Making sense through argument

In a recent op-ed article in the New York Times, academic Gerald Graff made the point that students who derived most from being at college (more like university in South Africa), were those who made sense of their experiences by constructing arguments. In his article, An argument worth having, Graff pointed out that many students coped with the cognitive dissonance brought about by different lecturers' views, by briefly taking on particular lecturer's philosophy and regurgitating his or her views as required. This process, according to Graff, limits the benefit the student could derive from the intellectual culture of university.

Graff found that the most successful students applied critical thinking to the problem of,

"(cutting) through the clutter of jargons, methods and ideological differences to locate the common practices of argument and analysis hidden behind it all."

He suggested the following steps:

Recognizing that diverse knowledge becomes more useful when turned into arguments.

This should be done by summarizing the arguments and assumptions underlying the views of lecturers

When summarizing, the thesis of an argument should be considered, but also points of controversy.

Using the summaries and the arguments one constructed, the aim would then be to develop one's own considered and expressed opinion.

Graff, of course, is describing part of the process of critical thinking. I see one problem (in South Africa at least), very few students starting out have any understanding of critical thinking or the construction of arguments of this nature. Critical thinking is one the critical outcomes of South African outcomes based education (OBE), but this outcome is seldom aimed at and is rarely achieved. I believe that critical thinking should be explicitly taught. I have found Rationale, the argument mapping software from Austhink, useful in this regard.