MSLD 500 Module 5 – Critical Thinking about Critical Thinking

Critical Thinking about Critical Thinking

I always considered myself a critical thinker, for the fact I analyze information in a deep perspective. I am used to bring up new possibilities and alternatives in a conversation, showing different points of views and antagonizing, especially paradigmatic data.

     Going through studies, I realize these traits are important and essential while thinking critically, however not necessarily means I am critical thinker. My competencies are still in a low stage. I got the knowledge of critical thinking concepts, elements, standards, traits and virtues, and most relevant, the importance of thinking critically and link all these knowledges, stated by Elder and Paul (2016).

     My thinking processes definitely changed since I went through the topic, however, in a practical scope, I still miss a structure, to analyze and face situations reasoning them out. I know which elements to consider and standards to focus on, but still does not come automatically to me, going around the circle (Nosich, 2012, p. 68) while reacting to an event or thinking about a subject matter, which according to the referred author, it is just the basic process of analysis. I recognize that some of the impediments listed by Nosich (2012, p. 16-25) and others not listed by him, have a great influence on my blockage for critical thinking.

     In an average perspective, considering the standards applied to the elements of critical thinking (Elder & Paul, 2016, p. 19), I can say I managed to internalize and apply, on a daily basis, some of them.  As mentioned, there is a long way to be in a high level, or level three, according to Elder and Paul (2016, p. 6). For an instance, in a personal and professional scope, the standards of clarity, logicalness, significance and depth is more constantly applied to the elements of purpose, points of views, information, inferences and implications. Consequently, I am already developing through my recent knowledge, fairmindedness, confidence in reason, intellectual courage, humility and slowly, intellectual autonomy.

     To make lasting, positive changes in the way I think, I need to step back while facing a challenging situation or conversations, and think through all I have learnt. For that, I need to memorize all the concepts and techniques by heart, to easily and quickly go through them, since some decision-making conditions lack on time availability. I understand that internalize deeply the knowledge I have learnt recently is the greatest step to take from now, only then I will be able to apply them naturally.

     I believe critical thinking and powerful leadership are inevitably connected. To be a great leader, it is crucial to think things through and act in accordance to it. To be an organizational powerful leader, with strong influence in the team and consequently in the organization, it is essential to lead by example, to be accurate, clear, relevant, logical, precise, significant, ample and deep, fair and complete, as a role model. It is compelling to think about the purpose of our thinking and actions, analyzing inferences, concepts, implications and assumptions, all the information available, alternatives and point of views, making questions to ourselves and our teams. Only this way we can achieve pivotal intellectual virtues to succeed as leader.

“Personal Power is the influence capacity a leader derives from being seen by followers as likable and knowledgeable… role model… competent … considerate.” (Northouse, 2016, p. 12)

  

Northouse P. G. (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7^th edition). Thousand Oaks, CA:  Sage.

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across the curriculum (4th edition). Boston, MA: Pearson

Paul R., Elder L. (2016). Critical thinking: concepts and tool. Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

MSLD 500 Module 3 - Organizational Leadership as a System

Organizational Leadership as a System

Organizational leadership can be seen in different ways depending on the perspective and approach of the leader, or of anyone interested on the subject. First it is important to understand the definition of organizational leadership, to than analyze the distinction between these perspectives.

     In accordance to TDK Technologies, organizational leadership is a dual focused management approach that works towards what is best for individuals and what is best for a group as a whole, simultaneously. It also mentions that it is also an attitude and a work ethic that empowers an individual in any role to lead from the top, middle, or bottom of an organization. Complementing this definition, MSG Experts say that organizational leadership deals with both human psychology as well as expert tactics. It emphasizes on developing leadership skills and abilities that are relevant across the organizations.

     There can be not just a distinction but often a contradiction between seeing organizational leadership as a simple body of information or as a system of thinking. Considering the definitions and descriptions mentioned previously, seeing the term simply as a body of information, it lacks on comprehension. There would be gaps with crucial questions as: what to do with this information? How to approach it? Who to direct to? For what? And so on.

