Critical Thinking in the Business Curriculum

NORA M. BRAUN Augsburg College Minneapolis, Minnesota

ecision making is a daily occurrence in the business world. Time is of the essence, and both managers and workers must sift through a growing volume of information to make decisions. Yet in a survey by the consulting company Kepner-Tregoe, half of the workers and 44% of the managers surveyed reported that issues are not precisely defined before they are addressed (Kepner-Tregoe, 2000). Although limited decision-making time and an abundance of available information are concerns, according to Kepner-Tregoe CEO Quinn Spitzer, the real issue is the lack of critical thinking skills in the workplace (Pascarella, 1997). The ramifications of poor critical thinking in decision making are seen readily in the business headlines. The Enron scandal revealed questionable ethics in financial reporting, but poor investment decisions also put the company on shaky financial ground (Zellner et al., 2001). How can this deficiency in critical thinking for business decision making be corrected? Professor Jerry Wind of the University of Pennsylvanias Wharton School of Business claims, Business schools should really be teaching critical thinking more than anything else (Q&A, 1996, p. S13). The U.S. Department of Labors Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills (1991) made the initial call to Journal of Education for Business

ABSTRACT. The call to make improved critical thinking a national education goal is often heard in the business world, where volumes of information must be reviewed daily for decision making. Business educators are charged with accomplishing the task of improving critical thinking in business school graduates. In this study, the author investigated the steps that business educators are taking to improve critical thinking and the effectiveness of such methods. She summarizes common approaches to critical thinking development in the business curriculum, reports on published results, and proposes additional efforts needed to accomplish this goal.

1. What have business educators and researchers done to date to improve the level of critical thinking in business school graduates? 2. Is there evidence of improvement? 3. How should business educators proceed in teaching critical thinking? Critical Thinking Approaches in the Business Curriculum A review of current literature shows that critical thinking skills are taught in the business curriculum from a number of perspectives. I categorize these approaches into three groups: problembased learning (case studies, live or applied projects),course-content-embedded learning (discussions, debates, guided questioning or scaffolding), and as an element underlying other pedagogies (critical theory, critical reflection, critical systems thinking). All of these approaches have common features that I discuss. Problem-Based Learning Business concepts readily lend themselves to illustration through their practice in the business world. The use of case studies, made popular by the Harvard Business School MBA curriculum and the establishment of Harvard Business School Publishing (HBSP), has long

make critical thinking skills a fundamental requirement for competing in todays global economy. This report fueled support for the enhancement of critical thinking in college graduates as a national education goal (U.S. Department of Education, 1991). Other countries, including the United Kingdom, Australia, and New Zealand, have reiterated the priority for higher education to instill critical thinking as a core competency in college graduates (Pithers & Soden, 2000). It also has driven funding in Japan for a group dedicated to developing the Asian public intellectual (Thaitawat, 2001). Given the magnitude of need for critical thinking skills, I sought to address following questions:

232

been a component of the business curriculum. HBSP publishes case studies that document actual business situations in detail and provide teaching notes for use with each case. Case studies readily illustrate particular business concepts of interest, but business faculty members also find case studies to be the most effective teaching method for developing critical thinking skills (McEwen, 1994; Pithers & Soden, 2000). Using case studies to teach business students to think critically requires more than merely providing a case for students to read. Faculty members must model critical thinking and engage students in productive dialogue (Pithers & Soden, 2000). By following basic problem-solving steps, students develop analysis skills when pulling apart and understanding the case, hone their judgment skills by identifying and evaluating assumptions and alternatives, and develop synthesis skills as they reconstruct the scenario with the modifications (Lavitt, 1992). This approach builds critical thinking ability in a stepwise method as prescribed in Benjamin

Blooms 1956 Taxonomy of Education Objectives, outlined in Table 1. Students identify business concepts illustrated in the case scenario, comprehend the dynamics of concept usage, and evaluate the results. A modification of the case study approach for developing critical thinking is hands-on experience. In the MBA curriculum at Pennsylvanias Wharton School of Business, student teams address actual corporate problems presented by company executives and work with company employees to analyze the situation and provide a recommendation (Q&A, 1996). Muir (1996) reported on a similar approach in a business communications course where students were assigned to communication consulting projects. Placing students into the workplace environment allows them to identify and challenge assumptions and values in the organization, to highlight the context in which action and practices occur, and to explore alternatives to a given situation (Muir, 1996, p. 77). Both approaches, case studies

