case study in critical thinking the late paper pdf

(Stanford users can avoid this Captcha by logging in.)

• Send to text email RefWorks EndNote printer

On course : strategies for creating success in college and in life

Available online, at the library.

Education Library (Cubberley)

The Education Library is closed for construction. Request items for pickup at another library.

More options

• Find it at other libraries via WorldCat
• Contributors

Description

Creators/contributors, contents/summary.

• 1. GETTING ON COURSE TO YOUR SUCCESS. Taking the First Step. What Is Success? The Power of Choice. Write a Great Life. Assess Yourself. Self-Assessment Forks in the Road. A Few Words of Encouragement. Journal Entry
• 1. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Jalana Onaga (University of Hawaii, HI). Becoming an Active Learner. How the Human Brain Learns. Three Principles of Deep and Lasting Learning. Your CORE Learning System. Journal Entry
• 2. On Course Principles at Work. Believing in Yourself: Develop Self-Acceptance Self-Esteem and Core Beliefs. Know and Accept Yourself. Journal Entry
• 3. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Phyllis Honore (Cuyahoga Community College, OH). Wise Choices in College: College Customs.
• 2. ACCEPTING PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Case Study for Critical Thinking: The Late Paper. Adopting the Creator Role. Victims and Creators. Responsibility and Choice. Journal Entry
• 4. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Brian Moore (Glendale Community College, AZ). Mastering Creator Language. The Language of Responsibility. Journal Entry
• 5. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Alexsandr Kanevskiy (Oakland University, MI). Making Wise Decisions. The Wise-Choice Process. Journal Entry
• 6. Personal Responsibility at Work. Believing in Yourself: Change Your Inner Conversation. The Curse of Stinkin' Thinkin'. Disputing Irrational Beliefs. Journal Entry
• 7. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Dominic Grasseth (Lane Community College, OR). EMBRACING CHANGE: Do One Thing Different This Week. Wise Choices in College: Reading.
• 3. DISCOVERING SELF-MOTIVATION. Case Study for Critical Thinking: Popson's Dilemma. Creating Inner Motivation. A Formula for Motivation. Value of College Outcomes. Value of College Experiences. Journal Entry
• 8. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Chee Meng Vang (Inver Hills Community College, MN). Designing a Compelling Life Plan. Roles and Goals. How to Set a Goal. Discover Your Dreams. Your Life Plan. Journal Entry
• 9. Committing to Your Goals and Dreams. Commitment Creates Method. Visualize Your Ideal Future. How to Visualize. Journal Entry
• 10. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Amanda Schmeling (Buena Vista University, IA). Self-Motivation at Work. Believing in Yourself: Write A Personal Affirmation. Claiming Your Desired Personal Qualities. Living Your Affirmation. Journal Entry
• 11. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Donna Ludwick (Carteret Community College, NC). EMBRACING CHANGE: Do One Thing Different This Week. Wise Choices in College: Taking Notes.
• 4. MASTERING SELF-MANAGEMENT. Case Study for Critical Thinking: The Procrastinators. Acting on Purpose. Harness the Power of Quadrant II. What to Do in Quadrant II. Journal Entry
• 12. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Jason Pozsgay (Oakland University, MI). Creating an Effective Self-Management System. Monthly Calendars. Next Actions Lists. Tracking Forms. The Rewards of Effective Self-Management. Journal Entry
• 13. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Allysa Lapage (Sacramento City College, CA). Developing Self-Discipline. Staying Focused. Being Persistent. Journal Entry
• 14. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Holt Boggs (Belmont Technical College, OH). Self-Management at Work. Believing in Yourself: Develop Self-Confidence. Create a Success Identity. Celebrate Your Successes and Talents. Visualize Purposeful Actions. Journal Entry
• 15. EMBRACING CHANGE: Do One Thing Different This Week. Wise Choices in College: Studying for Deep Learning.
• 5. EMPLOYING INTERDEPENDENCE. Case Study for Critical Thinking: Professor Rogers' Trial. Developing Mutually Supportive Relationships. Ways to Relate A Sign of Maturity. Giving and Receiving. Journal Entry
• 16. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Jason Matthew Loden (Avila University, MO). Creating a Support Network. Seek Help from Your Instructors. Get Help from College Resources. Create a Project Team. Start a Study Group. Journal Entry
• 17. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Neal Benjamin (Barton County Community College, KS). Strengthening Relationships with Active Listening. How to Listen Actively. Use Active Listening in Your College Classes. Journal Entry
• 18. Interdependence at Work. Believing in Yourself: Be Assertive Leveling. Making Requests. Saying No." Journal Entry
• 19. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Amy Acton (Southern State Community College, OH). EMBRACING CHANGE: Do One Thing Different This Week. Wise Choices in College: Studying for Lasting Learning.
• 6. GAINING SELF-AWARENESS. Case Study for Critical Thinking: Strange Choices. Recognizing When You Are Off Course. The Mystery of Self-sabotage. Unconscious Forces. Journal Entry
• 20. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Sarah Richmond (Missouri University of Science and Technology, MO). Identifying Your Scripts. Anatomy of a Script. How We Wrote Our Scripts. Self-Defeating Habits. Journal Entry
• 21. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: James Floriolli (Foothill College, CA). Rewriting Your Outdated Scripts. The Impact of Outdated Beliefs. Doing the Rewrite. Journal Entry
• 22. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Annette Valle (The Victoria College, TX). Self-Awareness at Work. Believing in Yourself: Write Your Own Rules. Three Success Rules. Changing Your Habits. Journal Entry
• 23. EMBRACING CHANGE: Do One Thing Different This Week. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Brandee Huigens (Northeast Iowa Community College, IA). Wise Choices in College: Writing.
• 7. ADOPTING LIFE-LONG LEARNING. Case Study for Critical Thinking: A Fish Story. Discovering Your Preferred Learning Style. Self-Assessment: How I Prefer to Learn. A. Thinking Learners. B. Doing Learners. C. Feeling Learners. D. Innovating Learners. Journal Entry
• 24. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Melissa Thompson (Madison Area Technical College, WI). Employing Critical Thinking. Constructing Logical Arguments. Asking Probing Questions. Applying Critical Thinking. Journal Entry
• 25. Learning to Make Course Corrections. Change Requires Self-Awareness and Courage. Change and Lifelong Learning. Journal Entry
• 26. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Jessie Maggard (Urbana University, OH). Lifelong Learning at Work. Believing in Yourself: Develop Self-Respect. Live with Integrity. Keep Commitments. Journal Entry
• 27. EMBRACING CHANGE: Do One Thing Different This Week. Wise Choices in College: Taking Tests.
• 8. DEVELOPING EMOTIONAL INTELLIGENCE. Case Study for Critical Thinking: After Math. Understanding Emotional Intelligence. Four Components of Emotional Intelligence. Knowing Your Own Emotions. Journal Entry
• 28. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Lindsey Beck (Three Rivers Community College, CT). Reducing Stress. What Is Stress? What Happens When Stress Persists? Unhealthy Stress Reduction. Healthy Stress Reduction. Choose Your Attitude. Journal Entry
• 29. ONE STUDENT'S STORY: Jaime Sanmiguel (Miami Dade College, FL). Creating Flow. College and Flow. Work and Flow. Journal Entry
• 30. Emotional Intelligence at Work. Believing in Yourself: Develop Self-Love. Design a Self-care Plan. Journal Entry
• 31. EMBRACING CHANGE: Do One Thing Different This Week. Wise Choices in College: Money Management.
• 9. STAYING ON COURSE TO YOUR SUCCESS. Planning Your Next Steps. Assess Yourself, Again. Self-Assessment. Journal Entry 32.".
• (source: Nielsen Book Data)

