As we shall see later, the most important factor in the training of good mental habits consists in acquiring the attitude of suspended conclusion, and in mastering the various methods of searching for new materials to corroborate or to refute the first suggestions that occur. To maintain the state of doubt and to carry on systematic and protracted inquiry — these are the essentials of thinking. (Final lines of Chapter 1 in John Dewey’s 1910 book, How We Think)
Psychology 4180: Critical Thinking in Psychology
2020 - 2021
Instructors
Ron Sheese, Course Director rsheese@yorku.ca
Tony Miller, Teaching Assistant tony2017@yorku.ca
General Description
The course presents critical thinking as a rhetorical strategy for persuading oneself and others of the accuracy or utility of ideas, positions, actions etc. The strategy is highly favoured in Psychology, in science, and in academia generally; thus, we will examine the concepts and skills that are valued for critically gathering, interpreting, and evaluating scholarly work. Emphasis will be placed on the concept of argument and on Psychology’s contributions to understanding both the obstacles to critical thinking and the means by which it can be facilitated. We will consider multiple examples of critical thinking in Psychology and critical thinking about Psychology. Students will practice thinking critically themselves in various contexts - Psychology research articles, popular accounts of psychological research, and applied settings.
Skills emphasized in the course include:
Locating research articles on psychological issues of interest and demonstrating critical thinking about the articles and issues,
Critically assessing and communicating the value of media reports about psychological concepts and studies.
Critically assessing the methodology used to address specific research questions,
Critically interpreting results from reported research,
Critically evaluating the credibility of scientific evidence and differentiating argument from conjecture,
Communicating with the lay public about professional psychologists’ scholarship.
Format
The course will have both synchronous and asynchronous elements.
Zoom class meetings, varying from 60 to 90 minutes in length, will be held every Thursday evening at 7:00 pm. By means of the Zoom Rooms feature, students will be divided into groups of four for these meetings and provided specific activities and questions to discuss in their groups. Attendance in these online discussion groups is a factor in the course evaluation.
Readings to be completed before the Thursday meetings will be assigned each week (see schedule below). Most of the discussion questions taken up in the Thursday meetings will be based on these readings. Students will write a reflection paper each week based on one or more of the assigned readings. In the week following submission, these papers will be peer reviewed anonymously by a random selection of classmates. Each person who submits a review paper will be allocated, randomly and anonymously, three papers from classmates. The submission and peer review process is managed by a Moodle app, and thus, no email or physical exchange of papers is necessary.
Instructor comments on each of the assigned readings will be recorded and made available on the course Moodle page. There will be at least two separate recordings each week - one very brief and providing a simple introduction to the readings with no expectation that listeners have begun studying them; another one (or more) with comments that do assume familiarity with the readings. These latter comments will include explanations of difficult concepts, elaboration on central ideas, and linkages to other aspects of the course. Typically the recordings will be available early in the week for which the reading is assigned, and students can listen to these on the schedules that suit them best.
Q and A sessions with the instructor will be held each week on Tuesdays 12:30 - 1:30 pm and on Wednesdays 7:00 - 8:00 pm. These sessions are optional, and the students who do participate may enter and leave a session as they please - their purpose is to give everyone opportunities to ask questions and/or clarify their ideas.
Evaluation
Attendance in weekly Thursday Zoom discussion groups (10%)
Submission of weekly reflection papers and peer reviews (10%)
Project 1 (10%), October 22. Critical analysis of a popular press article and its academic source.
Project 2 (15%), December 10. Critical analysis of a Psychology research article
Project 3 (20%), February 25. Critical review of a set of related Psychology articles
Project 4 (15%), April 15. Portfolio of eight reflection papers
Project 5 (20%), April 22. Plain-language recommendation paper regarding an issue of applied psychology
Weekly activites
Discussion Questions
Course Topics and Reading Assignments
September 10
Reynolds, G. (August 16, 2017). How exercise could help you learn a new language. New York Times.
September 17 — The world begins with the victory of persuasion over force.
