PART 1

T HE D ESIGN

OF

I NFUSION L ESSONS

Chapter 1: What is Infusion?

Chapter 2: Critical and Creative Thinking in
Science

APPROACHES TO TEACHING THINKING

TEACHING OF
THINKING

TEACHING FOR
THINKING

Direct instruction
in thinking in noncurricular contexts

Use of methods
which promote
thinking in
curricular contexts
INFUSION
Restructuring
content lessons for
direct instruction
in thinking

INFUSION integrates direct instruction in specific

thinking skills into content area lessons. Lessons
improve student thinking and enhance content learning.

C
W HAT

1
I NFUSION?

INFUSING
THINKING INTO INSTRUCTIONSECONDARY
HAPTER

IS

WHAT IS INFUSION?

Helping Our Students Become of school every day. They do not have to be
taught to do thinking.
Better Thinkers
Improving the quality of student thinking
is an explicit priority of current educational reform efforts. Recommendations from groups
ranging from education commissions to the
nations governors support this priority and affirm that good thinking is essential in meeting
the challenge of living in a technologically oriented, multicultural world.
Although these recommendations have
been advanced primarily because of the projected demands of the work force in the 21st century, they also reflect an awareness that knowledgeable thinkers have a better chance of taking charge of their lives and achieving personal
advancement and fulfillment. Our students
must be prepared to exercise critical judgment
and creative thinking to gather, evaluate, and
use information for effective problem solving
and decision making in their jobs, in their professions, and in their lives.
Making good thinking an educational goal
affirms that growth in thinking is obtainable by
all students. This goal also reflects confidence that
all teachers can help students to become better
thinkers whatever the learning level, socioeconomic background, and culture of the students.
Although textbooks and tests are changing
to reflect this aim, it is the classroom teacher
who, through day-to-day instruction, must assume the main responsibility for helping our
students become better thinkers. The effort that
is required to meet this goal must, therefore, be
directed at effective classroom implementation.
This handbook presents a teacher-oriented approach to improving student thinking that
blends sound theory and effective classroom
practice and can be used by every teacher.
What does it mean to emphasize good
thinking as a major educational goal? Students
already use a variety of types of thinking in their
personal lives. They compare and contrast when
choosing friends. They predict that they will
soon eat when they stand in line in the cafeteria. They make numerous decisions in and out
2

Performing such thinking tasks, however,

does not necessarily mean performing them
skillfully. For example, sometimes a person feels
inclined to do something and may not think
much about it before doing it. A person may
purchase an automobile just because he likes the
way it looks. Such hasty and ill-considered decisions may lead to disappointing and unexpected surprises, such as high repair bills. In
contrast, if we think about many options, search
for new alternatives, think about the significant
factors in making the choice, consider the consequences of our actions, and plan how to carry
out our choice, our decision may be a more effective one. It is ordinary thinking done well that
is our goal when we teach thinking.
How can we teach students to improve the
quality of their thinking? The thinking skills
movement of the 80s produced special programs and emphasized instructional methods
to foster thinking. Three principles emerged
from these efforts:
The more explicit the teaching of thinking,
the greater impact it will have on students.
The more classroom instruction incorporates an atmosphere of thoughtfulness, the
more open students will be to valuing good
thinking.
The more the teaching of thinking is integrated into content instruction, the more
students will think about what they are
learning.
These principles provide the basic rationale
for infusing critical and creative thinking into
content instruction.
Infusion is a natural way to structure lessons. The curriculum is not a collection of isolated bits of information; rather, it is the material that informed, literate people use to make
judgments. We expect that information about
nutrition should influence students dietary
habits. We expect that an understanding of
American political history should affect how
citizens vote. We expect that a deep understand-

1998 CRITICAL THINKING BOOKS & SOFTWARE WWW.CRITICALTHINKING.COM 800-458-4849

INFUSING THINKING INTO INSTRUCTIONSECONDARY

ing of a characters motivation and actions in a
story should inform a discerning reader about
his or her conduct and responsibility.
It is, therefore, essential that we teach students how to use information and concepts that
they learn in school to make decisions and solve
problems effectively. Infusion, as an approach
to teaching thinking, is based on the natural fusion of information that is taught in the content
areas with forms of skillful thinking that we
should use every day to live productively.

