Critical Thinking

Over the ten years that I’ve been teaching in nursing programs, I’ve observed variations in the ability of students to think critically. Some seem to come by it naturally and others struggle to demonstrate progress in this area. Critical thinking is a core competency in the analytic rubric for the program, yet I don’t think there is enough direct instruction paid to this important area. The requirements are vague and not always consistent across different areas of the program. In LRNT 502, a resource was provided for us that I feel is an excellent guideline for understanding and promoting critical thinking skills. Linda Elder and Richard Paul define critical thinking as “the ability and disposition to improve one’s thinking by systematically subjecting it to intellectual self-assessment” (para. 5). They believe that in order for a person to think critically, they need to be able to demonstrate this ability and disposition in most areas of their life, not just one dimension. I think this is a missing piece within my program; stepping back from the profession and looking at other areas of life to demonstrate critical thinking. The authors present a stage theory for the development of critical thinking consisting of six stages ranging from “The Unreflective Thinker” to “The Accomplished Thinker” with defining features and implications for teaching in the various stages. A key message that I took away from this resource is “that significant gains in the intellectual quality of student work will not be achieved except to the degree that teachers recognize that skilled critical thinking develops, only when properly cultivated, and only through predictable stages” (para. 1).

Resource:

Elder, L. & Paul, R. (1996) Critical thinking development: A stage theory. Retrieved from The Critical Thinking Web site: http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/critical-thinking-development-a-stage-theory/483

Formulating a Research Question

The terms and concepts that I’m most familiar with regarding research seem to stem from the quantitative approach—statistics, cause and effect, control groups, etc. I’m not exactly sure why this is because healthcare and education (the two fields that apply to me) both utilize qualitative as well as quantitative research.

In preparing for the next assignment in LRNT 502, I came across a resource that I found helpful in differentiating between research questions from the two different approaches. In quantitative research, the researcher poses a research question, a hypotheses or an objective to provide a focus for the research (Creswell, 2008). This is the method that I would describe if I had to explain the research process. I didn’t realize that the qualitative approach to research was different. In qualitative research, there are only research questions, no hypotheses or objectives. The research stems from one or two broad questions, referred to as central questions, and then five to seven subquestions for each central question provide the focus for qualitative research. In quantitative research, the research question or hypotheses is fixed, whereas in qualitative research, the questions are not static; they are guidelines and expected to change as the research evolves. Qualitative research questions often begin with how or what and uses exploratory verbs such as discover, explore, and describe the experience in order to present “an open and emerging design” (Creswell, 2008, p. 130).

Resources:

Creswell, J. W. (2008). Research question and hypotheses. In Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed method approaches. (3^rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. Retrieved from http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/22782_Chapter_7.pdf

Blogging and Research

A scholarly practitioner is described as “someone who mediates between her professional practice and the universe of scholarly, scientific, and academic knowledge and discourse  . . . that is, someone who is continually integrating professional practice and research” (Bentz & Shapiro, 1998, p. 66). Bentz and Shapiro (1998) indicate that the first step to becoming a scholarly practitioner is to get involved with research—asking questions, reading current and classic research, and articulating your interests in research. In recent years, blogging has become a rich resource for topics and discussion around research. I have been pleasantly surprised at the ease of reading research blogs in that the tone tends to be more casual and conversation-like.

Blogging allows academics and researchers a public or private platform to accomplish a variety of things. Terese Bird encourages researchers to jump in and get started with blogging and experience the possibilities such as: motivation and progress tracking; research diary; publicity; practice for career; academic networking; social networking; discussion; and digital profile/CV building.

Heide Estes uses her blog as a way to work through issues that arise from her academic work and also how she perceives a non-visible chronic illness impacts her academic identity. I couldn’t find a clear definition of academic identity (on her blog or elsewhere) but I believe it is an individual’s view of themselves as an academic and how they want to be perceived by others (students, colleagues, superiors, etc.).  I felt it was an appropriate way for her to bring attention to this issue of hidden disability for herself and for the population as a whole.

Resources:

Bentz, V. M. & Shaprio, J. J. (1998). Mindful inquiry in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.

Bird, T. (2011). Blogging for researchers [Slide share]. Retrieved from http://www.slideshare.net/tbirdcymru/blogging-for-researchers

Estes, H. (2012). Blogging and academic identity. Literature Compass, 9(12), 974-982. DOI: 10.1111/lic3.12017

Who Am I?

Bentz and Shapiro (1998) state that the process of becoming a researcher “can seem mysterious, mystifying, intimidating, or overwhelming, and can awaken feelings of insecurity, self-doubt, ignorance, inadequate preparation, and anxiety” (p. 162). Check, check, and check. I am ankle-deep in a sea of information, much of which is new to me. Bentz and Shapiro (1998) advocate the need to be centered, grounded, in research and the research process. Mindful Inquiry is presented by Bentz and Shapiro (1998) as a strategy to cope with the massive amount of information available in an advanced industrial society. A key component is the centering of research in yourself; that is, the research should stem from the researcher’s life and lifeworld. Awareness and reflection of our world should impact the intellectual awareness and reflection in our research and vice versa. From this perspective, the best place for me to start is with myself and to articulate who I am.

At first, I described myself as a wife, mother, daughter, sister, RN, educator, writer, cook, photographer, traveller, coffee, dog and outdoor-lover. I could go on with descriptors, but what does it all mean? These labels describe what I am but who am I? What is my sense of self? A balanced life is very important to me and something I’ve struggled with my whole career—the need to take care of myself so that I can take care of others. I am a fixer. I work too much sometimes, and have lost the ability to relax. I want to make a positive difference and valuable contributions to the lives of my family, patients, students, and peers. I need to feel challenged and that there is a purpose to the work that I do. I watched my dad struggle and succumb to Parkinson’s disease and dementia; my twin daughters were born prematurely and have long-term complications resulting from that; I work in a professional field that is physically and mentally exhausting, where suffering is a common plight that can’t always be fixed.  These events have impacted me, shaped me, given me a completely different perspective, a different worldview.

References: Bentz, V. M. & Shapiro, J. J. (1998). Mindful inquiry in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications

The First Steps

June 25, 2015

The first leg of this learning journey into research has stirred up feelings of apprehension and excitement all at the same time. I have had very little exposure to true research, with the bulk of it being from a quantitative approach, and although I knew I was a novice in the arena of research, I only now realize how little I really know. The learning curve is steep.

There have been experiences that I’ve documented with students, that I believe would fall into the ethnography tradition; had I known better at the time, I could have possibly approached the activities as  research projects. My employer encourages faculty to participate in research but I’ve never known where to even start.

Bentz & Shapiro (1998) in their book, Mindful Inquiry in Social Research, provide a compelling read for the beginner researcher. I was intrigued and pleasantly surprised by the personal nature of their writing and was startled (again, pleasantly) at the inclusion of a spiritual tradition (Buddhism) in their philosophy of research. Maybe this is common, but I wasn’t aware of it and it adds such a unique but important dimension. The authors advocate for the researcher to put themselves at the center of their research and ask detailed personal questions in order to find the appropriate research approach. I am interested to see what my own answers are to some of these questions and will dig into this as the weeks progress.

Resources: Bentz, V. M. & Shapiro, J. J. (1998). Mindful inquiry in social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.