critical thinking

i think Halpern's definition,

"Critical thinking is the use of those cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome. It is used to describe thinking that is purposeful, reasoned and goal directed - the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions when the thinker is using skills that are thoughtful and effective for the particular context and type of thinking task. Critical thinking also involves evaluating the thinking process - the reasoning that went into the conclusion we've arrived at the kinds of factors considered in making a decision. Critical thinking is sometimes called directed thinking because it focuses on a desired outcome."

Stahl and Stahl's definition,

"Critical thinking is the development of cohesive and logical reasoning patterns."

and Lindzey's definition,

"Critical thinking is "the examination and testing of suggested solutions to see whether they will work."

are the best definitions for critical thinking. from my experience whenever i do critical thinking, i usually need to solve a problem and figure out whether or not a statement is true or not and if i agree with it. i have to consider all points of view or solutions before coming to my conclusion, which is what halpern, stahl and stahl and lindzey all say. critical thinking is thinking logically about things you've learned before and putting it all together to produce a cohesive argument or conclusion.
i hope to create a website that forces people to think critically and create their own opinions about a certain topic. i wish to include all the views, positive and negative about my topic, so that people will think critically before making a judgment as soon as they figure out what my topic is. i don't want to lean toward any one side of my topic until i have considered all views.

the difference between the writing i've done in the past compared to the writing now is a lot more structured. all the papers i've written in the past all have the same structure and look the same. none of my papers ever had graphics or pictures, which is one very big difference to the writing i do now. i think pictures and graphic help and enhance a paper a lot. i wouldn't want to be the teacher reading forty papers over the weekend if they were just a bunch of words with no graphics. with graphic, papers become a lot easier on the eyes, instead of reading papers all day long, one can relax for a bit to look at the pictures on the side of a paper. the hypertext writing now is also a lot easier because we don't have to worry about writing transitions or summaries, everything is held together by links.