Stand-Alone Versus Integrated Critical Thinking Courses

Abstract

For well over 25 years, has been declared an educa tional ideal (Siegel, 1980, 1988). According to Diane Halpern, The ability to think critically is almost always listed as one of the desir able outcomes of undergraduate (1993, p. 238). More recently scholars claim that few concepts have attracted more atten tion in higher education than the notion of (Williams, Oliver, & Stockdale, 2004, p. 37). If one looks at the cat alogs of many colleges and universities, the goal of improving stu dents' skills is often found in their educational goals statements. However, though institutions are committed to teaching critical thinking (CT), there are numerous important questions that need careful treatment if this goal is to be met. First, the faculties must arrive at a shared understanding of what they mean by the phrase critical thinking. This is because one's conception of CT will determine what courses or materials are included in the attempt to enhance students' CT skills (Hatcher, 2000). This in turn will lead to questions of pedagogy. That is, just how is it that these skills are best taught? Although the first of these questions is important (Hatcher, in press), this article will focus on the second. Given recent assessment data, what sort of general approach is most effective for teaching CT? As Halpern (1993, p. 238) has pointed out, one fundamental ques tion is whether to require stand-alone courses in CT or to integrate instruction in CT skills with other courses. In 2001, one extensive sur vey concluded that specialized courses in have gen erally been successful in promoting this skill, but recent attempts to infuse activities into subject-matter courses have yielded marginal results (Williams & Worth, 2001, p. 13). In spite of this research, this article will argue that, given more recent, as well