and actual problem-based learning, provide a framework within the business curriculum for matching practical know-how with theoretical know-why. Course-ContentEmbedded Learning A second approach to developing critical thinking skills is to embed their practice within the students learning of course concepts. Techniques for critically exploring concepts and issues can include guided questioning, classroom discussions and debates, and group exercises in class. Key components to developing student critical thinking in these activities are active engagement of students, instructor modeling of critical thinking, and an emphasis on thought processes rather than simply concept learning (Katsioloudes & Tischio, 2001). Content-embedded critical thinking approaches often use Socratic dialogue or questioning to bring content alive and facilitate deeper learning of content (Celuch & Slama, 1999). For example, a marketing course can pose

TABLE 1. Correlation of Blooms Taxonomy, Problem-Solving Steps, and Critical Thinking Skills Blooms taxonomy: Levels of learning Knowledge Comprehension Application

Problem-solving steps applied to case study 1. Understand the problem situation read the case study identify business concepts embedded/illustrated in case comprehend the effects of the business concepts within the case 2. Analyze the problem situation analyze and evaluate components of the situation and their interactions identify underlying facts and assumptions judge the effectiveness of business concepts in the situation 3. Identify and evaluate alternatives identify other concepts to apply establish criteria to evaluate alternate solutions evaluate the impact and reasoning of alternatives 4. Select/implement alternative judge alternatives

Critical thinking skills applied Know where and how to get information Determine facts and evidence Recognize central thesis or arguments Assemble information into ones own words Identify cause and effect relationships Assess relevance, truth, validity, and strength of information Recognize stated and implied assumptions Identify cause and effect relationships Evaluate information from multiple perspectives Assess strengths and weaknesses of options

Analysis

Synthesis

Draw conclusions and evaluate the effectiveness and justification of the conclusion Evaluate information from multiple perspectives Create multiple options Determine the criteria to use to evaluate options Assess strengths and weaknesses of options Identify cause and effect relationships Evaluate information from multiple perspectives Assess strengths and weaknesses of options

Evaluation

5. Evaluate results evaluate how the alternative changed the case scenario identify potential changes in the business environment that could affect the solution

March/April 2004

233

questions such as, What are qualities of effective advertising? Why? or Evaluate three direct mail pieces in terms of criteria related to advertising deception and unfairness. Provide your reasoning (Celuch & Slama, 1999, p. 136). Course content is balanced with these focused critical thinking exercises to reinforce concepts through the application of critical thinking skills (Celuch & Slama, 1999, 2000). This Socratic type of questioning is extended with the use of instructional scaffolding techniques, which are based on Vygotskys zone of proximal development theory, in which student thinking can be extended to a higher level of development through one-to-one coaching between teacher and student (Bruning, Schraw, & Ronning, 1999, p. 218). Scaffolding allows the instructor to provide selective hints or questions that direct student thinking into new areas and provide perspectives for critical thinking that students might not have pursued. This approach, although time consuming, also aids in developing the students metacognitive awareness of their own thinking (Pithers & Soden, 2000). An Element Underlying Other Pedagogies Development of critical thinking ability in business curriculum is also found

as an element of other pedagogical approaches, including critical theory, critical reflection, and critical systems thinking. These approaches have their own theoretical underpinnings and objectives yet overlap with critical thinking development in the application of basic skills. Critical theory uses critical thinking skills within a framework constructed from its concepts of social constructs, power imbalance, and unequivocal commitment to change for societal good (Prasad & Caproni, 1997). Critical reflection emphasizes critical thinking as a commitment to questioning business assumptions regarding their effect on social justice within the processes of power and the social fabric of institutional structures (Reynolds, 1999). Critical systems thinking applies critical thinking skills in its analysis and intervention for complex societal problem situations through a merger of social theory and general systems thinking (Jackson, 2001). All of these critical approaches to the business curriculum require the development and honing of critical thinking skills to identify and question assumptions, draw inferences about interrelationships in the practice of business theory with regard to the larger scope of the environment, and make judgments on the tradeoffs between societal and individual values. An interdisciplinary cap-

stone course for senior undergraduates in management at Warwick Business School in the United Kingdom provides an example of how a composite of these critical theories is used for critical thinking in the business curriculum (Mingers, 2000). In Table 2, I describe the four aspects of the course approach and the critical thinking skills used. These aspects of the courses critical approach are carried out in a seminar structure, with student presentations and discussions of selected readings and real-life case studies. The only course lecture is the introductory session, in which the course approach and the critical aspects are explained and modeled through an initial case study. Common Aspects and Issues in Critical Thinking Approaches All of the critical thinking approaches found in the business curriculum provide an explicit and intentional focus on critical thinking. Critical thinking requires effort; therefore development of critical thinking skills must be an explicit focus of the course for it to build students metacognitive awareness of their thought processes as well as hone basic skills (Halpern, 1998; Pithers & Soden, 2000). This explicit focus on critical thinking demands modeling of skills by the instructor and active learning activities

