Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
SlideShare a Scribd company logo

Critical Thinking 2011

•Download as PPT, PDF•
•

Introduction to critical thinking that discusses open-eyes & open-mind matrix and staged appreciation.

1 of 21
Critical Thinking: Thinking reflexively about a ‘Problem Situation’ Lorraine Dodd [email_address] Ext.5274 © Cranfield University 2011
Critical Thinking: what is it and are we doing it? John Chaffee (2004) Thinking Critically , Wadsworth Press Thinking critically involves thinking for ourselves and carefully examining the way that we make sense of the world. Creative Thinking involves developing ideas that are unique useful and worthy of further elaboration. Systems Thinking is about seeing things from different viewpoints with multiple perspective lenses.
Cuban missile crisis (1962) 6 th Sept: Soviet Union puts missiles secretly into Cuba. 14 th Oct: US U2 flight over Cuba makes discovery. 16 th Oct: Kennedy establishes Exec Committee. 17 th Oct: more IMINT 30+ long-range missiles. Intelligence assessment: many ready to fire in one week. 18 th Oct: what courses of action would you advise? 21 st Oct: missiles are camouflaged. 23 rd Oct: US photo evidence presented at UN. 24 th Oct: Khrushchev orders full alert.
Six Questions for Effective Thinking [“IDEALS” Peter Facione: Critical Thinking] Identify the problem. What’s the real question we’re facing here? Define the context What are the facts and circumstances that frame this problem? Enumerate choices What are our most plausible three or four options? Analyze options What is our best course of action, all things considered? List reasons explicitly Exactly why we are making this choice rather than another? Self-correct Okay, let’s look at it again. What did we miss?
Cuban missile crisis Exec Committee estimates & options Courses of action: Do nothing (more INT + going to UN); Issue warnings; Quarantine / blockade around Cuba; Surprise air-strike now; Surgical air-strike*; Follow-up invasion. Two key teams advocating preferred option(s). * Plans called for an initial attack (500 sorties) striking all military targets, including missile sites, airfields, ports and gun emplacements and all could be ready to go by 23 rd October.
Cuban missile crisis Exec Committee Ways of working and thinking Kennedy does not attend Team sessions 19 th Oct (at 21.15) Teams present options: Strikes versus blockade. Kennedy raises many probing questions. Sends all back to deliberate further. Teams agree a way of working: Recommendations, outline for President’s speech to the nation and develop whole course of action; Exchange papers and each team dissect and criticize the other, then return notes to original with need to develop further answers. 21 st Oct (at 14.30): White House meeting Newcomer option: US offer to withdraw missiles in Europe. President’s speech postponed from 22 nd to 23 rd Oct. Decision made by Kennedy at 17.30
Ways of thinking Creatively Openly Appreciatively Reflexively Convergently Divergently Analytically All combine to support you as you think through your estimates and as such then critical thinking allows you to assess which type of thinking best suits the overall situation.
foreseen unforeseen non- creative creative small world big world transitional through education If in doubt go back to using SOPs Critical quality self-reflective vantage point ?
Recent work on “Cognitive Fitness”: thinking skills
What are your thoughts so far….? If everybody is thinking alike,  then somebody isn't thinking. General Jan Smuts one-time terrorist
Open-eyes / open-mind matrix closed eyes open eyes closed mind open mind
Closed-to-open sensing and sense-making
zero surprise Surprise Belief and Surprise (cf GLS Shackle) maximum surprise maximum surprise Belief Function Future outcome Belief Region of Possibility Imaginable futures Open mind
Simple starting steps Step One to acknowledge that the customary starting point is: What do we want/have to do? How can/might we do it? Step Two sketches the open-eyes/open-mind matrix which immediately gives people pause and very quickly the comfort of a framework for their thinking. Step Three encourages reflections on decisions taken in each of the eyes/mind states and draws out stories about choices made or not made.
Approach to thinking is moving … …away from ….towards objective and normative analyses single viewpoint fixed templates probability trend prediction solely advocacy time subjectively sensed appreciations multiple viewpoints adaptive framing possibility open imagination balance with inquiry timing
Options funnel: imagined deemed possible potential imaginable options without prejudice desirable options possible options available options performable options required options obligated options permitted options achievable options do-able options
Choice-making Comfort of closed eyes and minds relates to a restrained safe set of options, which may be due to: institutional pressures to conform (e.g. blame culture); lack of confidence in people to allow discretionary trust, etc. Understand where people are in terms of their ranges of options. What might be the implications of painting others or yourself into a corner? Encourage use of narrative and imagination in order to create new options (e.g. creating ‘hedging’ options to deal with ambiguity). Opening options will then naturally extend sense-making. Acknowledging and avoiding pacific shrimp syndrome.
Staged appreciation Where people are Sense-making: open-eyes/open-mind Belief / surprise Choice-making Focus function and preference Diverse viewpoints and multi-perspectives
Summary questions Adopting a self-critical standpoint, taking a broader systems view and creating novel options moves analysts closer to decision-makers. Do we need to have more adaptive HQ structures, functions and processes? A command team or organisation that adopts critical thinking is more likely to inspect its own preferences, beliefs and frameworks rather than simply focus on action options. How challenging do you think this is to current practice? Critical thinking provides us with practical approaches for considering our own/others’ perspectives and acknowledging unknowns before embarking on solutions. Does this present a paradox for assessment and military leadership?
What do you think
Facione, P. (2010) THINK_Critically, Pearson Education. Kitchener, K. and King, L, (1994). Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Mathieson, G.L. Complex Adaptive Reflective Systems . Unpublished. Mitroff, I. and Linstone, H. (1993). The Unbounded Mind: breaking the chains of traditional business thinking, Oxford: Oxford University Press. O’Connor, J. and McDermott, I. (1997). The Art of Systems Thinking . Harper Collins. Seddon, J. (2008). Systems Thinking in the Public Sector. Axminster, Triarchy Press. Senge, Peter. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: the Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation . New York, Doubleday. References

