Paper Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-CRITICAL-THINKING-APPROACH-TO-TEACHIN 👈

1. A CRITICALTHINKING APPROACH TO TEACHING
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW zyxw
by Nancy K. Kubasek’
INTRODUCTION
Almost everyone involved in higher education agrees that an
important elementof the educationalexperiencewe shouldbe providing
for our students is teaching them to engage in critical thinking.’
Professors in zyxwv
our discipline concur.’ Even when they do not use the
term “critical thinking,” faculty often refer to the importance of the
evaluation skib,which are the essence of critical thinking? And while
it is possible to take a critical thinking approachto any law class: this zy
* Department of Legal Studies, BowlingGreen S
t
a
t
eUniversity, BowlingGreen, Ohio
‘ zyxwv
See Arnold B. Aarons,#Critical Thinking’ and the Baccalaureate Curriculum, 71
LIBERALEDUC. 141(1985)
(offersthe proposition that curricular recommendation, reform,
or proposed structure has never been made without some obeisance to the generic term
“critical thinking“); ERNEST L. BOYER,COLLEGE: THE UNDERGRADUATE EXPERIENCE
IN
AMERICA (1987);
LAUREN B. RESNICK, EDUCATION
AND LEARNINGTO THINK(1987);
Gary
Galles, Reforms That Focus zyxwvu
on Content Alone Won’t Solve The Problems of Higher
Education, CHRON. OF HIGHER EDUC., April 13,1988,at B 1.
’See Symposium on Teaching Critical Thinking - ThePWS-Kent Symposium Series
in Legal zyxwvuts
Studies,9J.zyxwvuts
LEclu, zyxwvut
SrVD.EDUC.
468 (1991)
for a collectionof articles advocating
the teaching of critical thinking skills to legal environment and business law students.
See also Mary Anne F. Nixon & Edward M. Brayton, The Contractor’s Contract:A Tool
for Developing Critical Thinking Skills, 12 J.LEGAL STUD.EDUC.
219 (1994),for more
recent evidence of our discipline’s devotion to the project of critical thinking.
See, e.g.,John J. Bowignore, Toward the Definition of a Great Teacher, 14J.LEGAL
STUD. EDUC. 103,105(1996)
(discussinghow “a genuine need for evaluation produces a
more economic and highly motivated quest for information”).
‘See Nancy Kubasek & M. Neil Browne,Zntegrating Critical Thinking into the Legal
Environment ofBusiness Classnwm,1
4 J.LEGALSTUD.
EDUC. 35(19961,for a discussion
of the application of this approach to a legal environment of business classroom.

2. 20 zyxwvu
f zyxwvutsrq
Vol. 16f zyxwvuts
The zyxwvu
Journal ofLegal Studies Education
approach is especially appropriate for an environmental law class
because of the sheer number of controversies that arise in this area.5
While much of contract law, for example, is settled, environmental law
is evolving rapidly and continually. Many students come into an
environmental law class wanting to know what stance to take with
regard to many of the environmental issues pervading our culture.
Students who enter a course in environmental law wanting to know how
to evaluate arguments about various environmental issues are often
uncommonly likely to see a purpose for engaging in critical thinking.
Teaching a course in environmental law with a critical thinking
approach requires framingthe course i
n a slightly Merent manner. It
means approaching the course as one where theinstructor’s objective
is not to teach students what to think about environmental law issues,
but rather to teach them how to thnk deeply about these issues.
Consequently, the environmental law teacher who emphasizes a critical
thinking perspective fulfillstwo important teaching goals. Not only do
the students learn about environmental law, they learn an approach to
thinking about issues that they can apply beyond their immediate
classroom and beyond environmental law. Students can use their
critical thinking skills in other courses as well as in their jobs. Thus,
while students are likely to eventually forget many of the facts they
learn about environmental law, they learn a process of thinking that
they may retain and use throughout their lives.
Before one can approach a course zyxw
from a critical zyx
thinkingperspective,
one must have a clear definition of critical thinking in mind, and then
must make a conscious decision about which critical thinking skills to
emphasize. The first section of this article presents a definition of
critical thinking and a discussion of the skills that can be most easily
integrated into an environmental law class. The next section focuses on
the structure of the class. The final section then discusses assignments
that would be appropriate for a critical thinking approach to an
environmental law class.
A DEFINITION OF CRITICALTHINKING
While many forms of criticalthinking are espoused in the literature,
a review of the definitions of critical thinking given by the scholars who
have written most extensively on the topic shows that despite
differences in the precise formulations of each, there is fundamental
agreement about the basic attributes of critical thinking. Above a
l
lelse,
the definitions are expressed in terms of the criteria associated with
Controversies zyxwvuts
are essential for a critical thinking approach because critical thinking
is reactive i
n nature. Critical zyxwvu
thinbingprovides the tools and attitudes for evaluating the
arguments that constitute controversies.

