marginalised within patriarchal relations in education and culture. This is because home economics is characterised as women's knowledge, for the private domain of the home. The other perception is that only orthodox epistemological frameworks of inquiry should be used to interrogate this state of affairs. These perceptions have prompted leading theorists in the field to call for non-essentialist approaches to research in order to re-think the thinking that has produced this cul-de-sac positioning of home economics as a body of knowledge and a site of teacher practice. This thesis takes up the challenge of working to locate a space outside the frame of modernist research theory and methods, recognising that this shift in epistemology is necessary to unsettle the idea that home economics is inevitably marginalised. The purpose of the study is to reconfigure how we have come to think about home economics teachers and the profession of home economics as a site of cultural practice, in order to think it otherwise (Lather, 1991). This is done by exploring how the culture of home economics is being contested from within. To do so, the thesis uses a 'posthumanist' approach, which rejects the conception of the individual as a unitary and fixed entity, but instead as a subject in process, shaped by desires and language which are not necessarily consciously determined. This posthumanist project focuses attention on pedagogical body subjects as the 'unsaid' of home economics research. It works to transcend the modernist dualism of mind/body, and other binaries central to modernist work, including private/public, male/female,paid/unpaid, and valued/unvalued. In so doing, it refuses the simple margin/centre geometry so characteristic of current perceptions of home economics itself. Three studies make up this work. Studies one and two serve to document the disciplined body of home economics knowledge, the governance of which works towards normalisation of the 'proper' home economics teacher. The analysis of these accounts of home economics teachers by home economics teachers, reveals that home economics teachers are 'skilled' yet they 'suffer' for their profession. Further,home economics knowledge is seen to be complicit in reinforcing the traditional roles of masculinity and femininity, thereby reinforcing heterosexual normativity which is central to patriarchal society. The third study looks to four 'atypical'subjects who defy the category of 'proper' and 'normal' home economics teacher. These 'atypical' bodies are 'skilled' but fiercely reject the label of 'suffering'. The discussion of the studies is a feminist poststructural account, using Russo's (1994) notion of the grotesque body, which is emergent from Bakhtin's (1968) theory of the carnivalesque. It draws on the 'shreds' of home economics pedagogy,scrutinising them for their subversive, transformative potential. In this analysis, the giving and taking of pleasure and fun in the home economics classroom presents moments of surprise and of carnival. Foucault's notion of the construction of the ethical individual shows these 'atypical' bodies to be 'immoderate' yet striving hard to be 'continent' body subjects. This research captures moments of transgression which suggest that transformative moments are already embodied in the pedagogical practices of home economics teachers, and these can be 'seen' when re-looking through postmodemist lenses. Hence, the cultural practices ofhome economics as inevitably marginalised are being contested from within. Until now, home economics as a lived culture has failed to recognise possibilities for reconstructing its own field beyond the confines of modernity. This research is an example of how to think about home economics teachers and the profession as a reconfigured cultural practice. Future research about home economics as a body of knowledge and a site of teacher practice need not retell a simple story of oppression. Using postmodemist epistemologies is one way to provide opportunities for new ways of looking.

Thinking Collaboratively about the Peer-Review Process for Journal- Article Publication

In this conversation, Kevin K. Kumashiro shares his reflections on challenges to publishing anti-oppressive research in educational journals. He then invites eight current and former editors of leading educational research journals--William F. Pinar, Elizabeth Graue, Carl A. Grant, Maenette K. P. Benham, Ronald H. Heck, James Joseph Scheurich, Allan Luke, and Carmen Luke--to critique and expand on his analysis. Kumashiro begins the conversation by describing his own experiences submitting manuscripts to educational research journals and receiving comments by anonymous reviewers and journal editors. He suggests three ways to rethink the collaborative potential of the peer-review process: as constructive, as multilensed, and as situated. The eight current and former editors of leading educational research journals then critique and expand Kumashiro's analysis. Kumashiro concludes the conversation with additional reflections on barriers and contradictions involved in advancing anti-oppressive educational research in educational journals. (Contains 3 notes.)

Improving reflective writing in higher education : A social semiotic perspective

Reflective skills are widely regarded as a means of improving students’ lifelong learning and professional practice in higher education (Rogers 2001). While the value of reflective practice is widely accepted in educational circles, a critical issue is that reflective writing is complex, and has high rhetorical demands, making it difficult to master unless it is taught in an explicit and systematic way. This paper argues that a functional-semantic approach to language (Eggins 2004), based on Halliday’s (1978) systemic functional linguistics can be used to develop a shared language to explicitly teach and assess reflective writing in higher education courses. The paper outlines key theories and scales of reflection, and then uses systemic functional linguistics to develop a social semiotic model for reflective writing. Examples of reflective writing are analysed to show how such a model can be used explicitly to improve the reflective writing skills of higher education students.