Critical Thinking Evaluation
Critial Evaluation of an Academic Source
NMN
Capella University ED5001
Critial Evaluation of an Academic Source This paper is a critical evaluation regarding the suitability of using scholarly articles as an academic source. We will analyze the “Critical Thinking: An Extended Definition” that discusses various scholar definiitons on what is critical thinking and the process of critical thinking.
Checklist for Critical Evaluation
Peer Review Is the article peer reviewed? This article is a peer review. Is the article primary, secondary, or tertiary? This article is tertiary.
Main Issue What is the main issue or problem the author is focusing on in this article? The main issue that the author is focusing on is the idea that in the academic world the word critical thinking is used frequently, but the way it is defined is so broad that at times it is hard to apply these definitions. It seems that various scholars have a different definition for critical thinking, and in most cases the definitions are lacking in terms of giving direction on the process of thinking critically.
Significance of the Issue Discuss the significance of the issue which is the focus of the article. The significance of the issue in this article is the author is trying to tell those in the academic world that the idea of critical thinking is so broad that those in the various disciplines need to see there needs to be continuous discussion regarding the idea of critical thinking. This idea that there’s no one answer with reagrds to defining critical thinking. Why is it important? I think its important because according to the article that the different disciplines have a different way of looking at critical thinking. This main reason is why the author feels that everyone should discuss this idea of critical thinking on a continuos basis. Having discussions on a continuous basis allows scholars from various disciplines to look at
NMN
Capella University ED5001
Critial Evaluation of an Academic Source This paper is a critical evaluation regarding the suitability of using scholarly articles as an academic source. We will analyze the “Critical Thinking: An Extended Definition” that discusses various scholar definiitons on what is critical thinking and the process of critical thinking.
Checklist for Critical Evaluation
Peer Review Is the article peer reviewed? This article is a peer review. Is the article primary, secondary, or tertiary? This article is tertiary.
Main Issue What is the main issue or problem the author is focusing on in this article? The main issue that the author is focusing on is the idea that in the academic world the word critical thinking is used frequently, but the way it is defined is so broad that at times it is hard to apply these definitions. It seems that various scholars have a different definition for critical thinking, and in most cases the definitions are lacking in terms of giving direction on the process of thinking critically.
Significance of the Issue Discuss the significance of the issue which is the focus of the article. The significance of the issue in this article is the author is trying to tell those in the academic world that the idea of critical thinking is so broad that those in the various disciplines need to see there needs to be continuous discussion regarding the idea of critical thinking. This idea that there’s no one answer with reagrds to defining critical thinking. Why is it important? I think its important because according to the article that the different disciplines have a different way of looking at critical thinking. This main reason is why the author feels that everyone should discuss this idea of critical thinking on a continuos basis. Having discussions on a continuous basis allows scholars from various disciplines to look at
References: Capella University. (n.d.). Critical thinking model. Retrieved from http://media.capella.edu/CourseMedia/PSYC4900/criticalThinking/criticalThinking_wrapper.asp