3. 1998 zyxw
I A Critical ThinkingApproach I zy
21 zy
practical reasoning. Different scholars, however, tend to emphasize
differentaspects of critical thinking.
CarolWade: the author of Critical and Creative Thinking: zy
The Case
of Love and War,' defines critical thinking as "the ability and
willingnessto assess claims and make objectivejudgments on the basis
of well supported reasons."' She stresses the importance of not just
knowing how to use critical thinking zyxw
skills,but of wanting to use them.
Another critical thinking scholar, Stephen Brookfield: defines a
criticalthinker as one who habitually attempts to idenbfy and examine
assumptions before acting." His approach differs from that of other
scholarsin that he not only focuses on reasoning, but additionally looks
at the impact of emotions on how one responds to situations."
Michael Scriven" describes engagingin criticalthinking as being an
evaluator, and says that it requires having a set of standards that one
applies to both one's own position and to the positions of 0the1-s.'~
This
belief is echoed in an important distinction made by Professor Richard
Paul between strong sense and weak sense critical thinking." Weak
sensecriticalthinkingentails the use of criticalthinking skillsto simply
annihilate others' positions and defend one's own, and is therefore
unconcernedwith moving toward truth or virtue. Strong sense critical
thinking, on the other hand, requires us to apply the same criteria to
our own arguments as we do to others' in an attempt to protect
ourselvesfrom self-de~eption.'~ zyxw
' Carol Wade has a B.A in History from UCLA and a Ph.D. in Psychology from
Stanford University. A former editor of Psychology Today,she currently teaches at
College of Marin and Dominican College, and focuses on the teaching and promotion of
critical and creative thinking. One of her textbooks, Psychology,which is currently in its
third edition, was the first introductory psychology text to emphasize the application of
critical thinking.
' CAROLWADE, CRlTICALANDCREATIVETHINKING:THE CASEOF h3VE AND WARzyx
(1986).
John ESTERLE& DANCLURMAN,CONVERSATIONSWITH CRITICALTHWKERS 52(1993).
Stephen Brookfield is a Distinguished Professor in the Graduate Schoolof Education
at the University of St.Thomas in St. Paul, Minn. He has written several books in the
field of adult learning, and has been a consultant and workshop leader, introducing
critical thinking concepts and practices to both colleges and corporations in the United
States, Canada, and the United Kingdom.
lo ESTERLE
& CLURMAN,
supra note 8, at 8.
I' Id. at zyxwvu
9.
'*Michael Scriven has a doctorate in Philosophy from Oxford, and has taught at a
number of colleges and universities, including Swathmore College, University of
California at Berkeley, and the University of Minnesota. He has served on the editorial
boards of 35journals, and has over 280 publications a number of which are in the area
of critical thinking.
'' ESTERLE
& CLURMAN, supra note 8, at 35-38.
SeeM. NEILBROWNE
& STUARTKEELEY. ASIUNGT'HE RIGHTQUESTIONS9-10 (5th ed.
1998), for further discussion of this distinction and its importance.
'' Id.

4. 22 zyxwvut
IVol. 16I zyxwv
The zyxwvu
Journal of Legal zyxwv
Studies Education
Richard Paul," the director of the Center for Critical zyx
Thinking at
Sonoma State University, sees critical thinking as a commitment to
continually upgrading the quality of one's thinking so zyx
as to upgrade the
quality of one's life." He believes critical thinking involves the
development of a set of zyxwvu
skills and intellectual standards that one uses
to assess arguments to move one toward becoming a rational being."
A more in-depth reading of the works of these and other critical
thinking scholars reveals that what they all agree on is that critical
thinking involves developing a set of criteria that one uses to evaluate
arguments in order to cometo decisions about issues. Their differences
appear as emphases, dependent upon which evaluative questions they
feel are most important.
One approach to critical thinking that works well for the
environmental law class is the approach outlined by M. Neil Browne
and Stuart Keeley,inAsking the Right Q~.estions.'~
Browne and Keeley
believe that a sine zyxwvu
qua non of critical thinking is a focus on an
evaluation of the link between a claim and the basis for the claim.''
Thus, in their guide to critical thinking, they provide the reader with a
set of questions that he or she should ask when confronted with an
argument. By askingthese questions, the reader is able to evaluate the
argument. By evaluating various arguments on an issue, a reader will
then be able to make a reasoned, tentative decision about an issue.
Thus, using the approach defined by Browne and Keeley, critical
thinking involves learning a set of questions that one can ask in order
to evaluate the quality of arguments. Obviously, not every single
question is relevant to every argument, and part of what the students
learn is how to recognizewhich questions are relevant to the particular
article they are reading.
Premised upon the foregoing understanding of what critical thinking
is and what questions a critical thinker should ask, the next section
details how an environmental law class emphasizing this approach
would be structured.
STRUCTUREOF THECLASS
Students need three Merent materials for a critical thinking
approach to environmental law: a basic text from which they learn the
substantive environmental laws; a critical thinking text, such asAsking
l6 Richard Paul has written 8 books and over 50 articles on issues related to critical
I' ESTERLE zyxwvutsr
& CLURMAN ,supra note 8, at 92.
I* Id. at 91-111.
l9 BROWNE & KEELEY,
supra note 14.
2o ESTERLE& CLURMAN, supra note 8, at 71-89.
thinking.

