بررسی وضعیت گرایش به تفکر نقادانه دانشجویان (مطالعه موردی: دانشجویان پردیس فارابی دانشگاه تهران)

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری ، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری ، گروه مدیریت دولتی ، پردیس فارابی دانشگاه تهران ، قم ، ایران

2 استاد ، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری ، گروه مدیریت دولتی ، پردیس فارابی دانشگاه تهران ، قم ، ایران

3 استاد ، دانشکده مدیریت ، گروه مدیریت دولتی ، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران

4 استادیار ، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری ، گروه مدیریت بازرگانی ، پردیس فارابی دانشگاه تهران ، قم ، ایران

5 استادیار ، دانشکده مدیریت و حسابداری ، گروه مدیریت دولتی ، پردیس فارابی دانشگاه تهران ، قم ، ایران

10.22111/jmr.2021.32722.4926

چکیده

     هدف‌ غایی هر نظام تعلیم‌ و تربیت، ایجاد تحول‌ مثبت‌ در انسان‌ و یافتن‌ هویتی مطلوب‌ برای او در زندگی فردی و اجتماعی است‌. و بدون تردید نظام آموزش عالی، از انتقال آشکار و پنهان هنجارها و نگرش­های خاص به فراگیران، فارغ نیست. یکی از اهداف آموزش عالی تربیت دانش­ آموختگانی است که با استفاده از شیوه­ های مختلف تفکر، به ویژه تفکر نقادانه به فعالیت علمی بپردازند. لذا پژوهش حاضر در صدد بررسی سطح گرایش به تفکر نقادانه دانشجویان و چگونگی ارتباط متغیر وابسته گرایش به تفکر نقادانه دانشجویان و متغیرهای مستقل رشته تحصیلی، مقطع تحصیلی، سن، جنسیت بود. دستیابی به این هدف با استفاده از روش پیمایشی و ابزار پرسشنامه ریکتس (2003) میسر شد. پاسخگویان دانشجویان پردیس فارابی دانشگاه تهران بودند. مبنای انتخاب دانشجویان، نمونه ­گیری تصادفی بود و از این طریق،  نمونه ­ای به حجم 346  نفر از میان جامعه آماری که متشکل از 3550 نفر بود، تحلیل گردید. نتایج پژوهش نشان داد که دانشجویان جامعه آماری مورد بررسی دارای گرایش به تفکر نقادانه هستند. علاوه بر این، نتایج پژوهش گویای رابطه ­ی معنادار بین جنسیت، سن و مقطع تحصیلی با گرایش تفکر نقادانه دانشجویان بود. ولی بین متغیر رشته تحصیلی و گرایش به تفکر نقادانه ارتباط معنی­داری مشاهده نشد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Exploring the Students’ Critical Thinking Disposition (Case study: Farabi Campus Students, University of Tehran)

نویسندگان [English]

  • Akram Dastyari 1
  • Hasan Zarei matin 2
  • Hassan Danaeefard 3
  • Hamidreza Yazdani 4
  • Jabbar Babashahi 5
1 Ph.D. Student, College of Farabi, Department of Public Administration , University of Tehran, Qom, Iran
2 Professor, College of Farabi, Department of Public Administration , University of Tehran, Qom, Iran
3 Professor, Faculty of Management, Department of Public Administration , University of Tarbiyat Modares, Tehran, Iran
4 Assistant Professor, College of Farabi, University of Tehran, Qom, Iran
5 Assistant Professor, College of Farabi, University of Tehran, Qom, Iran
چکیده [English]

