批判性思考於臺灣高中教學之設計、實施與評量

全文

(1)國立台灣師範大學英語學系碩. 士. 論. 文. Master Thesis Graduate Institute of English National Taiwan Normal University. 批判性思考於臺灣高中教學之設計、實施與評量. Critical Thinking Instruction for Senior High School Students in Taiwan: Designing, Implementation and Assessment. 指導教授：葉錫南博士 Advisor: Dr. Hsi-nan Yeh 研究生：黃鈺雅 Jenny Yu-ya Huang 中華民國一○三年六月 June, 2014.

(2) CHINESE ABSTRACT 本論文旨在探討批判性思考對台灣高中學生認知和情意層面的影響，研究結果可作為高中英文教師實施批判性思考教學或將批判性思考教學融入正規英文科課程之參考，以符合學生當前及未來的需求。培養學生的思考能力為世界各國教育界之重要目標。在台灣，英文科於九九課綱中將思考能力融入英語教學，成為主要教學目標之一，這更強調了批判性思考教學的重要角色。本研究設計一個教導批判性思考能力的課程，四項思考能力被選為教學目標，分別為：分類排序的能力、比較異同的能力、分辨事實及意見的能力和分辨訊息關係的能力。六十位高二學生接受思考教學後，以書面測驗測試其各項思考能力之進展，其中三項思考能力有明顯的進步，包括：分類排序的能力、分辨事實及意見的能力、分辨訊息關係的能力；所有能力中惟有比較異同的能力在前後測中沒有明顯差異。第二階段，以問卷調查學生對此教學的想法和態度。學生認為批判性思考對高中學生而言是一項重要的能力，但一般課程中並無多加著墨；學生對此思考教學普遍給予正面的評價，並反映此教學能提升英語文的聽說讀寫四項基礎能力，特別是閱讀能力；教學目標的四項思考能力亦透過此教學課程得到進展，邏輯論述及偵測謬誤的能力也有成長；學生並表示此教學亦提供額外的好處，例如：有助於知識的擴展、學習效率的提升和整體認知能力的發展。最後，根據研究發現，本文亦提出教學建議，以供英文科教師參考。. 關鍵字：思考能力、批判性思考教學. i.

(3) ENGLISH ABSTRACT The study aims to investigate the effects of critical thinking instruction on students’ cognitive and affective domains in senior high school students in Taiwan. Research result can serve as a reference for high school English teachers to conduct critical thinking instruction or to integrate thinking-skill instruction into the regular English curriculum in order to suit their students’ current and future need. Cultivating students’ thinking abilities has been a significant goal in the educational field worldwide. In Taiwan, the 2010 High School Curriculum Guidelines in the English subject incorporates critical thinking skills into the regular language pedagogy, which highlights the important role of critical thinking instruction. On this study, four critical thinking skills have been selected as the teaching materials in a newly-designed curriculum. Sixty eleventh-graders received the critical thinking instruction and their improvement of individual skill was assessed in a written test. Three thinking abilities have significant progress after the instruction, including the ability to classify, order and rank, the ability to distinguish facts from opinions and the ability to identify the relationship between two pieces of information. The ability to compare and contrast demonstrates no obvious difference in students’ performances. At the second stage, a perception questionnaire was implemented to probe into students’ beliefs and attitudes toward the instruction. Students note that critical thinking skills are important for high school students; however, they are seldom mentioned in normal curriculum. Students generally display a favorable attitude to the instruction and report their improvement in four basic English skills, especially in the reading skill. As for the target thinking skills, they also detect their own progress in each skill. Their ability to reason logically and to detect fallacies improves as well. Furthermore, they state some additional benefits of the instruction, such as the ii.

(4) expansion of knowledge, increased learning efficiency and improvement in cognitive development. At last, based on the research findings, some pedagogical implications are provided in the study for English language teachers.. Keywords: Thinking Skill, Critical Thinking Instruction. iii.

(5) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The completion of the thesis should be dedicated to many people’s assistance and guidance. First and foremost, I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to my thesis advisor, Dr. Hsi-nan Yeh. When I was an undergraduate student, I worked as his assistant in many research projects, one of which was the 2010 Guidelines for Senior High School English Curriculum. This project led me to explore and focus on the topic of critical thinking. During the process as a research assistant, I learned many invaluable experiences and gained many insights into teaching practice from him. Dr. Yeh’s insightful advice always helped me overcome much confusion and uncertainty. The thesis could not have been consummated without his patient guidance and constant support. I am also grateful to the committee members, Dr. Chiou-lan Chern and Dr. Hsueh-ying Yu. Their professional suggestions enriched the depth and quality of my thesis. Their positive feedback made me more confident that my thesis may contribute to the development of critical thinking instruction. I also want to give my special thanks to the teachers of the English Department at NTNU, especially to professors in the TESOL program: Dr. Yuh-show Cheng, Dr. Shau-ju Chang, Dr. Wu-chang Chang, Dr. Ing Li, Dr. Yue-gui Hsu, Dr. Hao-ran Chen and Dr. Chih-cheng Lin. Their solid training and appealing teaching led me into the field of language teaching and learning. They are also the role models that I want to follow in my teaching career. I am also grateful to my students and colleagues in Taipei Municipal Cheng Gong High School. Throughout the years of pursuing my master’s degree, I served as an in-service English teacher at school. I was fortunate to have so many cute students who gave me an abundance of joyful moments. The time spent with them always iv.

(6) lighted up and enriched my life. I also received heart-warming encouragement from many experienced teachers in my school. They constantly provided me many brilliant suggestions in my teaching job. I was fortunate to have many interesting and hard-working partners in the English subject: Jill Lin, Jennifer Chang, Marina Lee, Winnie Hsu, Linus Lee and Rosa Lee. In addition to these partners, I was also thankful to many good friends in school: Jerry Chang, Tiger Lin, Dream K, Rainnie Lee, and Amay Huang. Their company made my life colorful. Special thanks go to Jerry Chang, with whom I cooperated in the featured course Global Issues & Leadership. He gave me total freedom and respect to design and implement my critical thinking instruction. We also exchanged the information and feelings in the abyss of thesis writing. I also want to show my appreciation to my college classmates, also my comrades in the TESOL program: Sarah Lin, Helen Hung, Amy Cheng and Carol He. As in-service teachers, we often shared our feelings or trouble when struggling to strike a balance between our teaching job and the study in graduate school. Whenever one encountered thorny problems, the company and assistance of this group motivated us to keep going on the journey. I was thankful to Christine Yang, my little angel, who helped me with the problems in statistics. At last, my earnest gratitude is dedicated to my parents and my brother, Gordon. Their support and encouragement push me to go forward and have always been the source of my courage.. v.