5. 1998 zyxw
I A Critical ThinkingApproach I z
23
the Right Questions,2' and articles collected from various newspapers
and journals. The need for an environmental law textbook is obvious;
students need someplaceto go for the basic substantivematerial for the
course. The need for a critical zyxw
thinkingtextbook, however, may require
somejustification.
First, students tend to focus on what they believe is important.
Unfortunately, a zyxw
sine qua non of importance seems to be a textbook. If
students are told that critical thinking zyxw
skills are important, but they do
not have a critical thinking textbook,it isvery hard for them to believe
the skills are indeed all that significant.Because most environmental
law textbooks do not include an explicit set of criticalthinkingquestions
as well as a discussion about how to use these questions, it is necessary
for students to learn these questions from a critical thinking text.
These skillsare also difficult for the students to learn, and in someways
it is unfair to expect them to be able to learn these skills without some
reference work that they can study.
Second, many instructors, as well as their students, believe that
students can already"think critically." However,research suggests that
students' critical thinking skills are deficient.22 Therefore, a critical
thinking text that teaches students how and why they should ask
certain critical thinking questions is necessary.
In addition to these two textbooks, the instructor needs to collect
articles from newspapers andjournals. While the environmental law
textbook is necessary for students to learn the substantive material, the
textbook does not provide a multitude of opportunities to practice
critical thinking skills. Instead, most textbooks have a fact-dispensing
tendency. In contrast, newspaper and journal articles emphasize the
disputes and dilemmas that infuse environmental law. Editorials are
particularly good examples to use to develop students' critical thinking
skills. Therefore, the instructor should collect prescriptive articles that
are relevant to the topics that will be discussed in class.
If one is going to approach the class from a critical thinking
perspective, then it is best to introduce the students to these skills up
front. The first day, when students have not read anything in advance
of class, provides an excellent opportunity for discussing what critical zy
'' BROW & KEEKEY, zyxwvutsrq
supm note 14. Other criticalthinking texts that could be used,
although they zyxwvut
are somewhat lengthier, include T. EDWARD DAMER, ATTACKING
FAULTY
REASONING:A PRAcrrcAL GUIDETO FALLACY-FREE
ARGUMENT (1995); [fillin info[.DIANE
HAWERN, THOUGHTAND KNOWLEDGE: AN LNTRODUCTIONTO CRITICALTHINKING (1996);
MARLYS MAYFIELD, THINKING FOR YOURSELF: DEVELQPINGCRITICALTHINKING SKILLS
THROUGH READING AND WRITING (1996).
z
z StuartKeeley,Neil Browne & Jeff Kruetzer A Comparisonof Freshmanand S
e
n
i
o
r
s
on Generaland SpecificEssay T
e
s
t
sofcritical Thinking,
17 RES. IN HIGHER EDUC. 139
(1982) (finding that college seniors rarely identify ambiguities, value assumptions, or
simple reasoning errors).