Extended Abstract
Abstract
The ultimate goal of any pedagogy system is to create positive transformations in human and finding a desired identity for him/her in social and individual life. Undoubtedly, higher education system is not free from explicit and implicit transfer of certain norms and insights to learners. One of the goals of the higher education system is to educate learners who conduct scientific activities by using different thinking methods especially critical thinking. Thus, present study intends to examine the students’ critical thinking disposition and the relationship between dependent variable of students’ critical thinking disposition and independent variables of gender, age, educational field and educational grade. This goal was realized by using a survey and Ricketts standard questionnaire (2003). Respondents were students at Farabi Campus of University of Tehran. The basis of selecting the students was random sampling technique by which 346 subjects were selected and analyzed from students’ population (3550 students). Of the most important findings of the research, one can refer to the fact that students in research population tend to critical thinking. Additionally, research findings suggest that there is a significant relationship between gender, age and educational grade with students’ critical thinking disposition while no significant association was observed between educational field and students’ critical thinking disposition.
Introduction
Today, by transformations in theoretical basics and nature of science, new approaches are raised on determining educational goals and training process. One of the most important approaches is to pay attention to thinking in training process. Growth and breeding students’ thinking skills has been always an important issued in education since our culture information outcome has gone beyond our critical thinking strength. Thus, in today world in which people can communicate through Internet, reading and writing is no longer the ability to meaning of words and to conceive texts and making a few grammatical sentences; rather, in today world, one should equip with critical thinking in encountering with information explosion in Internet (Mahdizadeh et al, 2012).
Overall, this research plans to answer this question that how is the critical thinking disposition among students? Additionally, four below goals are also pursued:

Determining the relationship between students’ gender and their tendency toward critical thinking disposition;
Determining the relationship between students’ age and their tendency toward critical thinking disposition;
Determining the relationship between students’ field of study and their tendency toward critical thinking disposition;
Determining the relationship between students’ grade and their tendency toward critical thinking disposition;

Case study: present research plans to study students’ critical thinking disposition in University of Tehran, Farabi Campus.
Theoretical framwork
Since mid-20th century, critical thinking is considered as an educational necessity and then, needed initiatives were taken to put this concept in all learners’ critical thinking training agenda. Undoubtedly, any action in this regard needs to specify the concept of critical thinking and its traits and aspects.
What used in present study are the aspects of critical thinking disposition raised by Ricketts (2003). He used Facion’s research as his own basis and due to criticisms against Facion’s classification, he attempted to reuse Delphi technique (however, based on the same theories achieved from Facion’s reports) to acquire new classifications. He asserts that critical thinking disposition is shaped by an inner report and its aspects include:

Engagement: propensity to engagement measures three issues: student’s tendency to look for opportunities to use rationality and argument; predicting those situations which need to argue; trust to the capability of rationality and arguing;
Innovativeness: tendency to innovation measures students’ talent since the tend to know the reality and are curious intellectually;
Cognitive maturity: it measures maturity of three issue: students’ talent to be aware of the complexity of real problems; openness to others’ attitudes; awareness on backgrounds and prejudices of oneself and others (Rickets, 2003: 20 – 21; cited by Khojasteh and others, 2014).

Methodology
This is a descriptive – cross sectional survey conducted in University of Tehran’s Farabi Campus by 3550 students in 2018 – 2019 educational year. In this study, by using Morgan and Krejcie Table, 346 students were selected by random simple sampling method as sample size. In present study, data collection tool is two-segment questionnaire. The first segment is a structured questionnaire which involves students’ demographical information. The second segment is critical thinking disposition scale by Rickets (2003). The subjects announce the degree of their agreement/disagreement with each item in Likert’s five – score scale. To analyze data, SPSS24 and AMOS24 software packages and to compare the means, t-test and One-Way ANOVA tests are utilized; Scheffe test is used if One-Way ANOVA test is meaningful.
Discussion and Findings
To test the normality, Kolmogorov – Smirnov multivariable test was used and the results indicated that data are following a normal distribution. To validate indicators and scales, confirmatory factor analysis was utilized. The results from fitness indicators for modelling three aspects of mental engagement, maturity and innovativeness suggest that all variables enjoy proper fitness. To evaluate measurement model, this model was initially validated. To this end, discriminate validity was examined. Its validity was more than 0.5 for all variable. Since there is more than one latent variable in this model, discriminant validity was also investigated. In present study, the correlation among all constructs is less than 0.9 which is plausible.
To see whether critical thinking disposition exists in different aspects or not and by considering results from Kolmogorov – Smirnov test which suggests data distribution normality, single t-test was conducted. In all aspects, significance coefficient equals with zero and less than test error level (0.05). Upper and lower level are positive and t statistic is out of -1.96 and +1.96 in all cases. Thus, in all aspects, critical thinking disposition is observed among them. Ultimately, single factor variance analysis, was used to study the role of demographical variables in critical thinking disposition and indep3endent t-test was used for gender variable. Research findings indicated that there is no significant difference between field of education and critical thinking disposition while there is significant difference between gender, age and grades with critical thinking disposition.
Conclusion
Research findings indicate that the mean of students’ critical thinking disposition is in positive and medium levels. This is consistent with findings by Gharib (2009), Saburi (2012), Zarabin et al (2016) and Folous & Cessarian (2014). However, need to constant training on such kind of thinking is more highlighted.
Research findings indicate that there is a significant relationship between average score of critical thinking disposition in such components as mental engagement and cognitive maturity with students’ gender so that its average is higher for girls (3.9) than boys (3.8) while there is no significant relationship for innovativeness.
There is no significant association between educational field and critical thinking disposition. It is consistent with findings by Azodi (2010), Saburi Kashani (2012) and Zarabian et al (2016).
Research findings indicate that students’ age associates with their critical thinking disposition significantly so that students above 35 years have the highest mean. It is consistent with findings by Azodi et al (2010) and Book et al (2013).
Likewise, present study indicated that there is a significant relationship between students’ educational grade and critical thinking disposition so that postgraduates have the highest level of critical thinking disposition. It is consistent with findings by Eslami Akbar (2010) and Safari et al (2012).

