How might language affect critical thinking performance?

Emmanuel Manalo, Chris Sheppard

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    3 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    This study examined whether language structure or language proficiency might affect students' critical thinking performance. Previous research has claimed that many non-Western students struggle with the demands of demonstrating critical thought. Two language-related causes have been suggested: one concerning structural limitations in the non-Western students' first language, and the other concerning their second language proficiency. In Study 1 described here, reports written by 110 Japanese second year university students, who had received instruction in academic discourse for critical evaluation (which is one aspect of critical thinking), were analyzed for use of evaluative statements. No disadvantage was found for use of the Japanese language, which is considered as having a more indirect structure that may make critical evaluation more difficult. Measurements of language proficiency in English and Japanese, however, were found to correlate with production of evaluative statements in those respective languages suggesting that language proficiency could affect critical evaluation use. In Study 2, the same task was given to 43 first year students who had not yet received the same instruction. Analysis revealed similar patterns in their written work but at a lower level, suggesting that the second year students had benefitted from the skills instruction. Furthermore, unlike the second year students, the first year students evidenced no correlations between their language proficiency scores and their production of evaluative statements, suggesting that proficiency on its own is inadequate: students need instruction on the specific language forms and structures to use to demonstrate critical thinking in their written work.

    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)41-49
    Number of pages9
    JournalThinking Skills and Creativity
    Volume21
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2016 Sep 1

    Fingerprint

    language
    performance
    instruction
    student
    first-year student
    evaluation
    cause
    university
    discourse

    Keywords

    • Cognitive cost
    • Critical evaluation
    • Critical thinking skills instruction
    • Language proficiency
    • Language structure

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Education

    Cite this

    How might language affect critical thinking performance? / Manalo, Emmanuel; Sheppard, Chris.

    In: Thinking Skills and Creativity, Vol. 21, 01.09.2016, p. 41-49.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    @article{9ca9c5dbe7ca4e4eb4646c7d07b92bf8,
    title = "How might language affect critical thinking performance?",
    abstract = "This study examined whether language structure or language proficiency might affect students' critical thinking performance. Previous research has claimed that many non-Western students struggle with the demands of demonstrating critical thought. Two language-related causes have been suggested: one concerning structural limitations in the non-Western students' first language, and the other concerning their second language proficiency. In Study 1 described here, reports written by 110 Japanese second year university students, who had received instruction in academic discourse for critical evaluation (which is one aspect of critical thinking), were analyzed for use of evaluative statements. No disadvantage was found for use of the Japanese language, which is considered as having a more indirect structure that may make critical evaluation more difficult. Measurements of language proficiency in English and Japanese, however, were found to correlate with production of evaluative statements in those respective languages suggesting that language proficiency could affect critical evaluation use. In Study 2, the same task was given to 43 first year students who had not yet received the same instruction. Analysis revealed similar patterns in their written work but at a lower level, suggesting that the second year students had benefitted from the skills instruction. Furthermore, unlike the second year students, the first year students evidenced no correlations between their language proficiency scores and their production of evaluative statements, suggesting that proficiency on its own is inadequate: students need instruction on the specific language forms and structures to use to demonstrate critical thinking in their written work.",
    keywords = "Cognitive cost, Critical evaluation, Critical thinking skills instruction, Language proficiency, Language structure",
    author = "Emmanuel Manalo and Chris Sheppard",
    year = "2016",
    month = "9",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.005",
    language = "English",
    volume = "21",
    pages = "41--49",
    journal = "Thinking Skills and Creativity",
    issn = "1871-1871",
    publisher = "Elsevier BV",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - How might language affect critical thinking performance?

    AU - Manalo, Emmanuel

    AU - Sheppard, Chris

    PY - 2016/9/1

    Y1 - 2016/9/1

    N2 - This study examined whether language structure or language proficiency might affect students' critical thinking performance. Previous research has claimed that many non-Western students struggle with the demands of demonstrating critical thought. Two language-related causes have been suggested: one concerning structural limitations in the non-Western students' first language, and the other concerning their second language proficiency. In Study 1 described here, reports written by 110 Japanese second year university students, who had received instruction in academic discourse for critical evaluation (which is one aspect of critical thinking), were analyzed for use of evaluative statements. No disadvantage was found for use of the Japanese language, which is considered as having a more indirect structure that may make critical evaluation more difficult. Measurements of language proficiency in English and Japanese, however, were found to correlate with production of evaluative statements in those respective languages suggesting that language proficiency could affect critical evaluation use. In Study 2, the same task was given to 43 first year students who had not yet received the same instruction. Analysis revealed similar patterns in their written work but at a lower level, suggesting that the second year students had benefitted from the skills instruction. Furthermore, unlike the second year students, the first year students evidenced no correlations between their language proficiency scores and their production of evaluative statements, suggesting that proficiency on its own is inadequate: students need instruction on the specific language forms and structures to use to demonstrate critical thinking in their written work.

    AB - This study examined whether language structure or language proficiency might affect students' critical thinking performance. Previous research has claimed that many non-Western students struggle with the demands of demonstrating critical thought. Two language-related causes have been suggested: one concerning structural limitations in the non-Western students' first language, and the other concerning their second language proficiency. In Study 1 described here, reports written by 110 Japanese second year university students, who had received instruction in academic discourse for critical evaluation (which is one aspect of critical thinking), were analyzed for use of evaluative statements. No disadvantage was found for use of the Japanese language, which is considered as having a more indirect structure that may make critical evaluation more difficult. Measurements of language proficiency in English and Japanese, however, were found to correlate with production of evaluative statements in those respective languages suggesting that language proficiency could affect critical evaluation use. In Study 2, the same task was given to 43 first year students who had not yet received the same instruction. Analysis revealed similar patterns in their written work but at a lower level, suggesting that the second year students had benefitted from the skills instruction. Furthermore, unlike the second year students, the first year students evidenced no correlations between their language proficiency scores and their production of evaluative statements, suggesting that proficiency on its own is inadequate: students need instruction on the specific language forms and structures to use to demonstrate critical thinking in their written work.

    KW - Cognitive cost

    KW - Critical evaluation

    KW - Critical thinking skills instruction

    KW - Language proficiency

    KW - Language structure

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84974603780&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84974603780&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    U2 - 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.005

    DO - 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.05.005

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:84974603780

    VL - 21

    SP - 41

    EP - 49

    JO - Thinking Skills and Creativity

    JF - Thinking Skills and Creativity

    SN - 1871-1871

    ER -