我國大學生批判思考能力與批判思考意向關係之實證研究

全文

(1)行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫. 成果報告. 我國大學生批判思考能力與批判思考意向關係之實證研究. 計畫類別：個別型計畫計畫編號： NSC93-2520-S-006-001執行期間： 93 年 08 月 01 日至 94 年 07 月 31 日執行單位：國立成功大學教育研究所. 計畫主持人：楊雅婷. 報告類型：精簡報告報告附件：出席國際會議研究心得報告及發表論文處理方式：本計畫可公開查詢. 中. 華. 民. 國 94 年 11 月 21 日.

(2) 行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫成果報告 ※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※ ※ ※ ※ 我國大學生批判思考能力與批判思考意向關係之 ※ ※ 實證研究 ※ ※ ※ ※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※※ 計畫類別：個別型計畫計畫編號：執行期間：93 年 08 月 01 日至 94 年 07 月 31 日執行單位：國立成功大學教育研究所. 計畫主持人：楊雅婷. 報告類型:精簡報告處理方式:本計畫可公開查詢. 中. 華. 民. 國 94 年 9 月 1 日. 1.

(3) 行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告計畫名稱：我國大學生批判思考能力與批判思考意向關係之實證研究計畫類別：個別型計畫計畫編號：執行期間：93 年 08 月 01 日至 94 年 07 月 31 日主持人：楊雅婷執行單位：國立成功大學教育研究所. 摘要 This study investigated whether critical thinking disposition (CTD) can be cultivated by the critical thinking instruction via asynchronous online discussion forums. In addition, the relationships between critical thinking skills (CTS) and CTD were also examined. The research design was a preand post-test quasi-experimental design with a control group, treatment I, and treatment II. The participants, a total of 220, were students enrolled in a general education course at National Cheng Kung University. Independent variables were the teaching and modeling of Socratic Dialogues and the cultivation of CTD. Dependent variables were CTS and CTD. The California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST) and California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI) were used to collect the research data. The analyses were descriptive statistics, t-test, Pearson product-moment correlation, and z-test. The results indicate that (1) students’ CTD can be improved by teaching and modeling of Socratic dialogues via asynchronous online discussions; (2) students’ CTD can be improved by cultivating CTD via asynchronous online discussions; (3) the relationship of students’ CTS and CTD was positive; and (4) the intensity of the relationship between CTS and CTD remained the same even though both CTS and CTD improved after CT instruction.. 教育的主要功能是來教導與發展學生的批判性思考能力，而批判思考能力包含批判思考技能與批判思考意向，在教導與發展學生批判思考能力時，所著重的面向不僅僅為批判思考技巧，也應著重於批判思考意向。因此，本研究的目的為了解批判思考意向是否能經由批判思考教學與訓練而有所提升，並探求批判思考技能與意向之間的關係為何。本研究為包含控制組、實驗組 I 和實驗組 II 的準實驗研究，實驗對象為修習國立成功大學的一門通識課程的學生(N=220)，進行為期一學期的線上討論活動，自變項為蘇格拉底式詰問法的教學與訓練和批判思考意向的提升，依變項為批判思考技巧與意向。測量工具為加州批判思考技巧測驗與加州批判思考意向量表；所採用的分析方式為描述統計、t 考驗、皮爾遜積差相關、z 考驗。研究結果顯示(1)台灣大學生批判性思考意向可經由非同步線上討論中的蘇格拉底詰問法的訓練而提升；(2)台灣大學生批判性思考意向也可在非同步線上討論中培養批判思考意向的方式而提升；(3)台灣大學生批判思考技能與意向的關係呈現正向關係；(4)經由批判思考的教學，台灣大學生的批判思考技巧及意向，雖皆能有效提升，但其相關強度不變。關鍵詞：批判思考技巧，批判思考意向，非同步線上討論 Abstract. Keywords: Critical thinking skills, critical 2.