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Critical thinking disposition
  • Engagement
  • innovativeness
  • Cognitive maturity
1-Arend, B. (2009). Encouraging critical thinking in online threaded discussions. Journal of Educators Online, 6(1), 1-23. Retrieved from http://www.files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ EJ904064
2-Badri Gargari, R., Fathi Azar, A., Hosseini Nasab, S. D.,  Moghaddam, M. (2010). The Impact of Reflection in Practice on Student-Teacher Critical Thinking in Tabriz Teacher Training Centers. Educational Studies and Psychology Journal, 11 (1), 210-189. (Persian)
3-Bagheri, M. B., Birjandi, P., Maftoon, P. (2018). The Place of Critical Thinking in Iranian Educational System, Foreign Language Research Journal, 7 (2), 299-323. (Persian)
4-Bernard, R. M.,  Zhang Dai, A., Philip C., Sicoly, F., Borokhovski, E., & Surkes, M. A. (2008). Exploring the structure of the Watson–Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal: One scale or many subscales? Thinking Skills and Creativity, 3:15–22.
5-Byrne, Barbara M. (2010) Structural Equation Modeling with AMOS: Basic Concepts, Applications, & Programming, 2th edition, New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
6-Castle,  A.  (2009).  Defining  and  assessing  critical  thinking  skills  for student radiographers. Radiography, 15, 70-76.
7-Chen, N. Sh, Kinshuk, Wei, Ch. W. & Liu, Ch. Ch. (2011). Effects of matching teaching strategy to thinking style on learner’s quality of reflection inan online learning environment, Computers & Education, 56: 53–64.
8-Ennis, R. H. (2013).  The nature of critical thinking. Retrieved from: http://criticalthinking.net, under “What is critical thinking?”
Facione, P. A. (2010). Critical Thinking: What It Is and Why It Counts, USA: Insight Assessment.
9-Facione, P. A. (2011). Critical thinking: Whatis it and why it counts. Retrieved from http://www.insightassessment.com/content/download/.../ what&why2010.pdf
10-Feuerstein, M. (2001). Media literacy in support of critical thinking. Learning, Media and Technology, 24, 43-54.
11-Fornell C. & Larcker DF. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with Unobservable variables & measurement error, J Marketing Res , Vol. 18, No.1, pp.39–47.
12-Gezer, N., Kantek, F. & Öztürk, N. (2010). Profile and critical thinking levels of nursing students in a health school, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9: 2057–2061.
13-Hair, J. R., Joseph, F., Black, W. C., & Anderson, R. E. (2006) Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th edition, available at:http://www.mediafire.com/? mkrzmjmmonn(accessed 1 December 2013).
14-H¨ulya, K., Emine, S., G¨on¨ul, B. (2016). Developıng crıtıcal thınkıng dısposıtıon and emotıonal ıntellegence of nursıng students: a longıtudınal research, Nurse Education Today(2016), doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2016.09.011
15-Hyytinen,  H.  (2015).  Looking  beyond  the  obvious.  Theoretical,  empirical  and methodological  insights  into  critical  thinking.  Academic  dissertation, UniversityofHelsinki.
16-Hyytinen,  H.,  Lo¨  fstro¨  m,  E.,  &  Lindblom-Yla¨  nne,  S.  (2016).  Challenges  in argumentation  and paraphrasing  among  beginning  students  in  educational sciences. Scandinavian, Journal of Educational Research, 1–19.
17-Johanson, E.B. (2002). Contextual Teaching and Learning what it is and why its here to stay. The 1 ed. United king Dom: Cowin press.
18-Khojasteh, S., Architect, S., Kianpour, M. (2013).The Situation of Tendency towards Critical Thinking in Students of the University of Isfahan and Some Factors Related to It, Journal of Applied Sociology, 2 (54), 117-138. (Persian)