Improving Student Thinking in

Content Area Instruction
This handbook spells out how we can perform ordinary thinking activities skillfully. Key
questions that effective thinkers raise and answer when making sound judgments are organized into thinking plans that can be used to
guide good thinking.
The curriculum contains a multitude of
natural contexts to teach skillful thinking. Utilizing such contexts, any teacher can design
well-crafted infusion lessons that dramatically
enhance student content learning.
Kevin OReilly, a teacher from the
Hamilton-Wenham School District in Massachusetts, introduces a lesson on determining the
reliability of sources of information in history
by staging a scuffle in the corridor outside his
classroom. He then asks student witnesses to
describe what happened. He draws an analogy
between his students differing accounts and the
variety of accounts regarding who fired the first
shot at the Battle of Lexington, the first battle of
the Revolutionary War, in 1775. As OReillys
students attempt to determine which of the eyewitnesses gave accurate accounts, they reflect
on why some historical accounts may be more
reliable than others. This reflection arms them
with critical thinking skills that they draw on
again and again in OReillys classroom. These
skills relate to assessing the reliability and accuracy of eyewitnesses, of observation, or of
other sources of informationskills of great importance in our lives outside of the classroom.
In the immediate context of studying the
Revolutionary War, OReillys students use the
skills of assessing the reliability of sources to ex-

WHAT IS INFUSION?
amine the context of the battle and the biases
that people might have had in describing it.
They then make informed critical judgments
about the accuracy of various textbook accounts
of the Lexington incident. Students who are simply directed to read to get the facts typically
do not make such judgments about material in
their texts. OReillys students gain a deep critical perspective on the role of firsthand reports
in constructing a history and learn that histories can be written from different points of view.
Infusion lessons are similarly effective in
the primary grades. Cathy Skowron, a first
grade teacher at the Provincetown (Massachusetts) Elementary School, uses the same technique to teach the tale of Henny Penny. Many
first grade teachers use this story to help students develop listening skills and vocabulary.
While fulfilling these language-arts goals,
Skowron also uses the story to teach students
to think skillfully about the reliability of sources
of information. Prompted by her questions, students discuss whether the other animals should
have accepted what Henny Penny told them.
How can they determine whether Henny Penny
is a reliable source of information?
Skowron restructures her lesson by including questions that students might ask about any
source of information. Raising questions about
Henny Penny as a source of reliable information helps them understand the story at a deeper
level. They then grasp the moral of the story:
hasty, unquestioning thinking can be dangerous.
Skowrons lesson differs from OReillys in
the sophistication of the content, the level of vocabulary, and students background knowledge.
However, both groups of students consider factors that are often overlooked in thinking about
sources. They develop strategies for asking and
researching the relevant questions about reliability. Between Skowrons first grade and
OReillys ninth grade, Skowrons students have
plenty of time to develop more and more sophisticated standards for the reliability of
sources. When they get to OReillys classroom,
in fact, they may already have considerable sophistication in judging the reliability of both
primary and secondary sources, and in applying these skills to a variety of content areas

1998 CRITICAL THINKING BOOKS & SOFTWARE WWW.CRITICALTHINKING.COM 800-458-4849

INFUSING THINKING INTO INSTRUCTIONSECONDARY

WHAT IS INFUSION?

across the curriculum. OReillys job will be to

build on and reinforce this prior learning. This
will take less class time than would be needed
if he were introducing students to this skill for
the first time in their educational careers, and
may allow for much more sophistication of his
approach to the study of American History than
is usually possible with ninth-grade students.
If students have not been exposed to this
kind of instruction before the secondary grades,
however, it is incumbent upon secondary school
teachers to introduce students to these skills as
soon as possible. Skillful evaluation of sources
can be taught, reinforced, and elaborated in
many contexts, subjects, and secondary grade
levels besides OReillys ninth-grade classroom.
When students are asked to do library research
and then write on a topic, for example, teachers
can ask them to compare a variety of books and
articles on the topic in the library, and then to
develop a list of questions they would need to
answer to decide which sources are likely to give
them accurate information on that topic. The
students would consider relevant factors, such
as the date of the publication, the expertise of
the authors, whether the account is primary or
secondary, whether the account is fictional,
where the author got his or her information, etc.
These questions can then be put in a more organized way and written down so that they serve
as a guide to the students thinking.
Based on the information they gather to answer their questions, students then make critical judgments about which of the book(s) being
considered are likely to provide the most accurate information. Usually, when students make
such judgments, their interest in the topic is enhanced, and better research projects result.
Equally important, however, is that, as in
OReillys classroom, such students develop a
strategy that they can use again and again to
make informed judgments about the reliability
of other sources of information.
The same content material can be used to
teach other critical thinking skills. For example,
Skowron introduces causal reasoning by
prompting her students to think about whether
Henny Penny had good evidence that the sky
was falling. Could something other than falling