(7) TABLE OF CONTENTS CHINESE ABSTRACT..................................................................................................i ENGLISH ABSTRACT.................................................................................................ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .......................................................................................... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ vi LIST OF TABLES......................................................................................................viii LIST OF FIGURES...................................................................................................... ix CHAPETER ONE INTRODUCTION ......................................................................1 Background and Motivation ......................................................................................1 Purposes and Research Questions of the Study.. ......................................................5 Significance of the Study ..........................................................................................5 Organization of the Thesis..........................................................................................6 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW..........................................................8 Bloom’s Taxonomy .................................................................................................8 The Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy.........................................................................9 Critical Thinking......................................................................................................15 Teaching Thinking Skills in A Language Curriculum......................................19 Teaching Thinking Skills in ESL/EFL Countries………………........................24 Teaching Thinking Skills in Taiwan…………………………....................26 Assessing Thinking Skills in A Language Curriculum...................................30 Curriculum Development………………………........................................33 Summary..................................................................................................................35 CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY.................................................................36 Research Design…………………..............................................................36 Procedure of Study...................................................................................................45 Research Instruments….……..............................................................................46 vi.

(8) Data Collection.......................................................................................................49 Data Analysis....................................................................................................49 Summary.................................................................................................50 CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION................................................51 Results of the Pre-test and the Post-test..................................................................51 Results of the Perception Questionnaire................................................................56 Results of the Written Responses in the Perception Questionnaire..................70 Summary..................................................................................................................76 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION............................................................................78 Summary of Major Findings....................................................................................78 Pedagogical Implication.....................................................................................80 Limitations of the Study and Suggestions for Future Research.............................83 References..................................................................................................................85 Appendix A. Lesson Plan of “Classify, Order and Rank”..........................................100 Appendix B. Lesson Plan of “Compare and Contrast”..............................................104 Appendix C. Lesson Plan of “Distinguish Facts from Opinions”..............................110 Appendix D. Lesson Plan of “Identify the Textual Relationship”….........................116 Appendix E. Test Items of the Pre-test…...................................................................123 Appendix F. Test Items of the Post-test…..................................................................127 Appendix G. The Perception Questionnaire (in Chinese)…......................................131 Appendix H. The Perception Questionnaire (in English)….......................................133. vii.

(9) LIST OF TABLES Table 1 The Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy....................................................................11 Table 2 The Knowledge Dimension of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy...................12 Table 3 The Cognitive Process Dimension of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy.........13 Table 4 Mean Scores and T-tests for the Ability to Classify.......................................52 Table 5 Mean Scores and T-tests for the Ability to Order and Rank...........................52 Table 6 Mean Scores and T-tests for the Ability to Compare and Contrast...............53 Table 7 Mean Scores and T-tests for the Ability to Distinguish Facts from Opinions .......................................................................................... .....................54 Table 8 Mean Scores and T-tests for the Ability to Identify the Textual Relationship ……………………………………………………………...........................55 Table 9 Mean Scores and T-tests for the Total Scores in the Tests..............................55 Table 10 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 1 to 4 .......................56 Table 11 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 5 to 7 .......................57 Table 12 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 8 to 12 .....................58 Table 13 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 13 to 16 ...................60 Table 14 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 17 to 18 ...................62 Table 15 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 19 to 21 ...................64 Table 16 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 22 to 23 ...................65 Table 17 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 24 to 26 ...................66 Table 18 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 27 to 28 ...................67 Table 19 Numbers, Percentage, and Mean Scores of Questions 29 to 32 ...................69 Table 20 Coding Scheme of the Written Responses in the Perception Questionnaire ……………………………………………………………............................71. viii.

(10) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Comparison between Bloom’s Taxonomy and Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy …………………………………………………………..…………………10 Figure 2 Tyler’s Model of Curriculum Development………………………..………34 Figure 3 Brown’s Systematic Approach to Designing Language Curriculum…..…35. ix.

(11) CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION This chapter includes the general background and rationale of the study. The first section introduces the background and motivation of the study. In the following sections, purposes of the research, research questions and significance of the study are presented. The organization of the thesis is provided in the last section.. Background and Motivation In recent years, the idea of “critical thinking” has gained worldwide attention in educational circles. Educators and researchers have become interested in teaching “thinking skills” of various kinds and studying its effects on learners. Though this idea seems to be a new educational trend, its history can actually be traced back to Socrates’ times (Wu, 2000). The Socrates’ Method, similar to the Inquiry Methods nowadays, advocates that valuable input provided by instructors will encourage learners to recognize their existing knowledge, to elicit their opinions and to motivate them to reflect on themselves or the world (Cotton, 1991; Shiao, 2010). Even though the spirit has not been fulfilled in most classrooms, it inspires the outgrowth of the Cognitive Approach in 1960s. The Cognitive Approach has been perceived in language teaching and the relationship between language and thinking. In order to promote thinking, teachers should observe the process of how students produce knowledge. Producing knowledge involves the incorporation of thinking skills such as analytical, problem-solving, creative, and critical thinking (Rose & Nicholl, 1997). Nowadays, developing thinking skills and critical thinking has become the goal of modern education and the center of curricula, as the skills equip students with the competence to judge or reason about social affairs in this changing society (Atkinson, 1997; Fisher, 2001). Critical thinking comes in many forms and includes a variety of sub-skills, but all possess a core feature—it focuses on a set of skills and attitudes that 1.

(12) enable a learner to apply rational criteria to the reasoning of speakers and writer (Browne & Keeley, 1998). These attitudes and skills are the substance of critical thinking texts and curriculum materials. To foster the critical thinking competence, students are expected to go beyond textbook knowledge and learn to develop skills including judging information, analyzing evidence, arguing with reasons and providing critique or evaluation. These critical thinking skills are not only crucial for the school settings but also vital in workplaces and future social, interpersonal contexts where judgment and decisions should be made independently and wisely on their own. Therefore, critical thinking, defined by Dewey (1909), is essentially an “active” process – one in which you think things for yourself, raise questions yourself, search for relevant information yourself, etc. rather than learning in a traditional passive way from other people. By defining critical thinking as an “active process,” students’ active and autonomous role is emphasized and valued. However, it does not downgrade the teachers’ role in teaching critical thinking skills. Some researchers suggest that thinking skills can be taught and should be taught when most students are not competent critical readers yet, especially for students from ESL/EFL countries (Crismore, 2000; Fisher, 2005; Lin, 2006). Teachers are believed to play a vital role in creating a learning environment that facilitates students’ thinking skills. First, they need to be informed of the significance of critical thinking skills. Then, they should be given training opportunities for the thinking skills and thinking instruction. Lastly, they need to incorporate critical thinking skills in the subject content or explicitly teach students to think critically so that students can be transformed in their learning through consistent instruction and diverse applications of critical thinking skills (Bataineh & Zghoul, 2006; Zhang, 2008). Cultivating critical thinking skills has been a popular issue in first language (L1) learning contexts. Since the 1990s, developing critical thinking skills and critical 2.

