Resize Text: 
Beneath the quad’s purple canopy of jacaranda blossoms, the dean of the faculty sat hunched over her laptop trying to gather her thoughts for her afternoon presentation to the board of trustees. As syncopated as a hip-hop beat, the approaching sound of a dribbling basketball invaded her consciousness. “What’s the matter, your e-mail down?” asked the women’s hoops coach, settling down beside her.
“No,” replied the dean, “Just enjoying the day. The morning session with the trustees was, let’s just say, challenging.”
The coach tucked the ball under her arm. “Budget issues?"
“No. We’re fine financially. They wanted to talk academic accountability. Don’t get me wrong—half those folks are alumni, and they love the place. But this one guy, he owns an engineering firm, said he couldn’t find any college graduates who knew how to think. That’s all it took. Everyone was into it: attorneys, bankers, the mayor, what’s-his-name who works at the capitol, all of them talking about critical thinking, and how colleges need to guarantee that their graduates can think.”
“What’s the problem? Isn’t that what we do?”
“Sure it is! But, with basketball you have a win-loss record. It’s easier ...”
“Whoa there, Dean! Meaning no disrespect, but training athletes to think as a team isn’t exactly easy.”
“Sorry, Coach. Didn’t mean to trivialize. But in sports there’s a clear definition of success. Our trustees probably can’t tell you what the term ‘critical thinking’ means.”
“I’ll bet they know it when they see it, right?” said the coach. “The average sportswriter can’t tell you all the rules of basketball, but they sure know good basketball from bad basketball when they see it. You don’t need a definition. Just agree on the basic idea. Then you get on with it. Introduce the core skills and have the kids play so they can begin enjoying the game.”
“We actually have a working consensus about critical thinking,” said the dean. “It comes down to reflective decision-making and thoughtful problem-solving about what to do or believe. You know, analyze the situation, evaluate claims, draw good inferences, supply sound reasons, and check to make sure you haven’t missed something important.”
“Sounds like passing, dribbling, shooting, and playing good defense to me. But you have to put the skills together to win games,” said the coach.
The dean looked at her for a few seconds and then said, “Thanks, you’ve given me the start I needed,” and then began typing furiously on her laptop.
Watching, the coach added, “One more thing. Desire. With Kobe and Shaq, the Lakers were loaded with skilled players in 2004, but the Pistons won the championship because they had the work habits, drive, persistence, confidence, and trust in their teammates. The Lakers didn’t.”
“Same applies to critical thinking,” said the dean. “Nothing like a passionate desire to know the truth, the courage to follow the reasons and evidence wherever they lead, and the integrity to be objective even if you learn things that go against your own cherished beliefs. Wow, if a college education could guarantee that!”
“Yeah ... and if our players were as hardworking as Ben Wallace, Steve Nash, Magic, or Bird, we’d never lose a game.”
“I don’t know, Coach. Those guys were blessed with serious talent.”
“Maybe, but I know that each of those guys practiced and practiced all through their careers. Even as a pro, Nash shoots 500 baskets a day in the off season. It may seem natural when a player is at the top of his game. But there’s no greater insult to an athlete than saying he or she became successful without hard work, dedication, physical training, and mental conditioning.”
“I hear you, Coach. Skills and dispositions are mutually reinforcing. Expertise comes from practice and from the desire to continue perfecting your skills.”
“And good coaching,” said the coach, with a laugh. “If you practice mistakes, you’re only reinforcing errors.”
“We call that meta-cognition,” said the dean.
“We call it half-time,” said the coach. “We step back, evaluate things, and, if necessary, make adjustments.” With that, she stood up, wished the dean luck with the board, and strode away.
Watching her, the dean wondered: What’s my win-loss percentage? How many graduates left here last weekend with stronger critical-thinking skills and dispositions than they came in with?
Peter and Noreen Facione study human reasoning and decision-making. They have developed nationally and internationally used measurement tools, including the California Critical Thinking Skills Test, the California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory, the Health Sciences Reasoning Test, the Business Critical Thinking Skills Test, and the Test of Everyday Reasoning. Peter, a former academic dean and university provost, is a professor of philosophy at Loyola University Chicago. Noreen is a professor of nursing emerita at the University of California-San Francisco.
Become a Subscriber