A Technical Writing Course Aimed at Nurturing Critical Thinking Skills

Author: Masao Kanaoka
Published 24 August, 1999

Designing effective technical documents requires insightful and well-designed thinking strategies. Experienced writers--usually good problem solvers--practice critical thinking to identify the problems arising out of conflicting goals and agendas. Problem solving starts with problem finding (Flower 1994), and critical thinking plays a vital role in achieving the resultant writing goals. This article describes the function of critical thinking and its practical application in a technical writing course in an occupational setting. A solid understanding of critical knowledge will enhance novice writers' capability of handling problems and making appropriate decisions.

While critical thinking is the subject of some of our oldest pedagogical studies, the dialogues of Plato, recent literature on critical thinking begins with Bloom's taxonomy in 1956. He classified critical thinking into six categories: knowledge, comprehension, application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation (Halonen 1995). Since Bloom's taxonomy, many definitions and descriptions of critical thinking have appeared in a variety of occupational contexts. Nevertheless, they tend to have common or overlapping characteristics: Kuhar (1998) simply states that critical thinking is "thinking about thinking" (p. 80). Carole Wade (1995) defines it as "the ability and willingness to assess claims and make objective judgments on the basis of well-supported reasons" (p. 24-25). According to Angelo (1995), most formal definitions characterize critical thinking as "the intentional application of rational, higher order thinking skills, such as analysis, synthesis, problem recognition and problem solving, inference, and evaluation" (p. 6). Rather than fastening onto a single prescriptive definition, Paul (1990) suggests we remain open to wide-ranging conceptions of critical thinking, since the concept is so complex in our increasingly complicated society.

In higher education, Glen (1995) claims preparation in critical thinking is essential for "true autonomy" in such a society (p. 170). He explicitly calls for introducing and exploring self-motivation and creativity-based critical thinking in the classroom. If, as its etymology suggests, a liberal education is an education suitable for free persons, we need to develop pedagogies enabling our students to acquire critical knowledge as the backbone of their "intellectual maturity" (p. 170). Higher education, as Glen suggests, usually involves bringing a student to the front line of current social discourse in a given, particular discipline. The nurture of each student's critical knowledge, on the other hand, demands a flexible and wide-ranging educational setting, mindful of a variety of social and political forces. Ever-changing social, economic, and political situations require higher-order practical thinking skills.

While fast-growing technology helps our society become more informed, it demands enhanced critical knowledge to make well-informed decisions: the power to identify and analyze problems, generate ideas, and distinguish accurate from flawed information sources in the daily blizzard. In the US, for instance, the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) now includes not only reading and math but critical thinking skills, and President Clinton has called for new ways to assess such skills in schools. In an interview at the 6th International Conference on Thinking, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Robert Swarts, University of Massachusetts Boston psychology professor explains: "If you make a choice and can't come up with reasons for that choice, or if the choice leads to a lot of negative consequences, it's easy to judge that it wasn't a good choice" (Academics, 1994). The quality of thinking, particularly in higher education, must be evaluated based on critical knowledge (creativity, self-motivation, well-reasoned argument for good ideas, and insightful judgment) to establish intellectual autonomy.

Critical thinking involves both cognitive and metacognitive elements. According to Hanley (1995), cognitive skills take information, data, as their object: they encode data, transform, organize, integrate, categorize, store, and retrieve them: familiar examples are the 3 R's, outlining, memorizing, recognizing and recalling, following a method or algorithm.

Metacognitive skills, however, are skills in monitoring and controlling one's own mental processes and states of knowledge; that is, they take as their object the cognitive skills themselves: "Metacognition is the awareness, monitoring, and control of one's cognitive processes" (King, 1995, p. 16). For example, Kuhar (1998) mentions two components: "identifying and challenging assumptions" (p. 80). We might add examples like weighing and assessing our judgments, choosing among heuristics or methods of problem-solving, judging whether one's unaided skills are sufficient to the task, whether more research or a new approach is necessary. In short, metacognitive skill involves the deliberate control of what to think about and how to think in order to maximize progress and minimize error.

While this theoretical distinction may aid planners of critical thinking curricula, in practice, cognition and metacognition are intertwined: Even as a strictly cognitive process, critical thinking is recursive, in that students discover problems, make inferences, reach tentative conclusions, then apply their cognitive skills to their own conclusions as new problems in turn, as they approach their goal. Underwood and Wald (1995) point out that critical thinking, knowledge, and skill are all interdependent. As we will see, those activities that Hanley calls "cognitive" often have a metacognitive dimension as well.