sky have caused the bump on Henny Pennys

head? How could we find out? In general, what
do we ask in order to find out what caused
something to happen?
Causal reasoning, a fundamental skill of inference, involves considering a cluster of questions different from those involved in thinking
about reliable sources. These questions prompt
consideration of which possible causes are reasonable in light of the evidence. Asking and carefully answering these questions contrasts with
hasty and ill-informed judgments that people
often make about what caused something.
Skowrons students engage in causal reasoning by thinking about what evidence they
would need to tell what really hit Henny Penny.
The students then look at the pictures in the
book for clues to determine what the cause
might be. They contrast careful thinking about
causes with Henny Pennys quick conclusion
that the sky is falling, identifying her thinking
as hasty thinking. They use the term Henny
Penny thinking to describe someone who
jumps to a conclusion about causes. This reminds them not to do the same thing but, instead, to look for evidence. Helping students
think skillfully about causes in the primary
grades can make this kind of thinking second
nature as they progress through upper elementary and secondary school.
Secondary school teachers will find ample
opportunities to introduce causal reasoning in
what they teach. The causes of the Civil War,
the events leading up to the stock market crash
in 1929, the extinction of the dinosaurs, the ability of jet aircraft to take off and fly, and the poor
(or good) performance of the schools football
team are topics that can all generate lessons in
which students not only gain a deep understanding of these events, but also learn strategies (that they can use repeatedly) for making
well-informed judgments about causes. The secondary curriculum is replete with such contexts.
Causal explanation lessons can also be used
in secondary school to introduce some of the
more challenging themes that students study.
For example, causal reasoning also clarifies human motivation and action. Questions like
What was Huckleberry Finns motivation in

1998 CRITICAL THINKING BOOKS & SOFTWARE WWW.CRITICALTHINKING.COM 800-458-4849

INFUSING THINKING INTO INSTRUCTIONSECONDARY

not turning in Jim? can generate lessons designed to help students learn how to use causal
reasoning to answer them. Building on such
activities, causal reasoning also helps us to determine the responsibility for things people do.
Cathy Peabody, a high school English teacher
in Groton, Massachusetts, asks her students
causal questions (similar to the type asked by
Cathy Skowron) as they study Romeo and Juliet.
She recognizes in this play that chance, emotion,
misunderstanding, and deliberate intent weave
a tragic causal web that raises important questions about responsibility.
Specifically, Peabody helps her students
spell out the causal chain that led to the deaths
of Romeo and Juliet by helping students to identify possible causes of the tragedy and then to
select the best explanations based on evidence
in the text. Recognizing that various people
played a role in this causal chain, Peabody poses
the question, Who, if anyone, is responsible for
the deaths of Romeo and Juliet? The feuding parents? The Prince? Friar Lawrence? The lovers
themselves? On what basis do we hold people
responsible for things that happen?
Through a detailed examination of the play,
informed by their conclusions about the causes
of the tragedy, Peabody and her students raise,
and try to answer, such deep questions about
responsibility. They develop an explicit set of
standards that enables them to make a well-supported judgment about who should be held responsible. Some students, for example, think
that Friar Lawrence should be held responsible.
They then stage a trial of Friar Lawrence to
determine whether he should really be held responsible for this tragedy. When they reach their
conclusion, Peabody helps them extract the standards they used to judge the friars responsibility. There is no substitute for careful thinking to
answer questions like these.
When such activities are completed,
Peabody usually helps her students see analogies between issues in the play and issues in
their own experience in which questions of
blame and responsibility have arisen. Peabody
helps her students test their ideas about responsibility by applying them in these personal cases.
Her intention is to expose them to this kind of

WHAT IS INFUSION?
thinking and to help them to transfer and use it
reflectively in a variety of appropriate contexts.
Thinking carefully about causes is crucial
in almost every profession. Effective work in science, engineering, accounting, journalism, nursing, and law enforcement, for example, involves
the need for well-founded judgments about
causes. This kind of thinking is also crucially
important in our daily lives. We make judgments about causes in getting to work on time,
preventing or treating illness, preparing a tasty
meal, and minimizing stress in our lives. Helping students transfer the use of skillful causal
explanation to these contexts enriches any infusion lesson on causal explanation.
These examples demonstrate how the infusion of key critical thinking skills into content
learning adds richness and depth to the curriculum. These examples are representative of a
multitude of other lessons that are designed to
help students develop a wide range of additional thinking skills and processes. This handbook provides the basic tools for such lessons.

