Author: eunice.tanwh

Panel 1: GenAI and Critical Thinking

Speakers: Dr. Sophia TAN, Mr. Alvin TAY, Ms. Jeanette CHOY, Ms. LIM Li Yin, Dr. Vinay KUMAR, Ms. LEE Yue Xin / NTU Centre for Teaching, Learning & Pedagogy (CTLP)

Title: The Place of Critical Thinking in the Development and Use of GenAI Chatbots in Higher Education

In recent years, with the popularization and proliferation of Generative AI technologies, there has been a collective anxiety about the implications of GenAI for CT. We contribute to the growing literature on GenAI and HE by focusing on the place of CT in the development and use of GenAI chatbots in HE. However, there are many existing definitions, conceptions, and ways of measuring CT, as evidenced by the numerous frameworks and models available in the academic literature and educational practice. In this paper, we examine the following questions:

1. To what extent
a. are chatbots designed with CT in mind?
b. do faculty implement chatbots with CT in mind?
c. do students use chatbots to develop their CT?

2. What specific conceptions of CT inform chatbot designers, faculty, and students’ design and use of chatbots?

Our research is empirically focused on an internal institutional effort to develop and implement chatbots for HE purposes. We use chatlog data from student use of chatbots, as well as surveys, semi-structured interviews, and focus-group discussions with chatbot designers, faculty, and undergraduate students at a public university in Singapore.

We share preliminary findings  and discuss some of the pedagogic implications of our research. This research is potentially significant as it has the potential to offer a sense of how CT is conceived among protagonists in HE. This will allow us to evaluate the extent to which such conceptions of CT might reasonably count as CT, providing a gauge of CT literacy in HE.

 

Speakers: Dr. Santhakumari THANASINGAM / Critical Education 21 Consulting Pte Ltd, Mr. Jason Tamara WIDJAJA / MSD

Title: Using disclosure frameworks to harness the use of AI without compromising academic integrity (virtual presentation)

Several educators and educational institutions have been apprehensive about endorsing the use of AI by students. Some common reasons given for this apprehension include risks to the accuracy of information, displacement of human skills and the undermining of educational rigor through widespread plagiarism.

In two recent papers presented at the 58th International Conference at RELC (2024) and the Redesigning Pedagogy International Conference at NIE (2024), to understand how critical thinking could harness the potential of AI, we presented two critical findings. The first was that AI was incapable of building student’s baseline knowledge or develop the student’s  critical thinking skills. The second was that with strategic prompt creation, sound baseline knowledge and good critical thinking skills, students could augment their writing outcomes.

To apply our findings, we will present a proposed disclosure framework to help students leverage on the strength of AI while instilling the habitual and consistent disclosure of appropriate AI use. This framework will be based on a rubric which leverages emerging best practice but right sizes or contextualizes it for daily use within an educational context. We believe a sound pedagogy for cultivating critical thinking for text construction, coupled with contextually relevant and well thought through and guided good practice for disclosure can be a possible solution to encourage students to interact with AI in a manner that allows them to tap on AI’s capabilities. The appropriate inclusion of AI can help students augment the quality of their written outputs without compromising academic integrity.

 

Workshop (Reading, writing and critical thinking)

Speaker: Ms. Anna LOSEVA / Western Sydney University Vietnam

Title: Believe nothing, question everything: Developing critical thinking as an interrogative mindset for university students

Critical thinking, an expression so common in education as an essential 21st century skill, can  intimidate students as it is vague and may appear out of reach in the contexts of East-Asian education systems, such as Vietnam. In an undergraduate Academic Skills classroom at an international university in Vietnam, students often report that even though they recognize the importance of critical thinking, they find it complicated and abstract, and are unsure of what it means to truly possess such skills or how they can be developed. This workshop aims to reframe critical thinking as a “disposition to think” (Kerr, 2022, p.29) that includes such attributes as inquisitiveness and an open mind; skepticism and an admission of ignorance (Fanselow, 2020) can indeed be a helpful foundation of a questioning mindset. Seen through this lens, critical thinking becomes more accessible—as a habit that can be cultivated through practice rather than an intimidating ideal or merely an education trend. This session will demonstrate an adaptable speaking activity that can help students approach critical thinking as a questioning practice, a mindset that can be fostered through developing a practical habit. The presenter will offer a blueprint for a mini-debate classroom activity that can be used to practice interrogating statements, claims, and even their own beliefs. Workshop participants can expect to walk away with a flexible, practical teaching strategy for their university classrooms that demystifies the term “critical thinking” and presents it as a conversational practice rooted in healthy skepticism.