In technical writing, for example, writers need to recognize the importance of audience awareness. And they need to recognize the gaps between that inferred cognitive state and their own. This metacognitive skill plays a crucial role in the cognitively appropriate identification, discovery, encoding, and organizing of information. If they fail to identify the audience level, their writing usually misses the target, communicates with no specific purpose, and fails to meet the audience needs. This applies to most business and technical documents. Writers in the workplace, for instance, take deliberate approaches to audience analysis (individual-to-group level, needs, current problems, possible adverse effects, etc.) while collecting information and comparing with the past records. In doing so, they find problems (in the past, the current, and prospective in the near future), develop practical assumptions and finally make well-assured decisions to attain the goal. Metacognitive and cognitive critical thinking reciprocally reinforce each other throughout.

The terms case study and discussion method are often used interchangeably for role-plays, written exercises, and other realistic simulations (McDade, 1995). Case study refers to the use of a case (a written description of a problem or situation) to present a problem for analysis; discussion method focuses on the process of the pedagogy--the method of facilitating a structure or preplanned discussion for students through analyzing a piece of material. A case is "a story about a situation that is carefully designed to include only facts arranged in a chronological sequence" (McDade, 1995, p. 9). The function of a case study is to create realistic laboratories in the classroom to apply research skills, decision-making processes, and critical thinking abilities.

In teaching technical writing, case study pedagogy is useful in nurturing what McDade calls "first-person analysis": identifying the sources and nature of conflicts and the dynamics of behavior, preparing solutions, anticipating and assessing possible results through decisions and actions (p. 9). Students design and apply theoretical constructs in a recursive, empirical manner, going back and forth between theory and practice. The more realistic the occupational setting--business title, assigned job, specific audience current business and technical constrains at workplace, etc.--the more sophisticated and strategic the students' self-motivation, self-insight, and critical knowledge will become. As a professional education course, technical communication seeks situations which emphasize hands-on writing and problem-solving skills. Consequently, the quality of case pedagogy, especially in professional courses, depends on the extent of the instructors' discourse-minded preparations--how practically and realistically occupational setting can be presented in the classroom.

The benefits of case studies can be summarized as follows:

• Emphasizing the process of analyzing information.
• Contextualizing understanding.
• Identifying and challenging assumptions.
• Imagining alternatives and exploring them for strengths and weaknesses.
• Promoting integrated learning by incorporating theory into practice and practice into theory.
• Developing critical listening by listening to diversified thinking processes of others.
• Developing and testing theories of audience and organization function.
• Learning cooperatively--teamwork, job, and collaborative learning, working together in small groups and in the classroom to solve problems, then to serve the most goals.
• Experiencing, exploring, and testing alternative ways of thinking.
• Considering different perspectives as various team members present ideas, analyses, and solutions beyond the reach of any single writer.

The case study method will ruin itself, however, if it oversimplifies problem solving, provides inadequate guidance for its social dimensions, or ignores its highly conflicted nature in everyday life. Bernstein (1995) concludes that any theory of problem solving or critical thinking as an aspect of problem solving "must be grounded in a more socially based view of knowledge and cognition" (p. 23). Problem-solving does not take place in a social vacuum.

For example, written assignments stimulate classroom writers to enhance their active learning spontaneously, but only if they are designed with care: Wade (1995) suggests that writing is an essential ingredient in critical thinking instruction, since it promotes greater self-reflection and the taking of broader perspectives than does oral expression. But for writers to get their full benefit, consequently, written assignments must leave time for reflection and careful consideration of reasons for taking a position or making an assertion. Writers need enough reflective time to (a) examine evidence (b) avoid personal and emotional reasoning (c) avoid oversimplification.

(Wade actually lists eight criteria for critical writing but acknowledges the limitations of working memory and realistic achievement in a semester course that must also cover basic content: (a) ask questions and be willing to wonder, (b) analyze assumptions and biases, (c) examine evidence, (d) analyze assumptions and biases, (e) avoid emotional reasoning, (f) avoid oversimplification, (g) consider alternative interpretations, and (h) tolerate uncertainty.)