TABLE 2. Critical Theories as Interdisciplinary Capstone Course Course aspect Critique of rhetoric Related critical theory Critical thinking Focus of student thinking Evaluation of logic, inferences, and conclusions; questioning of the language used, the form of argument, the validity of premises and assumptions Questioning of assumptions and traditions in organizations, the taken-for-granted, traditional ways of doing things Recognition of multiple perspectives through questioning of single dominant or privileged position Questioning of validity and bias of information and knowledge; the idea of objective, value-free, disinterested knowledge by recognizing it is partial and power-based Critical thinking skills making inferences and deductions identifying assumptions analyzing arguments identifying assumptions questioning and making judgments applying generalization identifying multiple viewpoints making value judgments judging credibility of sources identifying bias evaluating logic

Critique of tradition Critique of authority Critique of objectivity

Critical theory and critical reflection Critical theory and critical reflection Critical systems thinking

Note. The terms in column 1 are from J. Mingers, What is it to be critical? Teaching a critical approach to management undergraduates, 2000, Management Learning, 31(2), pp. 225227.

234

Journal of Education for Business

for student practice of critical thinking. Classroom time is devoted to application of thinking skills in focused exercises, case studies or experiential projects, and group discussions. These activities use class time that traditionally has been dedicated to course content. Pithers & Soden (2000) addressed this issue with the suggestion that first-year discipline-specific knowledge could be reduced to allow the students time to engage in activities which are likely to develop their thinking (p. 246). This conclusion is reiterated by other business educators (Celuch & Slama, 2000; McEwen, 1994). A similar area that must be addressed in approaches for critical thinking development is the building of skill levels. It cannot be assumed that students possess fundamental critical thinking skills such as identifying assumptions and assessing the validity of information without practice and assessment of these skills prior to developing more complex skills (Wolcott, Baril, Cunningham, Fordham, & Pierre, 2002). Skill development also must be focused, intentional, and taught through methods such as course exercises using directed questions and assignments (Celuch & Slama, 1999) and scaffolding techniques that raise student thinking to a higher level (Pithers & Soden, 2000). These skillbuilding techniques exacerbate the previous issue of balancing classroom time between course content and critical thinking development. Yet time constraints impeding critical thinking in the workplace are even stronger (Pascarella, 1997), making the time spent on development of critical thinking in the classroom a valuable trade-off for both students and their future employers. Assessment of Critical Thinking Regarding the curriculum approaches reviewed, empirical assessment data on the success of techniques for developing critical thinking skills are minimal. In the evaluation of their student responses, Celuch and Slama (1999, 2000) used Richard Pauls universal intellectual standards for critical thinking. These standards, which were adopted by the Foundation for Critical Thinking, address clarity, accuracy, precision, relevance, depth, breadth, logic, and signifi-

cance. However, the measurements of success presented in that study are reflections of student course and instructor evaluations and self-evaluations for familiarity and ability with critical thinking skills pre- and postclass, rather than measurements of the increases in student learning. Similar results have been reported in a summary of critical thinking approaches for accounting students (Wolcott et al., 2002) in which the majority of empirical research has been either descriptive (describing student characteristics) or relational (analyzing the degree of association among the educational environment, student characteristics, and educational outcomes) (p. 87). Thus, the issue of evidence of improvement has not been addressed sufficiently; and we must question the value of continued efforts in critical thinking development without empirical assessment data for evaluation of results (Wolcott et al., 2002). Conclusion Although much progress has been made in critical thinking skills development within the business curriculum, additional work is needed to address the transference of skills and the measurement of student improvement. The approaches found in the business curriculum use a number of common practices: an explicit focus on the development of critical thinking skills, modeling of critical thinking, and active learning opportunities for students within the course content. Although it is crucial that critical thinking skills be explicitly developed in the process of acquiring the knowledge deemed as the objectives of education (Glaser, 1984), students can encounter difficulty in applying these skills in new contexts (Halpern, 1998). Critical thinking approaches need to teach students to identify the underlying characteristics of problem structures and should provide a multitude of learning opportunities in varying contexts to promote transference of skills (Halpern, 1998). Interdisciplinary courses such as the management capstone course at Warwick Business School (Mingers, 2000) represent one method of providing exposure to criti-

