Skip to Main Content

PSYC 1100: Learning Frameworks

First-Year Seminar

Foundation for Critical Thinking Model

Elements of Thought thumbnail

The Foundation for Critical Thinking (FCT) model defines information as:

  • data
  • facts
  • reasons
  • observations
  • experiences
  • evidence

When thinking critically, one applies pertinent intellectual standards to those elements. These standards may include:

  • clarity
  • accuracy
  • precision
  • relevance
  • depth
  • breadth
  • significance
  • fairness
  • completeness

The Foundation for Critical Thinking model includes specific "intellectual traits or virtues," which a critical thinker should strive to develop. These intellectual traits include:

  • humility
  • courage
  • empathy
  • autonomy
  • integrity
  • perseverance
  • confidence in reason
  • fairmindedness

(Paul, Richard, and Linda Elder. The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools. Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking, 2014. pp.14-15).

Primary and Secondary Sources

Primary Secondary
Definition

Original materials providing direct or firsthand evidence of an event, person, subject, or object​

Materials that describe, evaluate, or interpret an event, person, subject, or object

Often involves use of multiple primary sources
Timing of Creation/Publication

Original materials contemporary to the event or subject described​

Produced sometime after the event or object has been created​
Formats / Examples

Personal correspondence & diaries

Works of art & literature

Speeches & oral histories

Audio & video recordings

Photographs, maps, & posters

Newspaper ads & stories (can also be secondary)

Laws & legislative hearings

Census & demographic records

Data & statistics

Ephemera (ticket stubs, flyers, postcards, receipts, etc.)

Biographies

History textbooks & non-fiction books about an event or time period

Encyclopedias & bibliographies
(may also be tertiary)

Journal & magazine articles

Book reviews

Documentaries

Commentaries/Criticisms

Websites

Adapted from Indiana University Bloomington  Libraries (https://libraries.indiana.edu/identifying-primary-and-secondary-sources) and University of Delaware Libraries (https://guides.lib.udel.edu/c.php?g=85421&p=548182).

Authority, Process, and Purpose

When we evaluate the quality of an information source, it can help to consider factors related to the source's authority, purpose, and creation process. 

Authority

We often turn to Authority (whether a source is considered trustworthy or credible for a given situation, community, or need) to help ensure accuracy.

  • Are the author's credentials and/or expertise indicated? Could that information be verified if needed?
  • Is the publisher or sponsoring body reputable and a reasonable source for such content?
  • Could either have a point of view or bias that should make you question that authority?

Purpose

Purpose can be a helpful factor when considering the relevance, fairness, and completeness of an information source.

  • Is the main purpose of the information to inform, persuade, sell a product, or entertain?
  • Is the purpose transparent, or is it hidden? Does it influence the degree to which you should be skeptical of the content?
  • If an opinion is being promoted, is it supported by a balanced, logical presentation of facts?

Process

Process is an important factor in whether an information source is clear, accurate, and complete.

  • How many people were involved in researching, creating, fact-checking, and editing the information source?
  • Was a peer-review or editorial review process used prior to publication?
  • Are suitable references or sources indicated?
  • If timeliness is critical to the question at issue, how current is the information? How much time has elapsed from initial creation to publication, and does that matter?

Types of Authority

Authority - a person whose opinion or testimony is accepted as true
 
Types of Authority

Lived Experience:  Credibility or expertise based on firsthand knowledge or experience

Professional Authority:  Credibility or expertise based on practical experience in a profession or trade

Journalistic Authority:  Credibility or expertise based on writing about or reporting on an issue

Academic Authority:  Credibility or expertise based on in-depth research or formal study

Evaluating Lived Experience Authority
  • Is the information based on direct or firsthand experience of an event?
  • Was the information created during the same time as the event?
Evaluating Professional Authority
  • Was the information created by a qualified professional?
  • Is the subject of the information relevant to the author's area of professional expertise?
  • Does the information provide practical information, solutions, or analysis?
Evaluating Journalistic Authority
  • What was the editorial or review process?
  • How much time elapsed from creation to publication?
  • Were claims verified?
  • Was the information presented in context?
  • Were the sources fact-checked?
Evaluating Academic/Scholarly Authority
  • Was the information created by a scholar?
  • Was the information created for other scholars?
  • Is the subject of the information relevant to the author's area of scholarly expertise?
  • Is the purpose of the information to share new knowledge?
  • Has the information undergone peer review?

Peer Review

Bayou Building 2402, 2700 Bay Area Blvd, Houston, TX 77058-1002