 

Panel 2: Reading, Writing and Critical Thinking

Speaker: Dr. Nimrod Lawsin DELANTE / LCC, Nanyang Technological University

Title: Feedback as a Critical Thinking Space: An Analysis of Students’ Emotional Responses to Feedback as Perceived by the Teacher

Feedback is a critical thinking space because it invites the teacher and student to engage in meaningful discourse. In CC0001 (Inquiry and Communication in an Interdisciplinary World), the possibility of feedback interaction is driven by vivid descriptions of observed data about a place, analysis of these observations leading to a conceptual question, an evaluation of sources to the research question, synthesizing, and advancing an overarching argument situated within the broader significance of the topic. Reading a student’s draft, understanding it, writing feedback on it, and discussing that feedback verbally with the student create a critical thinking space that compels the teacher to observe and analyse students’ emotional responses to feedback based on the teacher’s perception of such emotions captured through deep memory recall and reflection logs, and connecting these emotional responses to the students’ essay development.

Three main observations emerged from the analysis of textual data in forms of first draft and final draft of an essay. First, students who did not seem to listen attentively to feedback, who lacked attention to detail, who were perceived to be resistant to feedback but were compliant to the written task and were perceived to have negative emotionality about the teacher’s competence (i.e., viewed as hostile or antagonistic) produced poorly written op-ed essays. However, students who listened actively to feedback, showed careful attention to detail, were sensitive and responsive to feedback driven by openness and conscientiousness, and were perceived to trust the teacher’s competence and the writing process produced powerful, well-written op-ed essays. Lastly, students who did not seem to listen attentively to feedback and were perceived to be resistant to feedback at first, but who realised the value of feedback after the first assignment displayed a significant change in emotional behaviour such as openness, humility, and cooperative attitude. This behavioural change led to producing well-written op-ed essays.

This reflective study asserts that active listening, attention to detail in the feedback dialogue, asking questions to clarify assumptions, acknowledging alternative viewpoints, engaging in cooperative inquiry, negotiating meanings, and trusting in the teacher’s competence and the learning journey are critical thinking behaviours that propel students to produce a well-written piece. On the other hand, students’ negative emotionality about the teacher’s competence, viewed as resistance to feedback illustrated through hostility or antagonism, seems to impede critical thinking resulting in poorly written essays.

Interestingly, students who choose a topic that has so much bearing on their difficult emotional struggles, e.g., grief and sadness caused by the death of a loved one, produced op-eds of profound depth illustrating critical thinking as it allows them to pursue their desire to find an answer to their emotional struggles or existential questions.

Keywords: feedback, critical thinking, emotional responses, teacher perception

 

Speakers: Mr. Leo YU, Mr. John DELLA PIETRA, Dr. Rita Gill SINGH, Ms. Ashley WONG / Language Centre, Hong Kong Baptist University

Title: Developing Argumentation Skills in an EAP Classroom (virtual presentation)

With the advent of GenAI, the integration of critical thinking skills such as the ability to critically analyse, evaluate and respond to arguments has become an essential component for meeting the cognitive demands of higher education within the context of English for Academic Purposes (EAP). In the first part of the presentation, the authors will discuss the reconceptualisation and implementation of a redesigned speaking test in a compulsory first-year undergraduate EAP course, in which students were required to first listen to an extract on an academic, argumentative, but non-technical topic. Students were then asked to summarise the two opposing arguments and provide a refutation of one of the arguments of their choosing. The arguments in both the extract and the students’ responses should follow the Point-Evidence-Explanation-Link (PEEL) structure with a particular focus on the concept of ‘core idea’ to help students develop their argumentation skills. Afterwards, the authors will report on the students’ performance in the speaking test and examine whether the students were able to apply relevant skills in argument formulation for their argumentative essay assignments in the course. Finally, future directions of the speaking test and assignments will be proposed.  