      It is impossible to approach the term as just information given. Since it involves individuals, attitude, ethic, human psychology, tactics, all together, it is a must to involve thinking, or better than that, system of thinking. We can use a body of information associated to it, however not compare one definition with another.  Most of the organizations, especially in a time of constant changes witnessed nowadays, faces continual challenges which can turn to conflict and threats to any business. Thinking through the challenges as a whole, in a system perspective, it is crucial for organizational leaders and can define the future of their organization. Kaufman et al. (2003, p. 57) also highlights the importance of thinking and acting holistically for high payoff results. As leaders, we must to think through a system. The performance of a system depends on how the parts are connected and how they relate. (Kaufman et al., 2003, p. 61).

     Considering organizational leadership as a system of thinking does not change how I see and approach my course work, however it makes me keep focused on a holistic point of view through the discipline, facing leadership as complex system, where thinking critically plays an essential role through dynamic times.

“The greatest danger in times of turbulence is not the turbulence. It is to act with yesterday’s logic.” (Drucker, 1993).

    

Drucker P. (1993). Post-capitalist society. New York – NY: HarperBusiness.       

Kaufman R., Oakley-Browne H., Watkins R., Leigh. D. (2003). Strategic planning for success: Aligning people, performance and payoffs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/ Pfeiffer.

MSG Management Study Guide. Organizational Leadership. Retrieved from https://managementstudyguide.com/organizational-leadership.htm#

TDK Technologies. Key Components of Organizational Leadership. Retrieved from https://www.tdktech.com/tech-talks/key-components-of-organizational-leadership

MSLD 500 Module 2 - Tell Your Story

Tell Your Story

We all have been shaped by our personal history, influenced by associations, family, values, activities, environment and so forth. Our life story usually guides us on how to respond to the situations we face and which standards we follow to react to these situation, or in short terms, how our mind works on our relationship with the world.

          My life story was mostly shaped by non-critical- thinking standards, with some hints of critical thinking. While a child, I have watched my parents looking for joy. Along with my brother, we all went out to catch up with my parents’ friends during weekends, on environments surrounded with a lot of people, music, dance, and always on outdoor activities during the day. At least once a year, two things could not be missed: theme park and a holiday at the beach. Apart from that, sports were always present on our daily life, especially team sport. With that, I can say I was shaped by the non-critical-thinking standards, listed by Nosich (2012, p. 153), of fun, exciting, feels good and spontaneous. Some deeper non-critical-thinking standards were there in that phase of my life as well, such as free and loving.

          The great thing about it is that my parents did not let me grow only with these standards. The implement of some of the critical-thinking standards were always present which made me keep my feet on the ground, in harmony with the world around me. I have been grown in a well-organized and reliable environment, with plenty of clearness more than just obedience. Everything was always explained to me in order to make me understand the reason behind the rules. Honesty was always present as well, meaning it could be fun and full of joy but never without morality on my actions.

          My primary and extended family played a crucial role in my life story, and how I responded and still respond to all aspects in my life. I acquired my standards mostly from them. At school I just learnt alphabetization and all subjects in order to prepare me for my professional life. Value as discipline and respect were taught at home, and my parents never counted on my scholar education to that.

          One very interesting non-critical-thinking standard influenced the way I critically think indeed: freedom. The fact I was free to think, to say what I though, to ask, to choose anything I wanted (with my parents’ permission afterwards by all means), to argue when not agreed (to understand the reason behind), and have always been explained about everything, made be face the world in a critical way. These questions were always there: but why, why not, but if, if not, for what? I had plenty of arguments with teachers, professors, priests, and so forth. Until I was not convinced with reasonable aspects of a subject, I was not satisfied.

          My standards did not change dramatically over the years. I just learnt, while in college and during daily adult life (which still is going on by the way), how to calm down, to think before saying, to analyze if it is worth arguing or convincing someone. I have learnt how to choose people I want to be with and environments I want to go into. I have more obedience, due to my professional experience. I realized some aspects cannot be explained to me and full stop, which was hard at the beginning but I have learnt how to live with it peacefully.

          Currently, the way I face situations in my life is more reasonable, logical, rational, relevant and still deep. Work experience, relationships and life style changed in few aspects the way I think, but the way I respond to situations is, thus far, influenced by the values learnt throughout my childhood.

          So, after all, what is the point of going through our life history and understand how our life story was built? The most important aspect of becoming conscious about our influences and how we have been shaped is stated by Nosich (2012, p.39):

“That then lays a foundation for you to become more intellectually autonomous, to gain substantially more ability to shape your own present and future through critical thinking.”

Nosich, G. M. (2012). Learning to think things through: A guide to critical thinking across the curriculum (4th edition). Boston, MA: Pearson.