Elgin, C. (2016). Education reform: Confucius, Dewey, and Beyond. Excerpts from a presentation at Capital Normal University, Beijing, China. (link available on course Moodle site)
hooks, b. (2009). Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom. New York: Routledge. (Chapter 1: Critical Thinking)
Larsen, P. (2001). Rhetorical Analysis. In N. J. Smelser & P. B. Baltes (Eds.) International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 13323 - 13327.
Liu, F., Sulpizio, S., Kompetpanee, S., & Job, R. (2017). It takes biking to learn: Physical activity improves learning a second language. PLoS ONE 12, e0177624.
Swanwick, R., Kitchen, R., Jarvis, J., McCracken, W., O’Neil, R., & Powers, S. (2014). Following Alice: Theories of critical thinking and reflective practice in action at postgraduate level. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(2), 156-169. (pages 158-162)
September 24 — There are many tools of persuasion; psychology and culture are factors in their use.
Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and Thinking, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Chapter 4) (link available on course Moodle site)
Meyer, M. (2017). What is Rhetoric? Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Introduction)
Landis, K. (2008). Start Talking: A Handbook for Engaging Difficult Dialogues. Anchorage: University of Alaska (pages 38-39, 47-49)
Riddell, J. (January 7, 2020). Helping our students to develop rhetorical literacy. University Affairs.
Tafarella, S. (April 18, 2017). Rhetoric, Critical Thinking, and Checking Our Premises. Prometheus Unbound.
October 1 — What people find persuasive differs from culture to culture.
Frank, J. D. & Frank, J. B. (1991). Persuasion and Healing: A Comparative Study of Psychotherapy, (3rd ed.). Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. (pages 65-70) (link available on course Moodle site)
Kinney, A. (2014). Exemplary Women of Early China: the Lienü zhuan of Liu Xiang. New York: Columbia University Press. (Chapter 6).
Shapin, S. (2010). Never Pure: Historical Studies of Science as if It Was Produced by People with Bodies, Situated in Time, Space, Culture, and Society, and Struggling for Credibility and Authority. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press. (Chapter 13) (link available on course Moodle site)
Stroud, S. R. (2016). Pragmatism and the pursuit of social justice in India: Bhimrao Ambedkar and the rhetoric of religious orientation. Rhetoric Society Quarterly, 46(1), 5-27.
October 8 — Scientists and Psychologists find some tools more persuasive than others in their professional work.
Adams, S. (June 23, 2020). How to identify good ideas. dilbert.com
Carroll, A. E. (May 29, 2017). Science needs a solution for the temptation of positive results. New York Times.
Eisen, M. B., & Tibshirani, R. (July 20, 2020). How to identify flawed research before it becomes dangerous. New York Times.
Fahnestock, J. (2005). Rhetoric of science: Enriching the discipline. Technical Communication Quarterly, 14(3), 277-286. (pages 277, 283, 284)
Feynman, R. (1964). Feynman on Scientific Method. Cornell University physics lecture.
Roediger, H. L., & McCabe, D. P. (2006). Evaluating experimental research: Critical issues. In R. J. Sternberg, H. L. Roediger, & D. F. Halpern (Eds.), Critical Thinking in Psychology (pp. 15 – 36). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Thon, J. (January 21, 2020). What science should look like in practice. universityaffairs.ca.
Wieser, M. (2016). Psychology’s “crisis” and the need for reflection: A plea for modesty in psychological thinking. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 50, 359-367.
October 22 — Philosophers debate what characteristics make an attempt at persuasion logical.
Almossawi, A. (2013). An Illustrated Book of Bad Arguments, 2nd ed. New York: The Experiment. (selections)
Arp, R., Barbone, S., & Bruce, M. (2019). Bad Arguments: 100 of the Most Important Fallacies in Western Philosophy. Hoboken NJ: Wiley Blackwell. (Introduction) (link available on course Moodle site)
October 29 — Many situations involving persuasion involve more than logic and warrant very careful examination.
DiFonzo, N. (2018). Conspiracy rumor psychology. In J. E. Uscinski (Ed.), Conspiracy Theories and the People Who Believe Them, pp. 257-268. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Jin, C. H., & Parks, M. (April 20, 2020). Comic: Fake news can be deadly. Here’s how to spot it. National Public Radio’s podcast, Life Kit.