 

Speaker: Associate Professor Poonam SINGH / Department of English, Satyawati College, University of Delhi

Title: English Language Acquisition amongst Undergraduate Japanese Students: A Reflective Critic.

The present study underscores the critical thinking development of English language proficiency skills amongst Japanese students. Often Japanese people have been known for their great technical skills and process-based approach. However, in the current times Japanese youth seem to have stagnated at the world platform of various possibilities. The potential reasons could be the persistence of Japanese conservative culture of adhering to closed society and lack of opportunities to learn English academic language proficiency skills. As per Bloom’s taxonomy critical thinking and its subskills – Listening, Speaking, Reading and Writings are essential receptive and productive skills to enhance students’ reasoning and reflective skills. In Japan, English language is not taught at an early childhood, and it is available mostly to the privilege Japanese population, which is fairly a small number, or to the expats. As a result, Japanese students have difficulty acquiring complex vocabulary, complex grammar and different ways of rational thinking in English language. Their primary language remains Japanese only. It mars the possibilities of young Japanese youth at global level. Therefore, in this paper, I would attempt to build an argument around the potential reasons of lack of English language skills amongst the Japanese youth in the current times. I would like to draw upon my recent teaching experience at Aoyama Gakuin University. I discover that teaching at various levels such as freshmen, second year, and final year students, I was impressed by the extraordinary resilience of Japanese youth to learn the language. Their compliance to learn the English language skills was unmatchable in the world, which sets them apart from the rest of the world. The usage of various pedagogical techniques allowed me to also realize that to bring out the best, out of Japanese students, is to first thaw the connection between teacher and students. Instead of focusing on the goals of overwhelming teaching objectives at first, the learning can be done effectively by following a little slower than usual teaching lessons in the initial classes. Within no time, the Japanese students can be at par or better than any other English country students.

 

Speaker: Assistant Professor Rima NAMHATA / School of Liberal Art, Alliance University, Bangalore

Title: Critical Thinking as a Pedagogical Ethos for a Creative Writing Programme

A nascent two-year post-graduate degree programme in Creative Writing launched in 2023 in one of Bangalore’s prominent universities caters to eleven young minds. The study has developed from teaching the course and applying distinct pedagogical prompts/ ideas to make students articulate a conscious craft stemming from a self-critical process. Creative Writing courses have long been adorning the long debate of enjoying the historical position of “privileged marginality” and embracing the ‘lore’ of the discipline with assumptions. The study attempts to interrogate those assumption-ridden creative writing courses and reinforce the understanding of ‘creative writing’ with teaching interventions to build the pedagogical ethos. Adapting critical reflexivity as a methodological apparatus, teaching tools have been applied from design thinking school resources, writing prompts, revisiting Christmas carols, documentary texts, and field visits to build an attitude of the social context that inspires their writing. Following a series of assignments, the idea of the pedagogy was to question the romance and the myths that lie central to the discipline of creative writing. An array of activities was designed to shape the worldview of the world around them and craft their work around audience, tone, and purpose. Peer feedback and reflection journal was a part of the class ideation process to show them the critical deliberations that have gone into articulating it. While the pedagogical ethos could be a divergent teaching intervention from the conventional wisdom of creative writing, the feedback and the assignment series have shown the internalization of critical consciousness.

Panel 1: Measuring Critical Thinking

Speaker: Dr. Vinay KUMAR / NTU Centre for Teaching, Learning & Pedagogy

Title: What counts as critical thinking?

Pretty much everyone agrees that critical thinking (CT) is a worthwhile goal of education. However, there’s less agreement about what critical thinking means. Books, papers and conferences on CT often begin with discussions of ‘What is critical thinking?’ and several answers have been offered, sometimes with implicit or explicit disagreement (e.g., Davies & Barnett, 2015; Haber, 2020; Hitchcock, 2018). Which are correct? Which is the real, actual critical thinking? How do we tell? What should count (and not count) as critical thinking? How would we adjudicate between better and worse candidates?

Drawing on recent work in the philosophy of the social sciences (Abend, 2023), in this presentation I

(1) First attempt to clarify the nature of the problem of defining CT

(2) Propose an organization of the research literature on CT based on how CT is conceptualized in particular studies. This could help us develop a better sense of (a) the repertoire of available concepts of CT that exist in the literature; and (b) what research findings mean not for CT in general but for specific concepts of CT in particular.

