At family reunions or other gatherings—like over the Holidays—my family has a rule: No politics.We generally try to avoid topics that might cause disagreements. You and your family might thrive on lively debates.This same colour coding approach to differentiate between Bloom level I and II thinking can be applied to further differentiate analysis, synthesis and evaluation in level II, by using different colours.
Available at Over many years I have seen hundreds of examples of nursing curricula and syllabi that include outcomes related to critical thinking.
Such thinking is usually evaluated or measured by its presence in academic writing.
For example, if (Curtin, 2007) was used to support a statement, from inspection it can be seen that the Curtin article has a low level of evidence, so any claims, assertions, ideas or arguments made that were supported by Curtin's article would be evaluated accordingly.
If we consider the essential dimensions of any piece of academic writing, be it a discussion post or a paper, there seem to be at least 4 vectors, whose resultant space contains the piece in Figure 2.
When a writer takes their own experience and blends it with supporting primary source articles, and generates a new idea or potential application, it is an example of synthesis.
When writers evaluate the primary sources that they use to substantiate their writing, or when they self-assess the level and quality of their writing, those would be examples of evaluation.Here’s a quick summary: Hopefully, this article provides some useful guidance regarding confirmation bias and how to avoid it.We’ll probably never be able to convince your Uncle Fred to change his mind, but we just might be able to help you develop more effective learning programs. Online Journal of Nursing Informatics (OJNI), 19(3). Extracting Meaning in Support of Critical Thinking and Writing.(NOTE: Each chapter concludes with a Some Outcomes section and Exercises.) 1. Deeper, More Pervasive Impediments to Critical Thinking. The Experience of Learning to Think Things Through. Have you ever experienced a situation in which your debate partner just would not…could not…be moved by any degree of evidence, reasoning, or facts? In such a situation, your debate partner might be exhibiting confirmation bias.Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek out information that confirms one’s preexisting conclusions.For example, if the conclusion is, “The sky is blue.” The brain will more easily and more vividly recall information that confirms that conclusion, such as gazing into the sky on a sunny day, over sitting inside on an overcast grey-sky day. Confirmation bias also relates to how our brains prioritize those two pieces of information.Using the same example, if the intent was to decide if the conclusion was correct, rather than consider the two as equally relevant, the brain often prioritizes the confirmatory over the disconfirming information.