6. 24 zyxwvuts
I zyxwv
Vol. zyxwvu
16I zyxwv
The zyxwvu
Jourrualzyxwv
of Legal Studies Education
thinking is and why it is important. The instructor should emphasize
that critical thinking zyxwv
will be an integral component of the come;
specifically,he or she should tell students that they will be expected to
use critical thinking skillsin classroom discussions, when completing
writing assignments, and on tests. Unfortunately, students are quite
likely to attend only to information that they believe they will be tested
on. Thus,the studentswill spend time developingtheir critical thinking
skills only when they know that learning critical thinking skills is
imperative for performing well in the class.
On that first day of class, the instructor should go through the steps
of critical thinking using an overhead or PowerPoint presentation,
thereby introducing the students to the following critical thinking
approach before they read the text:
1. What is the issue?
2. What are the reasons and the conclusion?
3. Does the argument contain significant ambiguity?
4. What are the descriptive assumptions?
5. Does the argument contain any faulty analogies?'
6. Are there any errors in reasoning?
a. Confusing what should be with what is.
b. Searching for the perfect solution.
c. Creating a false dilemma.
d. Begging the question.
7. What ethical norms are fundamental to the author's
reasoning?
8. Is there any relevant missing information?23
The instructor should explain to the students that the first
questions-What is the issue? What is the conclusion? What are the
reasons?-are really a prelude to evaluation. These questions are
relevant to every article the students zyxw
w
i
l
l read, because before the
argument can be evaluated, the students must understand what an
argument is.= The issue is the question that the author is addressing,
and the conclusion is the answer to that issue. All reasons support the
conclusion.25
When the instructor introduces these initial critical thinking
questions, he or she will want to give an example of an argument
related to an environmental law issue. For example, the instructor
could offer the followingreasoning structure:
'' This zyxwvutsrq
set of questions is adapted f
r
o
m the set offered in BROWNE & KEELEY, supra
I
' An argument can be defined aa the conclusion and the reasons.
25 See generally B R O W 8 KEELEY, supm note 14. at 13-32.
note 14. This text i
s one example of a very -user fiiendlf critical thinking textbook.

7. 1998 zyxw
I A Critical ThinkingApproach I 25 zy
Issue: Should the Ohio legislature pass a law to make recycling
mandatory? zyxwvu
Conclusion zyxwv
:Yes, the Ohio legislature should pass
a mandatory recycling law. Reason: If people continue to
landfill trash at current rates, Ohio will run out of landfill space
infive years. Forcing everyone to recycle will reduce the demand
for landfill space, thereby allowing us to use our limited landfill
space for a significantly longer amount of time.
The instructor could extend this examination to include student
participation by asking students to draw alternative conclusions and
reasons. The instructor should make surethat the students concentrate
on providing reasons for their conclusion. Although this exercise may
sound very simple, students will probably struggle to provide reasons.
If time allows on this first day of class, students can even read a
simple editorial in class and work in groups to identify the issue,
conclusion, and reasons. See Appendix zyxw
A for a sample editorial you
could use and a sample response. zyxw
As the instructor is explaining the steps of the critical thinking
approach, he or she should point out that the evaluation process really
begins with the third critical thinking question -does the argument
contain any significant ambiguity?The student who engages in critical
thinking will learn to identify ambiguities that affect the reasoning.26
He or she should be able to provide alternative definitions of ambiguous
words or phrases, and show how one interpretation might lead to the
author's conclusion,whereas the other would not. The point here is that
until the reasoningis clarified,eliminatingthe ambiguity, the reasoning
is damaged goods. The instructor could ask students for ambiguous
words in the mandatory recycling argument. For example, "mandatory
recycling"is ambiguous. What materials are includedin the mandatory
recycling? Aluminum? Paper? Chemicals? Plastic? We need to know
what materials are included before we can decidewhether to accept the
reasoning. We may be more likelyto support the mandatory recycling
of certain chemicals but less likely to support the mandatory recycling
of plastic.
The next step in the critical thinking process is to identify any
descriptive assumptions, that is, any unstated beliefs about the world
upon which the reasoning depends.All reasons depend on assumptions,
but the critically thinking student is trained to look for those
assumptions that might be questionable." Obviously, if a reason is
based on a questionable assumption, the reason is not very strong until
the assumption has been persuasively substantiated. Turning back to zy
26 Id. at zyxwvut
35-47.
Id. at 66-74.

8. 26 zyxwvut
I Vol. 16I zyxwv
The zyxwvu
Journal of Legal Studies Education
the recycling example, the instructor could demonstrate that one
assumption about mandatory recycling is that citizens will be willing to
participate. For example, if the enforcement mechanism of the
program is weak, individuals may not fully comply with the program
and the amount of recycled materials will not change.
If the writer of the article uses analogies, the critically thinking
student would evaluate the quality of these analogies.28 This step is
especiallysalient for legal analysis. The reliance on precedent is a form
of argument from the authority of the exemplar analogy. Hence, we
evaluate the reasoning activated by that analogy via an examination of
the strength and relevance of the shared attributes and differences
between the precedent and the fact pattern of the case in question.
The instructor could offer the followinganalogy between mandatory
recycling and speed limits. Because the speed limit is law, people drive
according to the speed limit. Thus, we have reduced the overall
number of car accidents. Similarly, if we make recycling law, people
will obey the law, and we will decrease the overall amount of waste.
The students can identify the similarities and differencesbetween speed
limits and mandatory recycling. For example, one differenceis the ease
of enforcement. Police officers can use radar detectors to identify
individuals who are speeding. How would we enforcerecyclingof paper
inside the home? We would need to greatly increase the number of
waste disposal workers to monitor the trash from each home.
Therefore, because it seems much easier to monitor speed limits, the
analogy is somewhat flawed.
The next question focuses on identifyrng reasoning errors. zyx
A number
of common reasoning errors are discussed in the students’ critical
thinking text.29For example, students learn to distinguish correlation
from causation and to notice false dichotomization. Using the recycling
issue, the instructor can create illustrations of reasoning errors. For
example, one reason for passing a mandatory recyclinglaw is that every
other progressive state has passed such legislation, and we don’tdo not
want our state to be standing alone, as a model of antiquity. The
instructor should point out that this reason really contains two errors.
First, it is an example of the “bandwagon effect,“whereby one tries to
argue that one should do somethingjust because everyone else is doing
it. The mere fact that others are engaging in an activity is not a valid
reason for any individual to engage in that same activity. The reason
also contains loaded language designed to appeal to our emotions
(“progressive,”“modelof antiquity”),not to logic.
Even if the reasoning is sound, the critical thinker may still disagree
with the author’s conclusion if the arguments are premised on a value
28 zyxwvutsrqponmlkjih
Id. zyxwvuts
at zyxwvuts
117.
29 Id. zyxwvuts
at 78-98.

