Assessing Critical Thinking among Adolescent Respondents - Article Example

Assessing Critical Thinking among Adolescent Respondents: An Integration of the Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment, and the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal tests. Name Institution Abstract This article presents a recommendation report of the analysis of two critical thinking tests, Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment, and Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. It begins by briefly discussing the two tests before analyzing their strengths and weaknesses. The paper also discusses the methods we used for the assessment of different individuals in the analysis of the two tests. From the findings, a recommendation is drawn which suggests the best test for evaluating the level of critical thinking among individuals. At the end there is a conclusion of the discussion presented in the paper. Keywords: Critical Thinking, Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment, and Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Real-world outcomes. Thesis statement: There is a Need to Develop a New Critical Thinking Assessment Test to Overcome the Weaknesses Associated with the Existing CT Tests. Introduction. One of the objectives of education is to help students develop the ability to think critically about a comprehensive range of topics they may encounter in their daily events and academic settings. This require the use of data evaluation, analysis and synthesis which necessitates the need to equip the students with critical thinking techniques (Hassan and Madhum, 2007). Critical thinking refers to the use of cognitive abilities that increase the likelihood of the required outcome. The process is reasoned, purposeful, and directed towards achieving a certain goal (Halpern, 2003). According to Cheung, Rudowicz, Kwan, and Yue (2002), thinking critically means appraising the outcomes of ones thinking processes, how best his decision is or how fully he or she has solved the problem. Luton is of the view that, there are many tests used to access an individual’s level of critical thinking. Some of the most commonly used tests include; Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment, The general management aptitude test, The SHL Critical Reasoning Test Battery, Cornell Critical Thinking Assessment, and Verbal and numerical critical reasoning tests (1955). These tests have been in use since ancient times and have exhibited various pitfalls when evaluating an individual’s critical thinking ability. There was thus a need to analyze two of these tests in terms of strengths and weaknesses and suggest a possible solution. The proposed solution will be used to evaluate the convicted adolescents by Dr. Dunno, psychologist at Juvenile Corrections. This paper devoted to the analysis of Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment and Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal tests. 1. Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment (HCTA) The Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment is a dependable analysis of critical thinking that has been authenticated with several qualitatively various measures and tests of academic achievement (Halpern, 2010). Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment test offers the best way to gauge outcomes of learning programs whose aim is to improve critical thinking. It is a means of evaluating stages of critical thinking for the individuals from 15 years to adulthood. The test has been designed to analyze critical thinking abilities among adults, community college students, population of working adults, and state university students. HCTA is test can be conducted online and it’s available in 10 languages. The test involves asking respondents open ended questions followed by forced multiple choice questions. It comprises of 25 daily scenarios that those being assessed examine and criticize. 1.1 Strengths of Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment HCTA test uses multiple response formats as opposed to other available tests. This allows those being analyzed to demonstrate the ability to think about daily issues by use of both recognition formats and constructed responses (Butler, 2012). The test has been confirmed with different samples and can be used in different parts of the world since it is presented in different languages. It has been found that HCTA results relates well the with real-world outcomes of critical thinking among the individuals being evaluated. There may be no bias in the rating of respondents because the scoring and administration of the HCTA test is computerized. The results of the HCTA test indicate that there is no significance difference in the scores HCTA based on gender (Halpern, 2010). This again eliminates the possibility of gender biasness in the assessment. The test is also effective as it supports the prediction that HCTA scores are normally associated with the real-world outcome scores of the critical thinking record (Butler, 2012). 1.2 weaknesses of Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment HCTA exhibits some remarkable limitations in the assessment of critical thinkers. The test measures the real-world outcomes of the respondent using a behavioral inventory based on his self-report (Luton, 1955). It is also possible that those who demonstrated higher critical thinking skills might be intelligent responders than those who had a lower score in critical thinking. This implies that, those evaluated might be more careful of their responses to the real-world outcome accounts. They may thus have tailored their responses in order to be desired in their societies. In addition, the test only relates the scores of critical thinkers the with real-world outcomes without determining the cause. The test alone cannot guarantee that critical thinking aptitude is essential for making better real life decisions by critical thinkers (Hassan and Madhum, 2007) 2. Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal The Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) is designed to evaluate diverse features of critical thinking through; deduction, inferences, evaluation and interpretation of arguments. According to Hassan, & Madhum (2007), the test involves tasks that are well defined and moderately simple and seeks one answer from a number of provided choices. The test was mainly created for application in business, academia and government. It assesses decision making, creativity, and predicts judgement. The test is available for use in different languages including US English, Australian English, Spanish, Indian English, UK English, French, and Dutch. This makes a popular test of critical thinking all the world (Watson and Glaser, 2008). 2.1. Strengths of Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal According to Hassan and Madhum (2007), W-GCTA test demonstrates sufficient reliability and standard validity information of the assessed critical thinkers. The test also exhibits non-significant gender difference scores which implies that it’s not gender biased. W-GCTA has been a successful tool in predicting job success and selecting the best person for a particular job. The results of the test correlates with standard measures of critical thinking which provide a strong indication of its validity. 2.2. Weaknesses of Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal The W-GCTA test is one of the most regularly used and oldest multiple-choice CT tests in government, business, and academics. The test, however, has construct-validity problems. The test is unclear ambiguous, mysterious, and sometimes provides misleading instructions, which have not been change for a long time. Validity of the test has been diminished by items which are scored erroneously. W-GCTA test may also establish the relationship between the level of critical thinking and real-world outcomes but does state the underlying causes (Fong et al., 1986). Methods. The study involved 98 respondents aged between 15 to 21 years who had been convicted of various adolescent offences. Sixty of the convicted individuals were obtained from a nearby community college and forty 28 were undergraduates of two state universities. Thirty of them were female while rest were male. Three respondents failed to turn up due to personal reasons. The other respondents were reluctant to undergo the assessment but later agreed after we promised to keep their information as confidential as possible. The test lasted for about 45 minutes to complete. Forms containing open ended and closed questions were administered to the respondents who were required to fill them according to the given instruction. We used both the HCTA and W-GCTA tests to assess the critical thinking capability of the respondents after which we realized that the learned that the results were almost similar. We adopted the UK norms or to avoid guessing in order to ensure better accuracy. We also used the UK norms to create percentile ranks and standard scores. Results. The study revealed a mean score of 84.56 on the HCTA test with a standard deviation of 18.0. Results of the W-GCTA test had no significance difference implying that the two tests are closely related and exhibit the same outcomes. Community college respondents (n=60, M=98.66, & SD= 16.0) had a lower score than the state university respondents (n= 28, M= 103.29, & SD= 24.55). The test did not indicate any significance difference based on gender for both the HCTA and the W-GCTA tests. The results also revealed that respondents with prolonged exposure to education exhibited higher scores on both the W-GCTA and HCTA tests than those with less years of educational experience. Table 1. Comparison of the W-GCTA and HCTA tests of the respondents Community college students University students Age (in years) 18.6 (10.2) 19.8(6.3) Gender (% male) 69.30 65.8 W-GCTA score 0.47 0.62 HCTA score 98.66 (16.34) 103.29 (24.55) RWO score 0.30 (0.18) 0.22 (0.16) Discussion. The main goal of this study was to analyze the effectiveness of both the HCTA and W-GCTA tests in assessing critical thinkers. It is meant to suggest the best test or how the two can be integrated to evaluate the thinking capabilities of among individuals. It is expected that real-world outcomes of critical thinking tallies with the level of critical thinking of individuals (McDaniel and Lawrence 1990). The two tests confirm this ideology where good critical thinkers are said to make better decisions in life. The tests also confirm the allegation by Ennis, R. H. (1993) that critical thinking can be taught through instructions when state university respondents exhibit a higher score than those from the community college. The significance difference in the score is also expected because entry to the state universities is more selective than entry to community colleges (Kreber, Anderson, Entwistle, McArthur, and Hounsell, 2014). All the respondents in community colleges and state universities irrespective of gender attend the same classes and are taught by the same teachers. It is therefore expected of them to demonstrate the same level of critical thinking (Luton, 1955). The tests confirm this expectation by indicating insignificant difference in score of male and female respondents. The above scenario also implies that the tests are free from gender bias (Hassan and Madhum, 2007; Butler, 2012). Recommendations The assessment was done based on the respondent’s personal reports. The test takers may have been conscious and altered their replies to the real-world experiences in order to be socially acceptable and avoid embarrassment. The results of this research would have been more relevant if genuine behaviors had been observed and assessed. The study is not an assurance that critical thinking skills lead to good decision-making among the critical thinkers. Besides, the study only assesses critical