In examining evidence, students need to appreciate the difference between evidence and speculation and to recognize that ideas and opinions may vary in validity according to the strength of evidence. One approach is to show students a variety of print or on-line materials or audiovisuals to cite as evidence. To discourage oversimplification, or overgeneralizing from limited data, ask students to look for competence gaps in work performance: For instance, what are the points of distinction between pieces by writers accustomed to high-tech writing and those who are not? Or between experienced writers and novice ones working on the same project? They will soon grasp that fact-based reasoning, not emotionally-tainted opinions or speculation, results in superior argumentation and decisive conclusions.

In my technical writing class, I provide science and technology news from the Internet. Most stories are related to daily life technologies such as automobiles, electric appliances and computers, and focused on Japanese industries. In a bid to stimulate the students' critical thinking activities with their accumulated information and knowledge of technologies, I usually prepare two opposite stories--for example, one success story and one failure--in the same business field. Through the Internet, for instance, I picked up a successful cost-cutting and energy-saving story of the Honda of America Manufacturing (HAM) plant (Appendix I). Meanwhile, I presented a news article covering the sluggish business performance by a Honda arm in Thailand. Juxtaposing these opposite stories helps students recognize the critical, distinctive and decisive points in technology and business management: finding and analyzing major problems and their source or nature. Referring to the data provided in the stories, my students examine numerical evidence and related facts, and are further encouraged to assess evidence critically, avoid oversimplification, or emotional or personal speculation.

I urge my students to work on purpose analyzer--a sheet with four critical questions in writing--to clarify each student's thoughts on the paper. (See figure 1)

Before writing, use the Purpose Analyzer to clarify your thoughts:

Purpose Analyzer

1. Why are you writing?

--Can you specify your writing goal?

2. What do you want to accomplish with your writing?

--To inform, persuade, share experience, or what else?

3. What action do you want your readers to take after their reading?

--Taking up a new action, reflecting on experience, or what else?

4. What challenge do you hope to bring about?

--Readers will adopt your proposal; they will change their ideas and behaviors; or what else?

This is quite helpful in designing goal-directed statements of purpose which often appear in the opening paragraphs of technical reports. Finally I give them some writing assignments in a related case:

Honda's head office in Japan is thinking of closing down its Thailand factory if it cannot drastically improve its cost-cutting efforts, including energy saving. The staff in Tokyo cite HAM's drastic energy reduction as something applicable to the Thai plant. As a staff member at the Tokyo office, your job is to write an informal technical report that eventually urges the Thai factory to follow HAM's successful energy-cutting strategies.

Here is the overall problem-solving writing process to achieve the writing goal--designing a short technical document under a case:

• Make a digest of the Internet news (Honda of America Manufacturing's energy-saving story) then understand the whole text.
• Check technical terms and mark the parts related to this writing assignment.
• With the Purpose Analyzer clarify the writing goal.
• Design a short technical report with an argumentative statement of purpose.

It is difficult to evaluate each case-assisted writing assignment as a whole unit. I instead try to focus on each student's goal-directed critical thinking strategies that can be recognized through the paper. My evaluation therefore emphasizes the critical, logical and argumentative context armed with scrutinized evidence rather than writing with few mechanical errors or various information just listed to support the student's ideas. To this end, it might be useful to ask the students to submit diagrams describing the dynamics of their critical thinking processes from the initial information gathering level to the final decision making stage. Consequently, such evaluation can lead to good writing . "Good writing is a process of thinking, writing, revising, thinking, and revising, until the idea is fully developed" (Franke, 1989, p. 13). In other words, writing is not a static thing but a rapid changing technic (Mathes and Stevenson, 1991). Writing must be a challenge for the nurture of our critical knowledge and intellectual maturity.

Through the case study writing assignment, my students in technical writing course recognize the importance of critical thinking and problem solving activities. Most students, as a result, claim that they have understood the mission of technical writing as a reader-centered written communication (see: "the course evaluation"--Appendix III). In fact, writing must be a metacognitive act aimed at identifying the writing goal with a clear-cut rhetorical situation. In this sense, critical thinking is the key to a successful problem-solving strategy.

