Abstract
The emphasis on critical thinking in North American schools, colleges and universities has led educators to develop programmes to help students reason better. However, there are differing conceptions of critical thinking. In this article the policy implications of four of these conceptions ‐ those of R. Ennis, R. Paul, J. McPeck, and M. Lipman's Philosophy for Children programme ‐ are analysed. It is concluded that each of these conceptions would realize different approaches to curriculum and instruction, even though the overall ‘critical manner’ of teaching would be common to them all.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