Bibliographic information

Browse related items.

• Stanford Home
• Maps & Directions
• Search Stanford
• Emergency Info
• Terms of Use
• Non-Discrimination
• Accessibility

© Stanford University , Stanford , California 94305 .

• Previous Article

Introduction

Conclusions, author contributions, acknowledgments, competing interests, supplemental material, using case studies to improve the critical thinking skills of undergraduate conservation biology students.

• Split-Screen
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Guest Access
• Get Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Ana L. Porzecanski , Adriana Bravo , Martha J. Groom , Liliana M. Dávalos , Nora Bynum , Barbara J. Abraham , John A. Cigliano , Carole Griffiths , David L. Stokes , Michelle Cawthorn , Denny S. Fernandez , Laurie Freeman , Timothy Leslie , Theresa Theodose , Donna Vogler , Eleanor J. Sterling; Using Case Studies to Improve the Critical Thinking Skills of Undergraduate Conservation Biology Students. Case Studies in the Environment 5 February 2021; 5 (1): 1536396. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/cse.2021.1536396

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Critical thinking (CT) underpins the analytical and systems-thinking capacities needed for effective conservation in the 21st century but is seldom adequately fostered in most postsecondary courses and programs. Many instructors fear that devoting time to process skills will detract from content gains and struggle to define CT skills in ways relevant for classroom practice. We tested an approach to develop and assess CT in undergraduate conservation biology courses using case studies to address both challenges. We developed case studies with exercises to support content learning goals and assessment rubrics to evaluate student learning of both content and CT skills. We also developed a midterm intervention to enhance student metacognitive abilities at a light and intensive level and asked whether the level of the intervention impacted student learning. Data from over 200 students from five institutions showed an increase in students’ CT performance over a single term, under both light and intensive interventions, as well as variation depending on the students’ initial performance and on rubric dimension. Our results demonstrate adaptable and scalable means for instructors to improve CT process skills among undergraduate students through the use of case studies and associated exercises, aligned rubrics, and supported reflection on their CT performance.

Educating the next generation of professionals to address complex conservation and environmental challenges involves more than teaching disciplinary principles, concepts, and content—it also requires cultivating core competencies in critical thinking (CT), collaboration, and communication [ 1 , 2 ]. CT skills are key desired outcomes of college and university education [ 3 ] and can strongly influence how students make life decisions [ 4 ]. Unfortunately, college graduates in the United States appear to lack strong CT skills despite several years of instruction [ 5 , 6 , 7 ]. This may be due to overreliance on teaching and assessment approaches that emphasize mastery of large volumes of content and offer few opportunities to think critically while acquiring and using knowledge [ 8 , 9 ]. Courses that take an alternative approach, using active, collaborative, or inquiry-based approaches to learning could contribute to both long-term retention of knowledge and CT skills [ 10 , 11 , 12 ].

Using case studies to support active, inquiry-based approaches can be especially effective [ 13 , 14 ]. Case study pedagogies are well suited to supporting the development of CT skills because of their sustained focus on a theme with applications in a specific setting and the opportunity to emphasize distinct steps in the processes of understanding and analyzing issues that comprise essential CT skills. Creating exercises that foster CT using a case study approach combines strengths from both inquiry-based and case study–based best practices.

While definitions vary, CT is broadly recognized as “a habit of mind characterized by the comprehensive exploration of issues and evidence before accepting or formulating an opinion or conclusion” [ 15 ]. CT involves higher-order thinking skills, as well as a suite of concrete capacities, including the ability to select, analyze, infer, interpret, evaluate, and explain information, as well as draw conclusions based on varied and conflicting evidence [ 15 , 16 , 17 ]. Not confined to specific analytical tasks, strong CT skills support the ability to think in a complex manner and to process and assess diverse inputs in a constantly changing environment [ 17 ]. This capacity is essential to effective decision-making, problem solving, and adaptive management in conservation research and practice, particularly in addressing the tradeoffs and multiplicity of perspectives at the core of environmental concerns.

CT has been a focus of K–12 educational and cognitive researchers, who show that explicit instruction can enhance learning of CT skills [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. Unfortunately, adoption of these ideas and practices has been slower in tertiary STEM education [ 22 ]. Educators in undergraduate science classrooms rarely prioritize explicit direct instruction in CT skills or their assessment, fearing compromising the time available for “coverage” of content [ 6 , 23 ]. Thus, many instructors rely on teaching and assessing core content, assuming the CT skills will automatically develop along with deeper disciplinary knowledge [ 17 , 24 ]. Further, educators typically lack training on CT instruction [ 25 ]. Perhaps not surprisingly, on average, very small or empirically nonexistent gains in CT or complex reasoning skills have been found in a large proportion of students over the course of 4-year college programs [ 6 , 7 , 26 ].

Besides the potential to enhance learning outcomes, an emphasis on CT skills through more active and collaborative learning can also promote equal opportunity in STEM and boost completion rates. It has been shown that these approaches to teaching and learning can enhance learning for underrepresented groups in science [ 27 ] and could also boost performance and hence retention in the field in the midst of current high attrition rates in STEM [ 28 ].

