What's Behind the Label? A Qualitative Study of Critical Thinking Exercises in Two Popular English for Academic Purposes (EAP) Textbooks

Public Deposited
Resource Type
  • A review of the theoretical literature suggests three rival approaches to critical thinking: informal logic (e.g. D'Angelo, 1971; Ennis, 1987; Scriven, 1976), centred on generalizable cognitive abilities; epistemological (e.g. McPeck, 1981; Moon, 2008; Paul & Elder, 2016), centred on acquiring disciplinary knowledge and a relativist worldview; and critical pedagogy (e.g. Benesch, 2001; Canagarajah, 2005; Giroux, 1994), centred on neo-Marxist social transformation. This qualitative study employed deductive and inductive coding strategies (Pingel, 2010; Saldan͂a, 2016) to determine the extent to which these three critical thinking approaches were evidenced in exercises labelled as critical thinking in two popular English for Academic Purposes (EAP) textbooks. The textbook analysis revealed three major findings: the abilities targeted were frequently inconsistent with those abilities identified in the theoretical literature, the importance of subject-specific background knowledge was undermined, and there was a lack of concern for social transformation. The study concluded by offering several implications.

Thesis Degree Level
Thesis Degree Name
Thesis Degree Discipline
Rights Notes
  • Copyright © 2018 the author(s). Theses may be used for non-commercial research, educational, or related academic purposes only. Such uses include personal study, research, scholarship, and teaching. Theses may only be shared by linking to Carleton University Institutional Repository and no part may be used without proper attribution to the author. No part may be used for commercial purposes directly or indirectly via a for-profit platform; no adaptation or derivative works are permitted without consent from the copyright owner.
Date Created
  • 2018


In Collection: