Critical Thinking for the Under 16's

[phaedra]

Hi, I was wondering if anyone can help me out please?

Can anyone recommend any resources for teaching Critical Thinking to children under the age of 16? Even better has anyone had any direct experience of teaching CT to this age group?

I am aware of that the UK teaches CT at A Level (17/18) as there's a fair bit of stuff on The Skeptic Express but am at a loss for younger age groups.

Any help would be most welcome. Thanks.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

I'm not sure children below a specific age group can actually comprehend critical thinking because their brains aren't developed yet. They can't think outside of the box and use abstract reasoning to make tough decisions yet. I don't know what the average age is for such abilities however there is an age below which they can't comprehend things like 'critical thinking'.
However maybe you could make something? Where there is a niche after all? Maybe write a children’s story that expresses the greatness of critical thinking and skepticism?

[drkitten]

Originally Posted by Dustin

I'm not sure children below a specific age group can actually comprehend critical thinking because their brains aren't developed yet.

Yes, but that age is something like twelve months.

Or, to put it another way, even pre-verbal children can think critically; they know things like if you put two objects in an empty box, you can't pull three objects out of it. And if you somehow manage to do that (sleight of hand is wonderful for that), they know something strange is going on.

And if you are talking just about under-16s -- teens and pre-teens have absolutely wonderful bullsheet detectors.

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Originally Posted by drkitten

Yes, but that age is something like twelve months.

Or, to put it another way, even pre-verbal children can think critically; they know things like if you put two objects in an empty box, you can't pull three objects out of it. And if you somehow manage to do that (sleight of hand is wonderful for that), they know something strange is going on.

And if you are talking just about under-16s -- teens and pre-teens have absolutely wonderful bullsheet detectors.

Putting blocks in block containers and circles in circle containers is a whole different thing than determining what a reasonable or unreasonable belief is.

I find it hard to believe most people under 16 have the ability to call BS on so many things like ghosts or God when most adults can't even do it.

[Kaarjuus]

What's wrong with the classics? The Demon-Haunted World, Why People Believe Weird Things, that sort of books.

[cbish]

Originally Posted by Dustin

I'm not sure children below a specific age group can actually comprehend critical thinking because their brains aren't developed yet............I don't know what the average age is for such abilities however there is an age below which they can't comprehend things like 'critical thinking'.

It's not so much of an average age, but a range. The normal range is pretty wide. 12-21 years old is considered "normal" for the development of abstraction with about 10% of the population never doing it. That's one set back of having things like Algebra as a graduation requirement. Some peoples melons never ripen!

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Originally Posted by cbish

It's not so much of an average age, but a range. The normal range is pretty wide. 12-21 years old is considered "normal" for the development of abstraction with about 10% of the population never doing it. That's one set back of having things like Algebra as a graduation requirement. Some peoples melons never ripen!

Do you have a source for that?

[SirPhilip]

Originally Posted by phaedra

Hi, I was wondering if anyone can help me out please? Can anyone recommend any resources for teaching Critical Thinking to children under the age of 16? Even better has anyone had any direct experience of teaching CT to this age group? I am aware of that the UK teaches CT at A Level (17/18) as there's a fair bit of stuff on The Skeptic Express but am at a loss for younger age groups. Any help would be most welcome. Thanks.

Get an original hardback of Carl Sagan's Cosmos (they are however, rare). In my opinion, nobody ever popularized reason in such a balanced and mature way as he did, nor gave such a positive, interesting perspective on mysticism. Although the book deals with astronomy, it is an unexcelled work of philosophical realism for the laymen and educated alike. I practically lived in that book when I was a kid, spending hours with my nose in it when life seemed uncertain. The biggest issue these days among critical thinkers, and especially young ones, is many are motivated into critical thinking by seeing how unscrupulous people use mysticism to exploit others, instead of what it really was: a positive social expression of greater intelligence. Randi, being foremost in educating the public about this unwritten type of crime, and knee deep in it for most of his adult life, can be forgive for being bitter about it. This is unfortunate because it creates a rift between the other side of human experience, and people who consider reason important, but end up considering the former a worthless and dangerous human habits, and end up alienating a lot of people in the process.

[drkitten]

Originally Posted by Dustin

I find it hard to believe most people under 16 have the ability to call BS on so many things like ghosts or God when most adults can't even do it.

I've seen no evidence that any of your beliiefs are based in reality. Are you now planning to practice cognitive psychology based on the Wikipedia articles you've edited?

[Dustin Kesselberg]

Originally Posted by drkitten

I've seen no evidence that any of your beliiefs are based in reality. Are you now planning to practice cognitive psychology based on the Wikipedia articles you've edited?

Sure, I plan on starting my own practice and referencing my wikipedia experience on my application for a license.

[cbish]

Originally Posted by Dustin

Do you have a source for that?

It was back in my Ed Psych classes back in the day. I'm sure the specifics are debatable. The point is in support of your first post.

[drkitten]

Originally Posted by cbish

It was back in my Ed Psych classes back in the day. I'm sure the specifics are debatable. The point is in support of your first post.

You're making the same mistake that Dustin is, in thinking that "critical thinking" is something you either can or cannot do, in the same way that a light switch is on or off.

Even "abstraction" is a pretty vague concept, and depending upon how you operationalize the definition, you can get findings of the capacity in astonishingly young children -- or the incapacity in astonishingly competent adults.

As I said, there are pretty conclusive studies that children as young as 12 months have the ability to count things, which is a pretty "abstract" operation. Similarly, the abstract idea of "object permanence" -- the idea that something is still there even if it's behind something else -- develops pretty quickly. This means that there are some beliefs that even pre-verbal children recognize as "unreasonable" and can be encouraged to think critically about. (That's one reason that many children love magic shows and love learning about stage magic -- it's precisely because it's a puzzle in critical thinking. How does he make coins appear out of my nose?)

At the other extreme, Wason's four-card task shows that adults -- even trained logicians and mathematicians -- are pretty poor at abstract reasoning. But the task involved is much, much more difficult than simply figuring out that coins don't come out of people's noses by themselves.

The trick in presenting critical thinking is therefore a) to define the problem properly, and b) to pitch the "thinking" to the right level of abstraction. Teaching children stage magic (and mentalism) is a great way to show them how many of the classic scam artists like Sylvia work; even an eight year old can understand the idea of cold reading. Unfortunately for the original poster, I don't have any actual materials to recommend.

[Cuddles]

Originally Posted by Dustin

Putting blocks in block containers and circles in circle containers is a whole different thing than determining what a reasonable or unreasonable belief is.

I find it hard to believe most people under 16 have the ability to call BS on so many things like ghosts or God when most adults can't even do it.

But critical thinking is much more than just what beliefs are reasonable. If someone claims to have taken 3 blocks out of a box that you knew only contained 2, the ability to see that there is something wrong is the fundamental concept behind any critical thinking. It might be a very basic concept, but without it it would be impossible to seriously consider more abstract concepts.

[Pyrrho]

The Skeptics Society includes a section titled Junior Skeptic in each issue of SKEPTIC Magazine

http://www.skeptic.com

The Foundation for Critical Thinking offers some information:

http://www.criticalthinking.org/

Some ideas are being kicked around here:

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=2521

[Mercutio]

Originally Posted by Pyrrho

Some ideas are being kicked around here:

http://www.skepticforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=2521

Oh, good. I was going to recommend some of what Kiless and Athon have been working on. I have, in front of me as I write, a copy of a very impressive school newsletter, with an article on Kiless's work with her Year 10 class. This is an English class, not a science class, and the papers were entered in the competition for the West Australian Sceptics' Awards for Young Critical Writers. I have also a copy of "The Helix", in which Athon's illustrations of Australian exotic pests (species which were imported to the continent and which are endangering native species).

In the first case, the work was with one class, but in both cases the reports are in publications that reach a larger audience.

[Skeptic Ginger]

I tried in vane to get my son's teachers to show a single video that revealed marketing tricks in kids' TV commercials. The video was great but is outdated now and I can't find a link to it as I don't recall the title.

Anyway, I have taught my son critical thinking not just about science and evidence, but also about the various advertising tricks used to bypass critical thinking. These are some good places to find all sorts of materials for all sorts of ages. They teach critical thinking skills including those involving the massive commercial assault kids are all too familiar with. It's easy to get kids attention, though, with ads they are familiar with.

Don't Buy It, a PBS Guide to teaching children about marketing

Media Awareness Network

Quote:

MNet’s work is based on the belief that to be functionally literate in the world today – to be able to "read" the messages that inform, entertain and sell to us daily – young people need critical thinking skills.