Our experience running faculty professional development programs in diverse contexts over several years [ 29 ] has shown that faculty in diverse learning contexts seek and welcome evidence-based guidance on teaching and assessment practices that promote CT. Given only informal preparation on building CT skills and a curricular focus on essential disciplinary concepts, instructors often search for guidelines on how to incorporate these practices while supporting the simultaneous learning of concepts. Case studies can provide a particularly strong way to support the enhancement of CT skills that are adaptable for individual instructors.

To better understand the investment in time and effort needed for conservation students to learn process skills and for faculty to develop efficient teaching tools, we designed a multi-institutional study on three fundamental process skills: oral communication [ 30 ], data analysis [ 31 ], and CT. These different skills were selected to match the diverse interests of the participating faculty and were targeted by different faculty in different “arms” of the study (in different institutions, courses, and groups of students) to allow for comparison among results. Here we report on the results for CT. A key component of this portion of the study was the use of case studies to foster both content and skill development.

Our study design built on evidence showing that case study exercises help reinforce concept knowledge, as well as cognitive skills, and further, that repetition and reflection [ 32 ] support development of higher-order thinking skills. We investigated three questions: (1) Does instructor emphasis on CT skills—providing metacognitive support for reflection on their performance at light and intensive levels—influence the magnitude of individual CT skill gains? (2) Do students show similar responses for the different dimensions of CT learning, or are any of them more challenging than others? and (3) How does our intervention influence students at different initial achievement levels?

To address these questions, we first created and validated instructional materials in the form of case study exercises and assessment rubrics designed to develop and assess four main dimensions of CT skills (see below) and piloted these materials in diverse classroom settings across five institutions. We assessed student learning using a common rubric to score CT performance on two case study–based exercises, and using an independent assessment of CT skills (The Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT) [ 33 ]), applied at the start and end of each course. To address the frequent concern of instructors regarding trade-off with content learning, we investigated these questions while also measuring content gains. A key aim of this study was to develop and use approaches for active teaching using case studies that instructors can readily adopt as part of their regular teaching practices.

Developing, Validating, and Implementing Assessment Tools

Between April and July 2011, we created and validated a set of instructional materials based on case studies designed to develop CT skills (Instructional Unit for CT skills). The Instructional Unit consisted of (1) Case Study Exercise 1 on amphibian declines, with a solution file, (2) Case Study Exercise 2 on invasive species, with a solution file, (3) a pre/post content knowledge assessment for each exercise, (4) a student’s pre/post self-assessment of their CT skills, (5) our CT Rubric, and (6) the files associated with the intensive versus light Teaching Intervention, including a third brief Case Study on climate change used in the intensive intervention, with a solution file. The complete Instructional Unit as used in the study, as well as updated versions of the case studies, can be downloaded from the website of the Network of Conservation Educators and Practitioners (NCEP). 1

Development and Validation of the CT Rubric and Case Study Exercises

To evaluate student CT performance, we developed a rubric based on elements found in existing and available rubrics (e.g., Washington State University’s Guide to Rating Critical & Integrative Thinking from 2006, and Northeastern Illinois University CT Rubric from 2006) and the VALUE Rubric for CT [ 34 ]. The resulting rubric included descriptions of four performance levels (from 1 to 4) for four dimensions of CT: (1) explanation of issues or problems, (2) selection and use of information, (3) evaluation of the influence of context and assumptions, and (4) reaching positions or drawing conclusions. The final rubric drew on broadly validated rubrics and was adapted by a core group of eight participating project faculty at a workshop in 2011. Using a collaborative and participatory approach to rubric development, we sought to validate rubric content, ensure familiarity of faculty participants with the rubric, and minimize scoring differences among project participants.

We then developed two exercises based on real-world case studies, as recommended by the Vision and Change Report [ 1 ]. Case study topics were selected to correspond to core topics that could be incorporated into all courses with minimal syllabus disruption. We developed Case Study Exercise 1 with a focus on threats to biodiversity, specifically on understanding the causes of amphibian declines. We adapted Case Study Exercise 2 on the topic of invasive species, specifically on rusty crayfish in the Eastern United States, from a version previously published by the NCEPs ( http://ncep.amnh.org ). Each case study exercise contained three main parts: (1) a short introduction and instructions to the exercise, (2) the case study, and (3) a section with questions designed to prompt students’ CT skills in relation to the case. Each case study exercise was designed to teach conservation biology content in alignment with the CT skills assessed in the rubric; it included questions and tasks intended to elicit student performance in each of the four CT dimensions described in the rubric.

Implementation of the Case Study Exercises and CT Interventions

Between August 2011 and August 2013, we implemented the Instructional Unit following the experimental design shown in figure 1 in upper-level conservation biology courses given at five U.S. higher education institutions ( table 1 ). Case Study Exercise 1 was administered within the first 2 weeks of class as a preassessment and Case Study Exercise 2 was administered within the last 2 weeks of class in the term as a postassessment (see figure 1 ). To guide and facilitate data collection, we provided each professor with a scoring guide to assign points to answers to each question in the case study exercise and a spreadsheet to enter points. Scores from specific questions were assigned to one of the four CT dimensions. Professors then reported these final scores on each dimension of the rubric to the students. Scores from both case study exercises contributed toward students’ grades.

Experimental design and main questions within and across terms. The discontinuous arrow between Light and Intensive Teaching Interventions (TI) indicates an interchangeable order. Abbreviations are as follows: CAT = Critical Thinking Assessment Test; CE Ex = case study exercise. Not all students completed all components, so total sample size differs in our analyses of these data. N ranged from 52 to 82 for completion of the pre-/postcase study exercise content assessments for the specific case studies, with N = 113 total for the light teaching intervention and N = 103 total for the intensive teaching intervention. For CT skill gains across the case study exercises, N = 216. For the pre- and postcourse student-self assessments, N = 76 for the light and 79 for the intensive teaching intervention. N = 78 for the light and 71 for the intensive teaching interventions for the pre- and postcourse CAT tests.

Institution Type, Student Level, Class Size, and Term When the Instructional Unit With the Intensive (ITI) and/or Light (LTI) Teaching Intervention Was Used for Each Participating Course.

a Following the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education http://classifications.carnegiefoundation.org/ .

b Class size = average number of students enrolled in ITI and LTI sections of the course.