19-Nosich, G. (2012). Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across. the curriculum(4thed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
20-Martin, L., & Thompson, S. D., & Richards, L. (2008). Online Scenarios in FCS college courses: Enhancing critical thinking skills. Journal of family and Consumer Sciences. 100 (2), proQuest education Journals.
21-Moradi Najafabadi, Z. (2019). Assessing the critical thinking skills of graduate students in educational psychology based on Paul and Alder model, Master Thesis ,Al-Zahra University, Faculty of Educational Sciences and Psychology. (Persian)
22-Mahdi zadeh, H., Lotfi, F., Islam panah, M. (2013), The Impact of the Argumentation Maps on Students Critical Thought, Journal of Technology of Education, 7 (2), 160-153. (Persian)
23-Mundy, K., & Denham, S. A. (2008). Nurse educators - still challenged by critical thinking. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 3, 94-99.
24-Parrouty, J. (2016). Philosophy of education and critical thinking. Lulu Publishing Company.
25-Page,D. (2007). Promoting critical thinking skills by using negotiation exercises, Journal of education for business, 82(5): 251-257.
26-Piaw, Ch. Y. (2010). Building a test toassess creative and critical thinking simultaneously, Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2:551–559.
27-Paul, R. (1993). Critical  thinking: what every student need to survive in rapidly  changing  world  Retrieved  march  16.2008 from  Http://WWW.criticalthinking. org.
28-Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2007). Critical thinking competency standards. Dillon Beach: Foundation for Critical Thinking.
29-Ricketts,  J.  C.  (2003).  The  efficacy  of  leadership development, critical thinking dispositions, and student  academic  performance  on  the  critical thinking  skills  of  selected  youth  leaders. Unpublished  doctoral  dissertation,  University of  Florida,  Gainesville.  available  at :http://etd.fcla.edu/UF/ UFE0000777/ricketts_j.pdf.
30-Rezaee Sharif, A. (2015). The confirmatory factor analysis of Critical Thinking Disposition Scale (CTDS) in school students. Thinking and Children, 6(11), 45-60. (Persian)
31-Schumacker, R. E., Lomax, R. G. (2004). A beginner's guide to structural equation modeling, first edition, translation by Vahid Qasemi, Tehran: Sociology Publications. (Persian)
32-Safiri, Kh., Amooabdolahi, F. (2011). Critical Thinking disposition among Master's Students of Tehran State Universities, Proceedings of First National Conference on Reviewing Books and Texts of Humanities Sciences, 403-414. (Persian)
33-Siegel, H. (1989). The Rationality of Science, Critical Thinking,  and  Science  Education.  Synthese, 80(1), 9-41.
34-Snyder,  L.,  &  Gueldenzph.  S.,  &  Mark.  J.  (2008).  Teaching  critical  thinking  and problem solving skills. The Delta Pi Epsilon Journal, Volume l, No. 2.
35-Turan, H.; Kolayis, H. & Ulusoy, Y. O. (2012). Comparison of the faculty of education students’ critical thinking disposition. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46: 2020-2029.
36-Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence from four institutional case studies, The Journal of Higher Education, 73(3), 740–763.
37-Yaarmohamadzaadeh, H., Aaghaabaabaa'ee, R., Koohsaaree, M., P. Bakhtyaar Nasraabaadee, P.  (2010). Perceptual variables in critical thinking and the cognitive dimension of academic achievement, Journal of New thoughts on Education, 6 (2), 90-75. (Persian)
38-Yildrim,  B.,  Ozkahraman,  S., & Karabudak,  S. S. (2011).  The  Critical  Thinking  Teaching Methods  in  Nursing  Students,  International  Journal  of  Business  and  Social Science, 2(24): 174-182.
39-Wilkinson  JM.  Nursing  process  and critical  thinking.  4th edition.  Julie  Levin Alexander Publisher: 2007.