Collaborative Critical Thinking in Online Environment

Abstract

To determine the factors affected students' participation and critical thinking skill through online discussion the process of learning and teaching in one subject is revised. The findings of research affirmed A) the importance and effects of students' participation in learning process and giving prompt on the base of Socratic questions through discussion to promote critical thinking ability and B) the persistence of students' CT skills after the administration of teaching and the modeling of Socratic questioning in online discussion persuaded through Web Based Bulletin (WBB) discussions.

Full text

Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011) 1881 – 1887
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
1877-0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Selection and/or peer-review under responsibility of the 2nd World Conference on Psychology,
Counselling and Guidance.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.10.366
Procedia
Social and
Behavioral
Sciences
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
WCPCG-2011
Collaborative critical thinking in online environment
Zohreh Khoshneshin
a
Iran,Tehran ,Faculty of Education and Psychology Teacher Training University, Islamic Republic of iran
Abstract
To determine the factors affected students' participation and critical thinking skill through online discussion the process of
learning and teaching in one subject is revised. The findings of research affirmed A) the importance and effects of students'
participation in learning process and giving prompt on the base of Socratic questions through discussion to promote critical
thinking ability and B) the persistence of students' CT skills after the administration of teaching and the modeling of Socratic
questioning in online discussion persuaded through Web Based Bulletin (WBB) discussions.
R1-Background
1.1Collaborative Critical thinking
Collaborative Critical Thinking (CCT) is identified as an instruction method in which students work
together in analysis, inference, evaluation, deductive and inductive reasoning (Gokhale, 2005). This ability will be
facilitated by the use of Socratic Questioning Prompts (SQP) which enable the learner to think on particular lines
on the path of CCT.
Online discussion questions, which reflect differing instructional strategies, can take many forms and it is
important for designers and instructors to understand how the various strategies can impact students' critical thinking
levels.
1.2. The instructional strategies
According to McKnight (2001) critical thinking questions tend to generate more questions in both the
questioner and responder, engaging students in thinking in the discipline they are studying. He suggests a process to
cultivate the critical thinking ability and activate students in online environment by using the prompts like Socratic
questioning.
Online discussions have been heralded as a powerful tool that can assist students in the construction of
knowledge and serve as a scaffold that allows for multiple perspectives, negotiation of meaning, and an
understanding of knowledge gaps a learner may possess (Land.et al., 2007 and Haavind, 2006). Online discussion
questions, which reflect differing instructional strategies, can take many forms and it is important for designers and
instructors to understand how the useful strategy impact students' critical thinking levels. There are several strategies
advocated to help critical thinking ability include: Classroom Assessment Techniques (CATS) Case Study
/Discussion Method: McDade (1995) Cooperative Learning Strategies :Cooper (1995), Using Questions: King
(1995), Conference Style Learning: Underwood & Wald, 1995, Dialogues: Robertson and Rane-Szostak (1996),
Ambiguity: Strohm & Baukus.
Richardson
and Ice (2010) investigate about the effect of using different strategies on the students' level of
critical thinking in online discussions. For the purpose of the study three instructional strategies used in the
development and implementation of online discussion questions were examined open-ended (or topical) discussion.
The finding of their research on critical thinking achievement levels indicated that students generally scored lower
Open access under CC BY-NC-ND license.