9. 1998 zyxwv
I zyxwvu
A Critical ThinkingApproach zy
I 27 zy
priority that differs from that of the reader.30 In the environmental
area, it is often relatively easy for students to see that value conflicts
underlie a number of issues. Students can recognize,for example, that
a preference for collective responsibility over individual responsibility,
or for public health over economic freedom, may not only have a
significant impact on the author's conclusion,but also on the types of
arguments and evidence the author feels are persuasive. To
demonstrate this critical thinking question, the instructor could show
how someonewho values collective responsibility would be more likely
to support the mandatory recycling law than someone who valued
individual responsibility.
A final critical thinking question to be introduced to the students is
whether there is any omitted inf~rmation.~'
Students can always find
some missing information; what is more important is that they learn to
decide how crucial the missing information is to the validity of the
author's conclusion. They learn, therefore, to not just identify what
information is missing, but to explain how that missing information
could affect their willingness to accept the author's conclusion. The
instructor could ask the students to identify areas of missing
information regarding the mandatory recyclingargument. For example,
who is subject to the recyclinglaw? Everyone? Large corporations? We
might be more likelyto expect large corporationsto recycle allmaterials
while we might be less likelyto expect families to recycle all materials.
What percentage of materials currently going into our landfills are
recyclables? Is there a market for recycled materials? If not, recycling
may not be zyxwvu
as desirable because of the costs to implement the program,
which may be significantlyhigher if there is no market in which to sell
the recycled materials.
If the course is going to take a critical thinking approach, students
need to work on these skills from the outset. Thus, the first day's class
can be reinforcedby assigning the students to read the first half of their
critical thinking textbook before the second class. While this
assignment may sound overwhelming at first, it is not a massive
undertaking, Most supplemental critical thinking textbooks are small
paperbacks, easily read in one sitting. Furthermore, because the
instructor introduced the critical thinking questions and used an
example, such as the mandatory recycling example,the students will be
somewhat familiar with the critical thinking process. Consequently,
they should not be frightened by the assignment. The complete first
assignment would then be to read half the critical thinking textbook,
read the first chapter in their environmental law text, and read an
essay related to an issue addressed in the first chapter of their primary zy
3o Id. at51-65.
Id. at 147-54.

10. 20 zyxwvutsr
I zyxwvutsrqp
Vol. 16I zyxwvuts
The zyxwvu
Journal zyxwv
of Legal Studies Education
text. When reading the essay, students should be required to apply the
rubric they have learned from their critical thinking text, jotting down
for purposes of class discussion the issue, the conclusion, the reasons,
the evidence supporting the reasons, and any problems with the
reasons.
Part of the students’ second reading assignment would be to finish
reading their critical thinking supplement. Every subsequent class
assignment would include textual material and an essay discussing
some controversial issue related to the subject matter in the text.
Beginning with the second class period, a portion of the class
discussion would focus on the issue addressed in the article. zy
This
discussion could incorporate the material from the text as it relates to
the issue in the article, or textual material could be introduced to
providebackground for the issue. During the discussion, students would
evaluate arguments in the article, as well as introduce additional
arguments to try to reach independent conclusions as to how they
believe the issue should be resolved. Thus, the students will be
constantly developing their critical thinking skills, while at the same
time using these skills to better understand environmental issues.
The structure of the class should not always be exactly the same. For
example, sometimes the class discussion can occur in a semi-debate
format with the students being told in advance that they will initially
be asked to present reasoning for one conclusion or another. During the
discussion, students on one side will initially present their arguments,
with the rest of the class having an opportunity to evaluate the quality
of the arguments and the evidence supporting those arguments. The
other side will then take its turn presenting opposing arguments.
For example, ask students on one side of the class to present
arguments for passing legislation to explicitly make CERCLA
retroactive. The remaining students will argue that CERLA should not
be retroactive. zyxwvu
f i r all the arguments are presented, ask the students
to come to a personal conclusion in response to the following question:
should CERCLAbe applied retroactively? The instructor should ask the
students which arguments they found most and least convincing.
To facilitate the development of the students’critical thinking skills,
the instructor can give a number of assignments. The results of these
assignments can then be incorporated into the class discussion, as
explained in the following section.
ASSIGNMENTS TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF
CRITICALTHINKING
As previously mentioned, before a student can critically evaluate, he
or she must be able to identity the parts of the argument, i.e., he or she
must be able to find the issue, conclusion, and reasons. ORen, faculty do