Lazer, D., Baum, M., Benkler, Y., Berinsky, A., Greenhill, K., Menczer, F., Metzger, M., Nyhan, B., Pennycook, G., Rothschild, D., Schudson, M., Sloman, S., Sunstein, C., Thorson, E., Watts, D., & Zittrain, J. (2018). The science of fake news. Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science), 359(6380), 1094–1096.
Schudson, M. (February 23, 2017). Here’s what non-fake news looks like. Columbia Journalism Review,
Scull, A. (2019). Rattled: The travails of social psychology. TLS. Times Literary Supplement, (6042), 3-5.
Snelling, J. (October 7, 2020). Top 10 sites to help students check their facts. ISTE Blog.
Tiffany, K. (July 13, 2020). How a fake baby is born. The Atlantic.
Wardle, C. (2019). Misinformation has created a new world disorder. Scientific American, 321(3), 88-93.
November 5 — Psychologists have proposed many techniques for the careful examination of rhetorical situations.
Bellaera, L. (August 30, 2017). HOT or NOT: How to develop critical thinking. The Learning Scientists.
Espey, M. (2018). Enhancing critical thinking using team-based learning. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(1), 15-29.
Meriam Library (2010). Evaluating information: Applying the CRAAP test. California State University, Chico.
O’Doherty, K., & Burgess, M. (2019). Developing psychologically compelling understanding of the involvement of humans in research. Human Arenas, 2, 433-450.
York University Learning Commons (2014). Effective reading strategies. SPARK: Student Papers & Academic Research Kit.
November 12 — Rhetorical situations can be usefully conceptualized in terms of argument
Bell, S. (n.d.). Writing the academic essay. York University Writing Centre.
Dwyer, C. (2017). Historical Perspectives. In Critical Thinking: Conceptual Perspectives and Practical Guidelines (pp. 43-54). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McNulty, E. (n.d.). Toulmin argument. Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL).
Mercier, H., Boudry, M., Paglieri, F., & Trouche, E. (2017). Natural-born arguers: Teaching how to make the best of our reasoning abilities. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 1-16.
Misser, E. (n.d.). How to construct an argument. Wilfred Laurier Writing Centre.
Purdue Writing Lab (n.d.). Rogerian argument. Purdue Writing Lab (OWL).
The Writing Center (June 4, 2014). Thesis statements. George Mason University Writing Centre.
Wheeler, L. K. (2017). Toulmin model of argument.
November 19 — Arguments can be mapped, and those who argue will improve with frequent practice in mapping.
Davies, M. (2014). Computer-aided argument mapping as a tool for teaching critical thinking. International Journal of Learning and Media, 4(3-4), 79-84.
Dwyer, C. (2017). Pedagogical and Learning Strategies. In Critical Thinking: Conceptual Perspectives and Practical Guidelines (pp. 206, 210-221). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Graham, A. (2004). A guide to reading and analysing academic articles. Yukon College
Hurley, P. (1991). 1.6 Extended arguments. A Concise Introduction to Logic, 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Newton, D. (2005). Sternberg’s model of abilities as developing expertise. In D. Moseley, V. Baumfield, J. Elliott, S. Higgins, J. Miller, D. Newton, & M. Gregson, M. Frameworks for Thinking: A Handbook of Teaching and Learning (pp. 290-294).
Stapleton, P., & Wu, Y. (2015). Assessing the quality of arguments in students’ persuasive writing: A case study analyzing the relationship between surface structure and substance. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 17, 12-23.
van Gelder, T. (2013). Argument mapping. In H. Pashler (Ed.), Encyclopedia of the mind (Vol. 1, pp. 51-52). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Widder, R. M., & Anderson, D. C. (2015). The appeal of medical quackery: A rhetorical analysis. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 11(2), 288–296.
November 26 — The Toulmin model of argument emphasizes an argument’s content; dialogic models emphasize its participants, context, process, and evolution.
Brufee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the ‘conversation of mankind’. College English, 46(7), 635-652.
Cohen, D. H. (August 5, 2013). For argument’s sake. TED talk.