Thinking Skills and Processes

Featured in this Handbook
The types of skillful thinking we discuss in
this handbook form a core of important thinking skills that cut across the various content areas. They fall into the three main categories:
skills at generating ideas, skills at clarifying
ideas, and skills at assessing the reasonableness
of ideas. Generative skills are creative thinking
skills: they stretch our thinking and develop our
imaginations. Skills of clarification involve
analysis: they enhance our understanding and
the ability to use information. Skills at assessing the reasonableness of ideas are critical thinking skills: they lead to good judgment. Both examples discussed so far fall into the category of
skills at assessing the reasonableness of ideas.
When we engage in natural thinking tasks,
these skills of good thinking are rarely used in
isolation. Many thinking tasks that we face in
our lives or professional work involve decision
making and/or problem solving. Thinking skills
from each of the three categories blend together
for thoughtful decision making and problem
solving. We should try to generate original so-

1998 CRITICAL THINKING BOOKS & SOFTWARE WWW.CRITICALTHINKING.COM 800-458-4849

INFUSING THINKING INTO INSTRUCTIONSECONDARY

WHAT IS INFUSION?

lutions to problems; we should base our decisions on relevant information; and we should
assess the reasonableness of each option to select the best one.
These broader thinking processes are also
discussed in this handbook. The strategies we
present for skillful decision making and problem solving provide the link between the more
circumscribed thinking skills that appear in each
of the three categories and the authentic thinking tasks students must engage in both in and
out of school.
The outline in figure 1.1 shows the thinking skills and processes featured in this book.
In figure 1.2 (page 7), these thinking skills
and processes are shown within the more comprehensive context of the thinking domain.
Figure 1.3 (page 8) shows how various
thinking skills from each of these categories are
combined in decision making.
Teaching the thinking skills of clarification,
creative thinking, and critical thinking without
helping students learn how to use them in decision making and problem solving accomplishes
only part of the task of teaching thinking. Teaching strategies for problem solving and decision
making, without teaching students the skills
needed to use these strategies effectively, is similarly limited. If we teach lessons on individual
thinking skills and lessons on decision making and
problem solving, we can show how these thinking skills are connected with good decision making and problem solving. Students will then have
the thinking tools they need to face their most challenging tasks in using information and ideas.

thinking instruction, students learn how to use

explicit thinking strategies, commonly guided
by the teacher. Such lessons employ the language of the thinking task and procedures for
doing it skillfully. Usually the teaching of thinking occurs in separate, self-contained courses or
programs with specially designed materials and
is taught outside the standard curriculum. For
example, students are guided in using the terms
and procedures of classification to classify butThinking Skills and Processes
Featured in Infusion Lessons in
This Handbook
THINKING SKILLS
I.

1.

2.

Generating Possibilities
Multiplicity of Ideas
Varied Ideas
New Ideas
Detailed Ideas
Creating Metaphors
A. Analogy/Metaphor

II. Skills at Clarifying Ideas

1.

2.

Analyzing Ideas
A. Compare/Contrast
B. Classification/Definition
C. Parts/Whole
D. Sequencing
Analyzing Arguments
A. Finding Reasons/Conclusions
B. Uncovering Assumptions

III. Skills at Assessing the

Reasonableness of Ideas
1.

2.

The Structure of Infusion Lessons

Infusing critical and creative thinking into
content instruction blends features of two contrasting instructional approaches to teaching
thinking that educators have taken: (1) direct instruction of thinking in noncurricular contexts
and (2) the use of methods that promote thinking in content lessons.
Infusion lessons are similar to, but contrast
with, both of these types of instruction. The diagram in figure 1.4 (page 8) represents this triad.
The teaching of thinking by direct instruction means that, in a time period designated for

Skills at Generating Ideas

Assessing Basic Information

A. Accuracy of Observation
B. Reliability of Sources
Inference
A. Use of Evidence
a. Causal Explanation
b. Prediction
c. Generalization
d. Reasoning by Analogy
B. Deduction
a. Conditional Reasoning
(if ... then)

THINKING PROCESSES
I.