We evaluated whether students gained CT skills, content knowledge, and self-confidence in their skills in courses that used the Instructional Unit with one of two levels of teaching intervention: light and intensive. The intervention differed in the amount of time spent in class and the level of reflection required from the students. In the light intervention, students were only given the CT rubric and their scores from the first exercise, while in the intensive intervention, students received the same and also worked in groups around the CT rubric on an additional case over a single class period, followed by individual reflection on how to improve their performance in CT. Using both interventions in the same course, but during different academic terms, we investigated whether the intensity of emphasis on CT in a course influences students’ overall CT gains.

In addition, we conducted an independent assessment of CT gains under the two interventions. At the beginning and end of each course, we administered the Critical Thinking Assessment Test (CAT), a published, validated instrument developed by the Center for Assessment & Improvement of Learning at Tennessee Tech University (CAIL at TTU [ 33 ]; see figure 1 ). The CAT is a 1-h written test consisting of 15 questions that assesses student performance in evaluation and interpretation of graphical and written information, problem solving, identifying logical fallacies or needs for information to evaluate a claim, understanding the limitations of correlational data, and developing alternative explanations for a claim. These CT dimensions were comparable to those we evaluated in our rubric, particularly those under Evidence, Influence of context and assumptions , and Conclusions .

Further, to examine whether explicit instruction in CT skills was more influential than explicit instruction in other skills, the CAT assessments were also given in the other two arms of the study that evaluated interventions designed to improve data analysis [ 31 ] and oral communication skills [ 30 ]. Unfortunately, only one instructor in the oral communication study applied the CAT instrument, so we restricted comparison to the data analysis study, where four instructors applied the CAT in their courses.

We scored batches of completed CAT tests in nine full-day scoring sessions, including only tests for which we have both a pre- and postcourse test from the same student ( N = 290 total; CT study, N = 149; data analysis study, N = 141). In each session, we scored a sample of tests from across multiple institutions, study arms, and intervention levels, and each test was assigned a numerical code so that all scoring was blind. Following CAT procedures, scoring rigorously adhered to CAT scoring rubrics and was discussed by the scoring group as needed to ensure inter-scorer reliability. The CAT tests and scores were then sent to Tennessee Tech University for independent assessment, cross-validation, and analysis. For 2 of the 15 questions, the CAT scoring performed by our team was more generous than norms for these assessments performed nationally, but otherwise scores fell within those norms (results not included; analysis performed by CAIL at TTU). However, this did not affect the use of this tool as an independent assessment of CT skill gains because the scoring sessions were internally consistent and apply to both pre- and postcourse scores.

The project received an exemption from the AMNH Institutional Review Board (IRB 09-24-2010) and the Stony Brook University IRB (265533-1), and the other institutions operated under these exemptions.

A total of 217 students from five upper-level Conservation Biology courses completed both case study exercises over one term. We excluded one student who obtained the maximum score on both exercises while using the light intervention because no improvement was possible, leaving us with N = 216 students in this study. To assess CT skills, content knowledge, and self-confidence, we calculated changes in student performance using normalized change values ( c ) [ 35 ] and compared pre- and postassessments with paired Wilcoxon signed-rank tests [ 36 ]. The two teaching intervention groups (light and intensive) were assessed independently. Changes in the proportions of students scoring in a given quartile before and after the interventions were analyzed using χ 2 tests. We tested for the effect of instructional emphasis using the light versus intensive intervention with a linear mixed-effects model. Online Appendix 1 has additional description of these analyses.

Because we found no differences among courses given at the different institutions, and CAT test samples were homoscedastic, a repeated-measures ANOVA was used on data pooled across institutions. This ANOVA tested overall differences across teaching interventions, across instructional units, and effects on gains for specific skills measured in the CAT. All calculations and statistical analyses were performed in R [ 37 ].

Gains in CT Skills as Measured by Performance Over the Instructional Unit

Most students gained CT skills in each term, as measured by their relative CT performance on the two case study exercises ( figure 2 ). In terms where a light intervention was used ( N = 113 students), 81 students (72%) gained CT skills (positive c value), improving their performance, on average, by 34%. With the intensive intervention ( N = 103 students), 79 students (77%) gained in skills, improving by 37% ( table 2 ).

Percent scores for Case Study Exercises 1 and 2 used as pre- and postassessment of critical thinking skills, respectively, under the light and intensive teaching interventions (TI). Asterisks indicate significant differences ( p < .001) tested with the paired Wilcoxon paired signed rank test. In addition, differences in the percent scores were not equally distributed across quartiles in both the light ( N = 113; X 2 = 23.415, p = .0005) and intensive comparisons ( N = 103; X 2 = 31.893, p = .0005), and the contingency tables indicated shifts in frequency from the bottom quartile before the intervention to the highest quartile after the intervention.

Overall Average Gains for Conservation Biology Courses That Used the Instructional Unit for Critical Thinking With the Light (LTI) and Intensive Teaching Interventions (ITI).

Notes: n.s. = no significant gains between Case Study Exercises 1 and 2 using a paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test.

a Percentage of students that gained skills in parenthesis.

b average normalized gains ± mean standard error.

** Highly significant, * significant.

Significant shifts in performance between the first and second case study exercises were notable in both the light and intensive intervention, based on χ 2 analysis that indicates shifts in frequency from the bottom quartile before the intervention to the highest quartile after the intervention. We found no significant effect of the level of intervention on mean skill gains ( N = 216 students; F (1,216) = 1.359; p = .18). However, the level of intervention was associated with differential gains when students are grouped by initial level of performance, above or below the median; only in the intensive intervention did those performing above the median also show significant gains ( table 2 ). Under the light intervention, 54 students scored below the median of 66%, and 59 scored equal to or above the median in Case Study Exercise 1. Students below the median had greater gains than students with scores equal to or above the median. Students below the median improved their performance by an average of 41%, with 81% of them showing gains ( table 2 ). Students equal to or above the median improved their CT skills by an average of 27%, with 63% of them showing gains.

Under the intensive intervention, 48 students scored below the median score of 64%, and 55 scored equal to or above the median score in Case Study Exercise 1. Students below the median improved by an average of 44% with 90% of them showing gains, while students equal to or above the median improved their CT skills on average by 29% with 65% of them having gains ( table 2 ).