(13) literacy in undergraduate students has been set as a goal in higher education (Braun, 2004; Halpern, 1998). Then this trend has spread to secondary school and elementary school level since developing critical thinking skills is essential to helping students “know how to learn and how to think clearly” (Halpern, 1998, p. 450) and “make purposeful judgments about what to believe or what to do” (Facione, Sanchez, Facione, & Gainen, 1995, p. 3) regardless of their age. Then, the trend of cultivating high-order thinking has also influenced the field of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) and Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) (Aktinson, 1997). Though Atkinson (1997) is skeptical about the success of critical thinking instruction in the ESL/EFL classroom due to the different cultural backgrounds and different learning styles of various ethnic groups, other researchers (Daniel & Lansky, 2007; Kabilan, 2000) suggest that second language (L2) learners can master critical thinking skills. Many TESOL professionals also acknowledge that critical thinking has now begun to make its mark, particularly in the area of L2 composition. Liaw (2007) contended that since language learners can think critically in their L1, it’s plausible to assume that they can transfer the ability to L2. Daniel & Lansky (2007) argued that traditional language instruction lays too much emphasis on rote memorization and superficial understanding; therefore, language learning should not be restricted to linguistic analysis and comprehension only but should involve high-order thinking skills i.e. critical thinking. In addition to English–speaking countries such as the United States, United Kingdom and Australia which have listed critical thinking as a key component in education (Association of American Colleges and Universities, 2005; Australian Council for Educational Research, 2002; Higher Education Quality Council, 1996), Asian countries such as Hong Kong (Education Bureau, 2003), Japan (Atkinson, 1997) and Taiwan (MOE, 2008) have also encouraged the cultivation of critical thinking skills. 3.

(14) In an EFL context like Taiwan, thinking skills are integrated in the 2010 High School Curriculum Guidelines, which represents a significant breakthrough in English teaching and learning. This breakthrough highlights the thinking substance in the language learning classroom and replies to the lack of higher-order thinking skills due to policy defect (Scanlan, 2006). Learners are expected to be equipped with the eight thinking skills marked in the curriculum guidelines. The first three are basic abilities and the other five abilities are advanced. These abilities are listed as follows (MOE, 2008):. Three basic abilities: (1) Being able to compare, categorize, and sequence various sources of information. (2) Being able to figure out the causal relationship between information based on the context. (3) Being able to distinguish facts from opinions. Five advanced abilities: (1) Being able to analyze and induce the common points or conclusions among different information. (2) Being able to transfer the learned principles to new situations in order to solve problems. (3) Being able to synthesize the existing information and predict the possible development. (4) Being able to assess various information and propose reasonable judgments or suggestions. (5) Being able to integrate and organize related information, and demonstrate creativity.. Though clear guidelines are provided to encourage teachers to modify their 4.

(15) traditional teaching and integrate innovative teaching methods in the instruction, how to fulfill these curriculum objectives is of great importance and concern. L2 students are believed to have received much less higher-level cognitive training in L2 class than in L1 class. Hence, it is about time that EFL teachers pay more attention to this issue and grant their students chances to develop higher-order thinking skills while learning the English language. However, some empirical studies have proved that critical thinking can be applied in EFL contexts with positive results (Chapple & Curtis, 2000; Davidson & Dunham, 1996). Obviously, more research on the topic is needed in order to provide a clearer picture to make instructional decisions.. Purpose and Research Questions of the study In the present study, four lesson plans on different critical thinking skills and two critical thinking assessments are designed and implemented in the high school classroom. The study aims to investigate the effectiveness of the critical thinking instruction on the development of students’ ability to think critically in Taiwan’s high school context. This study also explores high school students’ attitudes and beliefs of critical thinking instruction. The research questions are as follows: 1. To what extent can students’ thinking skills be improved through critical thinking instruction? 2. What are students’ attitudes and beliefs of the critical thinking instruction?. Significance of the Study The purpose of the present study is three-faceted. Firstly, it explored the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction for high school students in Taiwan and surveyed high school students’ perceptions of critical thinking instruction. Students’ feedbacks on their own improvement in cognitive, affective, and linguistic dimensions 5.

(16) were analyzed thoroughly. Second, the study produced a series of critical thinking lesson plans, including instructions, activities and materials for educators as reference. The instructional method also converted the traditional teacher’s role of a lecturer to the facilitator of the cultivation of students’ thinking process. Finally, the study designed two critical thinking assessments, aiming to test the target critical thinking skills. Through the assessment, students’ improvement in thinking skills after the instructions was observed. Educators and teachers can also utilize the assessment to check students’ critical thinking proficiency. The study aims to make contributions to the following aspects. First of all, students are facing a rapidly changing society, which makes it impossible for them to exercise traditional ways of thinking only. To prepare themselves for the future changes, cultivating the ability to think critically and independently has gained its significance (Paul et al, 1997). Because the concept of critical thinking has been officially marked in the 2010 English Curriculum Guidelines in Taiwan’s, an analysis of how critical thinking instruction might be implemented serves as an essential reference for high school English teachers to adopt the concept in their own teaching. Moreover, it is expected that high school students can transform themselves into a critical thinker or critical reader from the guidance of the thinking activities and materials. Through this study, students’ challenges or difficulties in learning thinking skills or other obstacles that may hinder the development of critical thinking are detected so that educators can be aware of the problems and try to help students in their future instruction.. Organization of the Thesis The thesis includes five chapters and is structured as follows. Chapter One provides an overall introduction of background and rationale. Chapter Two contains 6.

(17) the literature review addressing issues related to the concept and studies of thinking skills, critical thinking, and Bloom’s Taxonomy. Chapter Three describes the methodology, including the participant, the instruments, and the procedure of data collection/analysis. The results and further discussion of the study are presented in Chapter Four. Chapter Five summarizes the major findings and concludes the study with the pedagogical implication, limitations of the current study, and suggestions for future research.. 7.

(18) CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter provides a theoretical background of the present study. The first part provides detailed explanations of the Bloom’s Taxonomy and the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy. The concept of thinking skills, including critical thinking and studies regarding the teaching and assessment of thinking skills, are also included. The second part consist of some potential factors in association with critical thinking such as learning style and motivation.. Bloom’s Taxonomy In terms of the research of cognitive skills, Bloom’s Taxonomy developed in 1956 is a classification hierarchy for knowledge types, cognitive processes and thinking skills. It has been the most used and famous taxonomy in educational setting. It has had great influence on educators as it serves as a useful tool to organize thinking skills and to provide a cognitive model that can be applied in classrooms. It provides insight into thinking about the relative difficulty level of different objectives for thinking (Forehand, 2005). Bloom’s Taxonomy is a multi-tiered model which classifies thinking skills into six cognitive levels. The hierarchy of cognition increases in complexity and difficulty, from basic knowledge to evaluative judgment. It provides a very concrete hierarchy that helps to cultivate the development of thinking skills (Brown, 2004). According to the taxonomy, cognitive skills development can be arranged by six levels of thinking structure: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. The concept embedded in the six categories is listed as follows: (1) knowledge: memorization, recognition, and recall of information (2) comprehension: organization of ideas, interpretation of information, and translation (3) application: problem solving, use of particulars, and principles 8.

