Defending the Chinese Learner: Examining Critical Thinking among Chinese International Students

• In Event: Navigating Global and Local Dimensions in Higher Education: Reflexivity, Relations, and Internationalization in China

Proposal

Chinese learner refers to “Chinese students in Confucian-heritage culture classrooms who are influenced by Chinese belief systems, and particularly by Confucian values” (Rao & Chan, 2009, p. 4). As Han and Scull (2010) state, “Confucianism has been enormously influential in shaping the worldviews, educational philosophies, and interpersonal relations in many Asian countries” (p. 603), such as China, Japan, Korea, Singapore and Vietnam, which are often called Confucian Heritage Culture, or CHC countries (Wong & Wen, 2001).

Critical thinking is often assumed to be self-explanatory in Western academic settings, and students are expected to know what it means (Woodward-Kron, 2002). International students, especially those from East Asian countries, are often confused about the term and are unsure about how to be “critical in an appropriate way” (Tian & Low, 2011, p. 64). Indeed, critical thinking has long been deemed a Western concept that has its origin in the Greek and Enlightenment philosophies and presuppositions, and is thus considered incompatible with and even suppressed in non-Western traditions such as Confucianism (Tan, 2017). Further, the reticence of Chinese students in class has led many to conclude that Chinese students are passive learners who lack critical thinking (Hwang, Francesco, & Kessler, 2003).

Despite the fact that there is little theoretical or empirical evidence that Chinese students are lacking in critical thinking, such perceptions are still widespread. To a large extent it is an accurate observation that Chinese students rely heavily on memorization in their learning and they tend to be reticent in class discussions. However, there is a huge gap between those observations and the stereotypical perceptions that they are passive learners who lack critical thinking skills.
The ability to think critically is regarded as the primary goal of education (Willingham, 2007), and critical thinking is considered an essential skill needed in the 21st century in order to actively participate in an increasingly globalized and rapidly changing era (Huang & Sang, 2023). A widely accepted definition is by Ennis (1991): “rationally reflective thinking which is concerned with what to do or believe” (p. 6). Similarly, McPeck (1981) defines it as “the propensity and skill to engage in an activity with reflective scepticism” (p. 8). In efforts to break down this complicated concept, some define it as a set of higher-level skills that could involve interpretation, analysis, evaluation, inference, and explanation, to name only a few (Facione, 1990; Geertsen, 2003). Lipman (1988) argues that critical thinking includes both the cognitive skills and the thinking process that involve various skills such as reasoning and concept formation. He defines critical thinking as “skillful, responsible thinking that facilitates good judgement” (p. 39), and good judgement “rests upon proficient reasoning skills that can assure competency in inference, as well as upon proficient inquiry, concept-formation and translation skills” (p. 43). Fairbrother (2003), in reviewing the definitions of critical thinking, highlights the importance of scepticism and “consideration of alternative viewpoints in forming one's attitudes” (p. 608).

Further, critical thinking is also defined as a learning process that enables one to question social inequalities and challenge the status quo (Benesch, 1993). Along the same line, Facione et al. (1995) argue that there is a “characterological profile, a constellation of attitudes, a set of intellectual virtues, and a group of habits of mind which we refer to as the overall disposition to think critically” (p. 2), and those dispositions may include “open-mindedness, curiosity, systematicity, analyticity, truth-seeking, self-confidence, and maturity” (Huang & Sang, 2023, p. 4). The disposition dimension could be understood as the intellectual or even moral virtues that critical thinking involves, such as open-mindedness, fair-mindedness and respect for truth (Kim, 2003). Similarly, Paul’s notion of a “strong sense of critical thinking” (Paul, 1993, pp. 205-09), Siegel’s “critical spirit” (1988) and Ennis’ (1991) definition of critical thinking all emphasize those virtues in critical thinking.

In spite of the complexity of the definition, it seems accurate to say that critical thinking in the West has two related, but conceptually distinct dimensions, namely, (reasoning) skills and disposition (to critique). The former refers to the capability for logic analysis and consistency, and the latter refers to critical spirit, which means the disposition to challenge and question existing dominant social and intellectual frameworks. One will need both the skills and disposition to be a critical thinker. Further, it is arguably safe to say that an essential component of critical thinking is skepticism, and that the ultimate reflection of having critical thinking is reaching good judgement.

To better understand Chinese students’ experiences and perspectives, as well as to explore why there is the stereotypical perception that Chinese students lack critical thinking, this study aims to address the following research questions: What are Chinese international students’ experiences with class discussion in American higher education institutions as a way to foster the development of their critical thinking skills?

Through analyzing interview data collected from 11 Chinese students studying at American higher education institutions, this study attempts to provide voices to those students while examining their experiences at the American higher education setting. Findings reveal that those students tend to think that class discussion is conducive to the development of critical thinking. Further, through discussing their experiences with class discussions, they have demonstrated their disposition and skills in critical thinking. In addition, they have demonstrated critical thinking in responding to perceptions about aspects of China that were different from what they had learned in China.

Chinese students’ heavy reliance on memorization is no reason to assume that they are surface learners, their reticence in class discussion is no ground to premise that they are passive learners, and their reluctance to question teachers is no rationale to conclude that they are lacking in critical thinking. The stereotypical perceptions are not well grounded in theoretical or empirical evidence. On the contrary, they seem to be well aligned with the changing views of traditional Chinese culture among Western scholars, in particular the role of Confucianism in economic development and modernization.

Author

• Baoyan Cheng, Univeristy of Hawaii At Manoa