11. 1998 zyxw
I A Critical ThinkingApproach I zy
29 zy
not place enough emphasis on this step, assuming the students already
engage in these steps when they read. A straightforward assignment at
the beginning of the semester can test whether in fact students are able
to identify the structure of an article. Ask students to read a short
editorial related to the substantive material they are reading, and to
identify the issue, conclusion, and reasons. To make sure that they
really understand what the issue, conclusion, and reasons are, they
should express these componentsin their own words, not copyverbatim
from the editorial. Remind them that the issue must be framed as a
question, the conclusion must answer the issue, and all the reasons
must support the conclusion.It is helpfd to emphasize to students that
the issue zyxwvu
will rarely be stated outright in the article; it must usually be
inferred from the conclusion.Again, you could use the sample editorial
in Appendix A to test the students' ability to identify the structure of
the argument.
The instructor should evaluate this initial assignment to make sure
all of the students are able to pull out the structure of an argument.
The students should then be told that whenever they are given an
article to read, they should always go through these steps for purposes
of being able to understand the argument. By the end of the semester,
this process should be automatic. In fact, ideally, any time they are
reading a prescriptive article they will ask these questions.
In examiningthe structure of an argument, students sometimeshave
difficulty to understanding the difference between a reason and
evidence and in knowing when a reason requires support through
evidence. A simple exercise can help them become more aware of the
relationship between the two. Take an issue you are going to be
discussing in class and assign half the students one conclusion and the
other half another conclusion. For example, half of the students could
argue that the Miller bill3' should be accepted to reauthorize the
Endangered Species Act while the other half argues that the
Kempthorne billu should be accepted. zyxw
Ask them to go to the library to
find a piece of evidence that supports zyxw
an argument for their conclusion.
Require them to bring to the next class a statement of their reason for
their conclusion, a description of the evidence they found, and an
explanation of how that evidence supports their reason. They should
also attach a copy of the evidence in whatever source they found it. In
class, then, you can have a much more thorough discussion of the issue
than would have occurred without the students having done some
independent research.
32 H.R. zyxwvu
2531,105th Cong. (1997). See 143 Cong. Rec. E 1595 (1997)for a discussion of
S. 1180,105th Cong. (1997).See 143Cong. Rec. S9422 (1997)for a discussion of the
the introductionof this bill.
introductionof this bill.

12. 30 zyxwvut
I Vol. zyxwvut
16 I zyxwvu
The Journal of Legal Studies Education
To help students understand different reasoning errors have them
write an essay on an environmental issue. Instead of giving strong
arguments to support their conclusion;however, they are to commit as
many reasoning errors as possible. On a separate page, they are to
explain which reasoning errors they committed. When they come to
class with their assignments, have them exchange papers with another
person in the class. Each should take turns identifying the reasoning
errors made by the other. Alternatively, you can give the students an
essay that you have created that contains a number of reasoning errors
that they are to identlfy. See Appendix B for an example.
Prolepsis is a rhetorical strategy that sharpens students’
examination of their own reasoning, while demonstratingrespect forthe
reasoning of those with whom they disagree. It consists of articulating
the arguments for a position one does not hold and then responding to
those arguments in advance of their being raised by adversaries to help
students learn to engage in prolepsis, ask them to take a position on an
issue. Once you have the class divided by their positions, have each
student write a paper in support of the position to which he or she is
opposed. A second prolepsis exercise illustrates to students how their
critical thinking skills enable them to become discriminating readers.
Have the students find two articles that provide strong support for a
position on a topic you are discussing in class and two that are weak.
Require the students to write a short paper explaining why they believe
the firsttwo articles are sound and the other two are weak. zyx
An in-class
exercisethat can be done with these articles is to pair the students and
have them exchange articles to see whether the partner classifies the
articles the same way as the person who originally found them.
It is easiest to work on critical thinking skills when using the essays
because critical thinking is reactive in nature, and we generally use
those skills to evaluate arguments. However, there are some
assignments that students can be given when reading their text that
will help them work on their critical thinking skills. For example,
critical thinking requires that students question rather than merely
absorb. One way to help them become more comfortable with
questioning is to have them rewrite all ofthe headings and subheadings
of the text as questions.
To help them get into the habit of looking for omitted information,
ask them to carefully examine a chapter in their text and zyx
try to identlfy
what kinds of information the authors should have included that would
have made the chapter more complete.
CONCLUSION
By using the foregoingassignments, alongwith classroom discussions
that focus on current environmental issues, students will not only

