Job Discussion Forums

[LongShiKong]

[Sashadroogie]

As we've said many, many times before here on the boards, there isn't even a single accepted definition of what is meant by 'critical thinking skills'. Most authorities will use it to mean discerning a truth statement from an unsupported one. Others use it to mean clarifying their 'thinking about thinking'. There is quite a range of subtle differences, even amongst knowledgeable thinkers.

The link to the IELTS band 9 descriptors [Task 1 only, by the way], however, has little overt connection to the wiki link on critical thinking skills. What connection are you trying to make between them? (Also, where did you get this descriptor? It is not the same as the publicly available descriptors.) All (hee hee) candidates have to do in an academic Task 1 is to write a report accurately based on selected data, with writing that is logically organised, and doesn't make mad assertions unsupported by the given data. There is in this strong connection to what Johnslat is driving at. But this IELTS task doesn't test learners ability to 'reason'. (And this is what many posters seem to think it means.) It does test their ability to present their thoughts and ideas in a logical manner consistent with the norms of anglophone academia. And that is all.

Suggesting that Arabic or Chinese norms, for example, are somehow less logical because they are based on different conventions is the main problem I have with those who push 'critical thinking' skills. Some ignorant TEFLers chauvinistically assume that English/European academic conventions are the last word in cold universal logic. This is patently not the case at all.

Perhaps if they used their own meagre abilities to reason just a little bit more, then they wouldn't be so quick to think they need to 'educate' the rest of the world 'how to think'.

Anyway, in a quick reply to your listed questions, Longshikong, please see below:

1. Critical thinking skills, as defined by Johnslat, are needed more for IELTS Reading tests than writing. But learner awareness of cohesion and coherence is important for all skills.

2.Yes, they do differ. Most educated learners can express themselves logically in their own language. Where they fall down using English is nearly always related to a lack of language, especially in discourse management, i.e. connectors etc. For IELTS essay writing, learners need to acquire skillful use of English language discourse markers. They do not need to be taught how to be logical generally. At least, no more than their teachers do.

3. Yes, it is. Extremely presumptuous. given that the majority of TEFLers abroad only have a passing acquaintance with the L1 of their host country, they really need to button up on sweeping generalisations about their students' inability to think. Generalisations such as these would fail their own critical thinking tests of truth statements in the first place!

4.Do you really have to ask? Look at the massive evidence on just this very forum. The clear winner is always the specialist in dialectical materialism.

5. Didn't really get what you were talking about here. Have I failed to demonstrate my ability to 'reason' or have you?



Arrgghh! This is thirsty work. Almost time for my 10:55 constitutional!!!

[Cool Teacher]

[mk87]

[Sashadroogie]

[LongShiKong]

[Sashadroogie]

Sorry. That was a struggle to read. Would only garner an IELTS 6.5 - 7 tops.

Time for my 20:33 constitutional : )

[johnslat]

Dear Sasha,

"Most educated learners can express themselves logically in their own language."

Clearly, you have never heard of the Republican Party.

"On average, self-identified Republicans have more years of education (4 to 8 months each, depending on the survey) and are probably more likely to hold, at the least, a 4-year college degree. (One major survey indicates that they are more likely, while the results of another survey are statistically insignificant.)"

Regards,
John

[Sashadroogie]

Dear Johnslat

Perhaps you could volunteer your skills to teach them critical thinking skills then? And teach logic and rhetoric too. Bush II didn't exactly shine in that regard, did he?

And while we are just throwing ideas out there, perhaps a critical reading of various religious texts that are taken so, so seriously by these types might be a good idea? We could hold them up against classics of logical exposition like... oh I dunno, "The Origin of Species".

Sound like a good plan? : )


Best wishes

Sasha

[Sashadroogie]

Phew! At last! 22:45 has rolled around! Now I can get some proper liquid nourishment : )

[johnslat]

Dear Sasha.

"You can't fix stupid."

"Beauty fades, but dumb is forever."

"Against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain."

Even I'M not THAT good.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-wYvQP8yvTBg/UCxn8LBPFlI/AAAAAAAADRs/yx8Se11wpjI/s640/YOU%2BCAN'T%2BFIX%2BSTUPID.png

Regards,
John

[Sashadroogie]

Dear Johnslat

Now, to return to my contention, teaching EFL and 'critical thinking' skills do not really go together as neatly as others may believe. Your case of the right-wing faction of the only party in the US is a good example. While Republicans may or may not be stupid or lacking in critical thinking skills, I would doubt an EFL language course would be an appropriate remedy. If they cannot reason logically, then language lessons won't really help. Even for Bush II.

It is similar to expecting EFL lessons to create more 'logically minded' foreigners. It rests on the same flawed premise, though. Namely, that we somehow 'think' in English, our whatever our native tongue is.


Best wishes

Sasha

[Cool Teacher]

[Sashadroogie]

Of course, it is all a medical conspiracy to begin with. Can't trust any of these medical types. That is why I stick with leeches. And they stick to me.

[fat_chris]