Self-Assessment of Reasoning Ability. Patricia M. Miller. Ferris State University

Transcription

1 Running head: SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 1 Self-Assessment of Reasoning Ability Patricia M. Miller Ferris State University

2 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 2 Abstract Critical thinking involves thinking about how you are thinking. It requires reasoning skills that must be continually assessed and improved in order to increase the effectiveness of one s thinking. The follow paper is a self-assessment of my reasoning ability. I have identified areas of strength along with areas of weakness and have provided examples from my metacognition critical thinking exercises. These identified strengths and weaknesses, along with excerpts of my work and analysis, will support my case for the grade that I believe I deserve.

3 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 3 Self-Assessment of Reasoning Ability The purpose of my self-assessment of reasoning ability is to assess my own performance of my thinking across the semester in Nursing 324. Critical thinking consists of thinking about your thinking while you re thinking in order to make your thinking better. If successful, this report will make it possible for those who read it to grasp explicitly what I have and have not learned this semester in the way of thinking skills and abilities. It will, itself, display critical thinking support. I will begin by stating the grade, which I believe that I have the evidence to support. I will then build a case for my grade using the criteria below and excerpts from my own work as substantiation. My Areas of Strengths: I am best at the thinking abilities listed below. In each case, I will attach evidence from my work along with accompanying analysis and commentary. 1. Information 2. Assumptions 3. Implications and Consequences 4. Inference and Interpretation My Areas of Weakness: I am weakest at the thinking abilities listed below. In each case, I will attach evidence from my work along with accompanying analysis and commentary. 1. Purpose 2. Questions at issue or central problem 3. Point of View 4. Concepts and Ideas. My grade for the metacognitive journal should be: A, based on the criteria for grades in the course materials. Below is a summary of the reasoning on which I base my judgment.

4 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 4 Summary of Reasoning Areas of Strength Information. The first area of strength that I was able to identify for myself is the element of reasoning labeled information. The criteria for this element of reasoning states: all information is based on data, information, evidence, experience, and research. I am providing an example from my Evidence Based Practice Project (EBPP): The current policy requires used IV pumps to be sent to central supply for cleaning and then returned to the unit. Contributing to my reasoning of this problem is previous experiences of being unable to find available infusion pumps. In researching solutions to this problem, I read articles focused on infection control because my concern is not only for improved efficiency in locating pumps, but I am also concerned for effective disinfection of the pumps. I effectively met the criteria for the information element of reasoning by basing my thoughts on data and information related to the policy for IV pump cleaning as well as evidence from research. I also included my own personal experience as part of the information. Assumptions. The second area of strength that I identified for myself is within the element of reasoning labeled assumptions. The criteria listed for this element of reasoning is described as: all reasoning is based on assumptions-beliefs we take for granted. I am providing an example from my EBPP: Assumptions that I am making in my reasoning include: assuming that the current policy for cleaning and disinfecting of IV pumps is the reason for the lack of available pumps

5 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 5 and assuming that changing the policy for cleaning the pumps will ensure infection control that is equal to the previous policy. I could also assume that the hospital believes that disinfection of IV pumps in central supply is more effective than having environmental services perform the task on the unit. This excerpt of my work is sufficient evidence for an identified strength because it thoroughly examines my assumptions and beliefs surrounding my proposed problem with the lack of available IV pumps. I have also identified an assumption that I was making related to the hospital s beliefs. Implications and Consequences. My third area of strength that I have identified is within the element of reasoning labeled implications and consequences. This element is described as: all reasoning leads somewhere. It has implications and when acted upon, has consequences. I am, again, providing an example from my EBPP: Some possible implications or consequences of my reasoning include: the use of disinfecting wipes on the infusion pumps could be an effective means of infection control and lead to increased nurse satisfaction as well as improved efficiency in patient care, my idea could lead to decreased effectiveness in infection control if the pumps are unable to be cleaned as thoroughly, or there could be no change in the problem even after a new cleaning policy is implemented. This example for the implications or consequences element of reasoning is effective in validating an area of strength. I was able to describe a variety of possible implications or consequences from different angles, identifying all of the possible outcomes if there were to be a change in the policy for the cleaning of IV pumps.

6 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 6 Inferences and Interpretation. The fourth and final area of strength that I have identified for myself is within the element of reasoning labeled inferences and interpretation. This element is described as: all reasoning contains inferences from which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data and situations. To demonstrate my strength in this area I have used an example from my metacognition critical thinking exercise on body temperature: The inferences that I am making are being influenced by new data and research. The study results from the excerpt on normal body temperature lead me to a conclusion that my belief in a normal temperature of 98.6 F is incorrect. This excerpt is a good demonstration of well-reasoned thought because I have incorporated my interpretation or conclusion along with a statement of inferences that have influenced my thought process. I have clearly stated that my interpretation is influenced by data and research. Areas of Weakness Purpose. The first area that I have identified weakness or needed improvement was within the element of purpose. This element of reasoning is described simply as: all reasoning has a purpose. To demonstrate how this area needs improvement, I am providing an example from my metacognition critical thinking exercise: The reason for my belief that 98.6 F is the normal temperature began by hearing my mother say that it was the normal temperature when I was child. As an adult when I am checking a temperature, either of a patient or one of my children, I need a reference in