(19) (4) analysis: finding the underlying organization, and the division of a whole into components (5) synthesis: a combination of ideas to form something new, creating something unique whether verbal or physical (6) evaluation: focuses on making judgments about issues, resolving disparities or disagreements. The hierarchical taxonomy is cumulative, which indicates that each level is subsumed in the higher levels. The functioning of the ability at the higher level refers to the mastery of the lower level ability. This successive relationship between each level reflects the natural development of learners’ thinking skills (Brown, 2004). Some researchers believe that critical thinking does not occur in the first two levels but appears from the third level, “application” (Morrison & Free, 2001). Through this taxonomy, teachers can set their teaching objectives with explicit and clear guidance (Costin, 1996). It has been considered a great reference for teachers to organize their critical reading or critical thinking instruction in language classrooms. The Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy Bloom’s Taxonomy has stood the test of time and it has been expanded, condensed, or reinterpreted in a variety of ways. The best and most thorough revision may go to Anderson and Krathwohl’s version (2001). They updated and revised the taxonomy due to the fact that thinking is actually more complex than Bloom’s original design. In addition, the modifications address the needs of students and teachers in the 21st century (Forehand, 2005). Figure 1 illustrates the comparison between Bloom’s original version and Anderson & Krathwohl’s version.. 9.

(20) Figure 1 Comparison between Bloom’s Taxonomy and Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy. Bloom’s Taxonomy (1956). Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy by Anderson & Krathwohl’s version (2001). Source: http://web.odu.edu/educ/llschult/blooms_taxonomy.htm (Schultz, 2005). The changes occur in three broad categories: terminology, structure, and emphasis. Changes in terminology are the most obvious differences. The six categories are changed from noun to verb forms. Additionally, the lowest level, knowledge is renamed as remembering while the highest two levels, synthesis and evaluation are renamed as evaluating and creating. More importantly, in terms of the structure, the original Bloom’s Taxonomy is one-dimensional while Revised Bloom's Taxonomy is two-dimensional since learning is not linear and does not always occur in the fixed order. As Table 1 demonstrates, it consists of two dimensions: one is the knowledge dimension and the other is cognitive process dimension. The knowledge dimension, referring to the kind of knowledge to be learned, includes: remember, understand, apply, analyze and create. On the other hand, the cognitive process dimension, dealing with the process used to learn, involves: factual knowledge, conceptual knowledge, procedural knowledge and meta-cognitive knowledge. The interaction of two dimensions constructs 24 categories that any teaching objectives, 10.

(21) activities and assessment can be classified and identified accordingly (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001; Forehand, 2005; Lan, 2007). This function echoes the third change of its emphasis. The revised version is intended for the broader audience. Emphasis is placed on its use as a more authentic tool for curriculum planning, instructional delivery and assessment. In the present study, this table will be adopted as the major taxonomy to categorize the activities of critical thinking instruction and to assess students’ performances on critical thinking development.. Table 1 The Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy The Cognitive Process Dimension The Knowledge. Remember Understand. Apply. Analyze. Evaluate. Create. Dimension Factual. List. Summarize. Classify. Order. Rank. Combine. Describe. Interpret. Experiment. Explain. Assess. Plan. Tabulate. Predict. Calculate. Differentiate. Conclude. Compose. Execute. Construct. Achieve. Action. Actualize. Knowledge Conceptual Knowledge Procedural Knowledge MetaCognitive. Appropriate Use. Knowledge. quoted from Forehand (2005). Bloom’s taxonomy: Original and revised. In M. Orey (Ed.). Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology.. Table 2 shows the major knowledge types and subtypes in the knowledge dimension. Each type is explained with examples.. 11.

(22) Table 2 The Knowledge Dimension of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy MAJOR TYPES AND SUBTYPES. EXAMPLES. A. FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE—The basic elements students must know to be acquainted with a discipline or solve problems in it 1. Knowledge of terminology. Technical vocabulary, musical symbols. 2. Knowledge of specific details and. Major natural resources, reliable sources of. elements. information. B. CONCEPTUAL KNOWLEDGE—The interrelationships among the basic elements within a larger structure that enable them to function together 1. Knowledge of classifications and. Periods of geological time, forms of business. categories. ownership. 2. Knowledge of principles and. Pythagorean theorem, law of supply and demand. generalizations 3. Knowledge of theories, models, and. Theory of evolution, structure of Congress. structures C. PROCEDURAL KNOWLEDGE—How to do something, methods and inquiry, and criteria for using skills, algorithms, techniques, and methods 1. Knowledge of subject-specific skills. Skills used in painting with watercolors,. and algorithms. whole-number division algorithm. 2. Knowledge of subject-specific. Interviewing techniques, scientific method. techniques and methods 3. Knowledge of criteria for determining. Criteria used to determine when to apply a. when to use appropriate procedures. procedure involving Newton’s second law, criteria used to judge the feasibility of using a particular method to estimate business costs. D. METACOGNITIVE KNOWLEDGE—Knowledge of cognition in general as well as awareness and knowledge of one’s own cognition 1. Strategic knowledge. Knowledge of outlining as a means of capturing the structure of a unit of subject matter in a textbook, knowledge of the use of heuristics. 2. Knowledge about cognitive tasks,. Knowledge of the types of tests particular teachers. including appropriate contextual and. administer, knowledge of the cognitive demands of. conditional knowledge. different tasks. 3. Self-knowledge. Knowledge that critiquing essays is a personal strength, whereas writing essays is a personal weakness; awareness of one’s own knowledge level. Cited from Anderson, et.al. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing – A Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.. 12.

(23) In Table 3, the cognitive processes dimension concerns how the knowledge is used. The six major categories are Remember, Understand, Apply, Analyze, Evaluate and Create. The category is sequenced based on its cognitive complexity, ranging from low to high.. Table 3 The Cognitive Process Dimension of the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy CATEGORIES ALTERNATIVE NAMES DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES & COGNITIVE PROCESSES 1. REMEMBER— Retrieve relevant knowledge from long-term memory. 1.1 RECOGNIZING Identifying Locating knowledge in long‐term memory that is consistent with presented material (e.g., Recognize the dates of important events in U.S. history) Retrieving relevant knowledge from long term memory (e.g., Recall the dates of important events in U.S. history) 2. UNDERSTAND— Construct meaning from instructional messages, including oral, written, and graphic communication. Changing from one form of 2.1 INTERPRETING Clarifying, paraphrasing, representation (eg, numerical) to representing, translating another (eg, verbal) (e.g., Paraphrase important speeches and documents) 1.2 RECALLING. Retrieving. 2.2 EXEMPLIFYING. Illustrating, instantiating. Finding a specific example or illustration of a concept or principle (e.g., Give examples of various artistic painting styles). 2.3 CLASSIFYING. Categorizing, subsuming. Determining that something belongs to a category (e.g., Classify observed or described cases of mental disorders). 2.4 SUMMARIZING. Abstracting, generalizing. Abstracting a general theme or major point(s) (e.g., Write a short summary of the events portrayed on videotapes). 2.5 INFERRING. Concluding, extrapolating, interpolating, predicting. Drawing a logical conclusion from presented information (e.g., In learning a foreign language, infer grammatical principles from examples). 13.