Corey, E. (n.d.). Michael Oakeshott, Introduction. Contemporary Thinkers.org.
hooks, b. (2009). Teaching Critical Thinking: Practical Wisdom. New York: Routledge. (Chapter 7: Collaboration)
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). Energizing learning: The instructional power of conflict. Educational Researcher, 38(1), 37-51.
Matusov, E., & Pease-Alvarez, L. (2020). Moving from collaboration to critical dialogue in action in
education. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal.
Newstok, S. (2020). "Of conversation". In How to Think like Shakespeare. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Pasternack, A. (March 7, 2020). How Wikipedia’s volunteers became the web’s best weapon against misinformation. Fast Company.
Sheese, R. (Ed.)(2020). Snippets related to dialogic arguments.
December 3 — Argument is the essence of academic culture, and academic writing requires understanding and using argument.
Graff, G. (2003). Clueless in academe: How schooling obscures the life of the mind. New Haven: Yale University Press. (Pages 1-14, 21-25, 30-32, 65-67, 83-95, 275-277)
Nussbaum, M. (2010). Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press. (Chapter 4 - Socratic pedagogy: The importance of argument)
Postman, N. (1985). Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. New York: Penguin Books. (Chapter 1 - The medium is the metaphor)
Wingate, U. (2012). ‘Argument!’ helping students understand what essay writing is about. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11 (2), 145-154.
January 14 — Psychologists know a lot about obstacles that stand in the way of forming good arguments and thinking critically.
Adams, S. (November 21, 2020). Smells like a trap. dilbert.com
Aronson, E., & Tavris, C. (July 12, 2020). The role of cognitive dissonance in the pandemic. The Atlantic (Ideas blog).
Dwyer, C. (September 7, 2018). 12 common biases that affect how we make everyday decisions. Psychology Today (blog).
Hoffeld, D. (January 19, 2018). This is the scientific way to win any argument (and not make enemies). Fast Company.
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. Toronto: Random House Canada. (Chapters 1 and 7) (link available on course Moodle site)
Lee, A. (January 31, 2020). The line between us: For Chinese-Canadians like me, coronavirus is just the latest strain of infectious fear we’ve faced. Globe & Mail.
Pattillo, A. (August 20, 2020). How to win arguments and actually change someone’s mind. Inverse.
Rauch, J. (2020). The constitution of knowledge. National Affairs, 45, 125-137.
Yagoda, B. (2018). Your lying mind: The cognitive biases tricking your brain. The Atlantic, 322(2), 72-80.
January 21 — And emotion is often more persuasive than cognition.
Carozza, L. (2007). Dissent in the midst of emotional territory. Informal Logic, 27(2), 197-210.
Chang, J. (2020). The LIbrary of Legends. New York: Harper Avenue. (pages 52-53)
Goldhill, O. (January 2, 2019). 150 years ago, a philosopher showed why it’s pointless to start arguments on the internet. Quartz.
Mattingly, C. (2012). Hoping, willing, and narrative re-envisioning. The Hedgehog Review,
Tavris, C., & Aronson, E. (2020). Wounds, rifts, and wars. Chapter 7 of Mistakes Were Made (but not by me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts. New York: Mariner Books. (link available on course Moodle site)
January 28 — Fear is a particularly difficult obstacle in the path of critical thinking.
Archon, S. (n.d.). The 3 main reasons why people are afraid to think. The Unbounded Spirit.
Birkey, J. (November 25, 2019). Fight or flight: The enemy of critical thinking. Fire Rescue Magazine.
Cognitive Behavioral Therapy Los Angeles (n.d.). Phobia Treatment.
Corasaniti, N., Peters, J. W., & Karni, A. (April 10, 2020). New Trump ad suggests a campaign strategy amid crisis: Xenophobia. New York Times.
Kuhn, D., Cummings, A., & Youmans, M. (2020). Is reasoning a fruitful path to changing minds? Discourse Processes, 57(1), 36-47.
Pierre, J. (July 15, 2020). How does fear influence risk assessment and decision-making? Psychology Today.
Sloat, S. (October 17, 2017) Conspiracy theorists have a basic cognitive issue, say scientists. Inverse.
February 4 — Belief systems (personal networks of beliefs) are often highly resistant to critical thinking and attempts at persuasion.