(4) instructor, but differed in terms of instructional treatment used. Students enrolled in section I served as the control group (or comparison group); students in section II served as the experimental group. The difference between control group and experimental group was the teaching and modeling of Socratic dialogues. After the online discussions began, section II was divided into treatment I and II. The difference between treatment I and II was the cultivation of CTD via the asynchronous online discussions. That is, treatment II received both the teaching and modeling of Socratic dialogues and the cultivation of CTD while treatment I only received the teaching and modeling of Socratic dialogues. 220 complete sets of data were collected (75 in control group, 71 in treatment I, and 74 in treatment II).. thinking dispositions, asynchronous online discussions 1. Introduction and Purpose The central purpose of education is learning to think (Dewey, 1933). Encouraging students to develop critical thinking skills (CTS) and dispositions toward critical thinking (CTD) has become an important issue in higher education. Previous research has proved that CTS can be improved via asynchronous online discussions. However, research on CTD has remained largely within the realm of theoretical speculations and pedagogical discussions. “Few have taken an empirical approach to exploring the overall disposition to value and utilize CT, nor has empiricism been used to study the relationship between that disposition and the attainment of CT skills” (Facione, Giancarlo, Facione, & Gainen, 1995, p. 4). Although APA Delphi report speculates that in general one might expect to find a positive correlation (APA, 1990) between CTS and CTD, there was no evidence to prove the relationship. Thus, this study investigated whether CTD can be cultivated via asynchronous online discussions and what are the relationships between CTS and CTD. In particular, the research effort was directed to empirically examine: (a) the effectiveness of CT instruction via asynchronous online forums in promoting students’ CTD by conducting quasi-experiments, (b) the relationships between the CTS and CTD of college students in Taiwan.. Research Hypotheses. The research hypotheses in this study are: (a) teaching CT via asynchronous online discussions in promoting students’ CTD was effective, (b) the relationship between students’ CTS and CTD was positive.. The research design was a pre- and post-test quasi-experimental design with a control group, treatment I, and treatment II.. Independent Variables. There were two independent variables in the study. The first independent variable was the teaching and modeling of Socratic dialogues via the asynchronous online discussions. CT questioning was taught and practiced at the beginning of the semester and students practiced these questioning techniques via asynchronous online discussions throughout the semester in the experimental group (section II; treatments I and II). The second independent variable was the cultivation of CTD in treatment II. The examples and articles about CTD were posted in the asynchronous online discussions and the students were encouraged to increase their CTD in treatment II.. Participants. The course used in this research is a general education course at National Cheng Kung University. There were two sections for this course: section I and section II. These two sections had the same course content, examinations, text materials, and. Dependent Variables. There were two dependent variables—CTS and CTD. Students’ CTS was evaluated via the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST), and students’ CTD was measured using the California Critical Thinking. 2. Methodology. 3.

