The importance of critical thinking has been reiterated in recent documents delineating standards and new goals for social studies education. Yet, according to author “teaching critical thinking is problematic because there are competing definitions, practices, and many barriers to its implementation.” (Wright, 2002).
The author’s negative perception in regards to the current techniques employ in teaching critical thinking leads him to believe that new standards and goals will be very difficult to meet. “This assumption is a an unstated belief about how the world was, is, or will become.” (Pearson, 2003).
The author’s emotions progress rapidly towards forming his own rational decisions without putting a more structural picture into clearer focus.
Furthermore, he fails to examine the precise meaning of the various components available before reacting to the ideas being presented. Understanding the precise meaning of key words or phrases is an important prerequisite on deciding whether to agree or disagree with someone’s opinion. Wright’s inability to clearly define the worth of his argument with facts is obvious; consequently, the reader’s evaluation process is much harder and ambiguous. He defines the new methods for teaching critical thinking in a positive form however each of these methods suggests a different way to measure standards that according to him are barriers for the implementation of new system. Effective writing strives for clarity. Thinking about the characteristics of intended audience helps to determine whether or not ambiguities need to be clarified.
The Essay on Teaching Critical Awareness
Jane Mayer begins the article by bringing out the important part in teaching sociology which is ensuring that the students have understood the various types of social structures and their relationship with each other and to individuals. In order to achieve the above objective, integration of various processes and learning experiences is important. They involve an integration of both passive and ...
A specialized audience may adequately understand phrases or specific abstractions that could be very ambiguous to a general audience. Wright’s use of ambiguity can be interpreted as a form of fallacy and logic distortion due to the heavy emotional impact intended. The intended meaning of Wright’s writing is not clearly communicated on this article due in most part to the lack of concrete illustrations to support meaning intended. The article cannot be evaluated until we know the communicator’s intended meaning of key terms and phrases as well as alternative meanings they could conceivably have had in the context of the argument. References Pearson Custom Publishing (2003).
Readings in Critical Thinking (p-27) Boston, MA: Pearson Custom Publishing Wright, I. (2002).
Challenging Students with the Tools of Critical Thinking. The Social Studies issue 6, 257-261.
Retrieved February 11, 2003 from Proquest database on the World Wide Web: web.
