Productive thinking	181

•engaging students in dealing with tasks that call for reasoned judgment or assessment

•helping them to develop intellectual resources for dealing with these tasks

•providing an environment in which critical thinking is valued and students are encouraged to engage in critical discussion.

Bailin is, as we have seen, opposed to the teaching of critical thinking skills or processes and sees only limited value in developing strategies and heuristics. However, she also warns against assuming that the highly contextualised nature of critical thinking means that it will automatically be developed through immersion in a subject. There is a need for an explicit pedagogy for critical thinking, particularly given the nature of subjects as conceived within the typical school curriculum, which are not necessarily synonymous with the traditions of enquiry that support the development of critical practices.

Evaluation

Bailin locates her work in the field of critical and creative thinking and seeks to show where existing approaches have strengths and limitations. She follows other writers in distinguishing between knowledge, concepts, strategies and dispositions (habits of mind). Her easily understandable framework can be usefully compared to the more detailed work of Paul (Paul, 1993). What is distinctive about Bailin’s contribution is the emphasis she places on critical thinking as induction into cultural, critical practices and traditions of enquiry. She takes account of the cognitive, affective and conative aspects of critical thinking and provides detailed accounts of the first two but does not develop the idea of how to engage learners in critical thinking in any depth. There is a suggestion that critical thinking is a cultural phenomenon that can engage learners from their early years, so it is a question of their becoming more conscious and effective in its use. Bailin’s analysis of the current situation regarding critical thinking (at least in the USA and Canada) is coherent and persuasive and she offers some suggestions for establishing appropriate pedagogy for critical thinking.

In Bailin’s writing it is sometimes difficult to distinguish between the components of critical thinking and what others might simply describe

182 Frameworks for Thinking

as a liberal education. This is particularly evident in the list of intellectual resources, which can be seen as extremely general and hard to operationalise. Bailin is not, however, alone in exhibiting this tendency and it would seem to be the case that those writers who position themselves at the philosophical, normative end of the critical thinking spectrum avoid what they see to be the pitfalls of a skills-based approach by losing the specificity of what the teacher should instil or develop in learners. When Bailin does offer more focused advice and recommendations, the distinction between intellectual resources and what other writers would call skills or mental abilities begins to be eroded.

Bailin’s framework/model relies on concepts such as strategies and dispositions which can be reified just as much as those which she criticises so strongly (thinking skills, processes and procedures). It is therefore unlikely to resolve what is often a sterile philosophical debate regarding the existence of generalisable critical thinking skills. However, teachers may find her framework helpful when thinking about how to provide experiences and guidance that can promote critical thinking and as a stimulus for their own pedagogical enquiry.

Bailin’s writing is clear and accessible but does assume prior knowledge of approaches to critical thinking. Unfortunately, the practical examples she herself offers (such as the lesson on logging in British Columbia in Bailin et al., 1999b) fall somewhat short of the vision outlined elsewhere in her writing.

Summary: Bailin

		Relevance for
Purpose and structure	Some key features	teachers and learning
Main purpose(s):	Terminology:	Intended audience:
• to provide greater	• assumes prior	•	educators
conceptual clarity so that	knowledge of existing	•	policy makers
educators can make	approaches to
informed choices and	critical thinking
develop an appropriate
pedagogy for critical
thinking