(24) 2.6 COMPARING. Constructing, mapping, matching. 2.7 EXPLAINING. Constructing models. Detecting correspondences between two ideas, objects, and the like (e.g., Compare historical events to contemporary situations). Constructing a cause‐and‐effect model of a system (e.g., Explain the causes of important eighteenth-century events in France) 3. APPLY— Carry out or use a procedure in a given situation Applying a procedure to a familiar 3.1 EXECUTING Carrying out task (e.g., Divide one whole number by another whole number, both with multiple digits) Applying knowledge (often procedural) to a non‐routine task. (e.g., Determine in which situations Newton’s second law is appropriate) 4. ANALYZE— Break material into constituent parts and determine how parts relate to one another and to an overall structure or purpose Distinguishing relevant from 4.1 Discriminating, irrelevant parts or important from DIFFERENTIATING distinguishing, focusing, unimportant parts of presented selecting material. (e.g., Distinguish between relevant and irrelevant numbers in a mathematical word problem) 3.2 IMPLEMENTING. Using. 4.2 ORGANIZING. Finding coherence, integrating outlining, parsing, structuring. Determining how elements fit or function within a structure. (e.g., Structure evidence in a historical description into evidence for an against a particular historical explanation). Determining the point of view, bias, values, or intent underlying presented material. (e.g., Determine the point of view of the author of an essay in terms of his or her political perspective) 5. EVALUATE— Make judgments based on criteria and standards. Detecting inconsistencies or fallacies 5.1 CHECKING Coordinating, detecting, within a process or product. monitoring, testing Determining whether a process or product has internal consistency; detecting the effectiveness of a procedure as it is being implemented. (e.g., Determine whether a scientist’s conclusions follow from observed data) 4.3 ATTRIBUTING. deconstructing. 5.2 CRITIQUING. Judging. Detecting inconsistencies between a product and external criteria, 14.

(25) determining whether a product has external consistency; detecting the appropriateness of a procedure for a given task or problem. (e.g., Judge which of two methods is the best way to solve a given problem) 6. CREATE— Put elements together to form a coherent or functional whole; reorganize elements into a new pattern or structure Coming up with alternatives or 6.1 GENERATING Hypothesizing hypotheses based on criteria (e.g., Generate hypotheses to account for an observed phenomenon) 6.2 PLANNING. Devising a procedure for accomplishing some task. (e.g., Plan a research paper on a given historical topic). Designing. Inventing a product. (e.g., Build habitats for certain species for certain purposes) Cited from Anderson, et.al. (2001). A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching and Assessing – A. 6.3 PRODUCING. Constructing. Revision of Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.. According to Krathwohl (2002), it provides “a clear, concise visual representation of the alignment between standards and educational goals, objectives, products, and activities.” In conclusion, the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy illuminates the path to deeper understanding, helps sequence the teaching objectives logically and provides insight into how to teach a given objective. It also has significant effect on designing a thorough curriculum or syllabus for thinking skill instruction.. Critical Thinking Critical thinking skills have been acknowledged as one of the major educational goals for students at all school levels and it has been incorporated in various subject matters and studied in different learning contexts. Thinking skill, according to Fisher (2003), is the mental capacity people apply to explore the world, to solve problems and to make judgments. They are the habits of. 15.

(26) intelligent behavior learned through practice to think consciously to attain some purposes. Such intelligent behaviors include remembering, making meaning from information, solving problems, making decisions, planning, synthesizing and analyzing information. Following the umbrella term of “thinking skill,” critical thinking has long been viewed as one of the major sub-field of thinking skills; however, critical thinking has a complex terminology issue. Several seemingly interchangeable terms, including metacognition and higher-order thinking skills are used when discussing critical thinking (Johnson & Johnson, 1986). The present study will distinguish these terms and use them as separate concepts. Metacognition, based on its dictionary definition, is the awareness or analysis of one's own learning or thinking processes. In the present study, it refers to the processes that allow people to reflect on their own cognitive abilities. In other words, metacognition enables people to know what they know or to think about their thinking. As for the term “higher-order thinking skills,” they are believed to include critical, reflective and creative thinking (King, Goodson & Rohani, 1998). Critical thinking and reflective thinking are sometimes used synonymously. John Dewey proposed the concept “reflective thinking” and defined it as “active, persistent, and careful consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds which support it and the further conclusions to which it tends” (Dewey, 1909, p. 9). According to Halpern (1997), critical thinking is sometimes called directed thinking because it focuses on a desired outcome. Reflective thinking, on the other hand, is a part of the critical thinking process referring specifically to the processes of analyzing and making judgments about what has happened. Therefore, in the present study, the meaning of reflective thinking is integrated into the term of critical thinking. Creative thinking refers to the ability to form new combinations of ideas to fulfill a need, or to get original or appropriate results. Sternberg & Lubart (1999) suggested that creativity 16.

(27) involves the ability to offer new viewpoints, generate novel and meaningful ideas, raise new questions, and come up with innovative solutions to problems. Originally, this concept of creative thinking was not included in the domain of critical thinking. In 2001, Anderson & Krathwohl revised Bloom’s Taxonomy and added Create as the highest cognitive dimension. This revision connected the concept of critical thinking and creative thinking; hence, the present study will include creation into the definition of critical thinking. When it comes to the development of critical thinking, Dewey, who believes that thinking does not occur spontaneously but is evoked by problems or questions, has been considered the “father” of the modern critical thinking. Greatly influenced by him, Glaser (1941), the co-author of the most widely used test of critical thinking, the Watson–Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, indicated three components of critical thinking: (1) an attitude of being disposed to consider in a thoughtful way the problems and subjects that come within the range of one’s experience; (2) knowledge of the methods of logical enquiry and reasoning; and (3) some skills in applying those methods. Earlier definitions of critical thinking focus more on the cognitive factor by defining it as a skill, a set of skills or a mental procedure (Baron, 1985; Ennis, 1962). These definitions emphasized formal rules of logic rather than the daily applications of thinking. In recent definitions, a broader perspective has been introduced. Ennis maintained that critical thinking is a “reasonable, reflective thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe and do” (Ennis, 1987, p.10), which is a revised version of his previous notion that critical thinking is “the correct assessing of statements” (Ennis, 1962, p.81). Norris (1985) turned to the implications of daily-life situations and argued that critical thinking is not only “a set of skills to be learned, but skills which need to be accompanied by sets of behaviors in order to make them effective, such as 17.