More Related Content

Critical Thinking 2011

  • 1. Critical Thinking: Thinking reflexively about a ‘Problem Situation’ Lorraine Dodd [email_address] Ext.5274 © Cranfield University 2011
  • 2. Critical Thinking: what is it and are we doing it? John Chaffee (2004) Thinking Critically , Wadsworth Press Thinking critically involves thinking for ourselves and carefully examining the way that we make sense of the world. Creative Thinking involves developing ideas that are unique useful and worthy of further elaboration. Systems Thinking is about seeing things from different viewpoints with multiple perspective lenses.
  • 3. Cuban missile crisis (1962) 6 th Sept: Soviet Union puts missiles secretly into Cuba. 14 th Oct: US U2 flight over Cuba makes discovery. 16 th Oct: Kennedy establishes Exec Committee. 17 th Oct: more IMINT 30+ long-range missiles. Intelligence assessment: many ready to fire in one week. 18 th Oct: what courses of action would you advise? 21 st Oct: missiles are camouflaged. 23 rd Oct: US photo evidence presented at UN. 24 th Oct: Khrushchev orders full alert.
  • 4. Six Questions for Effective Thinking [“IDEALS” Peter Facione: Critical Thinking] Identify the problem. What’s the real question we’re facing here? Define the context What are the facts and circumstances that frame this problem? Enumerate choices What are our most plausible three or four options? Analyze options What is our best course of action, all things considered? List reasons explicitly Exactly why we are making this choice rather than another? Self-correct Okay, let’s look at it again. What did we miss?
  • 5. Cuban missile crisis Exec Committee estimates & options Courses of action: Do nothing (more INT + going to UN); Issue warnings; Quarantine / blockade around Cuba; Surprise air-strike now; Surgical air-strike*; Follow-up invasion. Two key teams advocating preferred option(s). * Plans called for an initial attack (500 sorties) striking all military targets, including missile sites, airfields, ports and gun emplacements and all could be ready to go by 23 rd October.
  • 6. Cuban missile crisis Exec Committee Ways of working and thinking Kennedy does not attend Team sessions 19 th Oct (at 21.15) Teams present options: Strikes versus blockade. Kennedy raises many probing questions. Sends all back to deliberate further. Teams agree a way of working: Recommendations, outline for President’s speech to the nation and develop whole course of action; Exchange papers and each team dissect and criticize the other, then return notes to original with need to develop further answers. 21 st Oct (at 14.30): White House meeting Newcomer option: US offer to withdraw missiles in Europe. President’s speech postponed from 22 nd to 23 rd Oct. Decision made by Kennedy at 17.30
  • 7. Ways of thinking Creatively Openly Appreciatively Reflexively Convergently Divergently Analytically All combine to support you as you think through your estimates and as such then critical thinking allows you to assess which type of thinking best suits the overall situation.
  • 8. foreseen unforeseen non- creative creative small world big world transitional through education If in doubt go back to using SOPs Critical quality self-reflective vantage point ?
  • 9. Recent work on “Cognitive Fitness”: thinking skills
  • 10. What are your thoughts so far….? If everybody is thinking alike,  then somebody isn't thinking. General Jan Smuts one-time terrorist
  • 11. Open-eyes / open-mind matrix closed eyes open eyes closed mind open mind
  • 13. zero surprise Surprise Belief and Surprise (cf GLS Shackle) maximum surprise maximum surprise Belief Function Future outcome Belief Region of Possibility Imaginable futures Open mind
  • 14. Simple starting steps Step One to acknowledge that the customary starting point is: What do we want/have to do? How can/might we do it? Step Two sketches the open-eyes/open-mind matrix which immediately gives people pause and very quickly the comfort of a framework for their thinking. Step Three encourages reflections on decisions taken in each of the eyes/mind states and draws out stories about choices made or not made.
  • 15. Approach to thinking is moving … …away from ….towards objective and normative analyses single viewpoint fixed templates probability trend prediction solely advocacy time subjectively sensed appreciations multiple viewpoints adaptive framing possibility open imagination balance with inquiry timing