1882 Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011) 1881 – 1887
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
2
on the open-ended discussion. They suggest that a crucial factor in effective use of online discussions for higher-
order thinking resides with students' comfort levels and to foster critical thinking, instructors need to assist learners
in gaining comfort and confidence in the online discussion format.
Yang (2002) advocate the use of structured Web-based Bulletin Board (WBB) discussions with Socratic questioning
to enhance students' critical thinking skills in distance education. His study investigated the effects of using
structured WBB discussions with Socratic questioning to enhance students' critical thinking (CT) skills in
university-level correspondence-style distance learning courses. The results from the inferential statistical analysis
and content analysis indicate: (a) the facilitation of structured WBBs significantly improved students' CT skills and
attitudes toward learning via WBBs, but not the attitudes toward WBBs; (b) the teaching and modeling of Socratic
questioning helped students demonstrate CT skills at a higher level in the process of making judgments and
decisions; and (c) after exposure to and modeling of Socratic questioning, students maintained their CT skills
without the instructor's further facilitation. These findings suggest that using structured WBB discussions with
Socratic questioning could be an effective pedagogy to enhance students' critical thinking skills.
At the first step of the present study the process of discussion in virtual class managed by using Socratic
Questioning Prompts (SQP). At the end of each class two question proposed by the teacher to be answered after
discussion in discussion board for several students (seven of them) and some other (7 students) should answer
individually. The kind of questioning proposed in this step giving opportunity to the students to have discussion and
through the discussion, they could achieve a deeper understanding of the topic.
1.3. Teaching and assessing critical thinking
There is much talk given to the concept of critical thinking and related skills in learning and instruction,
and as many definitions and perspectives as there are disciplines. Facione and Facione (2007) define critical
thinking as ―reflective decision-making and thoughtful problem solving about what to believe and do‖ (p. 44).
Similarly, Halpern(2003)defines critical thinking as ―cognitive skills and strategies that increase the likelihood of a
desired outcome… thinking that is purposeful, reasoned, and goal-directed — the kind of thinking involved in
solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions‖ (2003, p. 6).
California Academic Press (CAP), (1990) categorized and explained the meaning of critical thinking sub-
skills and identified the meaning of critical thinking ability as the sum of abilities in:
• Inductive reasoning
• Deductive reasoning
• Analysis
• Inference
• Evaluation
The sum of abilities: The sum of the abilities such as analysis, inference, and evaluation are core skills in critical
thinking. We use these skills in both inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. The total can also be calculated
by summing the induction and deduction values.
Facione (1990) explained experts’ viewpoints on this subject, and he noted that experts find good critical
thinking to include both a skill dimension and a dispositional dimension. Further CT includes cognitive skills in: 1)
Interpretation 2) analysis 3) evaluation 4) inference 5) explanation and 6) self - regulation. Each of these six is at the
core of CT. Associated with each are criteria by which its execution can be meaningfully evaluated.
Two assumptions are proposed in the present study. The first one is about using SQP as a teaching method
and allocating time to have discussion after the virtual class through discussion board which leads to promote
students’ abilities at different levels of learning. It is also assumed that the students’ abilities would be promoted by
a repeat of this method and a combination of these two processes (using SQP in virtual class and discussion board)
affects learning skills positively. Designing of this process through a focus on the kinds of meaning construction
provides an opportunity to the course content designer and teacher in the virtual universities to reconstruct meaning
of contents in the future or have a new approach to pursue. To reveal these objectives there are processes designed
by the researcher to teach how to teach and how to promote the critical thinking ability of students.
One course (Company Law 1) was selected as a sample in the study. Four questions are asked to students in
different groups in two sessions (two questions in each session). These questions were about the condition of

1883
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011) 1881 – 1887
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
3
making or cancelling contracts in different situations. The students had to answer the questions according to their
inferences from any articles of Commercial Law (inductive reasoning) or evaluate the evidences which lead them to
a correct conclusion (deductive reasoning). The students’ promotions in different levels of learning skills had a
meaningful relation at one glance when one looked at them. These promotions were proved by analysis which is
explained in the next section. There are two different kinds of questions which asked students in two sessions as
inductive or deductive kinds of reasoning, such as:
• There is a contract between a tradesman who is bankrupt and most of creditors (according to articles of law
No.480). It is confirmed later that one of the creditor’s demand who realized as creditor is voided. Is this
contract void or not? (It needs deductive reasoning)
• A commission factor man became bankrupt before giving money to seller and goods to commander, which one of
the sellers or the commander are permitted to releasing the goods and which one can be considered as creditor?(It
needs inductive reasoning.) The kinds of reasoning in different levels are explained as follows:
• Inductive: according to article of law (No 530) if a contractor became bankrupt and seller before
selling back the goods, the commanding is creditor because of consideration.
• Deductive: it is not possible to void a contact between a tradesman and majority of creditors
even it recognized later that one of the creditor’s demands became void.
• Evaluation: (according to the above deductive reasoning), it is not possible, because we need a
special reason or explicit wording in the articles of law.
• Analysis (propose): an article of law (No 423) voids some kinds of contracts, but it is not
applicable to all.
• Inferences: the contract is confirmable, if it is not void in any case.
Using this method could prove to make the students more active in the virtual class. It is explained in more
detail in the next section.
During the teaching-learning process, there is a suggestion to the teacher to lead students on the basis of
questions which are Socratic kinds of questioning prompts. In each class the teacher asked two questions to the
students who attended the class and led them to have discussion according to SQP. It helped them to find out how to
give answer. It is supposed that the final answer to these questions underlies two main and highest levels of learning
(which includes deductive and inductive kinds of reasoning). It was a private panel discussion between the teacher
and the researcher in the virtual class. This panel has been used to give suggestions according to the Socratic
questioning model to the teacher by the researcher. Here are some examples of questions which used as a prompt:
• To whi
ch one of law articles can we refer this question? How could you find out? Could you explain your reason to
us? Do you have any evidence for that? What caused you to feel this way?
2. Method
The author of this study were interested in gaining insight into how employing the kinds of Socratic questions as an
instructional strategy through discussion in virtual class engaged students in meaningful learning as promote
CTS(Critical Thinking Skill) and whether or not the persuade of discussion in discussion board promote student's
levels of critical thinking.
To analyze the effectiveness of the virtual class management by using SQP and group discussion on
discussion board and their effects on different learning skills, dependent and independent variables are:
- Using SQP and discussion board (as independent variables).
- Learning skills at different levels, critical thinking ability and learning individually or in group (as
dependent variables).
To analyze the effect of experimental method; paired t-test was used. The details of data analysis, findings
and some interpretations are presented by follows.