Critical thinking, starting from "thinking about thinking" (Kuhar), plays a vital role in professional writing. Because of its solid link with ever-changing science and technology, technical communication requires us to earn advanced problem solving skills. The more developed information technological society we have, the more sophisticated critical knowledge and intellectual maturity we need to assess and cope with various problems arising from our complex society. "The ability to think clearly about complex issues and solve a wide range of problems is the cognitive goal of education at all levels" (Pellegrino, 1995, p. 11). To this end, case study helps novice writers--unfamiliar with how to solve problems in an occupational setting--develop their goal-directed critical processes. A case, however, needs to be designed within a realistic occupational setting. A major role of using case, especially in a technical writing course, is to empower the students' problem solving skills, including information gathering, data analysis and evidence examination. Writing assignment therefore need to be carefully designed without ruining the case study benefits aimed at fostering critical knowledge. "Writing is a problem-solving activity--response to a rhetorical situation where problems arise out of conflicting goals and agendas" (Flower and Ackerman, 1994, p. 17). Consequently, the final goal of critical thinking and case study writing is to make students good questioners and good thinkers. When attaining this goal, students will be able to make their thinking visible not only to others but to themselves.

The appearance of interactive technologies and telecommunications, like the Internet, digital cameras, computer graphics, satellite-assisted communication networks, etc., has brought extensive opportunities to change the conventional text-based linguistic communication style. As thinking tools, these pictorial and graphic media would be integrated into the new development of critical thinking strategies. In fact, Pellegrino (1995) notes that this challenge has already began in technology education:

Teachers at all levels of education need to encourage their students to use multiple-representational strategies and explore new ways of thinking, such as switching back and forth from linguistic to visual--spatial representational displays. If we do not teach our students how to master these new 'media of thought,' they cannot benefit from the multimedia, interactive technology that is increasingly being developed and used. "(p. 11)

As Pellegrino suggests, technology lets us focus on the logic of what we are doing rather than keep track of all the details. Our thought, in both memory capacity and its conscious manipulation, is severely limited. Technology therefore has been developed partly to facilitate and extend our problem solving strategies. This is the crucial point of technology-assisted critical thinking instruction:

Students need to be explicitly taught how to use technology to relieve complex processing demands so that they can focus on finding solution paths, instead of using their limited information-processing resources to maintain information in working memory. (p. 11)

As a result, In critical thinking class, the instructor's knowledge and the capability of new technology will need to be emphasized as new criteria in pedagogy.

In addition to case study, several approaches are available in teaching and modeling thinking processes. The discussion method urges students to make their ideas visible by sharing their thinking paths with the teacher and classmates. Like case study, the learning outcomes will be focused less on the facts than on thinking processes and problem solving strategies. Similarly, the conference-style method supports students' critical thinking skills in interpersonal context, in which they to consider the interrelations among their thoughts and those of others. In the conference method, students need to read assigned materials, practice formulating analytic questions, think aloud about challenging issues, all while respecting other participants' intuitions (Underwood and Wald, 1995). In designing the occupational setting, careful selection or integration of these pedagogical methods will become more critical for the benefits of critical thinking education under the growing complex society.

Angelo, T. A. (1995). Beginning the dialogue: thoughts on promoting critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 6.

Academics mull art of critical thinking. (1994, July 22). The Boston Globe, p. B-2.

Bernstein, D. A. (1995). A negotiation model for teaching critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 22-24.

Bloom, B. S., Jr. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Handbook 1. The cognitive domain. New York: McKay.

Flower, L. (1993). Problem-Solving Strategies for Writing (4th ed). Texas: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Flower, L., & Ackerman, J. (1994). Writers at Work. Texas: Harcourt Brace & Company.

Franke, E. (1989). The value of the retrievable technical memorandum system to the engineering company. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication, 32 (1), 27-32.

Glen, S. (1995). Developing critical thinking in higher education. Nurse Education Today, 15, 170-176.

Halonen, J. S. (1995). Demystifying critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 75-81.

Hanley, G. L. (1995). Teaching critical thinking: Focusing on metacognitive skills and problem solving. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 68-71.

King, A. (1995). Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking across the curriculum. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 13-16.

Kuhar, M. (1998). Critical thinking--a framework for problem solving in the occupational setting. AAOHN JOURNAL, 46, 80-81.

Mathes, J. C., & Stevenson, D. (1991). Designing Technical Reports (2nd ed). Massachusetts: Simon & Schuster.

McDade, S. (1995). Case study pedagogy to advance critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 11-12.

Paul, R. W. (1990). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world. Rohnert Park, CA: Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique.

Pellegrino, J. (1995). Technology in support of critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 9-10.

Underwood, M. K. & Wald, R. L. (1995). Conference-style learning: A method for fostering critical thinking with heart. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 17-21.

Wade, C. (1995). Using writing to develop and assess critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 24-28.

© Masao Kanaoka 1999