NDI Advocacy Training Manual – November 2002
Page 1 of 3
CRITICAL THINKING The term ‘critical thinking’ is gradually becoming a part of people‟s basic vocabulary in Kyrgyzstan, in the non-governmental sector in particular. This term might seem easy to understand because both words, „critical‟ and „thinking,‟ are commonly used. Critical thinking is more than a fact you learn once and know forever; it is a skill you can always improve and that you need to practice to retain. Just as people dance better if they practice more, the more you practice your critical thinking skills, the better you get at them. Developing critical thinking skills is especially important for the development of democracy. Can you imagine building a civil society without people who can think independently, be confident in their reasoning, and demand their human and civil rights? Is it possible to have fair and transparent elections if people cannot make independent choices and stand up for their rights? What does it mean to be “fair” and “transparent”? Advocacy requires stating your objectives in a clear message to your target audience, whether it‟s a legislator, the general public, mass media, or the local administration. Critical thinking involves deconstructing somebody else‟s message. Learning to do this will not only make you a better-educated voter, but also help you to improve your own message development and other advocacy skills. For example, as you analyze more messages, you‟ll identify common elements among the ones that seem most effective to you, and be able to use those elements in your work. It is a cycle of reflecting learning, and creating. Public policy is also a message; it reflects values of the state. Public policy message can be deconstructed like any other message and requires critical thinking. Questioning whether a piece of legislation would be beneficial to your family or community demands the ability to analyze and evaluate its content in relation to your values and needs. ‘INGREDIENTS’ OF CRITICAL THINKING It is easier to define the component elements of critical thinking than to define it as a single concept. Six are listed below1. They are all interrelated; for example, to evaluate a message you need to analyze the relationships among its main points. Interpretation – is paraphrasing ideas and concepts and trying to understand the meaning of an article, book, or a statement, for example, when you are reading a report on unemployment or sex trafficking and you try to identify the author‟s main point, you are interpreting. When 1
Some parts of the following section were adapted from Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts, Peter A. Facione, “California Academic Press: Leaders in Critical Thinking Assessment”, available at http://www.calpress.com/critical.html, accessed on September 15, 2001. All the following definitions are as defined by a panel of experts including 46 men and women from throughout US and Canada, participants of a research project that lasted two years and was conducted by the American Philosophical Association. Their work is described in Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purpose of Educational Assessment and Instruction [The California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA, 1990].
NDI Advocacy Training Manual – November 2002
Page 2 of 3
you look at someone‟s face and see that the corners of the person‟s lips are turned down, and her/his face looks gloomy, you may decide that the person is upset or offended. That is also interpretation. Analysis – is identifying relationships among statements, questions, concepts, and descriptions intended to express belief, judgment, experience, or opinions. Some examples of analyzing are: Comparing a presidential draft law with a draft law on the same issue proposed by the Legislative Assembly of Jogorku Kenesh and identifying similarities and differences between them. Reviewing the relationship between Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan for the last four years and deciding whether improved or not. Comparing statements like, “Seventy-five per cent of the Kyrgyz Republic‟s population voted for the incumbent President at the presidential elections on October 29th 2001,” and “The people of the Kyrgyz Republic are not ready to elect akims and governors yet.” Do you think these two statements contradict each other? Why do you think they do or don‟t? Analysis also involves identifying the values one statement or document states or implies and the interests at stake. Evaluation - is assessing the credibility and value of descriptions of people‟s perceptions, experiences, judgments, beliefs, or opinions. In the election example above, analysis involved deciding if the two statements contradict each other. Evaluation is further considering if they seem true or not. Inference - is making conclusions from data, statements, and opinions. One possible inference would be deciding that if the people were ready to elect even the President, they could certainly elect akims and governors. Another inference would be that if they are not ready to participate in elections for akims and governors, then citizens are not ready to elect a president either. You might doubt the level of genuine citizen participation in the president‟s 75% victory. Explanation – is being able to to state the results of your reasoning; to justify that your reasoning in terms of the evidence, analysis, evaluation and interpretation on which one‟s results were based; and to present your reasoning in the form of cogent arguments. For example, an effective project proposal advocating for state-funded women shelters would explain the benefits to battered women and the indirect benefits to society. It would also describe the methods and criteria you used to analyze the issue of domestic violence. Self-awareness – is consciously analyzing your own ideas, judgments, and conclusions. It is thinking before you speak and act; not only about what you say and do, but also about the consequences it will have on other people. Examples include trying to examine biases, being aware of the influence, your assumptions and prejudices may have on your work, accepting previous mistakes or miscalculations, and being willing to change your mind. For example, you might believe that disabled people can‟t be good workers and decide not to hire them or let them join your organization, even though it is a human rights NGO. Attempting to be self-
NDI Advocacy Training Manual – November 2002
Page 3 of 3
aware, however, you might recognize that your bias is personal, rather than “the truth,” and that your decision could harm your NGO‟s reputation. You might decide to encourage disabled people to join your organization, despite your bias, and later be open to recognizing the efficient, committed efforts of a volunteer who uses a wheel chair. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO BE AN EFFECTIVE CRITICAL THINKER? The following are the characteristics of effective critical thinkers:
Avoid taking statements/facts for granted by - paraphrasing ideas (trying to understand the meaning of statements/facts); - questioning doubtful statements/ideas/facts; - searching for alternative solutions/ideas and questions; and - identifying the interests at stake and the power relations among speakers, writers, and decision makers.
Examine and remain aware of biases, stereotypes and assumptions by - evaluating the relevance and validity of evidence supporting or disapproving statements; - making conclusions based on analysis; and - examining why they believe what they believe and the origins of their beliefs.
Have independent opinions on issues that are - supported by arguments, facts and experiences; - based on personal analysis and values, rather than someone else‟s opinion or decision; - confident and reasoned; - not always based on what is, but what could be; - creative.
Can make and explain a statement - based on analysis of a situation; - justified with relevant facts, experience, and knowledge; - drawn from connections among pieces of evidence; - demonstrating that they considered other points of view and why they still support the given statement.
Try to stay informed about the issues they discuss and advocate by - following the progress of relevant events; - knowing the issue‟s history - knowing the actors/sides involved in the process and their interests in it; - studying all aspects of the issue raised (background, current status, possible outcomes).
