An experimental study comparing critical thinking growth and learning styles in a traditional and workshop based introductory mathematics course

The purpose of this study was to compare gains in critical thinking skills and in overall achievement in a traditional and workshop based introductory mathematics course, called Quantitative Reasoning (QR); and to identify if possible, the learning styles of the students who performed better in either format. The workshop format had more of the features described in the literature that are thought to facilitate the growth of critical thinking in the classroom, compared to the lecture format. Consequently, greater gains in critical thinking were expected for subjects enrolled in the workshop format. At the same time it was hoped that students in the workshop format would do just as well in overall achievement in the course.; The subjects for this study were selected from undergraduate students taking QR during the Spring 2001 semester, at a major research university in the North Eastern part of the United States. Initially, a total of 150 students enrolled in QR. Of these, 83 were enrolled in lecture (control group) and 67 were enrolled in workshop (experimental group). A quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design was used since students self-selected the format in which they registered. Students in both groups were pre-tested using Form A of the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA), and were post-tested using Form B of the WGCTA. The Kolb Learning Style Inventory was used to determine the learning style of each subject. They also all took a common final exam at the end of the semester.; Results of this study indicated no statistically significant differences between the treatments in critical thinking achievement when comparisons were made by format gender, or school within the University. There was a statistically significant difference between the treatments by class level. There was no statistically significant difference between the treatments in overall achievement. Results also revealed that the variables school and CT pre-test scores were the best predictors of CT achievement, and that deduction was the best predictor of overall achievement. There were no statistically significant differences between the treatments in critical thinking achievement, or overall achievement for each type of learner.