In this paper, the first of two, we analyze three widely-held conceptions of critical thinking: as one or more skills, as mental processes, and as sets of procedures. Each views, we contend, wrong-headed, misleading or, at best, unhelpful. Some who write about critical thinking seem to muddle all three views in an unenlightening melange. Apart from the errors or inadequacies of the conceptions themselves, they promote or abet misconceived practices for teaching critical thinking. Together, they have led to the view that critical thinking is best taught by practicing it. We offer alternative proposals for the teaching of critical thinking.
In this paper, the second of two, we set out a conception of critical thinking that critical thinking is a normative enterprise in which, to a greater or lesser degree, we apply appropriate criteria and standards to what we or others say, do, or write. The expression `critical thinking' is a normative term. Those who become critical thinkers acquire such intellectual resources as background knowledge, operational knowledge of appropriate standards, knowledge of key concepts, possession of effective heuristics, and of certain vital habits of mind. We explain why these intellectual resources are needed and suggest that we can best teach critical thinking by infusing it within any curricular practice in which our students are involved.