13. 1998 zyxw
I A Critical ThinkingApproach I zy
31 zy
understand environmental law, but will also develop their critical
thinking skills. This approach will also make the class an exciting one
for the instructor, because student responses are often unpredictable.
But the key rationale for the approach is its vision of a learner, who zy
can
do so much more than mimic a hornbook zyxw
of environmental law. When
we saywe want students to understand the content of our field,we have
in mindthe use of that content to participate in and evaluate reasoned
claims about environmentallaw. Critical thinking can provide a process
that fulfills these aspirations and thereby heightens our sense of
commitment to the very yearnings that were responsible for our choice
of career.

14. 32 zyxwvut
/ Vol. 16 zyxwvu
I zyxw
The zyxwvu
Journal zyxwv
of Legal Studies Education zyx
APPENDMA
Sample Editorial
The time for Congress to act is now. To promote compliance with
environmental regulations, companies must be able to conduct
environmental audits knowing that the information they uncover will
not be used against them. The onlyway they can secure this knowledge
is if they are given an absolute privilege. The way the current EPA
policy now stands, a zyxw
f
i
r
mthat does an environmental audit, reports the
violation, and corrects the deficiency will receive a lesser fine for the
violation than would a iirm that did not discover and report the
violation. However, the EPA or anyone else who tries to sue the
corporation is still entitled to get a copy of the environmental audit
through the discovery process.
Managers are smart. No intelligent manager would dare conduct an
audit because their act of goodwill could be used against zy
him or her.
Why, the manager might zyxwv
as well put on his own handcuffs and lock
himself in prison! Companies know that if they conduct environmental
audits, they will be harmed by the result. zyxw
An absolute privilege is needed. Look at the attorney-client
relationship. If a client does something wrong, an attorney cannot
testifj. against his client. Similarly, the audit should keep the
company’s secrets. The audit is supposed to be used to help the
company instead of hurting it. Just as we hold that the conversations
between a psychiatrist and hispatient are privileged and those between
a lawyer and his client are privileged, so should the environmental
audits be privileged.
The EPA even believes that audits should enjoy an absolute privilege.
A recent survey of EPA inspectors showed that 89% believe that
completing an environmental audit results in greater compliance by
firms. If the EPAbelieves that audits result in greater compliance,why
should we argue? The goal of the environmental audit is to make
companiescomplywith regulations. If we want greater compliancewith
regulations, we should encourage companies to conduct environmental
audits. Companies will conduct audits onlyif the results are privileged.
Congress should listen to the EPA and pass legislation that gives
environmental audits an absolute privilege.
Assignment:
Identify the issue, conclusion, and reason in the above essay.

15. 1998 zyxw
I zyxw
A Critical ThinkingApproach zy
I 3 3
Student Response zyxw
The author of this article addresses the following issue: Should
environmental audits that companies conduct enjoy an absolute
privilege? The author offers the following conclusion: yes, Congress
should pass a bill that gives an absolute privilege for environmental
audits completedby companies. To support this conclusion,the author
provides the followingreasons.
First, the author claimsthat because the EPA can obtaina copy of an
environmental audit in the discovery process of a suit, no intelligent
officer would conduct an environmental audit. Therefore,the author
argues that we shouldgive an absolute privilege to the environmental
audit. Second,the author offers an argument by analogy: the attorney-
client privilege is similar to the audit privilege. Third, the author
claimsthat the EPA supportsgivingenvironmental audits an absolute
privilege. zyxwv
As evidence, the author cites a survey of EPA inspectors,
reporting that 89% believe that completing environmental audits
results in greater compliance.