Abdurraqib, H., Bromwich, D., Clancy, K., Greenwell, G., Lalami, L., Luhrmann, T. M., & Smith, M. D. (February 2018). The minds of others: The art of persuasion in the age of Trump. Harper’s Magazine, 336(2013), 27-36.
Beck, J. (March 13, 2017). This article won’t change your mind. The Atlantic.
Boden, M. T., Berenbaum, H., & Gross, J. J. (2016). Why do people believe what they do? A functionalist perspective. Review of General Psychology, 20(4), 399-411.
Warren, S. (May 25, 2020). That’s strange. I remember it differently … (cartoon #14 of 16). The New Yorker.
February 11 — Social construction theory offers suggestions about the development of belief systems and how to think critically about them.
Atleo, S., & Atleo, H. (2020). Foreword. In W. A. Macdonald. Might Nature be Canadian? (pp. xi-xiii). Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Macdonald, W. A. (2020). Might Nature be Canadian? Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. (publisher’s description)
Moghaddam, F. (2005). Great Ideas in Psychology: A Cultural and Historical Introduction. Oxford: Oneworld Publications. (Chapter 20)
Reay, D. (2006). I’m not seen as one of the clever children. Educational Review, 58(2), 171-181.
Sheese, R. (Ed.). (2021). Snippets related to social construction.
Social Representation. Wikipedia.
Taylor, C. (2004). Modern Social Imaginaries. Durham NC: Duke University Press. (Chapter 2)
February 25 — Formal education and parenting have the potential to facilitate the development and use of critical thinking.
Crick, N. (2019). Dewey for a New Age of Fascism: Teaching Democratic Habits. University Park PA: The University of Pennsylvania Press. (Chapter 7, pp. 123-127) (link available on course Moodle site)
Haber, J. (March 2, 2020). Teaching students to think critically. Inside Higher Education.
Kahne, J. & Bowyer, B. (2017). Educating for democracy in a partisan age. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1), 3-34. (pages 3-10, 15, 26-31)
Kuhn, D. (2018). A Role for Reasoning in a Dialogic Approach to Critical Thinking. Topoi 37, 121–128.
Mulnix, J. W. (2012). Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44(5), 465-479. (Section 3)
Watson-Gaze, J. (2007). Reflections on a damaged education. Psynopsis: Canada’s Psychology Newspaper, 29(3), 12.
Woo, M. (February 5, 2018). Stop answering your kid’s questions. Lifehacker.
March 4 — But sometimes parents, teachers, and/or governments purposefully mislead students and seek to inhibit critical thinking.
boyd, d. (April 26, 2019). Agnotology and epistemological fragmentation. Points: Data & Society.
Boyles, D. (2017). Book review of Miseducation: A history of ignorance-making in America and abroad. History of Education, 46(5), 696-699.
Fine, S. (April 20, 2020). Judge sides with inmates in solitary-confinement class action against Ontario. The Globe & Mail.
Higgins, A. (February 9, 2021). Polish court orders scholars to apologize over holocaust study. New York Times.
Launer, J. (2020). The production of ignorance. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 96(1193), 179-180.
Lim, L. (2014). The People’s Republic of Amnesia: Tiananmen Revisited. Cary: Oxford University Press. (Introduction only)
Mintz, S. (October 28, 2020). The 1619 Project and uses and abuses of history. Inside Higher Education.
Perlstein, D. (2016). Class. In A. J. Angulo (Ed.), Miseducation: A History of Ignorance-Making in America and Abroad (pp. 123-139). Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.
March 11 — Critical thinking’s close relatives include constructive thinking and discourse analysis.
Cypher, J., & Martin, D. (2008). The mobius strip: Team teachers reflecting on disability studies and critical thinking. Disability Studies Quarterly, 28(4).
Gee, J. P. (2012). Introduction to Social Linguistics and Literacies: Ideology in Discourses (4th Ed.). London: Routledge.
Gough, B., McFadden, M., & McDonald, M. (2013). Critical Social Psychology: An Introduction (2nd Ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. (pages 141-143, 147; link available on course Moodle site)
Potter, J. (1996). Introduction to Representing Reality: Discourse, Rhetoric, and Social Construction. London: Sage Publications.