Goal Oriented Processes

A. Decision Makin
B. Problem Solving

Figure 1.1

1998 CRITICAL THINKING BOOKS & SOFTWARE WWW.CRITICALTHINKING.COM 800-458-4849

 1998 CRITICAL THINKING BOOKS & SOFTWARE WWW.CRITICALTHINKING.COM 800-458-4849

Figure 1.2

PROBLEM SOLVING
Goal: Best solution
BASIC STRATEGY:
Consider possible solutions, predict
consequences, and choose the best solution
SKILLS:
Skills at generating ideas, clarifying ideas,
and assessing the reasonableness of ideas

CREATIVE THINKING
Goal: Original product
CORE SKILLS:
Skills at generating Ideas
1. Generating Possibilities
Multiplicity of Ideas (Fluency)
Varied Ideas (Flexibility)
New Ideas (Originality)
Detailed Ideas (Elaboration)
2. Creating Metaphors
Analogy/Metaphor
REPRESENTATIVE ATTITUDES:
Unusual ideas should be considered

DECISION MAKING
Goal: Well-founded decisions
BASIC STRATEGY:
Consider options, predict consequences,
and choose the best option
SKILLS:
Skills at generating ideas, clarifying ideas,
and assessing the reasonableness of ideas

all
D
rec
AN
te
a
G
r
I
u
IN
AT ND acc
FIC STA and
I
AR ER ng
CL ND ndi
U rsta
g
e
tin n
nd
as
u
as
s
ep LS: g Ide
ntr initio ship
e
o
f
L
l: D SKI rifyin as ing/C /De tion
a
n
a
ns
Go RE t cla g Ide par atio Rel
sio
CO ills a yzin Com sific hole
on
clu
l
s
n
ati
k
s
a
g
o
S Ana
rm
Cl rts/W cin
/C tion
o
f
s
.
s
n
1
Pa que ent ason ump S: nt in
a
Se rgum Re Ass UDE elev
A ing ing TIT e r
g
r
s
d
zin Fin ove E AT nd u
c
aly
a
Un TIV rity
An
.
A la
2
T
N ek c
E
ES se
PR uld
RE sho
e
W
ON

Go
CO al:
Sk RE Criti
1. ills a SK cal CRI
An t A ILL jud TIC
aly ss S gm A
zin es :
en L T
t
HI
g B sin
2.
NK
as g th
Inf
A
IN
i
er
e
c
c
G
en R cur Inf Re
e
a
o
c
Us es liab cy rma aso
na
ilit of
eo
t
i
y o Ob on ble
f
ne
f S se
Ca Evi
ss
ou rva
Pr usa den
of
rce tio
c
e
l
e
Ide
n
s
Ge dic Ex
p
t
as
n
i
o
l
RE
De Rea era n ana
ti o
du so liza
W PR
n
e
n
c
E
sh sh SE Co tion ing tion
ou ou N nd
by
T
l
ld
i
An
be d ba ATI tiona
alo
V
s
op e
E l
gy
en jud AT Rea
-m gm T
s
o
ind e ITU nin
ed nts DE g (
on S if .
.. t
go :
he
od
n)
re
as
on
s;
we

INFUSING THINKING INTO INSTRUCTIONSECONDARY

WHAT IS INFUSION?

INFUSING THINKING INTO INSTRUCTIONSECONDARY

WHAT IS INFUSION?

THINKING SKILLS INVOLVED IN THE

DECISION MAKING PROCESS
WHAT MAKES A DECISION
NECESSARY?

WHAT ARE MY OPTIONS?

WHICH OPTIONS ARE BEST?

What are
the facts?
What could I do?
Whats responsible
for the problem?

Consequences
of each option?

Value
of consequence?

HOW CAN I DO IT?