  • 16. Options funnel: imagined deemed possible potential imaginable options without prejudice desirable options possible options available options performable options required options obligated options permitted options achievable options do-able options
  • 17. Choice-making Comfort of closed eyes and minds relates to a restrained safe set of options, which may be due to: institutional pressures to conform (e.g. blame culture); lack of confidence in people to allow discretionary trust, etc. Understand where people are in terms of their ranges of options. What might be the implications of painting others or yourself into a corner? Encourage use of narrative and imagination in order to create new options (e.g. creating ‘hedging’ options to deal with ambiguity). Opening options will then naturally extend sense-making. Acknowledging and avoiding pacific shrimp syndrome.
  • 18. Staged appreciation Where people are Sense-making: open-eyes/open-mind Belief / surprise Choice-making Focus function and preference Diverse viewpoints and multi-perspectives
  • 19. Summary questions Adopting a self-critical standpoint, taking a broader systems view and creating novel options moves analysts closer to decision-makers. Do we need to have more adaptive HQ structures, functions and processes? A command team or organisation that adopts critical thinking is more likely to inspect its own preferences, beliefs and frameworks rather than simply focus on action options. How challenging do you think this is to current practice? Critical thinking provides us with practical approaches for considering our own/others’ perspectives and acknowledging unknowns before embarking on solutions. Does this present a paradox for assessment and military leadership?
  • 20. What do you think
  • 21. Facione, P. (2010) THINK_Critically, Pearson Education. Kitchener, K. and King, L, (1994). Developing Reflective Judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Mathieson, G.L. Complex Adaptive Reflective Systems . Unpublished. Mitroff, I. and Linstone, H. (1993). The Unbounded Mind: breaking the chains of traditional business thinking, Oxford: Oxford University Press. O’Connor, J. and McDermott, I. (1997). The Art of Systems Thinking . Harper Collins. Seddon, J. (2008). Systems Thinking in the Public Sector. Axminster, Triarchy Press. Senge, Peter. (1990). The Fifth Discipline: the Art and Practice of the Learning Organisation . New York, Doubleday. References

Editor's Notes

  1. The figure shows the relationship between belief and surprise according to GLS Shackle's work in economic expectation and "un-knowledge". If we take any one of the attributes being used to appraise situational events then there is usually a subjective belief about the likelihood of the attribute assuming a particular value (see belief function in light-blue). Such belief-related likelihoods are called clamped likelihoods and are generally representative of a closed-mind approach. Inversely-related to the belief function then is a function of surprise (see dotted orange U-shaped function) such that the value of the attribute that has zero surprise corresponds to the value of maximum clamped likelihood and maximum surprise occurs where there is a belief that such extreme values of the attribute will not be seen at all. It may be objectively feasible, however, for the attribute to adopt such extreme values and so we introduce the notion of free likelihood that represents the range of potentially-feasible attribute values and (as depicted by the blue line-graph) usually assumes equal likelihood across the range of possible values. (This need not always be a uniform distribution as shown but could be any distribution that represents the degrees of possibility.) Clamped likelihoods are used formally to represent closed-minds in the sense that likelihood estimates for the attribute values will be calculated according to a known probability distribution (or model) that has an expected value (i.e. mean  ) and a (stable) variance. Free likelihood is used formally to represent an open-mind that is willing to consider possibility as well as probability. Closed-eyes and open-eyes is a simple registration of the ranges of attribute vales that are scan-able due to either physical/technical sensing limitations or due to psychological blinds that may be raised to conform with the state of mind.