A detailed analysis shows students improved their levels of performance in most of the four dimensions of CT defined for this study. However, achievement level varied among dimensions ( figure 3 ). Surprisingly, for Explanation of the issues to be considered critically , students decreased their level of performance under both interventions ( v = 1542; p < .0025, with Bonferroni correction). In the case of Evidence and Influence of context and assumptions , students significantly improved regardless of which intervention was used ( v = 524 and 39; p < .0025; see figure 3 ).

Distribution of students’ performance within the four levels of proficiency for critical thinking skills (1 = lowest, 4 = highest) when using the instructional unit with the light ( N = 113 students) and intensive ( N = 103 students) teaching interventions. Asterisks indicate significant differences ( p < .0025) and n.s. indicates no significant differences ( p > .0125) between the rubric scores for Exercises 1 (preteaching intervention) and 2 (post teaching intervention), tested with the paired Wilcoxon test, Bonferroni corrected.

Student Content Knowledge, CT Skills, and Self-Confidence

Students gained content knowledge related to the topics of both case study exercises under the light and the intensive intervention, with gains greater than 26% from pre- to postexercise (see table 3 ). Gains in concept knowledge associated with both case studies were greater than 35% for the light teaching intervention and similarly high for the first case study in the intensive teaching intervention group.

Average Gains in Students’ Content Knowledge Measured as the Average Normalized Change ( c ave ) While Using Exercises 1 and 2 of the Instructional Unit With the Light (LTI) and Intensive Teaching Interventions (ITI).

Note: p values are for the paired Wilcoxon signed-rank test on the percentages of the pre- and postcontent scores.

In addition, there was a marginally significant correlation between gains in CT skills and content knowledge ( N = 136 students; ρ = .161; p = .06). Students who showed greater gains in CT skills also showed greater gains in their content knowledge in the topic areas that were the focus of the case studies.

Based on individual self-assessment questionnaires, we found average gains in student self-confidence with CT skills of 21% regardless of intervention. Increases were statistically significant for some of the self-assessment questions, under the intensive intervention only ( figure 4 ). Our results indicate no correlation between gains in CT skills and self-confidence ( N = 155 students; ρ = .049; p = .5).

Frequency distribution of students’ self-assessed confidence levels with their critical thinking skills when using the instructional unit with the light ( N = 79 students) and intensive ( N = 76 students) teaching interventions. One and two asterisks indicate significant differences between pre- and postassessment scores with p < .0125 and p < .0025, respectively, and n.s. indicates no significant differences ( p > .0125) tested with the paired Wilcoxon test, Bonferroni corrected.

Gains in CT Skills as Measured by the CAT Instrument

We also evaluated differences in CT gains as measured by the CAT instrument, both within the CT study arm described here, and the additional arm of the larger study focused on data analysis skills [ 31 ].

Students gained CT skills in both the light and the intensive intervention, with a significant interaction effect of teaching intervention as students had greater gains in the intensive intervention (repeated measures ANOVA: F (1,147) = 4.081, p = .045; figure 5 ). Significant gains were seen with the light intervention for two questions related to the ability to summarize the pattern of results in a graph without making inappropriate inferences, and the use of basic mathematical skills to help solve a real-world problem, with effect sizes of 0.28 and 0.35, respectively. Over all 15 questions, CT gains were moderate, with an effect size of 0.19 ( table 4 ). Under the intensive CT intervention, significant gains were seen in five different questions, with effect sizes ranging from 0.32 to 0.38, and overall gains across the 15 questions were large, with an effect size of 0.49 ( table 4 ).

Comparison of gains in total CAT scores administered pre- versus postcourse by teaching intervention, as measured by the CAT instrument, across all institutions. Scores (SD indicated between parentheses) of the light teaching intervention were 20.00 (5.87) precourse and 21.22 (6.71) postcourse; scores for the intensive intervention were 19.39 (5.74) precourse and 22.37 (6.30) postcourse. A repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare the effect of teaching intervention (Light/Intensive) and test administration (pre-/postcourse) on the CAT total score for courses using the CT Unit, showing a significant interaction of Teaching Intervention and pre-/postcourse administration ( F (1,147) = 4.081, p = .045). Students in the Intensive Intervention made greater gains on the CAT total score than students in the light intervention.

Specific CT Skills Identified in CAT Questions in Which the Students in This Study Showed Significant Gains.

Notes: The specific CAT question numbers are given, with a brief description of the CT skill addressed by the question. The pre- and postcourse means, probability of difference, and effect sizes are given only for those cases in which there was a significant difference observed.

Students using the CT Instructional Unit showed greater increases in CAT scores than those in the data analysis arm of the study ( F 1,290 = 9.505, p = .002), a pattern driven by the results of the intensive teaching intervention. Students in the Intensive Teaching Intervention treatment of the CT arm of the study had significantly higher gains in CAT scores than those in the data analysis arm of the study ( F 1,148 = 11.861, p < .001). There was no significant difference in student CAT scores for those in the light teaching intervention of the two arms of the study ( F 1,142 = 2.540, p = .113).

Our study adds to recent literature on effective approaches for teaching and learning of CT skills (e.g., [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]), an essential outcome of college and university education. Our pedagogical intervention hinges on the use of case studies to foster both content knowledge and CT skills, with support of an assessment rubric. We show that educators can foster measurable gains in CT over the course of a single term or semester by giving students an opportunity to practice these skills through case study exercises at least twice and reflect on their performance midway through the term, using a rubric that provided an operational definition of CT.

We chose a case study approach because real-world problem solving involves making decisions embedded in context [ 14 , 38 ]. Learning how to think critically about information available in its context and evaluating evidence through identifying assumptions and gaps to arrive at strong inference is better supported through lessons presented in case studies, rather than as abstract principles alone. A key to our process was to help students identify the steps they are taking—enhancing their metacognition—through naming specific skills in formative rubrics. In this way, we specifically targeted enhancing their CT skills while gaining concept knowledge about conservation.

Does Instructor Emphasis on CT Skill Affect the Magnitude of Individual Skill Gains?

The light and intensive interventions used in our study differed in level of engagement with a rubric specifically designed to promote and assess CT skills—a type of formative rubric use. Rubrics are generally designed with assessment and grading in mind and developed to fit a specific assignment; however, they have great potential to help with process skill development [ 39 ]. In this study, students were given the detailed rubric after completing the first case study exercise and were encouraged to locate their performance on the rubric. In the intensive intervention, students were further tasked with using the rubric to evaluate and improve sample answers to an additional, short case study.