Thayer-Bacon, B. (1998). Transforming and redescribing critical thinking: Constructive thinking. Studies in Philosophy and Education, 17, 123-148.
March 18 — Psychologists have attempted to measure the ability to think critically, as well as to draw relationships between critical thinking ability and various psychological traits, states, needs, attitudes.
Assessment Day (n.d.). Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal.
Council for Aid to Education (n.d.). CLA College Sample Assessment.
Grover, N. (February 22, 2021). People with extremist views less able to do complex mental tasks, research suggests. The Guardian.
Ksiazkiewicz, A., & Krueger, R. F. (2017). The Role of Genes and Environments in Linking the Need to Evaluate with Political Ideology and Political Extremity. Social Justice Research, 30(4), 381-407. (Abstract only)
Kuhn, D. (2018). A Role for Reasoning in a Dialogic Approach to Critical Thinking. Topoi 37, 121–128. (Section 1 only)
Saribay, S. A., & Yilmaz, O. (2017). Analytic cognitive style and cognitive ability differentially predict religiosity and social conservatism. Personality and Individual Differences, 114, 24-29.
Stenner, K. (February 11, 2021). How to live with authoritarians. Foreign Policy.
Washington State University (2009). Guide to rating critical and integrative thinking: Long form.
March 25 — Some Psychologists are thinking critically about the standard methods of the discipline.
Arnett, J. J. (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American Psychology needs to become less American. American Psychologist, 63(7), 602-614.
Hunter, J. D. (2019). The Deficient Animal. The Hedgehog Review, 21(1), 62-67.
Sheese, K., & Liu, W. (2014). Activism. In Thomas Teo (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology. New York: Springer.
Sheese, R. (Ed.). Snippets related to thinking critically about the discipline and methods of Psychology.
Tafreshi, D., Slaney, K. L., & Neufeld, S. D. (2016). Quantification in psychology: Critical analysis of an unreflective practice. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 36, 233-249.
Wetherell, M. (2015). Discursive psychology: Key tenets, some splits, and two examples. In Ian Parker (Ed.). Handbook of Critical Psychology. New York: Routledge, pp. 315-324.
April 1 — Some Psychologists are thinking critically about the purposes of psychological study and the standard concepts used in psychological study.
Adams, G., Dobles, I., Gómez, L., Kurtiş, T., & Molina, L. (2015). Decolonizing Psychological Science: Introduction to the Special Thematic Section. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 3(1), 213-238. (page 213-220 assigned)
Adams, G., Gómez Ordóñez, L., Kurtiş, T., Molina, L., & Dobles, I. (2017). Notes on decolonizing psychology: from one special issue to another. South African Journal of Psychology, 47(4), 531-541. (abstract only)
Gergen, K. J., Gulerce, A., Lock, A., & Misra, G. (1996). Psychological science in cultural context. American Psychologist, 51(5), 496-503. (specific excerpts assigned provided on course Moodle site)
Grose, R., Dutt, A., & Grabe, S. (2014). Power, Overview. In Thomas Teo (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology. New York: Springer.
Pettit, M. (2015). Subject matter: Human behavior, psychological expertise, and therapeutic lives. Social Studies of Science, 45(1), 146-158. (specific excerpts assigned provided on course Moodle site)
Teo, T. (2018). Introduction. In T. Teo, Outline of Theoretical Psychology: Critical Investigations, pp. 1-23. London: Palgrave MacMillan.
Ussher, J. (2014). Depression. In Thomas Teo (Ed.). Encyclopedia of Critical Psychology. New York: Springer.
April 8 — So, let’s review and summarize what we have learned.
Billig, M. (1996). Arguing and Thinking, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Chapter 4) (link available on course Moodle site)
Brufee, K. A. (1984). Collaborative learning and the ‘conversation of mankind’. College English, 46(7), 635-652.
Mercier, H., Boudry, M., Paglieri, F., & Trouche, E. (2017). Natural-born arguers: Teaching how to make the best of our reasoning abilities. Educational Psychologist, 52(1), 1-16.
Sheese, R. (Ed.) (2021). Snippets from previous readings for an end-of-term review.