Center for Media Literacy

Quote:

(CML) is a nonprofit educational organization that provides leadership, public education, professional development and educational resources nationally. Dedicated to promoting and supporting media literacy education as a framework for accessing, analyzing, evaluating and creating media content, CML works to help citizens, especially the young, develop critical thinking and media production skills needed to live fully in the 21st century media culture. The ultimate goal is to make wise choices possible.

Originally a newsletter for teachers and leaders in the religious community, it evolved over time into a non-commercial, non-sectarian publication with a circulation of over 5,000. Each issue explored a single topic through articles by scholars, interviews, excerpts from new books, and action ideas for teachers, youth workers, family counselors and others.

[brooklyn44]

Great sites, Skeptigirl. Thnx.

[Skeptic Ginger]

welcome

[phaedra]

Wow Guys! Thanks for being so very helpful.

I agree with drkitten in that the secret to success with younger minds is to match the right material to the right level of abstraction. Critical thinking is possible within the younger age groups it just works at a different level. Magic tricks are a brilliant way to get children thinking about how they can be fooled by an illusion.

Skeptigirl - thanks also for those terrific links. I must admit, marketing tricks hadn't occurred to me but are perfect for encouraging rational thinking.

Over the years I've had some success with my own son (aged 13) by encouraging him to ask questions and discuss rather just spoonfeeding him the answers. By not criticising his responses but gently questioning his reasoning he is able to think through the consequences of what he has said reconsider his position if he needs to. Its also great way of keeping a lively parent/child conversation going over the years.

If anyone has any practical experience or further links to add into the pot I'd still be interested to hear from them.

[Jeff Corey]

Magic tricks and visual illusions are very useful in teaching critical thinking. Here are the instructions for constructing a sure-fire classroom demo of the size-weight or Charpentier's illusion http://www.skepticreport.com/tools/charpentier.htm

[fishbait]

Children have their own ideas.

Quote:

Children develop their own ideas about the physical world, ideas that reflect their special perspectives. Below are some perceptions from some sixth grade students:

"Fossils are bones that animals are through wearing."

"Some people can tell what time it is by looking at the sun, but I have never been able to make out the numbers."

"Gravity is stronger on the earth than on the moon because here on earth we have a bigger mess."

"A blizzard is when it snows sideways."

Children's experiences help them form their ideas, and these often don't match current scientific interpretations. We need to allow our children to ask questions and make mistakes without feeling "stupid."

[Dave1001]

Originally Posted by Dustin

Putting blocks in block containers and circles in circle containers is a whole different thing than determining what a reasonable or unreasonable belief is.

I find it hard to believe most people under 16 have the ability to call BS on so many things like ghosts or God when most adults can't even do it.

As someone raised by agnostics, I think that many people far below 16 have the capacity to understand why one should be skeptical of God or ghost claims. Doesn't mean they still won't be terrified of what's in their closet or under their beds at night.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Those are so cute, Fish.

[Skeptic Ginger]

Originally Posted by Dustin

Putting blocks in block containers and circles in circle containers is a whole different thing than determining what a reasonable or unreasonable belief is.

I find it hard to believe most people under 16 have the ability to call BS on so many things like ghosts or God when most adults can't even do it.

From Piaget's observations as summarized here:

Quote:

The formal operational stage is the fourth and final stage in Piaget's theory. It begins at approximately 11 to 12 years of age, and continues throughout adulthood, although Piaget does point out that some people may never reach this stage of cognitive development.

The formal operational stage is characterized by the ability to formulate hypotheses and systematically test them to arrive at an answer to a problem.

The individual in the formal stage is also able to think abstractly and to understand the form or structure of a mathematical problem.

Another characteristic of the individual is their ability to reason contrary to fact. That is, if they are given a statement and asked to use it as the basis of an argument they are capable of accomplishing the task. For example,they can deal with the statement "what would happen if snow were black".

My son correctly defined "automatic" when asked by the teacher interviewing him for pre-school at the age of 4. He said something with automatic in the sentence so she asked him if he knew what it meant. I certainly hadn't taught him the word and I can't imagine anyone including it in preschool reading or vocabulary. That was a bit of abstract thinking.

The first time he spoke a sentence (age 2) he wanted his 'banky' and I told him we left it at home. He replied, "Go home get it". Kids have incredible understanding we may not give them credit for because their language skills lag behind their thought processes. Not that I think Piaget had it wrong, but you don't seem to be giving them enough credit in your opinion there, Dustin.