讨论课中的创新思维与批判思维的能力发展
张在新
北京外国语大学英语学院
（讲座摘要）
讲座内容简介：
以英语专业讨论课为例（西方文化与电影解读、媒体创意与思维陷阱、批判思维与议论文等课程），探讨创新思维和批判思维能力发展的教学方法，以便培养学生用开放视角和理性方法看世界的人文素养。
讲座语言：汉语、英语PPT及英语电视广告、影视片段等视频和文字资料（需要使用多媒体设备）
讲座人简介：
张在新，男，北京外国语大学英语学院教授。教授西方当代文论、西方文化与电影解读、媒体创意与思维陷阱、创新思维与记叙文、批判思维与议论文等课程。
讲座内容提纲
思维方法专设课程、注入课程 （Jones and Idol, 1990；Geertsen, 2003）
社会文化讨论课
1.西方文化与电影解读（思维方法注入）
2.媒体创意与思维陷阱（思维方法专设）
技能课（讨论）（思维方法注入）
3.创新思维（写前阶段）与记叙文
4.批判思维与议论文
学生的思维转变
角色转变：“板凳队员”?“场上队员”
自主学习，进行高层次思维活动和实践训练
教师的思维转变
以学生为中心的讨论 / “苏格拉底式讨论” (Socratic discussion）+ 以教师为中心的讨论（Teacher-fronted discussion) (Billings & Fitzgerald, 2002; Kipp-Newbold, 2010)
角色转变：“课堂权威”?“场外指导”（学生为中心）
设计教学活动、对学生提示/激励/启发/引导/促进/评价（教师引导）
1. 以学生为中心：理解、看法
挑战备课/主讲课的统一性：思维活动的灵活性
（女性主义/心理分析）
2. 因势利导：引导学生自己从A点走到B点
挑战自我满足感，观点出处让位于学生
（女性主义话题讨论：婚姻、异性装扮）
3. 补充说明
挑战知识结构和即兴发挥的能力
（异性装扮；女性地位 – 批判思维）
4. 给学生留有思考余地：观点、表达方式
挑战完美主义态度
讨论课激发创新思维
1. 教师不首先发表看法/学生畅所欲言，思维广度
--suspend judgment/fluency, flexibility, originality
2.挑战约定俗成的观点
--a questioning attitude toward existing beliefs
3.发表不同看法
--the reversal method/changing the entry point
创新思维
Being generative
“Judgment is suspended during the generative stage of thinking in order to be applied during the selective stage.” (Creative vs. Critical)
Being effective
“Being right means being right all the time. Being effective means being right only at the end” (De Bono 1970).
思维认知定式 (Perceptual blocks to creativity)
三S思维定式 (The three S’s)：
老套陈规 (stereotype)
自我限制 (self-imposed limits)
信息饱和 (saturation)
创新思维的特点
流畅性（fluency）：思维的广阔性
灵活性（flexibility）：思维种类的多样性
独特性（originality）：思维的新颖性
创新思维方法
任意词激发 (Random Word Stimulation)
左右脑（Left-brain and Right-brain）
方法-目标分析 (Means-ends Analysis)
逆向思维 (The Reversal Method)
切入点变换 (changing the entry point),
创意清单 (checklist for new ideas)
激发批判性思维/提高表达能力（以写作能力为例）
Critical Thinking: Universal Intellectual Standards
Linda Elder and Richard Paul
1. Clarity (清晰): Could you elaborate further on that point? Could you express that point in another way? Could you give me an illustration? Could you give me an example?
(写作能力：Paragraph development)
2. Accuracy (准确): Is that really true? How could we check that? How could we find out if that is true?
(写作能力：Every premise in an argument/syllogism must be true, in order to accept the conclusion to be true)
3. Precision (精确): Could you give more details? Could you be more specific?
(写作能力：Using specific details)
4. Relevance (关联): How is that connected to the question? How does that bear on the issue?
(写作能力：Addressing the audience)
5. Depth (深度): How does your answer address the complexities in the question? How are you taking into account the problems in the question? Is that dealing with the most significant factors?
(写作能力：Problem/solution, fallacy avoided: oversimplification)
6. Breadth (广度): Do we need to consider another point of view? Is there another way to look at this question? What would this look like from a conservative standpoint? What would this look like from the point of view of...?
(写作能力：Argumentation: both sides of an issue)
7. Logic (逻辑): Does this really make sense? Does that follow from what you said? How does that follow? But before you implied this and now you are saying that; how can both be true?
(写作能力：Discussions about fallacies, induction, deduction, statistics)
8. Significance (意义): Is this the most important problem to consider? Is this the central idea to focus on? Which of these facts are most important?
(写作能力：Thesis statement: central point of a paper)
9. Fairness (公平): Do I have any vested interest in this issue? Am I sympathetically representing the viewpoints of others?
(写作能力：Fallacy avoided: straw man)
批判性思维
理性特质 (logos)
精神特质 (ethos)
情感特质 (pathos)
需求分析 (needs analysis)
逻辑错误 (Fallacies)
1. 求助于情感 (appeal to emotion)
2. 极端选择 (false dilemma)
3. 关联不当 (non sequitur):
4. 新潮诉求 (appeal to novelty)
5. 传统诉求 (appeal to tradition)
6. 错误类比 (faulty Analogy)
7. 含混不清 (equivocation)
8. 急于归纳 (hasty generalization)
9. 人身攻击 (ad hominem)
10. 良好意图 (good intentions)
11. 不当权威 (appeal to authority)
12. 随大流 (bandwagon)
13. 表面文章 (tokenism)
14. 以错对错 (two wrongs make a right)
15. 陷阱问题 (loaded question)
16. 过于简单 (oversimplification)
17. 可疑原因 (post hoc)
18. 转移话题 (red herring)
19. 耸人听闻 (slippery slope)
20. 稻草人 (straw man)
21. 隐瞒证据 (suppressed evidence)
22. 假定证实（begging the question）
参考文献
张在新（主编）《大学英语写作教程——从创新思维到批判思维》，外语教学与研究出版社，2014年。
Allen, Matthew. Smart Thinking: Skills for Critical Understanding and Writing. 2nd ed. Melbourne: Oxford UP, 2004.
Billings, Laura and Jill Fitzgerald. “Dialogic Discussion and the Paideia Seminar.” American Educational Research Journal 39.4 (2002): 907-941.
Browne, M. Neil and Stuart M. Keeley. Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking. 11th ed. Boston: Pearson, 2015.
Cavender, Nancy and Howard Kahane. Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric: The Use of Reason in Everyday Life. 11th ed. Belmont: Wadsworth, 2010.
Chesla, Elizabeth L. Critical Thinking and Logic Skills for College Students. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1999.
De Bono, Edward. Lateral Thinking: A Textbook of Creativity. Middlesex: Penguin, 1982.
Geertsen, H. Reed. “Rethinking Thinking about Higher-Level Thinking.” Teaching Sociology 31.1 (2003): 1-19.
Jones, Beau F. and Lorna Idol. Dimensions of Thinking and Cognitive Instruction. Hillsdale: Erlbaum, 1990.
Kipp-Newbold. “That's Fierce! Collaboration in the English Classroom.” The English Journal 99.5 (2010): 74-78.
Moore, Brooke Noel and Richard Parker. Critical Thinking, 10th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 2012.
评论