(3) Suggest that the question of what counts as CT–hat types of CT matter and what should be prioritized for research and pedagogy—is a value-laden one, with ethical or moral, social, political, and ecological implications. Thus, the question should be deliberated collectively, arguably by including stakeholders who may be impacted by what counts and doesn’t count as CT. Such as students, for example.

 

Speaker: Dr. Santhakumari THANASINGAM / Critical Education 21 Consulting Pte Ltd

Title: The Fundamentals of critical thinking – can we agree? (virtual presentation)

The ability to think critically is an important 21st century skill. Both content and writing educators often however find it challenging to cultivate it in their students (Bitchener & Banda, 2007; Holbrooke, Bourke, Fairbairn & Lovat, 2007, Lilis & Turner, 2001). This presentation will cover material from a PhD thesis (Thanasingam, 2019) and will discuss some of the reasons for the challenge.

The first part of the presentation will cover two main reasons why educators can be finding it a challenge to facilitate the cultivation of critical thinking in students. It will cover the ambiguous nature of the term critical thinking based on an extensive survey of the literature. For instance, how do the terms “critique”, “critical evaluation”, “academic criticism”, “critical consciousness” relate to one another. The various terms and definitions attributed to critical thinking will definitely impact what we are trying to cultivate in students and how.  The second reason for the challenge has to do with disagreements about whether it can be taught, and if so, how. For instance, is critical thinking cultivated through immersion in the right contexts or is there a place for deliberate instruction?

In the second part of the presentation, I will provide a framework for conceptualizing critical thinking and discuss a justification for how the conceptual framework can be applied to create learning environments that can promote the development of critical thinking among students. This framework was applied in three Masters level business courses in the University of Auckland with good outcomes.

 

Panel 2: Reading, Writing and Critical Thinking

Speakers: Mr. John DELLA PIETRA, Dr. Ellie LAW, Dr. Joshua CHAN / Language Centre, Hong Kong Baptist University

Title: Bridging Concept and Application: Rethinking Genres for Critical Engagement in English for Academic Purposes

As transdisciplinary knowledge and generative AI reshape academia, new assessment designs are needed to ensure English for Academic Purposes (EAP) programs continue to effectively support student learning. One means by which that goal is being pursued is through a renewed emphasis on developing practical critical thinking (CT) skills. To this end, this paper outlines an 8-move framework for a literature review genre that supports critical thinking by blending guidelines with flexibility for independent decisions, affording space for students to exercise subjective and evaluative thinking. The first five moves focus on analyzing core concepts and foundational theories related to the student’s chosen topic, while the latter three require students to apply these to their own academic fields, connecting to current and future research trends. Exemplars with a shared structure but varied details encourage students to evaluate and adjust their own approach, developing critical judgment and evaluation skills. Antifragile in design, the genre adapts to diverse student responses, allowing for the application of critical thinking skills both within their specific disciplines and across different academic contexts. As a compass, it aids educators in aligning assessments with critical thinking goals and guides students through fundamental principles of academic discourse. The paper examines assessment methods that value understanding and independent thought, contributing to discussions on critical thinking in higher education.

 

Speakers: Dr. Sujata Surinder KATHPALIA, Mr. Roger WINDER / LCC, Nanyang Technological University

Title: Critical Thinking in Research Communication

Developing tertiary students’ higher order learning is an essential aspect of higher education and this particularly applies to teaching and learning in research communication courses offered to undergraduate and graduate students, where the focus is on applying critical thinking skills in specific academic disciplines. Although many studies have been conducted on promoting critical thinking in the context of academic writing, there are very few studies that examine the role of context (audience and purpose), different modalities (reading, writing and speaking), and educational technology in holistically preparing students for their academic success at university. Relying primarily on Bloom’s revised taxonomy of educational objectives (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001), the objective of this paper is to evaluate the efficacy of classroom activities and assignments currently employed in our undergraduate and graduate research communication classes for engineering and science students at Nanyang Technological University (NTU) in developing critical thinking skills incrementally. As various studies have highlighted the struggles of students in acquiring and applying such skills, we examine whether sufficient scaffolding and support is offered contextually using different modalities and available technological tools to guide students in their learning journey to mastering more complex and sophisticated thinking skills necessary for academic success. It is hoped that recommendations based on this assessment will inspire discussion of how the acquisition of critical thinking skills in the classroom can be enhanced further to benefit students through their tertiary education and beyond.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy of learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Longman.