7 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 7 mind to determine if a fever is present and I revert back to what I have always learned that 98.6 F is normal. However, in reading the excerpt and thinking more about the normal temperature, I begin to question the truth in my belief. This response describing my thoughts related to the element of reasoning of purpose is not clear and specific. It is rather long and wordy but does not convey a clear sense of my purpose for reasoning. The first sentence recounts personal experience and would be better described in the information element of reasoning. Throughout the semester I was able to improve in my critical thinking skills. My work in the EBPP shows progress made in this area of weakness. Below is an excerpt of the purpose element of reasoning from my EBPP: It is often difficult to obtain an intravenous infusion pump that has been cleaned and sterilized when it is needed for a new patient admission. The current policy requires all used pumps to be sent to central supply for cleaning. It is time consuming for the nurse to search for an available pump. As Jeff Fereng discussed in his article, the lack of available supplies and equipment results in nurses spending a great amount of wasted time locating supplies, and leads to them becoming dissatisfied with their job (2010, p. 14). This excerpt demonstrates a clearly stated purpose. It describes the purpose for my thoughts much more specifically than the previous example. Questions at issue or central problem. The second area of weakness that I was able to identify within myself was the element of reasoning labeled questions. This element is described as: all reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some question, solve some problem. I am providing an example from my metacognition critical thinking exercise to demonstrate this weakness: Why have I always

8 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 8 believed 98.6 F is the normal temperature for everyone and what is the truth to the question of what is the normal body temperature? The questions asked in this excerpt are somewhat broad and nonspecific. The first part of the sentence, asking why I believe 98.6 is the normal temperature, appears now to have very little significance to my reasoning. The main question that I was reasoning through is simply: Do individual s body temperatures vary from one another? The EBPP provides a much more clear and specific response in the element of question, thus demonstrating an improvement in this area over the course of the semester: Is there a more efficient way to clean infusion pumps while maintaining appropriate sterilization? Can a policy be implemented for environmental services to clean and sterilize the pumps on the unit rather than transferring them to central supply? These questions are more concrete and directly related to the purpose of my reasoning. Point of View. The third area of weakness that I have identified for myself was within the element of reasoning labeled point of view. This element is described as: all reasoning is done from some point of view; think about the stakeholders. To provide an example of this area that needs improvement, I have inserted an excerpt from my EBPP: My point of view, as a nurse, is that it is frustrating and time consuming to be unable to locate a cleaned IV pump. The patient s point of view may also be one of frustration as there is a delay in their care. While these thoughts are clear and specific, I have not thoroughly identified the points of view of all individuals involved in this problem. I failed to take into account the opinions or points of view of the individuals that are in support of the current policy for IV pump cleaning.

9 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 9 Concepts and Ideas. The fourth area that I noticed a need for improvement in was within the element of reasoning of concepts and ideas. This element is described as: all reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas. To demonstrate this weakness I am inserting an example from my metacognition critical thinking exercise: In my reasoning related to the topic of normal temperature it is important to examine the concept of body temperature regulation as well as different theories and definitions concerning this topic. I must also examine the validity of the evidence being presented. This excerpt presents rather broad statements about ideas thought about during my reasoning on the topic of normal body temperature. It does not, however, specifically state the concepts and ideas that I am processing during my reasoning. During the course of the semester, as my critical thinking abilities improved, I was able to process my reasoning at a more advanced level as demonstrated in an excerpt of concepts and ideas from my EBPP: The current procedure of intravenous infusion pump cleaning is based on a concept of optimal infection control and is guided by a policy. My reasoning for a more efficient way of cleaning infusion pumps is based on concepts of increased accessibility, better time management, and increased organization. This example of the element of reasoning of concepts and ideas is much more clear and specific. It precisely states my exact ideas that I am basing my reasoning on. Conclusion Critical thinking skills are not skills one is inherently equipped with. They are skills that must be developed and can be improved with practice. Critical thinking is also not a skill that I

10 SELF-ASSESSMENT OF REASONING 10 put much effort into improving prior to taking this class. However, over the course of the semester, I have developed and improved on my critical thinking skills to what I believe to be deserving of an A grade. The criteria for the grade of A states, The work at the end of the semester is almost invariably clear, precise, and well-reasoned. I have provided evidence to prove that my work has improved over the course of the semester and my reasoning abilities now demonstrate thoughts that are clear, precise, and well-reasoned. While there is always the possibility of continued needed improvement, such as in my response related to the element of reasoning labeled point of view, the criteria for the grade of A does not use the term always, rather it uses the terms almost invariably. For this reason, I believe that my grade for the metacognition journal should be an A.