(28) thinking critically in daily life, monitoring and thinking about one's own thought processes, and acting congruently with one’s critical thinking. ” Kuhn (1991) added a social element to critical thinking definition by stating that it is a type of reasoned argument. She claimed that a student’s ability is developed through the process of differentiating their own theory, seeking supporting evidence, providing alternative interpretations and adopting a reasonable stance. Similarly, Silverman and Smiths (2002) provided illustrations of critical thinking including the abilities of asking questions, examining evidence, detecting fallacies, analyzing problems, considering other possibilities and tolerating ambiguity. Halpern (2003) defined critical thinking as a purposeful, reasoned, and goal-directed thinking process whose cognitive skills and strategies can increase the possibility of a desired result. This kind of thinking consists of “solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decision (2003, p.6).” Wu (2000) reviewed 67 papers to survey the definition of critical thinking. She proposed that skepticism and rationality are the two most dominant characteristics of critical thinking disposition, together with features of solving problems, making judgment and analyzing data. In addition to dealing with the definition of critical thinking, other researchers direct their attention to the disposition of critical thinking or critical thinkers. Rafik & Nair (2007) viewed critical thinkers as active thinkers who are willing to use thinking skills to logically evaluate their thinking or make proper judgments. According to Walker. (2003),. disposition. of. critical. thinking. involves. inquisitiveness,. open-mindedness, analyticity, truth-seeking, self-confidence and maturity. American Philosophical Association (APA) provided a thorough description of traits for critical thinkers:. “...habitually inquisitive, well-informed, trustful of reason, open-minded, flexible, 18.

(29) fair-minded in evaluation, honest in facing personal biases, prudent in making judgments, willing to reconsider, clear about issues, orderly in complex matters, diligent in seeking relevant information, reasonable in the selection of criteria, focused in inquiry, and persistent in seeking results which are as precise as the subject and the circumstances of inquiry permit” (APA, 1990). Based on the above review, the concept of critical thinking can be classified as two dimensions: the disposition/attitude to think critically and the ability/skills to think critically (Burkes & Williams, 2005). Some researchers believe that these two seemingly different dimensions are actually correlated. Facione et al. (2000) suggested that these two are mutually reinforcing since developing learners’ thinking skills and motivating their consistent use of critical thinking are of equal importance. As Oxman-Michelli (1992) stated that becoming a critical thinker requires the ability of critical thinking skills and the readiness and willingness to apply those skills. However, this present study will focus only on the ability and skills of critical thinking since disposition is an abstract concept that is hard to assess. The operational definition of critical thinking in the present study is: critical thinking is a set of cognitive skills that active learners will employ to rationally reason, analyze, reflect, evaluate and to create.. Teaching Thinking Skills in A Language Curriculum In the field of language teaching, critical thinking has been emphasized and implemented during the 1990s (Day, 2002). Since critical thinking has been deemed as a vital educational goal, how to teach critical thinking and how to integrate it into a language curriculum have been widely studied. Critical thinking in the language learning context includes two concepts: self-reflecting about language learning and active reasoning (Dearn, 2003; Ennis, 1987; Oxford, 1990). Johnson and Johnson (1994) declared that critical language thinkers can 19.

(30) distinguish sense from nonsense. As the same token, Pennycook (1997) noted that language learners are regarded as critical thinkers when they make sense of the text or discourse. Nowadays, many educators and researchers agree that the objectives of the language learning curriculum should not be restricted to linguistic components only, but should entail the cultivation of critical thinking skills (Brown, 2004). In language teaching, critical thinking also encourages learners to make use of the language to express and communicate in an appropriate manner in the society. Moreover, to become a proficient language user, knowing the language meanings, creative and critical thinking also come into play (Brown, 2004; Kabilan, 2000). With thinking skills and critical thinking gaining their weight, they have now found their way into curriculum guidelines in some countries. In the UK in 1996, the UK Quality Assessment Agency indicated an interest in requiring higher education institutions to include provision for developing “key skills”, one of which is “learning to learn”. The skills are related to collecting, analyzing and organizing information, planning activities, problem-solving, communicating information, and using technology. These skills or competencies are in parallel with those developed in New Zealand (Essential Skills) and the US (Workplace Know-How Skills). In 2002, in the National Curriculum of the UK (Department of Education and Skills), five categories of thinking skills are recognized: information processing, reasoning, enquiry, creative thinking and evaluation. Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency promoted critical thinking instruction by setting criteria for assessment in their guidelines. Students of Advanced Subsidiary level (AS-level) students should be able to: (1) understand the language of reasoning (2) clarify expressions and ideas (3) identify reasons and conclusions 20.

(31) (4) recognize and evaluate different kinds of claims (5) judge the credibility of sources (6) understand and use different patterns of reasoning as well as different standards for evaluating arguments (7) recognize and evaluate special kinds of reasoning: causal explanations, justifying decisions, reasoning from different points of view, basic ethical reasoning (8) recognize assumptions (9) present relevant arguments (10) understand basic forms of statistical reasoning appropriate to informed citizens.. After students move onto Advanced level (A-level), they are expected to: (1) evaluate rhetorical and persuasive language, including some classic fallacies (2) understand forms of statistical reasoning appropriate to informed citizens (3) understand and use features of hypothetical reasoning such as for example what if, suppositional reasoning, testing hypotheses (4) identify and evaluate ethical arguments, making reference to principles (5) recognize and apply some basic logical ideas, such as for example excluded middle, converse, contradiction, consistent, circularity, counter example, necessary and sufficient conditions, imply/entail, generalization use images, symbols and other non-verbal stimuli in reasoning such as for example those in news reporting, advertising, political and similar cartoons.. According to Facione et al. (1995), in the US, most schools have recognized the development of critical thinking as an essential outcome of the curriculum. In Scotland, the 5-14 Curriculum guidelines promoted an educational initiative called A Curriculum for Excellence (2004), which encourages “applying critical thinking in new contexts, to solve problems, to make informed choices and decisions and to think creatively and independently.” Apart from highlighting the importance of critical thinking in curriculum guidelines, researchers contended that practical teaching (Fisher, 2005) and well-designed activities can help foster thinking skills (Perkins, Allen, & Hafner, 1983). When it comes to teaching thinking in language learning classrooms, three 21.

(32) approaches have been introduced by Ennis (1987): the process approach, the content approach, and the infusion approach. The “process approach” teaches thinking skills directly, aiming to encourage students to apply cognitive skills to other disciplines (Nisbet & Davies, 1990). The idea behind is that the learned generic skills will form a tool-kit that the learner can generalize to other situations. The second approach, “content approach,” is perceived that certain cognitive skills are specific to specific subjects, such as mathematics or science, and should be taught in a specific context (Ashton, 1988). The “infusion approach” is the combination of teaching thinking skills and teaching the curriculum (Swartz & Parks, 1994). Pithers (2000) stated that thinking skills can be developed more effectively through teaching subject-matter content. On the other hand, Costa (2002) argued that the advantages of the infusion approach as follows:. “Firstly, skillful thinking cannot be performed in a vacuum – there must be something to think about; and secondly, the nature of the discipline imposes certain constraints on the procedures of problem solving. The content informs the selection and application of thinking skills just as their selection and application shape the insights and knowledge derived from the subject matter being investigated… scientific problems, in which the control of experimental variables is paramount, differs from social and aesthetic problems in which ethics and artistic judgment play a significant role.”. To conclude, language classes are the suitable contexts for critical thinking instruction due to the abundance of its materials and diverse approaches and activities (Chen, 2006; Sokol et al., 2008). Various approaches and techniques have been employed in the language classrooms to investigate the effect of critical thinking instruction: content-based teaching (Lin, 2006), literature-based reading (Brunt, 2005), discussion (Tillman, 1994), debates (Walker, 2003), reciprocal teaching (Shiao, 2010),. 22.

