Fall 2002 Retreat
Critical Realizations:
Recognizing and Refining Critical Thinking Practices
An Autumn Retreat
Sleeping Lady Resort,
Leavenworth, WA
September 22 & 23, 2002
In the Fall of 2002, selected faculty members
from eastern Washington’s two and four year education institutions
and from the U. of Nevada Reno came together for a two day intensive
workshop in the beauty and isolation of the Cascade Mountains near
Leavenworth, Washington. As the most recent in the series of working
retreats on critical thinking, its purpose was to explore tangible
ways in which critical thinking plays into our work of teaching,
mentoring, and administrating.
Assessing critical thinking ability requires a mutually shared set
of evaluation criteria, as well as an understanding of the influence
that teaching methodology has on facilitating critical thinking.
These sessions explored ways to use the guide to rating critical
thinking to promote learning, refine teaching and articulate assessment
practices.
The three small-group sessions of the workshop (Saturday evening,
Sunday morning and Sunday afternoon) were each divided into three
thematic groups. Following each of the sessions, the participants
were asked to comment on the group discussions and the lessons learned.
Below are some of their comments and observations:
Session 1: Saturday, September 22, 7:30
PM to 9:00 PM:
a) “What is a Rubric Anyway?” facilitated
by Robin Jeffers, from Bellevue Community College and Gary Brown
from WSU.
b) “Course and Assignment Design” facilitated
by Sharon Roy, WSU
c) “Critical Thinking as a Faculty Development
Issue” facilitated by Becky Reed, University of Washington,
Bothell.
Q: What are you going to do with the information
from this session?
Participants’ Comments:
“Integrate it into our work with assessment”
“Change tests to include questions that would demonstrate
critical thinking skills.”
“Use more thought in developing rubrics for student assignments”
“Use it to critically examine my current syllabi. Look for
ways of clarifying what I expect from students, what I assign and
how I assess those assignments”
“Explore the possibility of using the rubric format in student
self-evaluation forms”
“Try to make my course goals clear to students. Expect students
to participate in reaching those goals.”
“Think more about how to use the CT Rubric to reinforce responsible
learning in my students.”
“Look at my course through new eyes – then try to step
out of the loop to a greater degree and put more responsibility
on students for their own learning.”
“We are in the process of more fully developing our assessment
system in response to our recent accreditation visit. This information
will help us. “
Session 2: Sunday, September
23, 10:30 AM to 12:00 PM:
d) “Teaching Critical Thinking” facilitated
by Chris Martin, from Pierce Country College and Bill Condon from
WSU.
e) “Design Your Own Critical Thinking Rubric
and Assignments” facilitated by Diane Kelly-Riley and Lisa
Johnson from WSU.
f) “Articulating Programmatic Goals” facilitated
by Richard Law and Gary Brown from WSU.
Q: What are you going to do with the information
from this session?
Participants’ Comments:
“I’ll be more specific in rubric/assignment descriptions.
Be more realistic in expectations: focus on one or two of the critical
thinking rubric per assignment.”
“What I see that I can do now is to give the students a rubric
that they can use to evaluate themselves, comparing their answers
with my own and using that comparison to see where they would likely
fall on the rubric. Not as ideal as a one-on-one interaction, but
a step in the right direction toward providing an evaluation of
the skills I want students to develop.”
“Require students to critique information, not just summarize.”
Session 3:
Sunday, September 23, 1:15 PM to 2:45 PM:
g) “What’s Next? Putting It All Together.”
Facilitated by Gary Brown and Sharon Roy, WSU.
h) “Implementation of Local and Programmatic
Critical Thinking Goals”, Facilitated by Diane Kelly-Riley,
WSU and Robin Jeffers, Bellevue CC.
i) “Classroom Assessment and Meeting the Needs
of Constituencies” facilitated by Bill Condon, WSU.
Q: What are you going to do with the information
from this session?
Participants’ Comments:
“Share information with the Department and try to develop
local rubrics without re-inventing the wheel.”
“Think about how to connect classroom accountability with
programmatic and institutional accountability.”
“Think of more ways to partner 4 year – 2 year programs.”
Q: What is the most important thing you
learned on this retreat?
Participants’ Comments:
“The concept of an over-arcing question (“what
do I want my students to learn?”); the idea of being clear
on my own teaching goals; the beauty of a rubric from a student’s
perspective (clarity of expectations) and from a teacher’s
perspective (explicit clarity for grading).”
“How to give responsibility for assessment
to all faculty (not have responsibility be held by just a few).”
“The idea that Critical Thinking is actively
supported and encouraged, or silenced by a specific culture.”
“Actually, that this is a step by step process.
I don’t feel as overwhelmed by the need to feel ‘instant
competence!”. Very comfortable (but informative) retreat.”
“The most important thing I learned was that
I don’t have to implement every CT rubric into every course
rubric.”
I learned that “I can use portions of the
CT rubric in targeted contexts.”
“How an assessment program evolves over time
and improves, first in response to outside pressure, and also as
a means, internally, to learn important things about students, learning
and instruction.”
“How Washington institutions are seeking
to collaborate across two and four year programs in college and
K-12; Leverage!”
“Critical Thinking is a learned process and
freshman to seniors should show advancement in thought process;
Critical Thinking can be evaluated in non-written format. CT can
be applied to many disciplines in different ways. It appears that
the goal of CT is that no matter what the subject, the student should
be able to take a position or propose a solution and defend it based
on a logical (supported) line of reasoning and recognize alternative
views that they cannot support.”
“Mainly, we are trying to find a way to develop
common, campus-wide, ability rubrics and to help faculty develop
and integrate rubrics into their own classrooms. The WSU model has
been helpful, and the conversations about how to work with faculty
and to use meaningfully, the results of these assessments (to improve
teaching and learning) are giving us ideas on how to proceed.”
“I will be more explicit with students about
how this fits into their own learning. We will set goals together
and assess progress together.”
“To enhance seminars on course design for
teachers and TA’s in my program. Possibly to design a new
presentation for Writing Project teachers, K-13. To begin designing
a third ‘round’ of writing program assessments that
may integrate more effectively in the General Ed. Program.”
Q: What directions would you like to see the
future Critical Thinking meetings take?
Participants’ Comments:
“Continue with this format. We (teachers)
know this ‘stuff’ but the busy-ness of daily activities
moves us away from consistent re-evaluation of our teaching rubrics.”
“About where should transfer students’
CT scores be when they come to WSU?”
“K-12 inclusion”
“Find ways for more similar groups (i.e.
folks from Community Colleges, similar departments, similar experience
levels, etc.) to work together, to explore questions together and
address common problems together.”
“Application/demonstration of CT skills via
mediums other than writing.”
“Very stimulating and thoughtful discussion
leaders. We will put the WSU CT Project link on our own Assessment
site in the Assessment Method page with ‘Direct Assessment
Methods.’”
“Good information. Will be used to hopefully,
improve student experience and help them become independent thinkers.”
This
retreat was sponsored by a grant from the U.S. Department of Education
FIPSE Comprehensive Program, and the Campus Writing Programs, the
Center for Teaching, Learning, and Technology, and the General Education
Program at Washington State University.
|