1884 Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011) 1881 – 1887
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
4
3. Findings
3.1. Effect of SQP on learning skills used in virtual class (in two sessions)
Data analysis revealed the meaningful difference between the students’ learning skills in inference,
deductive and inductive reasoning during two sessions (Session One and Session Two). It is postulated in fiigure1.
Figure 1: Effects of using SQP on learning skills (session 1 as compared to session 2)
It is indicative of the usefulness of using SQP when it was approached during the two sessions. The scale of
CCT (which is the sum of all abilities) also has a meaningful difference. It means that the strategy is able to promote
the students’ abilities in inference, inductive, and deductive reasoning as much as it could cover disabilities in the
other levels.
3.2. Effect of using group discussion on different levels of learning skills (in two sessions)
By using paired t- test analysis, it is revealed that leading students to have discussion (in discussion Board)
after using SQP strategy in the virtual class has been gradually able to promote students’ abilities in: analysis,
deductive reasoning and CCT total.
Figure 2: Effects of group discussion on learning skills in session 1 as compared to session 2
Students’ learning abilities when they lead to discussion through a discussion board in the second
session indicate the effects of the process on the promotion of abilities such as: analysis, deductive reasoning, and

1885
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011) 1881 – 1887
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
5
CCT total score. Students’ ability in inference level is not changed but it is at the highest score. Evaluation as an
ability could not be promoted through the process while deductive level was promoted considerably. And inductive
reasoning as a learning level at the highest score is not changed. The students’ ability on CCT total is nearly as twice
which indicates the meaningful effect of the process.
3.3. Effect of using SQP and group discussion on the students’ learning skills (in the first session)
To answer the question about the effect of using prompt in comparison with discussion in discussion board
on learning skills, the data shows that these two styles had different effect on skills.
Figure 3: Effects of SQP and group discussion on learning skills in the first session
Students’ learning abilities in the levels such as: Inference and inductive reasoning are the best through
discussion even in the first session. Through individual learning students’ ability only at the analysis level is
different which has made a significant difference. It is proposed that the repeat of the process affects the leaning
abilities at all levels. Meanwhile going through the process more frequently could prove the effects of learning in the
group. These differences are postulated and are more visible in the next figure.
3.4 Effect of using SQP and group discussion on discussion board on learning skills (in the second session)
To answer the question about the effects of having discussion through a discussion board in comparison
with learning individually and the effects of repeating the process on learning levels, the related process is designed
and approached. Paired t- test could reveal that these two methods have different effects on all learning levels.