(33) journal writing (Paul &Elder, 2001), etc. As McGuinness (2005) indicated, no matter which kind of approach is used, all of them somehow rely on metacognition level. He further explained that “these methods try to make students thinking process more explicit, thus enabling them to clarify and reflect upon their thinking and gain more self-control” (p.94). For example, in literature-based reading, a reader is required to identify text patterns, fit details into these patterns, then relate them to other texts or previous experiences. This method responds to the essence of critical thinking because thinking skills such as explanation, analysis, synthesis, interpretation, evaluation and logical reasoning are exercised during the process (Facione, 2007; Halpern, 1998; Lazere, 1987). Take debate as another example. Debating is a structured procedure full of reasoning and argumentation that facilitates participants to apply, analyze and evaluate from different perspectives and think strategically about both their own and their opponent’s stance (Yang, 2002). Thus, the use of debate for instruction helps foster students' critical understanding in a specific subject area (Pilkington & Walker, 2003). Another reason of teaching critical thinking in a language classroom is that critical thinking skills can be intertwined with language skills. Paul and Elder (2001) specified critical listening, reading and writing. The concept of critical speaking is introduced by Heaslip (2005), who defined it as an active process of expressing in-depth viewpoints to display the understanding on certain issues. Aside from the above reasons, language classrooms are more communicative and interactive in nature. It is believed that students are more likely to develop thinking skills in a language classroom where learners are encouraged to be active in asking questions and seeking information (Mayer, 1986). Critical thinking is inclined to be a participant activity so students’ active engagement in the thinking instruction is important. Teachers can create such learning environment by designing situations for participation, providing 23.

(34) opportunities for emotional interaction with the materials, and allowing learners the time to pause as well as the space to reflect on and discuss (Yuretich, 2004). To sum up, research exploring critical thinking instruction is prospering. Its significance and status in the educational field have been recognized. Critical thinking is a promising discipline and its instructional methods or strategies deserve further exploration. Language learning classrooms are the appropriate settings to teach critical thinking since students can acquire the skills of critical listening, reading, writing and speaking as well. With the combination of suitable learning environments and carefully-designed instructional methods, a positive result to enhance students’ critical thinking skills is expected.. Teaching Thinking Skills in ESL/EFL Curriculum Though the concept of critical thinking has been recognized in Western countries, it still requires further promotion and more practical application in school curricula. This is particularly true in the Eastern countries such as China, India and Japan, where people lack the notion of critical thinking (Davidson, 1995). Atkinson (1997) even claimed that Eastern culture has some social barriers for thinking so that critical thinking is cultural dependent. On the other hand, some researchers refuted this statement and argued that it is a cultural stereotype and that Asian people have their distinct argumentative thinking ability (Le, 2004). Long (2003) stated that “though there are certain aspects of critical thinking that may be ‘foreign’ in a non-Western context, if students are not exposed to these skills, they will be denied the opportunities to compete in the global community” (p. 230). Hence, despite the debate over whether critical thinking skill is cultural dependent or not, students, regardless of their ethnic background, should be equipped with the ability to think critically. Educators have emphasized the importance of promoting higher-order thinking skills 24.

(35) in ESL and EFL classrooms (Chamot, 1995). Empirical studies also support the effectiveness of teaching critical thinking skills in English classrooms (Davidson, 1995). As long as appropriate critical thinking instruction is given in the curricula, students in Eastern countries can benefit from the instruction and be able to cultivate critical thinking skills. For example, Malaysia integrates critical thinking in their formal educational system. The Malaysia Education Master Plan (MOE Malaysia, 2006) places emphasis on both creative and critical thinking abilities. Since these two skills are expected to produce first class human resources, creative and critical thinking instruction and learning strategies have been implemented at their schools (Suresh, 2009). In Singapore, the emphasis of thinking skills was displayed in the practice of the “Thinking Schools, Learning Nation” (TSLN) ideal in 1997. This curriculum intends to develop creative thinking skills and a passion of lifelong learning and reflects the urgency for schools in Singapore to cultivate thinking. Recently, the MOE of Singapore revised the curriculum of “Junior College,” which places more focus on developing critical thinking skills and nurturing the skills required for globalized, competitive future citizens (MOE Singapore, 2002). In Hong Kong, Curriculum Development Council (CDC) introduced the critical thinking syllabus to English teachers from all secondary school level in 1999. This syllabus highlights the importance of thinking in the field of English teaching and requires teachers to help cultivate students’ higher-order thinking. In Japan, the history of incorporating thinking skills in guidelines can be traced back to early 1990s, when English debate was introduced in oral courses. This innovation was a response to the worries of “multiple choice” exams; nevertheless, according to Davidson (1995), few promising outcomes were observed as teachers did not have sufficient time in practice. Therefore, a reform was conducted by introducing a new course aiming to develop the 25.

(36) abilities of decision-making, problem-solving and independent research (MEXT, 2002). In Taiwan, the same efforts can been seen in recent years. Absent as it is in 2006 Tentative High School Curriculum Guidelines, critical thinking is added to 2010 High School Curriculum Guidelines. The listed eight abilities are partially modified from the thinking types from Bloom’s Taxonomy.. Teaching Thinking Skills in Taiwan Concerning the emphasis on thinking-skill instruction other EFL countries have placed, Taiwan has also viewed teaching thinking as a primary educational purpose. Many researchers and educators have advocated the importance of thinking skill instruction lately with different approaches or methods (Chang, 2009; Chen, 2010; Chen, 2010; Chi, 2002; Chou, 2012; Liaw, 2007; Shiao, 2010; Tsai, 2010; Tsui, 2005; Tung & Chang, 2009; Wu, 2005; Yang, 2008; Yu, 2007). The efforts of implementing critical thinking instruction are made in college education as well as in secondary school curricula. In both of the language learning settings, the result of critical thinking instruction is positive and inspiring. Tsui (2005) revealed that students of lower English proficiency were found to improve significantly in higher-order thinking skills just like those of higher proficiency. This result indicated that EFL students could be competent potential critical thinkers, regardless of their language proficiency; hence, implementing thinking-skill instruction in language classrooms is necessary (Tung & Chang, 2009). Based on the above enlightenment, the following studies will explore different implications of critical thinking instruction. As Yang (2008) pointed out, critical thinking could be taught through the forms of discussions. She investigated the effects of teaching critical thinking skills in a large college class through asynchronous discussion forums (ADFs) with the facilitation of teaching assistants and provided a 26.

