This presentation formed part of the HEA-funded workshop 'Critical thinking in action: developing analytical skills in Criminology students. An experiential learning approach' The workshop presented research and facilitated discussion on developing critical thinking skills in criminology students. Discussion of research results and use of a case study approach to teaching and learning highlighted how student views/concerns about their failure in developing critical thinking skills can be addressed via new directions in teaching. This presentation forms part of a blog post which can be accessed via: For further details of HEA Social Sciences work relating to active and experiential learning please see: http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/resources/detail/disciplines/Soc_Sci/Strategic_2013/ActiveandExperiential

1. HEA Critical Thinking Workshop
Postgraduate Course Feedback
Middlesex University
27 November 2013

2. Developing Critical Thinking
Postgraduate Course the teaching of analytical
Student Perspectives on Feedback
thinking and (socio-legal) problem solving skills: a
research discussion
Dr Angus Nurse
Email – a.nurse@mdx.ac.uk

3. Background to the Research – How
is Critical Thinking Taught?
• Academic and student views of critical/analytical
thinking: gaps in perspective
• Critical Thinking Research: students may not be
developing the skills that teachers think they are
• Collaboration, motivation, innovation: student
views, preferences and information to develop
effective strategies

4. Research Questions
• What is critical thinking and how is it taught
or developed (initially) in Law Schools?
• How do students develop their critical
thinking skills?
• How do students think they should be
taught these skills and what assistance or
materials do they need to develop them?

5. What is Critical
Thinking?
The Delphi Experts (1990) defined Critical Thinking
as:
“purposeful, self-regulatory judgment which
results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and
inference, as
well as explanation of the
evidential, conceptual, methodological,
criteriological, or contextual considerations
upon which that
judgment is based.”

6. The Research Stages
• Overview of previous
research on Critical
Thinking
• Questionnaire to all first
and second year law
undergraduates (May and
June 2009)
• Two Focus
Groups/Workshops in
June 2009
• Publication of interim
research report and
recommendations
(July/August 2009)
Slide 6
28/11/13
• Presentation of initial
results and staff
discussions - LILAC 2010
(Jan 2010)
• Further literature review
• Group discussions with 3rd
Year criminology/CI
students October ‘11-April
‘12 further staff discussion
• Environmental Justice and
Green Criminology case
study/workshop - 2012/13
• Student EJGC feedback case studies May 2013

7. Teaching Critical Thinking
• The Development of critical thinking skills
requires:
• dedicated effort with this in mind
• reflection on thinking skills, practice and
procedures, not subject specific content
• similar effort and formal training to the
development of research students

8. Teaching Critical Thinking
Slide 8
28/11/13

9. Teaching Critical Thinking
• ‘If we want our students to become good reasoners, we
must become concerned to help them begin to notice the
inferences they are making, the assumptions they are
basing those inferences on, and the point of view about the
world they are taking – hence the systems in which they are
thinking. To help our students do this, we need to give them
clear examples of simple cases, and lots and lots of practice
analyzing and reconstructing them.’
(Paul, 1993
Slide 9
28/11/13

10. Student problems in applying critical/analytical
thinking skills
• What are the main problems that students
have in answering problem-type questions
or applying critical or analytical thinking
skills?
• Discussion

11. Research Results
Student Comments:
• Lectures generally aren’t useful unless they have an interactive element.
• [Students] whinge about skills teaching but if you give them a choice on
learning the skills and having practical skills most students would
welcome it as an addition to the pure academic consideration.
• Teaching viewed as non-essential to passing the degree or preparing
students so that they could actually go and do a job tends to be avoided
by students; why turn up if its clear you don’t need to and can pass
anyway?
• There needs to be more practical application; you should be taught how
to read cases, analyse policy documents etc. If student essays are good
but they’re not analysing, evaluating etc. this should be flagged up so
that the student is given the skills you need.
• Low take up on electives demonstrates the popularity of lecturers but not
their personality, their ability to teach the material and help students learn
the material.

12. Teaching Critical Thinking
– student comments
• Students do not agree that this is achieved
through ‘traditional’ teaching
• lectures seen as ‘delivery mechanism’,
informative but outmoded
• teaching may not reflect their needs in absorbing
information
• teaching methods and perceived value impacts
on attendance

13. Student Views – Developing Skills
• Practical Simulated Learning – e.g. clinics, practical case work,
workshops highly valued
• Longer in-depth work aids understanding
• Collaborative working through workshops and exploration of faulty
reasoning and processes necessary?
• Reflective practices and not just right or wrong answers.

14. Student Views: Some
Desirable Elements…
• Analysis of how ‘correct’ reasoning is arrived at
• Discussion of elements in faulty reasoning and steps leading up to
incorrect conclusions
• Workshop discussion of flawed cases, common errors and
misconceptions
• Analysis of areas of dispute/conflict between professionals, text book
authors - the ‘what if’s’
• Techniques for evaluating evidence and detail so that conclusions can
withstand scrutiny

15. Student Views – Developing
Skills
•
Greater emphasis on practical work required
•
Move away from teacher led instruction to
student centred learning
•
The ‘how’ of analytical/critical thinking rather
than just subject specific analysis.
•
Motivation is improved when reasoning is
explained, developed and understood.

16. Student Views – Developing
Skills
•
Practical Simulated Learning – e.g. clinics,
practical case work, workshops highly valued
•
Longer in-depth work aids understanding
•
Collaborative working through workshops and
exploration of faulty reasoning and processes
necessary?
•
Reflective practices and not just right or wrong
answers.

17. Student Views: Some Desirable
Elements…
•
Analysis of how ‘correct’ reasoning is arrived at
•
Discussion of elements in faulty reasoning and steps
leading up to incorrect conclusions
•
Workshop discussion of flawed cases, common errors
and misconceptions
•
Analysis of areas of dispute/conflict between
professionals, text book authors - the ‘what if’s’
•
Techniques for evaluating evidence and detail so that
conclusions can withstand scrutiny

18. Options for teaching Critical
Thinking/Problem solving
•
•
•
•
•
A dedicated separate module
Practical Case Workshops/use of real case
examples
Lectures on solving legal/policy problems
Seminars that explore problem solving
techniques
Clinical Education or Simulated Learning
Other experiential learning?

19. Discussion:

20. Research Contact
• Dr Angus Nurse
WG27 School of Law
Email –
a.nurse@mdx.ac.uk
• Office Hours:
Tuesday 11 – 1pm
Thursday 11.30 – 1.30pm