1886 Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011) 1881 – 1887
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
6
Figure 4: Effects of SQP and group discussion on skills in the second session
It is observable in the table that group learning style through the sessions has been able to promote students
abilities. When focusing on the differences of mean, it is clear that the means of different levels of skill in group are
more than individual (except evaluation). In the case of evaluation skill, the mean of learning individually is more
than learning on the base of learning by SQP method in addition to discussion. It is observed that the effect of this
process on evaluation level is neutralized because of the sample size and the limitation of the session to repeat the
process.
4. Discussion
As it is explained Yang (2004) found the efficacy of teaching and modeling Socratic questioning in developing
students' CT skills in structured WBB discussions. As a useful strategy, we had an approach to the process of collaborative
critical thinking by using several disciplined questions from students during virtual classes and leading them on to have
discussion through discussion board identified in one subject (Company law). It is found that the mentioned process help
students to promote their learning abilities at different levels and also in critical thinking ability which has been shown as
the sum of all abilities. Implication of the procedures used in the study suggest improved teaching – learning procedures
through the virtual class and group discussion board, course content design and construction of meaning and identifying
the format of learning environment. To ensure effective use of the research findings about CCT in online learning
environment several strategies are suggested including the following:
• Consider and prepare the devices which help teachers to teach how to think. It is possible through infusion
teaching for thinking in regular classroom instruction (e.g. virtual class) and following these activities in
group discussion on discussion board or other discussion group facilities as it is approached by the
researcher in this study. The devices which have been used by the researcher are about a new approach to
using SQP in the virtual class. It leads students to have discussion after class following the main discussed
subject. For this, first of all think of construction of meaning in any special subject by the teacher (like
Company Law in this research study).
• Construct and manage the process of group discussion and its dynamics in a virtual class as it is approached by
the researcher and generally proposed in any other communicative model of collaborative learning.
References
Ceecez, D. Kecmanoric.(2000). Web based learning and technology: opportunities and challenges, India: Idea Publishing Group
Campos, M. (2003.. A constructivist method for the analysis of networked cognitive communication, the assessment of collaborative learning and
knowledge-building. Journal of A synchronous Learning Networks (JALN). (8)Issues –April.
Cooper, J. L. (1995). Cooperative learning and critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22(1), 7-8.
Facione, P. (1990).Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction .American
philosophical association, the Delhi Report. "ERIC" document, ED 315-423.Millbrae California: the California Academic Press
Evans, B.T. Jonathan, O. Handley, D. Simon, J. (2003). A theory of hypothetical thinking. New York: John Wiley and sons’ Ltd
Gokhale, A. (2005).Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of education, 7(1), 112
Haavind, S. (2006). Key factors of online course design and instructor facilitation that enhance collaborative dialogue among learners. Paper
presented at the Annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA
Jones, M. Haynes, B.T. (1999). Teaching thinking skills: mapping the arguments for curriculum choices revisited. Paper presented at the
Australian association for research in education conference. Adelaide. Retrieved from: www.google.com
Johnson, D.W. Johnson, R.T. (1986). Cooperative learning in the classroom. Journal of education, 14(10)12-13
King, A. (1995). Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking across the curriculum: Inquiring minds really do want to know:
Using questioning to teach critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 13-17.
Land,S.M. Choi, I and Ge, X.(2007), Scaffolding online discussions to promote reflection and revision of understanding, International Journal of
Instructional Media 34 (4) (2007).
McDade, S. A. (1995). Case study pedagogy to advance critical thinking. Teaching Psychology, 22(1), 9-10.
Neenan, Michael.(2008).Using Questioning in Coaching. -Journal of Rational-Emotive & Cognitive-Behavior Therapy .Volume 27, Number 4,
249-264,
Olivares, Orlando. J.(2005). Collaborative critical thinking: conceptualizing defining a new constructs known construct. Retrieved from:
http://education.curtin.edu.au/iier/iier15/Olivares.html
Oliver, R. Stephenson, J. (2001). Teaching and learning online.Kogan Page LTD

1887
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences 30 (2011) 1881 – 1887
Zohreh Khoshneshin / Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 00 (2011) 000–000
7
Ornstein, A.C. Hunkins.A. (1998). Curriculum: foundation, principles, and issues. Needham Height: Allyn and Bacon.
Paul, R. (1990). Critical thinking: How to prepare students for a rapidly changing world. Foundation for critical thinking. Santa Rosa,Calif.
Richardson, Jennifer. Ice, Phil.(2010).Investigating students' level of critical thinking across instructional strategies in online discussion. The
Internet and Higher Education,Volume 13, Issues 1-2, January 2010, Pages 52-59
Robertson, J. F. Rane-Szostak, D. (1996). Using dialogues to develop critical thinking skills: A practical approach. Journal of Adolescent & Adult
Literacy, 39(7), 552-556.
Strohm, S. M. Baukus, R. A. (1995). Strategies for fostering critical thinking skills. Journalism and Mass Communication Educator, 50 (1), 55-
62.
Underwood, M. K., Wald, R. L. (1995). Conference-style learning: A method for fostering critical thinking with heart. Teaching Psychology,
22(1), 17-21.
Yang,Carolyn(2002).Use of structured Web-based bulletin board discussions with Socratic questioning to enhance students' critical
thinking skills in distance education
. Thesis submitted for Ph.D. Purdue University. Retrieved from
http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/dissertations/AAI3105051.Date:2002