(37) detailed description of how students’ discussions moved from the lower level of critical thinking to the higher level. Results indicated that instructor and teaching assistants who used Socratic dialogues during small-group online discussions could develop students’ critical thinking skills successfully. Similarly, Yu (2007) analyzed the process of college students’ critical thinking during group discussion. It is concluded that students tended to engage in critical thinking more when they could connect their life experiences and that a supportive, respectful classroom atmosphere could enhance their motivation. In addition to discussions, debate is another form of oral/speaking activity, which is believed to be beneficial to cultivating students’ higher-order thinking. Chang (2009) explored students' participation in competitive English debate by surveying 64 high school students’ perceptions on participating in the Taipei Cicero English Debate Tournament. These debaters perceived that they not only improved English skills but also enhanced skills of communication, public speaking, critical thinking, analytical thinking and argumentation. The outcome confirmed the educational value of debate in developing thinking skills. The cultivation of critical thinking can be integrated into the instruction of other language skills. Chi (2002) examined the relationship between reading instruction and critical thinking by investigating how college students comprehended and interpreted English stories. Two patterns were identified in the result: the comprehension level and the interpretation level. The comprehension level, including summarizing, elaborating, and inferring, helped participants understand the text while the interpretation level, evaluating, associating, and transferring, facilitated participants to become critical readers and thinkers. The implications suggested that it was encouraged to create a rich learning environment for students to make personal, sensible, and meaningful connections through a social inquiry process. Another example is Huang’s study (2004). She conducted an experiment aiming to research on 27.

(38) the effectiveness of an inquiry-based approach to English reading instruction. The approach made talks in classroom become in-depth communication with rich content via the teacher’s leading questions. It was expected to develop students’ thinking skills at the same time. The result reflected that the inquiry-based approach proved to be feasible in teaching EFL reading, especially in that it improved students’ critical thinking, self-learning ability and social skills as well. As the same token, Shiao (2010) also conducted an empirical study to investigate whether reciprocal teaching, a reading instruction that includes predicting, clarifying, summarizing, and questioning, is effective in developing higher-order thinking skills among high school students. Student-generated questions and the participants’ responses were collected and analyzed via Bloom’s taxonomy. The result showed that students improved their language skills and became more aware of their own learning and thinking. More importantly, they became more capable of reading critically and generating better questions. Furthermore, reading literature is another viable way to cultivate thinking skills. Literature has been verified to be a motivating source in the language classroom as it expands students’ language competence, develops their critical thinking and enhances personal growth. Chen (2010) probed into the relationship between reading English literature and critical thinking development and maintained that positive effects were found. When it comes to the most helpful forms of literature materials in boosting critical thinking, picture books had the best effects; dramas were the second place and poetry remained the third. Another finding was that the more transparent dilemmas appeared in a play, the more critical thinking skills could be displayed. Another study of reading literature (Chen, 2010) argued that the use of peer-led literature discussions allowed students to become actively engaged in meaning making and in cultivating critical thinking. Chou (2012) implemented the reader response approach—which 28.

(39) triggers students’ personal experience, opinions and emotions to transact with the text—to teach literature in a high school class. According to the results, aside from the improvement of reading and speaking ability, the reader response approach encouraged students to judge and evaluate with analytical, reflective process and promoted their personal development. Another attempt to introduce critical thinking instruction into classrooms is through the content-based approach. It is widely believed that language is a way of thinking and learning; however, this concept has not been testified in instructional practice. To bridge the gap between theories and practices through the design and implementation of a content-based junior high school EFL syllabus, Liaw (2007) conducted an empirical study to examine the effectiveness of promoting learners' critical thinking skills and EFL skills with a content-based approach. Data collection included class assignments, a critical thinking assessment instrument, a questionnaire and a teacher-constructed language proficiency test. The findings demonstrated significant growth in students' English language proficiency, the improvement of critical thinking skills and content area knowledge mastery. Tsai (2010) had the same attempt as Liaw’s and designed a content-based literature curriculum. Her result also reflected that the utilization of content-based language instruction in the literature class could enhance students' reading comprehension as well as critical thinking ability. To sum up, researchers have recognized the positive effects of the thinking skill instruction in English classrooms and numerous studies have introduced various approaches and methods to examine the instructional applications and pedagogical implications in different learning contexts.. 29.

(40) Assessing Thinking Skills in A Language Curriculum Apart from the thinking skill instruction, the assessment of its effectiveness and students’ ability to think critically has become another issue that draws researchers’ attention. Watson and Glaser (1980) developed the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) to assess critical thinking, which is one of the most prominent critical thinking tests, according to Fulton (1989). The WGCTA test originally contained 80 items which aimed to elicit students’ performances on five aspects of critical thinking skills based on Watson and Glaser’ definition. The online version now consists of 85 items and students need to answer them within forty minutes. The five components are (1) inference, (2) recognition of assumptions, (3) deduction, (4) interpretation, and (5) evaluation of arguments. The five sections in the test follow a similar pattern that a statement is presented first and then test-takers need to choose whether the statement is true, the assumption is made or the conclusion follows the statement. Nevertheless, studies investigating its usefulness as a potential predictor of a specialized course revealed contradictory results (Bauwens & Gerhard, 1987; Wagner & Wilson, 2004). This proves that the multiple-choice format has its limitations in testing students’ critical thinking skills. In addition to the multiple-choice format, open-ended test formats are preferred by several researchers (Norris & Ennis, 1990; Taube, 1997). Ennis & Weir, (1985) developed the Ennis–Weir Critical Thinking Essay Test (EWCTET), which is an essay test of the critical thinking ability of high school or college students. To examine students’ ability to identify reasoning fallacies hidden in an argumentative passage and the ability to defend their own arguments, the test has highly specific contexts (Ennis, 2003). In this test, a complex argument is presented to test-takers, who are asked to formulate another argument to respond to the first. Hence, the test is recognized to evaluate a persons’ creative dimension in the critical thinking ability. 30.

(41) For example, in one scenario, test-takers are presented with a letter and test-takers should evaluate the logic of the letter and write a response accordingly. Another prominent feature of the EWCTET test is that it measures test-takers’ ability to analyze and respond to arguments and debates in authentic situations. This helps observe the transfer effects of applying the critical thinking skills to real-life problems. However, Taube (1997) commented that the highly structured design and fixed structure may limit test-takers’ responses, and thus real thinking performances may not be adequately displayed. Moreover, test-takers’ different writing proficiency levels and the subjective scoring process may cause some biases of the result (Adams, Whitlow, Stover, & Johnson, 1996). Both the multiple-choice and open-ended formats of critical thinking have their respective advantages and limitations. In an attempt to combine the benefits of different test formats, Halpern (2007) generated another measurement tool by incorporating both multiple-choice and open-ended response formats into a single assessment tool. The Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA) test includes 25 scenario-based questions. Each question asks for two responses: open-ended one as well as multiple-choice one, consisting of 50 responses in total. The open-ended part should be answered first. This section focuses on strategic use of thinking skills as well as the ability to come up with solutions without hints. The multiple-choice part requires test-takers to select correct responses from a list of alternatives. The test is certified that it allows test-takers to demonstrate their capability to think about daily topics or situations by using both constructed responses and recognition formats; that is, it is effective in predicting test-takers’ real-world performances (Butler, 2012). Besides the above-mentioned measurements, some principles for selecting a thinking test are suggested by some thinking test developers (Torrance, 1987; Watson & Glaser, 1980; Taylor & Getzels, 1975). The suggested criteria are as follows: 31.