Decision
(Best
option)

SKILLS

SKILLS

SKILLS

SKILLS

SKILLS

SKILLS

Reliable
information

Causal
inference
(use of
evidence)

Many,
varied,
detailed,
original
ideas

Prediction
of
consequences
(evidence)

Reliable
information

Comparing/
contrasting

Ranking/
prioritizing

Deduction

Reliable
information

Valuing

Reliable
sources
Accurate
observation

Reliable
information

Planning
how to
do it
(Mini decisions
about means)

Recall

Figure 1.3

APPROACHES TO TEACHING THINKING

TEACHING OF
THINKING

TEACHING FOR
THINKING

Direct instruction
in thinking in noncurricular contexts

Use of methods
which promote
thinking in
curricular contexts
INFUSION
Restructuring
content lessons for
direct instruction
in thinking

INFUSION integrates direct instruction in specific

thinking skills into content area lessons. Lessons
improve student thinking and enhance content learning.
Figure 1.4
8

1998 CRITICAL THINKING BOOKS & SOFTWARE WWW.CRITICALTHINKING.COM 800-458-4849

INFUSING THINKING INTO INSTRUCTIONSECONDARY

tons, to demonstrate and practice the thinking
skill, or they are asked to assess arguments from
text books on critical thinking, to practice skills
in logic. Since the skills are taught using examples that are not curriculum-related, they
must then be bridged into the curriculum if students are to apply them to content learning.
In contrast to this approach, infusion lessons are not taught in separate courses or programs outside the regular curriculum. They do,
however, employ direct instruction in the thinking skills and processes that they are designed
to improve. In infusion lessons, direct instruction in thinking is blended into content lessons.
Teaching for thinking involves employing
methods to promote students deep understanding of the content. Such methods include using
cooperative learning, graphic organizers, higher
order questioning, Socratic dialog, manipulatives, and inquiry learning. While students may
respond thoughtfully to the content, no thinking strategy is taught explicitly. In contrast, although infusion lessons also feature such methods, infusion lessons are characterized by direct
instruction in thinking skills and processes.
Educators often confuse infusion with using methods that promote thinking. For example, many teachers employ higher order
questioning or Socratic dialogue to stimulate more thinking about the content than asking standard recall-oriented questions. They
typically ask Why, What if, and How
questions. For example, a question like Why
did the plague spread so rapidly in medieval
Europe? is a challenging question and unlike
the question What were the dates of the plague
in medieval Europe? provides an opportunity
for higher order thinking.
This kind of questioning, however, remains
content-oriented. Its goal is usually to yield a
deeper understanding of what is being taught.
When students respond by mentioning factors
like lack of sanitation or lack of medical knowledge, teachers usually ask students to elaborate
so that the class can develop a rich understanding of conditions that could cause such an epidemic. The product (student answers), rather
than the process (student thinking), is the focus
in these lessons.

WHAT IS INFUSION?
Typically, when using such methods as
higher order questioning, teachers spend little or
no classroom time discussing the thinking students engage in when they respond to such questions. How students arrive at their responses remains implicit. Some students may respond
thoughtfully; others may respond hastily and
unsystematically. Some students may not respond
at all. In order to yield more thoughtful responses
from more students, teachers must take time to
clarify the skillful thinking needed to develop
thoughtful responses to the questions asked.
Infusion lessons are crafted to bring into
content instruction an explicit emphasis on skillful thinking so that students can improve the way
they think. Classroom time is spent on the thinking skill or process, as well as on the content. Infusion lessons feature a variety of effective teaching practices that characterize the way thinking
is explicitly emphasized in these lessons:
The teacher introduces students to the
thinking skill or process by demonstrating
the importance of doing such thinking well.
The teacher uses explicit prompts to guide
students through the skillful practice of the
thinking as they learn concepts, facts, and
skills in the content areas.
The teacher asks reflective questions that
help students distance themselves from
what they are thinking about, so they can
become aware of how they are thinking and
develop a plan for doing it skillfully.
The teacher reinforces the thinking strategies by providing additional opportunities
for students to engage in the same kind of
thinking independently.
Conducting a lesson using this four-step
strategy to teach thinking is time well spent and
will maximize our chances for real improvement
in student thinking.
To summarize: Although some people use the
word infusion only to describe the techniques
used to promote higher-order thinking about the
content material, what we have been calling infusion lessons are also crafted to bring into content instruction an explicit emphasis on skillful thinking, together with the use of such thought-provoking methods, so that such lessons maximize

1998 CRITICAL THINKING BOOKS & SOFTWARE WWW.CRITICALTHINKING.COM 800-458-4849