 

Speaker: Ms. LE Phuong Anh / University of Macau

Title: Promoting Critical Thinking for Undergraduate Students through Activities with Conceptual Thinking and CER Framework in EAP Classes

Critical thinking forms the foundation of undergraduate education and is vital for success in both academic and professional environments. In language education, it is essential to develop students’ critical thinking skills, as this preparation can greatly enhance their future career success. The American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages (ACTFL) also advocates for incorporating 21st-century skills, such as critical thinking, into language courses because this approach aids students in navigating complex situations and boosts their professional growth. This study discusses the strategies of promoting critical thinking among undergraduate students through activities that integrate conceptual thinking and the Claim, Evidence, Reasoning (CER) framework in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) classes. In this study, conceptual thinking and the CER framework were introduced to 60 freshmen in three EAP classes. Data was gathered through classroom interactions, analysis of writing assignments, and informal discussions. By engaging students in those activities involving conceptual thinking and CER framework, the study aims to enhance students’ analytical and argumentative skills with a clear structure helping them organize their thoughts and arguments logically. The results indicate improvements in students’ ability to approaching issues from multiple perspectives and construct well-supported arguments. These findings suggest that combining conceptual thinking with the CER framework can be an effective approach to encourage critical thinking in EAP classroom settings.

 

Panel 3: Facilitating domain or task transference of CT

Speaker: Professor Hong-Chi Shiau / Shih-Hsin University

Title: Media Literacy and Critical Thinking: A Pegodagical Reflection on Social Media Role-play Assignment (virtual presentation)

Through the media literacy course in a college specializing media production, understanding of media bias is imperative for students before working in a wide range of media industries. In this pegodagical case study, students enrolled in media literacy class should be equipped with a strong foundation in critical thinking skills, including the ability to analyze information, evaluate arguments, and make informed judgments. In order to present a real-life media situation, students are provided with recent media issues for a role-play assignment where they assume different stakeholders including reporters, editors, advertisers, or consumer. This assignment engages them to evaluate the event through different lens and develop empathy while analyzing media messages. There are three scenarios assigned in these assignments – celebrity scandal, political campaign and greenwashing. Prior to the role playing, the educator first requires students to identify key stakeholders for an event and identify and analyze different perspectives on an issue.  Group discussions afford students opportunities to share their opinions and insights on help them develop communication and collaboration skills while refining their critical thinking abilities. Subsequently, critical theories in line with media literacy are unfolded through the selection of sources, the use of language, and the framing of issues. In the end, the presenter evaluate advantages and challenges revolving around the assignment.

 

Speakers: Dr. Jennifer R. CASH, Dr. Pritpal SINGH / ICC & History, NTU

Title: What does “Design Thinking as Critical Thinking” mean? Reflections from an Interdisciplinary Collaborative Core module

In teaching NTU’s Interdisciplinary Collaborative Core module, “Science and Technology for Humanity”, we tell students that their weekly tasks to design innovative devices, programs, and other interventions to address the challenges of rapidly ageing societies, digitalized economic transformation, and the expansion of AI are examples of “design thinking as critical thinking”. We adopted this approach within the first semester of rolling out the course (in AY 2022-23) as a response to students’ demands for more engagement with the meaning of their coursework in a class that was heavily activity-based, and for more critical perspectives on activities that modelled business and product development scenarios. But how well have we built the bridges between design thinking and critical thinking? We use this paper as an opportunity to explore and discuss strengths of our existing course activities, how we can improve them, and – just as importantly – how we can communicate principles of both design and critical thinking to students across the university, as well as to our diverse body of instructors. We try to develop some visual models, based on our actual teaching materials, to communicate our concepts to new instructors, students, and other practitioners interested in similar approaches in courses that are general education, interdisciplinary, and activity-based.