cal thinking outside of a students specific discipline area. Such courses support the need for the crossfunctional expertise required of todays business executives (Q&A, 1996). Measurement of critical thinking improvement, as with other current assessment movements in higher education, requires a focused commitment and effort toward identification of student learning outcomes and applicable assessment measures of those outcomes. Business curriculum aimed at critical thinking skill development should identify specific skills being addressed, the standards applied to each skill, and acceptable evidence that reflects attainment of those standards. Although these requirements for assessment will place an additional burden on course time constraints, acquisition of empirical data on the effectiveness of the techniques used is crucial to improvement of students thinking abilities. This assessment will require faculty members to rethink and prioritize concepts covered in the course, but it will be beneficial in the long run. Business curriculum is making a contribution to achieving the national education goal for enhanced critical thinking in college graduates, but business education must make a greater effort to effectively prepare business executives who can handle the information volumes and fast-paced decision-making environments of the workplace. We must continue to hone and improve teaching approaches based on good assessment of results and expand student critical thinking opportunities across disciplinary boundaries. With a continued focus on critical thinking within the business curriculum, we will produce the decision makers of tomorrow.
REFERENCES Bloom, B. (1956). Taxonomy of education objectives. London: Longman. Bruning, R., Schraw, G., & Ronning, R. (1999).Cognitive psychology and instruction (3rd ed.). New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. Celuch, K., & Slama, M. (1999). Teaching critical thinking skills for the 21st century: An advertising principles case study. Journal of Education for Business, 74, 134139. Celuch, K., & Slama, M. (2000). Student perceptions of a marketing course taught with the crit-

March/April 2004

235

ical thinking approach. Marketing Education Review, 10, 5764. Glaser, R. (1984). Education and thinking: The role of knowledge. American Psychologist, 39, 93104. Halpern, D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains. American Psychologist, 53(4), 449455. Jackson, M. (2001). Critical systems thinking and practice. European Journal of Operational Research, 128, 233244. Katsioloudes, M. I., & Tischio, V. (2001). Critical thinking in nonprofit management education. Human Systems Management, 20, 4757. Kepner-Tregoe. (2000). Minds at work: How much brainpower are we really using? (Research Summary). Princeton, NJ: Author. Lavitt, D. A. (1992). A case for training. Training & Development, 46(6), 1922. McEwen, B. C. (1994). Teaching critical thinking skills in business education. Journal of Education for Business, 70(2), 99103.

Mingers, J. (2000). What is it to be critical? Teaching a critical approach to management undergraduates. Management Learning, 31(2), 219237. Muir, C. (1996). Using consulting projects to teach critical-thinking skills in business communication. Business Communication Quarterly, 59(4), 7787. Pascarella, P. (1997). The secret of turning thinking into action. Management Review, 86(5), 3839. Pithers, R. T., & Soden, R. (2000). Critical thinking in education: A review. Educational Research, 42, 237249. Prasad, P., & Caproni, P. (1997). Critical theory in the management classroom: Engaging power, ideology, and praxis. Journal of Management Education, 21(3), 284291. Q&A: Professor Jerry Winds got a radical suggestion for business schools: Teach students to think. (1996). Sales & Marketing Management, 148(3), 1215. Reynolds, M. (1999). Critical reflection and man-

agement education: Rehabilitating less hierarchical approaches. Journal of Management Education, 23(5), 537553. Thaitawat, N. (2001, March 22). Critical thinking. Bangkok Post. [Retrieved from Infotrac, pBKPO15733961] U.S. Department of Education. (1991). America 2000: An education strategy (revised ed.). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. U.S. Department of Labor. (1991). What work requires of schools. A SCANS report for America 2000. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Wolcott, S. K., Baril, C. P., Cunningham, B. M., Fordham, D. R., & St. Pierre, K. (2002). Critical thought on critical thinking research. Journal of Accounting Education, 20, 85103. Zellner, W., Forest, A. A., Thornton, E., Coy, P., Timmons, H., Lavelle, L., et al. (2001, December 17). The fall of Enron. Business Week, 3762, 3035.

236

Journal of Education for Business