The formative rubric use allowed us to align assignments to the dimensions of a given skill, in line with the principles of backwards design [ 40 ] and constructive alignment [ 41 ], and to identify the components where students struggle the most, as areas to target. Our results provide support to the benefits of rubric use [ 39 , 42 ]. Using a rubric to codify and operationalize a complex skill like CT seems to help both educators and learners. Our results are concordant with those of Abrami et al. [ 18 ] and Cargas et al. [ 19 ], as we show that “corrective feedback on a common rubric” aligned with relevant, authentic tasks supported learning, and that the simple act of sharing a rubric with the students may not be sufficient by itself [ 43 ]. We encourage others to make use of available collections of rubrics, such as those generated by the VALUE initiative [ 15 ].

The rubric allowed us to provide qualitative feedback to students as they practiced—an anchor for student reflection—and to analyze gains quantitatively. Furthermore, the unit as a whole was designed to promote self-reflection, which has been shown to increase students’ ability to monitor their own selection and use of resources and evidence [ 44 ]. Self-reflection was also found to increase oral communication performance in a parallel arm of our study [ 30 ].

Finally, using case study exercises aligned to the rubric but designed to encompass topics relevant to course content, we were able to assess the learning of content while practicing CT skills. Our results support previous findings [ 45 ] that students can experience simultaneous gains in knowledge and skills, even when instructional materials and class time are dedicated to CT skill development. Indeed, we found student content knowledge gains were positively correlated with their CT skill gains, although this was marginally significant. Taken together, our results suggest that cultivation of CT skills not only does not compete with content knowledge gains but that the focus on CT skills may well enhance content knowledge.

Do Students Show Similar Responses for the Different Dimensions of CT Learning?

Formative rubric use provided insights into which dimensions of CT are more challenging to students, providing valuable feedback to educators. Our results indicate that some dimensions of CT are more challenging to improve than others. A finer examination of the CT gains shows that the changes driving our results stem from two dimensions in our rubric: selection and use of evidence and recognition of the influence of context and assumptions (see figure 3 ). Several aspects of the CT Instructional Unit are likely to have enhanced outcomes in these dimensions, such as the fact that both exercises were based on case studies where students were asked to explain how a change in context would change their course of action or conclusions. Case studies are considered valuable for science teaching because they can reflect the complexity of problems and professional practice in social-environmental systems [ 14 , 38 ]. Cases present concepts and connections among them in a specific context, therefore highlighting the influence of context and assumptions, and require students to evaluate the information being presented and to select the most useful or relevant evidence for a particular task or decision. Our results support previous studies showing case studies can enhance CT skills and conceptual understanding by design [ 45 , 46 , 47 ].

Student performance did not significantly improve in the remaining dimensions of our CT rubric. In the case of ability to clearly and comprehensively explain the issue , overall students showed a loss ( figure 3A ). This dimension was unique in that students were already high achievers at the outset of the term, and the slight loss may correspond to noise along a dimension in which students were already at maximum performance levels. Alternatively, exercise structure could have played a role. The instructions for Case Study Exercises 1 and 2 were not identical in the questions relating to this dimension. Case Study Exercise 1 scores were derived from three separate questions ( What problem are amphibians facing? Summarize the Climate hypothesis; Summarize the Spread hypothesis ), while Case Study Exercise 2 scores rested on a single answer ( Write a paragraph for your supervisors describing and explaining the problem Bright Lake is facing and why it is important to address it ). Despite the former scores being averaged, having separate questions may have offered more opportunities for achievement in the first exercise and fewer in the second, resulting in an observed loss in this dimension. This was the only rubric dimension for which the number of questions contributing to a dimension’s overall score varied between case study exercises.

Finally, the most challenging dimension for students was the ability to make judgments and reach a position, drawing appropriate conclusions based on the available information, its implications, and consequences. No significant gains and the lowest rates of achievement were observed for this dimension, which maps to higher-order cognitive tasks or higher Bloom’s taxonomy levels, and has also been shown to be the most challenging for students in a broader science context [ 48 , 49 ]. In a review of student writing in biology courses, Schen [ 49 ] observed that students were often adept at formulating simple arguments but showed limited ability to craft alternative explanations or to engage with other more sophisticated uses of available information. Our results mirrored this observation, as students generally only made simple use of information. Becker [ 50 ] found similar patterns in student performance and further showed that explicit instruction in constructing arguments based on evidence resulted in students developing more accurate and more sophisticated conclusions. Again, our results spotlight the importance of explicit instruction in CT. Focusing student attention on how to sift among details presented in case studies to draw inferences and conclusions and on expressing their arguments with clear connection to the evidence within case studies may be necessary steps for students to have significant gains in these more advanced aspects of CT.

Similarly, gains in CAT scores were not randomly distributed throughout questions or dimensions of CT. Students significantly improved their CAT scores in questions measuring the ability to evaluate and interpret information, think creatively, and communicate effectively. Conversely, students did not gain in their capacities to use information critically in drawing conclusions (e.g., identify additional information needed to evaluate a hypothesis , use and apply relevant information to evaluate a problem , or explain how changes in a real world problem situation might affect the solution ). The results of the CAT and our case study assessments were broadly similar, with many significant gains seen in CT, except in those dimensions that required more sophisticated reasoning. Together, these results suggest that more, and perhaps different, instructional attention is needed to help students achieve certain specific dimensions of CT (see also [ 11 ]).

How Does the Intervention Affect Students at Different Achievement Levels?

Students with lower initial performance (i.e., below the median in the first exercise) gained more than those with a higher performance (above the median). These differential CT gains suggest that distinct mechanisms for improvement may be at play. We hypothesize those students who were initially least proficient in CT were assisted by the combination of repeated practice (two case study exercises) and calling attention to the components of CT through the rubric-driven intervention, along with self-reflection. Using similar instructional activities could enhance performance or retention in science courses in general [ 51 ], given links between process skills and risk of failing introductory biology [ 52 ]. We further hypothesize that for higher achieving students, the greater emphasis on metacognition in the intensive intervention may be critical to promote gains in performance. Simply prompting students to reflect on their learning may be insufficient [ 53 ], as many students need support in implementing metacognitive strategies despite being familiar with them, such as purposeful peer interaction [ 54 ]. The combination of repeated practice and reflection through the intervention’s in-class discussion may have helped students engage more effectively with their learning.