16. 34 zyxwvuts
I zyxwvu
Vol. 16I zyxwv
The zyxwvu
Journal zyxwv
of Legal Studies Education zyx
APPENDMB
Sample Essay
The acid rain control program is a program that was well intended,
but has been an abysmal failure. As zyxw
w
i
t
h any other failure, it is best to
just admit we were wrong, and end the program before we waste any
more money on it.
The acid rain control program has,been in place now since zy
1990,and
guess what? We stillhave an acid rain problem. If the program hasn’t
been successful in eliminating acid rain by now, it is time to try
something else that has the potential to solve the problem.
We live in a democracy,and as a democracy, the people should have
a say in how their government is run. And people do not want this
program. A recent survey of over 20,000 American Citizens aged 18to
78, with education ranging from the 8th grade to Ph.Ds, living in every
state of the Union, revealed that only 3%listed acid rain as one of the
five major environmental problems facing the United States today, and
not a single person listed acid rain as the single most important
problem facing us today. Thus, it is clear that the American people do
not want this program.
The only ones who really want this program are the economists. And
we a
l
l know what economiststhink about the environment- they don’t.
It figures that the only supporters of this program would be a group of
professionals who see everything only in terms of money, and who
therefore have no appreciation of environmental or aesthetic values.
Please join with those of us who are genuinely concerned about the
quality of the environment and want to replace the Acid Rain Control
Program with a more effectiveprogram that zyxw
will eliminate the acid rain
problem before it is too late. Write your representatives in Washington
and tell them that “enough is enough.” We want an end to the Acid
Rain Control Program now!
Assignment:
Identify the issue, conclusion, and reason in the above essay.
Sample of a good student response
The conclusion of the article is the following:We should end the acid
rain control program. This conclusion is in response to the following
issue: Shouldwe continue funding the Acid Rain Control Program? The
author provides several reasons to support this conclusion, and I will
now address those reasons.

17. 1998 zyxw
I A Critical zyx
ThinkingApproach I 35 zy
First,the author argues that we stillhave zyx
an acid rain problem, and
the program has been in place since 1990. We have not solved the
problem of acidrain; therefore, we should end the program. Thisreason
is problematic because the author ignores the fact that the program
might have lowered the acid rain problem. She seems to be searching
for a perfect solution to the acid rain problem. However,we might not
ever be able to completely eradicate the acid rain problem. She
considers no evidenceabout the effectivenessoftheprogram (i.e., are we
reducing the amount of acid rain?). Therefore, because the author is
searching for a perfect solution to the acid rain problem, we should
reject the reason.
The second reason the author offers is the following: the American
people do not want the program. Because we live in a democracy, we
should listen to the people and end the program. This reason is
problematic for several reasons. F’irst, the author commits a fallacy by
arguing that we should do whatever the “people” want. Instead of
evaluating the merits of the program, she tries to convince us that
simply because the people want something, we should comply. The
popularity of an idea is not a good criterion forjudging the worth of the
acid rain controlprogram. Instead, we should look at the effectiveness
of the program. Thus, we should reject this reason. However, to be fair
to the author, we need to consider the evidence that she offers for this
reason. She provides a survey of 20,000 American citizens. Only 3%
listed acid rain as one of the five major environmental problems.
However, are these citizens educated about the problem of acid rain?
Are they educated enough about environmental problems? The author
states that citizenshad educations rangingfrom the 8thgrade to Ph.Ds;
yet, we do not know how many people with Ph.D’s participated in this
survey. We don’t know enough about the sample to be convinced that
it is representative. Even if someoneis highly educated,he or she may
not be educated about environmental problems. I would be more
persuaded if these results came from a survey of environmental experts.
Yet, even if acid rain is not one of the top five environmental problems,
perhaps its effeds are severe enoughthat we should be concerned zy
- even
if we are more concerned with other environmental problems. The
survey question really does not address the author‘s issue. Evidence
that people do not think that acidrainis one of our worst problems does
not tell us anything about whether people support the Acid rain
program. Therefore, I am convinced the evidence is flawed; thus, the
reason is not supported.
The third reason the author provides is the following:economistsare
the only people who want the acid rain control program. The author
claims that economists aren’t genuinely concerned about the
environment, so we should not be persuaded by their support of the

18. 36 zyxwvut
I zyxwv
Vol. 16I zyxwv
The zyxwvu
Journal ofLegal Studies Education
ARCP. Therefore,we shouldend the program. In this line of reasoning,
the author is attacking economists rather than the acid rain control
program. She claimsthat they do not care about the environment, but
she offers no evidenceto support zyxw
thisclaim. Furthermore, she does not
address the fact that maybe we should be concerned with financial
issues.
Finally,the author suggeststhat people who are generallyconcerned
about the environment want the acid rain control program to end.
However, she never offers any reasons why being generally concerned
aboutthe environmentleadsto the conclusionthat program shouldend.
People who support the acid rain control program may be genuinely
concerned about the environment. She seems to be engaging in name
calling. Consequently,we should not be persuaded by the reason.
In conclusion, because the author has offered no good reasons in
support of her conclusionthat the acidrain control program should end,
we are forced to reject her argument.