(5) As mentioned before, the difference between treatment I and II was the cultivation of CTD. In treatment II, examples and articles about CTD were posted on the asynchronous online discussions. In addition, when treatment II students attempted to think critically and engaged in critical discussions, they were encouraged and supported by the teaching assistants. Finally, at the end of the semester, all of the research participants completed the CCTST, the CCTDI and an open-ended questionnaire in class.. Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI). Both of CTS and CTD were measured as the change in the students' pre to post-test scores at the beginning and at the end of the semester. Research Procedures. At the beginning of the semester, all of the control group, treatment I and treatment II received a cover letter with an informed consent form, a pre-course demographic survey, the CCTST and the CCTDI. Students who voluntarily agreed to participate in this research study were required to complete and return these documents. Different asynchronous online forums were created for the three research groups (control group, treatment I, and treatment II). There were a total of five discussion exercises posted on each of the discussion forums. Each student in these three research groups was required to participate in the online discussions. The discussion exercises were posted in online forums at different times during the semester. The first three discussions took place during the first half of the semester; the remaining two during the second half. Each discussion lasted for two weeks. In the section I (control group), no CTS or CTD was taught during the class or on the discussions although they were still required to participate in asynchronous online discussions. In the section II (treatment I and II), the instructor spent one lecture defining CT, explaining to students how to examine their own thinking by asking CT questions during the online discussions, and discussing why having CTS is important for them. The aim of that lecture was to make CT questioning explicit to the students as well as to help them contextualize these questioning techniques in the course content. During online discussions, the instructor then modeled the CTS. Students were strongly encouraged to practice some of these CT questions during the discussion to probe the meaning, justification, or logical strength of a claim, position, or line of reasoning so as to develop and test their own ideas and help their classmates evaluate their thinking by making it explicit.. California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST). CCTST (Facione, 2002) is considered the best choice for this study to measure the participants’ general CTS. This is mainly because it is aimed at college students and offers a Chinese version of a reliable critical thinking test. There are a total of 34 multiple-choice items in the CCTST and the test covers the domain of the five cognitive skills—analysis, evaluation, inference, deductive reasoning, and inductive reasoning. The internal consistency reliability (Kuder-Richardson 20) of the published version of Form 2000 ranges from 0.78 to 0.84. California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI). CCTDI is intended to measure one's disposition toward CT. It is also the only instrument that can be used in conjunction with the CCTST used in this study to measure students’ CTS. The CCTDI consists of 75 declarative item with 6-point Likert scale from 1 = strongly disagree to 6 = strongly agree. Seven subscales in the CCTDI are truth-seeking, open-mindedness, analyticity, systematicity, confidence, inquisitiveness and maturity include the domain of CTD. The standardized score of each subscale with 9-12 items are calculated by multiplying the raw scores and dividing the number of item. The scores of subscale is from 10 to 60, and the scores of the CCTDI is from 70 to 420. The total score above 280 indicates a positive overall disposition toward CT. The overall Cronbach alpha internal consistency reliability coefficients were .91 (truth-seeking .70; systematicity .73; 4.

(6) inquisitiveness .84; open-mindedness, .64; confidence, .82; maturity, .70; and analyticity, .84).. =.851, p=.397. These results indicate that time would not independently make students’ CTD improved. Only students who received the CT instruction improved their CTD. 3. Results and Discussion 2) Independent groups t-test: The means of The analyses of this study were CTD between control and treatment I descriptive statistics, t-test, Pearson were significantly different at the end of product-moment correlation, and z-test. The the semester, t = 5.04, p<.05. The means research results are discussed in the of CTD between control and treatment II following three subsections—descriptive were significantly different at the end of statistics, hypothesis I, and hypothesis II. the semester, t = 8.179, p<.05. These results indicate that the means of CTD of Descriptive Statistics. The mean score on the treatments I and II were significantly CCTST of pretest was 17.45 (SD=3.62) in different at the end of the semester, t = control group, 17.54 (SD=3.44) in treatment I, 2.512, p<.05. Students who did not and 17.55 (SD=3.65) in treatment II. The receive CT instruction did not change mean score on the CCTST of posttest was their CTD. The mean CTD score of the 17.60 (SD=3.94) in control group, 18.86 students who received the teaching and (SD=3.46) in treatment I, and 19.92 modeling of Socratic dialogues was (SD=3.71) in treatment II. higher than that of the students who did The mean score on the CCTDI of pretest not receive the treatment. In addition, the was 265.64 (SD=27.52) in control group, mean CTD score of the students who 266.20 (SD=28.31) in treatment I, and 266.51 received the teaching and modeling of (SD=29.06) in treatment II. The mean score Socratic dialogues and the cultivation of on the CCTDI of posttest was 267.68 CTD is higher than that of the students (SD=31.61) in control group, 297.13 who only received the teaching and (SD=39.70) in treatment I, and 313.03 modeling of Socratic dialogues. (SD=36.51) in treatment II. ANOVA was used to test whether CTS Hypothesis II. The relationship between CTS and CTD of these groups were homogenous. and CTD was analyzed by Pearson The CTS result, F(2, 217)=.017 and p=.983, product-moment correlation. indicates that students’ CTS were 1) Relationship at the beginning of the semester: The pre-course CCTST scores homogenous for the three research groups. In and the pre-course CCTDI scores of all addition, students’ CTD were also students had significantly positive homogenous for these three groups, F(2, relationship, r = .629, p< .05. This 217)=.018, p=.982. positive relationship means that most of the high CTS students had high CTD and Hypothesis I. The effect of treatments was most of the low CTS students had low analyzed by repeated measures t-test and CTD. On the other hand, most of the high independent groups t-test. The means of CTD students had high CTS and most of students’ CTD were significantly different in the low CTD students had low CTS. different groups. The comparisons of each These results coincide with the group were summarized below: suggestion of APA Deliphi report that the 1) Repeated measures t-test: The mean of relationship between CTS and CTD CTD of Treatment I was significantly might be positive. The correlations of different after the semester, t =9.378, students’ CTS and CTD in three research p<.05. The mean of CTD of Treatment II groups (control group, treatment I and was significantly different after the treatment II) were homogenous at the semester, t =13.524, p<.5. The mean of beginning of the semester. The Pearson CTD of control group was not Product-moment correlation coefficient significantly different after the semester, t 5.