Students showed significant gains in CAT scores under both interventions, although significantly higher under the intensive intervention. Importantly, because the students took the CAT at the end of the course, the CAT measured their response to both exercises plus the intervention , which, in the case of the intensive intervention, included practice in improving responses to a short case study exercise in alignment with the CT rubric. This contrasts with the instructional assessment, which measured gains corresponding only to the midterm teaching intervention as measured by improvement in scores for the second case study exercise. Thus, as measured by the CAT, the whole unit improved CT skills among these students over the term in both interventions, while the extensive discussion of CT skills that was part of the intensive intervention improved CT performance even further.

Advancing CT skills has proven to be challenging for many institutions. The CAT test has been used in over 250 institutions around the world [ 55 ], but few have observed gains in CT overall (see [ 11 , 56 ]), although some have found an effect on individual CT dimensions [ 19 , 57 ]. We consider the inclusion of case study–based exercises to be an important factor in activating student learning and fostering strong CT gains among students in our study.

The CAT assessments were also given in another arm of the overall study that evaluated interventions designed to improve data analysis skills [ 31 ], enabling us to compare CT gains when directly targeted (in the CT arm of the study) to when they were not (the data analysis arm of the study). Only students in the CT arm of the study showed notable CT gains under a light intervention, and the gains were greater under the intensive intervention in the CT arm than in the data analysis arm. The intensive intervention was designed particularly to foster student capacity to reflect on their own learning, or metacognition, as this skill has been shown to improve academic performance [ 53 , 58 ]. Thus, the independent CAT assessment shows that explicit instruction in CT, coupled with repeated practice and reflection, is effective in improving student CT (see also [ 57 ]). Importantly, the CAT results imply that by developing CT in a conservation biology context, students are also enhancing their ability to apply that CT skill to other domains of their learning, such as the more general tasks required in the CAT.

Implications for Future Research and Scaling

While the results of this study are promising, our approach could be subjected to further testing. A limitation of the study was the lack of collateral data collection, such as GPA averages or overall course grades, which would have allowed for additional comparison of the student populations in each intervention. Differences in course achievement among classes, however, would not affect our interpretation of the effect of the intervention because the CT gains were observed between exercises in each term and are an internal comparison within the same student population within a given course. Our study did not use a treatment and control design or randomly assign students to the interventions. An approach based on multiple linear regression at the student level [ 59 ] could be a helpful alternative.

Adoption of the approach presented here was successful in a variety of contexts and situations. The institutions in this study varied in size and type, class size, and instructor; they included those ranked as R1, MA-granting and undergraduate only, private and public, a Minority Serving Institution, part-time and residential, and with class sizes between 10 and 60 students (see table 1 for details). Despite this variation, in 9 of the 10 classes, we observed an increase in students’ CT performance over a term, under both light and intensive interventions.

Our study shows educators can foster measurable gains in CT over the course of a single term or semester by giving students an opportunity to practice at least twice and reflect midway using case study exercises aligned to both course content and a rubric that provides an operational definition of CT. Despite the brevity of the interventions, the study has provided valuable new findings on student performance in different dimensions of CT and shows promising results from instructional approaches that can be easily adapted and integrated into a variety of courses and contexts. Importantly, the study design also allowed us to work together as a team with diverse faculty in the design and application of assessment materials, which served as a professional development for faculty that can help “close the loop” between assessment and future teaching practice.

CT underpins the kind of leadership capacity needed in society today, including “ethical behavior, the ability to work with diverse populations, and the ability to think from a systems perspective” [ 17 ]. These skills are essential for conservation biology researchers and professionals because of the multidisciplinary nature of challenges comprising various forms of evidence [ 60 ], the potential for consequences to diverse stakeholders, and the high prevalence of trade-offs among alternative scenarios. Encouraged by the results of this study, we urge educators to explore these and other approaches to target CT explicitly in their learning activities and teaching practice.

ALP, AB, NB, and EJS developed the study framework. ALP, AB, MJG, NB, BJA, JAC, CG, MC, TT, DSF, DV, and EJS contributed to development of the instructional units. ALP, MJG, LMD, BJA, JAC, CG, DLS, MC, DSF, LF, TL, and DV implemented the CT study in their classrooms and collected data for the study. AB, LMD, and ALP performed the data analysis. ALP, MJG, and AB led the writing of the manuscript, with contributions from EJS, LMD, and NB. All authors contributed to CAT scoring sessions and to the discussions that supported writing of the manuscript. The study was made possible by an NSF grant to EJS, ALP, and NB.

We are grateful to all study participants, those who helped score the CAT, and K. Douglas and N. Gazit for key assistance. We thank G. Bowser, A. Gómez, S. Hoskins, K. Landrigan, D. Roon, and J. Singleton for their contributions to the initial design and the original authors of the NCEP materials adapted for this study. The Biology Education Research Group at UW provided helpful input in initial discussions.

The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Martha J. Groom is an editor at Case Studies in the Environment . She was not involved in the review of this manuscript.

This project was supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) CCLI/TUES Program (DUE-0942789). Opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect NSF views.

Appendix 1. Supplementary Information on Methods.

Both versions can be downloaded by registering as an educator on http://ncep.amnh.org . To find the original versions used in the study, which also include all instructions given to participating faculty, see “NSF CCLI / TUES Instructional Unit: Critical Thinking.” For classroom-ready, updated versions of the case studies, see “Applying Critical Thinking to an Invasive Species Problem,” and “Applying Critical Thinking to the Amphibian Decline Problem.” These cite more current literature and have been edited for clarity.

Supplementary data

Recipient(s) will receive an email with a link to 'Using Case Studies to Improve the Critical Thinking Skills of Undergraduate Conservation Biology Students' and will not need an account to access the content.

Subject: Using Case Studies to Improve the Critical Thinking Skills of Undergraduate Conservation Biology Students

(Optional message may have a maximum of 1000 characters.)

Citing articles via

Email alerts, affiliations.

• Recent Content
• All Content
• Special Collections
• Info for Authors
• Info for Reviewers
• Info for Librarians
• Editorial Team
• Prize Competition
• Online ISSN 2473-9510
• Copyright © 2024

Stay Informed

Disciplines.