thinking and cannot drive us into conclusions that, negative life occasions are associated with instruction and education in critical thinking. The tests used in the study makes an assumption that, college attendance has a significant role in development of critical thinking. However other studies have found that there is insignificant growth critical thinking in most respondents who reported to have attended colleges and universities (Keeley et al.1982). This barely suggests that instructional approaches might not yield the anticipated outcomes in critical thinking (Pawlowski et al. 1998). The two tests used in the study based its analysis on academic attainment and merits of the respondents to establish validity. But the respondents must also be able to apply critical thinking abilities outside their classes. If knowledge in critical thinking has to benefit learners outside the class, then the two assessments used in the study should have had capability of reflecting this ideology. It should be a requirement for those with higher scores during critical thinking assessment to demonstrate less negative life happenings compared to those with lower scores. But neither of the CT tests has foreseen real-world outcomes of critical thinking in other fields of life except in business and academics. There is an experiential evidence that abilities acquired during the teaching of critical thinking extend beyond academics to other areas of life in the society. We therefore recommend future studies to explore the relationship between real-world outcomes and critical thinking instructions particularly on the importance of education to the individuals. Critical thinking cannot not only be taught or instructed, but can also gained from various sources. There is a possibility that, critical thinking acquired from non-academic foundations is the main cause of good decision-making aptitudes by an individual. However, there is also a likelihood that clear critical thinking instructions make the students to apply the skills acquired in classes to their lives. A need therefore arises to implement a new grading system and assessment test that will establish and possibly explain the relationship between critical thinking and the real-world outcomes. The test will improve the scoring consistency of the critical thinker not only while in class but also when making real life decisions. Conclusion. This study has provided evidence that scores on a critical thinking assessment can predict real world outcomes when an appropriate test assessment tool is used. Individuals must use the critical thinking skills acquired in class through teaching and instruction to make better decisions in the real world. Benefits of both HCTA and W-GCTA must be integrated to develop a universal test that will establish the cause of the relationship between critical thinking scores and the real world outcomes. References Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamin, R., & Zhang, Bensley, D. A., Crowe, D. S., Bernhardt, P., Buckner, C., and Allman, A. L. (2010). Teaching and assessing critical thinking skills for argument analysis in psychology. Teaching of Butler, (2012), Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment Predicts Real-World Outcomes of Critical Thinking. Journal of Applied Cognitive Psychology 26(5) 721-729 Cheung, C., Rudowicz, E., Kwan, A. S. F., & Yue, X. D. (2002). Assessing university students’ general and specific critical thinking. College Student Journal. D. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research. Ennis, R. H. (1993). Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32, 179–186. Facione, N. C., & Facione, P. A. (2008). Critical thinking and clinical reasoning in the health sciences: An international multidisciplinary teaching anthology. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press. Flores, K. L., Matkin, G. S., Burbach, M. E., Quinn, C. E., & Harding, H. (2010). Deficient critical thinking skills among college graduates: Implications for leadership. Educational Halpern, D. F. (2003). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (4th edn). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Hassan, & Madhum (2007), Validating the Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal. Journal of Higher Education 54(3) 361-383. In Kreber, C., In Anderson, C., In Entwistle, N. J., In McArthur, J., & Hounsell, D. (2014). Advances in innovations in university assessment and feedback: A festchrift in honour of Professor Dai Hounsell. Jordan, A., Carlile, O., & Stack, A. (2008). Approaches to learning: A guide for teachers. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Lewis, M. (2010). Handbook of emotions. New York, NY [u.a.: Guilford. Luton, J. N. (1955). A study of the use of standardized tests in the selection of potential educational administrators. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Tennessee, Memphis. Marin, L., & Halpern, D. F. (2011). Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: Explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 6, 1–13. McDaniel, E., & Lawrence, C. (1990). Levels of cognitive complexity: An approach to the measurement of thinking. New York: Springer-Verlag. Pasch, G., & Norsworthy, K. (2001). Using Internet primary sources to teach critical thinking skills in world languages. Westport, Conn. [u.a.: Greenwood Press. Philosophy and Theory. Psychology Riggio, H. R. & Halpern, D. F. (2006). Understanding Human Thought: Educating Students as Critical Thinkers. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. Watson, G., & Glaser, E. M. (1980). Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, Forms A and B manual. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation Wilson, D. G. & Wagner, E. E. (1981). The Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal as predictor of performance in a critical thinking course. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 41, 1319–1322. Read More

Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment test offers the best way to gauge outcomes of learning programs whose aim is to improve critical thinking. It is a means of evaluating stages of critical thinking for the individuals from 15 years to adulthood. The test has been designed to analyze critical thinking abilities among adults, community college students, population of working adults, and state university students. HCTA is test can be conducted online and it’s available in 10 languages. The test involves asking respondents open ended questions followed by forced multiple choice questions.

It comprises of 25 daily scenarios that those being assessed examine and criticize. 1.1 Strengths of Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment HCTA test uses multiple response formats as opposed to other available tests. This allows those being analyzed to demonstrate the ability to think about daily issues by use of both recognition formats and constructed responses (Butler, 2012). The test has been confirmed with different samples and can be used in different parts of the world since it is presented in different languages.

It has been found that HCTA results relates well the with real-world outcomes of critical thinking among the individuals being evaluated. There may be no bias in the rating of respondents because the scoring and administration of the HCTA test is computerized. The results of the HCTA test indicate that there is no significance difference in the scores HCTA based on gender (Halpern, 2010). This again eliminates the possibility of gender biasness in the assessment. The test is also effective as it supports the prediction that HCTA scores are normally associated with the real-world outcome scores of the critical thinking record (Butler, 2012). 1.2 weaknesses of Halpern Critical Thinking Assessment HCTA exhibits some remarkable limitations in the assessment of critical thinkers.

The test measures the real-world outcomes of the respondent using a behavioral inventory based on his self-report (Luton, 1955). It is also possible that those who demonstrated higher critical thinking skills might be intelligent responders than those who had a lower score in critical thinking. This implies that, those evaluated might be more careful of their responses to the real-world outcome accounts. They may thus have tailored their responses in order to be desired in their societies. In addition, the test only relates the scores of critical thinkers the with real-world outcomes without determining the cause.

The test alone cannot guarantee that critical thinking aptitude is essential for making better real life decisions by critical thinkers (Hassan and Madhum, 2007) 2. Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal The Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA) is designed to evaluate diverse features of critical thinking through; deduction, inferences, evaluation and interpretation of arguments. According to Hassan, & Madhum (2007), the test involves tasks that are well defined and moderately simple and seeks one answer from a number of provided choices.

The test was mainly created for application in business, academia and government. It assesses decision making, creativity, and predicts judgement. The test is available for use in different languages including US English, Australian English, Spanish, Indian English, UK English, French, and Dutch. This makes a popular test of critical thinking all the world (Watson and Glaser, 2008). 2.1. Strengths of Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal According to Hassan and Madhum (2007), W-GCTA test demonstrates sufficient reliability and standard validity information of the assessed critical thinkers.

The test also exhibits non-significant gender difference scores which implies that it’s not gender biased. W-GCTA has been a successful tool in predicting job success and selecting the best person for a particular job. The results of the test correlates with standard measures of critical thinking which provide a strong indication of its validity. 2.2.

Read More