(7) of students in control group, treatment I and treatment II were r=.724, p=.000, r=.551, p=.000, and r=.607, p=.000, respectively. The z-test was used to test the homogeneity of the relation among three groups. The z-test were ZC TI = 1.238, ZC TII = .8963, ZTI TII = .3501 for α =.05, Z(0.95) = 1.645. The correlation coefficients among three groups were not significant. These results show that the relationships in three groups were homogenous. 2) Relationship with different treatments: Pearson product-moment correlations was used to examine whether the relationship between CTS and CTD might be changed with different treatments at the beginning and at the end of the semester. In all of the control group, treatment I and treatment II, the Pearson product-moment correlations were not significantly different at the beginning of the semester, Z = .017 < Z(0.95)=1.646, Z = .078 < Z(0.95)=1.646 and Z = .1.417 < Z(0.95)=1.646, respectively. The z-test was also used to test whether the intensity were changed after the different treatments; that is, whether the Pearson product-moment correlations of CTS and CTD at the end of the semester might be different among the three research groups. The z-tests at the end of the semester among three groups were ZpoC poTI = .5061, ZpoC poTII = .1311, ZpoTI poTII = .3752 for α =.05, Z(0.95) = 1.645. The intensity was not statistically different among these groups at the end of the semester. These results indicate that the intensity of the relationship between CTS and CTD did not change. According to the above statistical results, the relationships of CTS and CTD were positive. That is, in general, the students who had high CTS had high CTD, and vice versa; the students who had low CTD had low CTS and vice versa. In addition, even though students who received the teaching and modeling of Socratic dialogues and the cultivation of CTD (both of students’ CTS and CTD improved), the intensity of the relation between CTS and CTD did not change over time.. 4. Conclusion The relationships of CTS and CTD were discussed by researchers; however, it has not yet been examined experimentally. This study, using a quasi-experimental design, has been made a first step toward ascertaining the relationship between students’ CTS and CTD. The results indicate that (1) students’ CTD can be improved by teaching and modeling of Socratic dialogues via asynchronous online discussions; (2) students’ CTD can be improved by cultivating CTD via asynchronous online discussions; (3) the relationship of students’ CTS and CTD was positive; and (4) the intensity of the relationship between CTS and CTD remained the same even though both CTS and CTD improved after CT instruction. 5. Self-Evaluation According to the experience from this study, the relationship between CTS and CTD is positive. Therefore, it is encouraged that instructors and courseware designers take the challenge to create an active learning environment where CT is valued and where students are motivated and supported in their attempts to think critically via asynchronous online discussions. Finally, due to time constraints, the research results from this study have not been disseminated appropriately through professional conference presentations or archival journal publications. The researcher will fulfill these tasks in the near future. 五、參考文獻 [1]. 6. American Philosophical Associaton. (1990). Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction, The Delphi Report: Research findings and recommendations prepared for the committee on pre-college philosophy. P. Facion, (Project Director). ERIC Doc. No. ED 315-423..

(8) [2]. [3]. [4]. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. New York: Prometheus Books. Facione, P. A. (2002). The California critical thinking skills test (CCTST): Form 2000. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press. Facione, P. A., Sánchez, (Giancarlo) C. A., Facione, N. C. & Gainen, J., (1995). The disposition toward critical thinking. Journal of General Educatio 44(1), 1-25.. 7.

(9)