3. Critical thinking

Subject title Critical thinking

Purpose of the activity To acquaint participants with the concept and theory of critical thinking and during the practical task to strengthen the ability to understand, accept and analyse one‘s own and other people‘s decision-making systems and models of world perception.

Duration 2–4 hours.

Location and tools Chairs, projector, writing tools, printer

Number of participants 10–30 participants

Acquaintance/ team building methods Participants are divided into groups of 4-5 people. Each group is invited to choose the topic of the study they would like to conduct in order to find out opinions on a particular situation or topic. Later, the groups are invited to go outside and speak to people about the topic.

Key moments they need to figure out:

• the position of the survey participants on a particular issue,

• why people have precisely such an opinion.

The survey takes about 20 minutes.

When they return to the training space, the participants create a system for demonstrating the results (they have another 15 minutes for that), which they present to all participants.

Practical tasks

The method “Abigail”

4.3.3 “Abigail” 59 4 Intercultural learning “T-kit No. 4”

It is a discussion about a sad love story: who is the worst and who is the best?

Resources required:

Each participant is given one copy of this story.

Abigail loves Tom, who lives on the other side of the river. The flood destroyed all the nearby bridges across the river, leaving only one boat in the water. Abigail asks Sinbad, the owner of the boat, to take her to the other side of the river. Sinbad agrees, but demands that Abigail make love with him in return. Abigail doesn’t know what to do and runs to her mother for her advice. The mother replies that she does not want to interfere in Abigail’s affairs. Confused, Abigail makes love with Sinbad, who then takes her across the river. Abigail runs to Tom, hugs him happily, and tells him everything that happened. Tom rejects her harshly and Abigail escapes. Not far from Tom’s home, Abigail meets John, who is Tom’s best friend. She also tells him everything that happened. John beats Tom for what he did to Abigail and goes out together with her.

Practical tasks • Enough space for participants to work individually, in groups of 4 to 5 people and in a common circle.

Number of participants in the group

Minimum 5 participants, maximum 30 (larger groups can be split and the assessment can be done separately).

Duration

From 1 h 15 minutes to 2 h 15 minutes:

• 5 minutes for introduction; • 10 minutes for individual reading and assessment; • 30–45 minutes for work in small groups; • 30 minutes for work in a larger group (optional); • 30–45 minute for evaluation in the common circle.

The course of the task:

Introduce participants to a task that will help them identify different values. Ask them to read the story separately and rate each character (Abigail, Tom, Sinbad, Abigail’s mother, and John) according to their behaviour: who behaved the worst, who did a little better, and so on. After participants evaluate the characters, ask them to divide into small groups (3 to 6 people) to discuss how they understand the behaviour of these characters. Task for small groups: to create a common list that all group members would agree to. Ask participants to avoid mathematical calculations when creating a common list, but rather try to make it based on a discussion of what is good and what is bad. After the small groups make up their lists, you can, if you want, repeat this phase by joining 2 small groups together and forming a medium-sized group (if you decide to do that, the initial groups should have no more than 4 people). Evaluate this task in a common circle, first presenting the results and discussing their similarities and differences. Gradually move on to the questions, on what basis the participants performed the evaluations. How could they decide what behaviour is good and what behaviour is bad?

End of session reflection methods

Discussion and evaluation of the method “Abigail”

When evaluating, it is important to understand the relationship with the values that influence us in deciding what is good and what is bad. Once we have figured out that, the next step is to see if it is hard or easy to negotiate values in order to make a common list. You can ask participants how they agreed on a common list: which arguments convinced them and why, where was the boundary to understand and support the other. Looking further, one can reflect on “where we have learned to distinguish what is good or bad”.

THEORETICAL INFORMATION

Critical thinking is a skill of the thought process which helps to filter the information received and, after properly weighing all the facts, respond to it. As a result, the most accurate picture of reality is created, and the decisions made are correct.

Critical thinking provides an opportunity to adequately analyse the current situation and predict the future.

The importance of critical thinking as a skill development could be confirmed by the Dunning-Kruger effect. In 1999, at Cornell University researchers David Dunning and Justin Kruger conducted a series of experiments which proved that incompetent individuals tend to greatly

overestimate their abilities and be misconceptions about themselves, while competent individuals tend to misjudge others. This means that most people tend to make mistakes when making one decision or another and assessing situations. The key to critical thinking is sincere hesitation about the fairness of your position. Conversely, assured and unbreakable adherence to one’s position indicates a lack of critical thinking skills. Socrates has said: “I know that I know nothing”. This is well illustrated by the three circles of information available to each person:

Things we have no idea we don’t know about.

Things that we are aware of, but we don’t know much about them.

Things we know.

One of the essential methods of critical thinking which helps to critically address emerging issues and problems is to break down an existing query into finer details and analyse them sequentially.

Example: Tom and Andrew have the same health problem. Tom shared with Andrew information about homeopathic remedies prescribed to him by his doctor and these medications helped him perfectly solve the health problem. So, Andrew is currently deciding whether he should try the same medications.

How should Andrew address this issue based on critical thinking skills?

He should first break down all the facts:

Fact no. 1: The medication was prescribed to Tom by a doctor. A doctor is a qualified professional whose opinion can be trusted. It is a strong fact that encourages 232

listening to Tom’s experience and supporting his side.

Fact no. 2: The medication helped Tom. It is also a strong fact based on Tom’s experience that encourages listening to Tom’s experience and adopting it.

Fact no. 3: Tom was taking homeopathic medicines. After reviewing various research studies and international consolidated memoranda, information can be found that homeopathic medicines are not reliable and their effects have not been proven. The use of homeopathic medicines is classified as alternative medicine, their prescription is not recommended for patients. Thus, after reviewing all three facts, we can conclude that despite the fact that the medicines were prescribed by a qualified doctor and they helped Tom, such a solution is not scientifically recognized internationally, and after critically evaluating all the aspects, it is likely that Andrew would not choose the indicated medicines.

The main aspect on which our decisions are based are the models of world perception, otherwise known as the map of world perception. The model is a visual image of various situations, which is based on many individually formed facts: experience, values, individual imagination and expectations. For example, by knowing the laws of gravity we can predict what dynamics of objects’ movement can be expected. Or, when having a good knowledge of the patterns of behaviour of a particular person, one can predict how he/she will behave in one situation or another in the future. The more scientifically based information, the more accurately it can describe the future and the more it can be trusted.

PRINCIPLES OF CRITICAL THINKING:

1. Separate facts from their interpretations and assessments

Models and beliefs of world perception are being formed on the basis of concrete facts

2. To think and to draw conclusions based on rationally weighed and verified evidence It is important to be open to new evidence and facts questioning available conclusions that can encourage us to reconsider and reshape our existing model of reality by transforming the elements within it.

3. Pay attention to the opinion of professionals In case of hesitation, pay attention to the conclusions and opinions of the consolidated groups of specialists, without sticking to the position of individual experts.

4. Do not be afraid to be wrong, to accept alternative opinion and truth

For notes, ideas, observations

Subject title

Purpose of the activity

Duration

Location and tools

Number of participants

Acquaintance/ team building methods

End of session reflection methods

Practical tasks

THEORETICAL INFORMATION