• Ancient World
• Anthropology
• Communication
• Criminology & Criminal Justice
• Film & Media Studies
• Food & Wine
• Browse All Disciplines
• Browse All Courses
• Book Authors
• Booksellers
• Instructions
• Journal Authors
• Journal Editors
• Media & Journalists
• Planned Giving

About UC Press

• Press Releases
• Seasonal Catalog
• Acquisitions Editors
• Customer Service
• Exam/Desk Requests
• Media Inquiries
• Print-Disability
• Rights & Permissions
• UC Press Foundation
• © Copyright 2024 by the Regents of the University of California. All rights reserved. Privacy policy    Accessibility

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

• Effective Teaching Strategies

Guiding Students to Think Critically Using Case Studies

• February 21, 2014
• Laura Trujillo-Jenks, PhD

One of the best practices in teaching and learning is the use of a three-part case study, or a scenario-based story, to help students deepen their understanding of a concept. The three parts of a case study are a scenario-based story that focuses on a specific, hypothetical problem, supporting literature that aligns with the main themes of the story, and guiding questions that help the learner gain the most from understanding the concepts and objectives of the case study by applying critical and higher order thinking skills.

A scenario-based story is a situation, problem, or issue that is used to help students grasp the learning objectives of a lesson. For example, in an educational leadership law course that I teach, one day I might create an elaborate scenario that focuses on several problems and issues that also align with the lesson’s objectives and concepts. Another day, the scenario could be a short one- to two-sentence story that is used at the beginning of class to engage students in reviewing key concepts and prepare them for the day’s lesson, or at the end of a lesson to review what was discussed during class. Finally, I might present a scenario-based story through a video or news story. There are many great videos on YouTube and many great news stories all over the Internet that offer up scenarios that are easily accessible and provide a visual that may help stimulate learning.

Supporting literature that aligns with the main themes of the case study helps students focus on what is important. This literature can be the texts and supplemental material that are required for students to read for a course, or, for example, it can be state and federal codes that must be followed. Then, the guiding questions are created and used to help students think about the different outcomes that could occur and possibly prepare for confronting an issue in the real-world. These questions can be as elaborate or straightforward as needed.

Like a book study, a case study can provide the necessary platform for students to communicate and collaborate about a situation that concerns a certain group. They can be used to help a group of learners or others focus on a specific concept, or they can help those solve a problem. Additionally, they can be used to analyze a current practice, like an ineffective policy. Although case studies are not a new teaching method, they are a method that can be useful, providing an opportunity for students to think outside the box. Through the use of a case study, students can actively engage in applying learned concepts, objectives, and knowledge to hypothetical situations by using critical and higher order thinking skills to answer tough questions.

Below are brief examples of the three types of case studies that I’ve used in my graduate course:

1. Elaborate Case Study: A high school senior is caught cheating on an exam. A passing grade on this exam is essential, since the exam grade will be applied to the senior’s overall GPA. The teacher respects the student and counts the student as a favorite, especially since the student was accepted to attend Harvard. The teacher decides to ignore the policy and does not report the student’s cheating, and allows the grade to be averaged with the student’s GPA.

• What are the implications of the teacher not reporting the cheating?
• How would you have handled this situation differently?

2. One- to Two-Sentence Case Study: You are on campus late one night working on paperwork when you hear laughter and loud talking down the hall. As you approach the raucous, you enter a classroom to find three teachers and their spouses drinking beer.

• What do you do next and is your decision based on ethics or fear?

3. Video/News Story Case Study: Please view the assigned videos. As you watch them, keep in mind what you have learned about student speech and academic freedom.

• Are there any student speech or academic freedom issues?
• Has the student code of conduct been violated with these dances?

Dr. Laura Trujillo-Jenks is an assistant professor in the Department of Teacher Education at Texas Woman’s University.

Stay Updated with Faculty Focus!

Get exclusive access to programs, reports, podcast episodes, articles, and more!

• Opens in a new tab

Welcome Back

Username or Email

Remember Me

Already a subscriber? log in here.

We will keep fighting for all libraries - stand with us!

Internet Archive Audio

• This Just In
• Grateful Dead
• Old Time Radio
• 78 RPMs and Cylinder Recordings
• Audio Books & Poetry
• Computers, Technology and Science
• Music, Arts & Culture
• News & Public Affairs
• Spirituality & Religion
• Radio News Archive

• Flickr Commons
• Occupy Wall Street Flickr
• NASA Images
• Solar System Collection
• Ames Research Center

• All Software
• Old School Emulation
• MS-DOS Games
• Historical Software
• Classic PC Games
• Software Library
• Kodi Archive and Support File
• Vintage Software
• CD-ROM Software
• CD-ROM Software Library
• Software Sites
• Tucows Software Library
• Shareware CD-ROMs
• Software Capsules Compilation
• CD-ROM Images
• ZX Spectrum
• DOOM Level CD

• Smithsonian Libraries
• FEDLINK (US)
• Lincoln Collection
• American Libraries
• Canadian Libraries
• Universal Library
• Project Gutenberg
• Children's Library
• Biodiversity Heritage Library
• Books by Language
• Additional Collections

• Prelinger Archives
• Democracy Now!
• Occupy Wall Street
• TV NSA Clip Library
• Animation & Cartoons
• Arts & Music
• Computers & Technology
• Cultural & Academic Films
• Ephemeral Films
• Sports Videos
• Videogame Videos
• Youth Media

Search the history of over 866 billion web pages on the Internet.

Mobile Apps

• Wayback Machine (iOS)
• Wayback Machine (Android)

Browser Extensions

Archive-it subscription.

• Explore the Collections
• Build Collections

Save Page Now

Capture a web page as it appears now for use as a trusted citation in the future.

Please enter a valid web address

• Donate Donate icon An illustration of a heart shape

Winningham's critical thinking cases in nursing : medical-surgical, pediatric, maternity, and psychiatric

Bookreader item preview, share or embed this item, flag this item for.

• Graphic Violence
• Explicit Sexual Content
• Hate Speech
• Misinformation/Disinformation
• Marketing/Phishing/Advertising
• Misleading/Inaccurate/Missing Metadata

plus-circle Add Review comment Reviews

65 Previews

4 Favorites

Better World Books

DOWNLOAD OPTIONS

No suitable files to display here.

PDF access not available for this item.

IN COLLECTIONS

Uploaded by station42.cebu on September 28, 2021

SIMILAR ITEMS (based on metadata)