Teaching Philosophy 32 (3):247-261 (2009)
|Abstract||The conception of thought as a kind of argumentative dialogue has been influential in curricula designed to promote the development of thinking skills. Educators have sought to “teach” this kind of thinking by providing their students with opportunities to participate in argumentative exchange. This practice is based on the belief that thinking processes will mirror or mimic the interpersonal exchanges in which the thinker engages. In this article, another approach to teaching argumentative thought is developed. It is argued that while training and practice in interpersonal argumentation increases students’ overall argumentation skills, it is not particularly effective in helping students to develop the practice of engaging dialogically with their own beliefs. On this other approach, students are required to engage in “metacognitive inquiry” in which their own judgments in respect of curriculum materials, and in respect of the various strategies they have deployed to generate these judgments, become a subject matter for reflection and critical evaluation. The article concludes with the discussion of an in-class experiment in using the metacognitive approach|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||No categories specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Jennifer Wilson Mulnix & M. J. Mulnix (2010). Using a Writing Portfolio Project to Teach Critical Thinking Skills. Teaching Philosophy 33 (1):27-54.
Cynthia D. Coe (2011). Scaffolded Writing as a Tool for Critical Thinking. Teaching Philosophy 34 (1):33-50.
Mari-Ann Igland (2009). Negotiating Problems of Written Argumentation. Argumentation 23 (4):495-511.
Jennifer Wilson Mulnix (2010). Using a Writing Portfolio Project to Teach Critical Thinking Skills. Teaching Philosophy 33 (1):27-54.
Andrea Giampetro-Meyer (2004). The Social Fallout of Critical Thinking. Inquiry 23 (3):27-31.
Paola Cantù (2007). Is Common Ground a Word or Just a Sound? In Proceedings of the International Conference: Dissensus & The Search for Common Ground. Ontario Society for the Study of Argumentation.
Taeda Jovičić (2004). Authority-Based Argumentative Strategies: A Model for Their Evaluation. Argumentation 18 (1):1-24.
Jan van Laar (2010). Argumentative Bluff in Eristic Discussion: An Analysis and Evaluation. Argumentation 24 (3):383-398.
David Hitchcock (2002). The Practice of Argumentative Discussion. Argumentation 16 (3):287-298.
Assimakis Tseronis (2011). From Connectives to Argumentative Markers: A Quest for Markers of Argumentative Moves and of Related Aspects of Argumentative Discourse. Argumentation 25 (4):427-447.
Susan H. Peet (2004). Controversy and Critical Thinking Involving African-American Families. Inquiry 24 (1-2):13-19.
Robert Garnett & Kristin Klopfenstein (2004). Critical Thinking as an Interpersonal Experience. Inquiry 23 (3):11-16.
Linda Ferren, Rebecca Molden & Betty B. Ragland (2000). Coaching for Critical Thinking in Collaborative Settings. Inquiry 19 (3):44-50.
Kevin L. Flores, Gina S. Matkin, Mark E. Burbach, Courtney E. Quinn & Heath Harding (2012). Deficient Critical Thinking Skills Among College Graduates: Implications for Leadership. Educational Philosophy and Theory 44 (2):212-230.
Stephen Lewis (2005). Philosophizing Incognito. Teaching Philosophy 28 (3):237-247.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads2 ( #232,265 of 548,979 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,327 of 548,979 )
How can I increase my downloads?