The identification and description of critical thinking behaviors important in clinical laboratory science.

摘要

The ability to think critically has been identified as a pivotal attribute of health care professionals. The purpose of this study was to identify and describe critical thinking (CT) behaviors, observable events resulting from CT, important in the practice of clinical laboratory science (CLS). Recent medical, educational, and psychological literature related to the many behaviors characterized under the CT rubric was focused by an operationalized definition positing CT to be a metaprocess that facilitates learning by interlinking the more basic processes associated with different learning orientations: behaviorist, cognitivist, humanist, and situated/contextual learning. Critical thinking behaviors, identified and described from a 6-point importance ranking scale in a national survey of practitioners (N = 1571, > 50% of time in bench work), were further characterized through exploratory factor analysis. Seven factors, each representing a commonality among composite CT behaviors, emerged as the framework for CT behaviors in CLS: (1) reflecting on tasks, (2) acting professionally, (3) managing tasks, (4) reasoning technologically, (5) managing time, (6) developing expertise, and (7) using experience. One factor (1) was cognitive in nature while others were considered either behavioral (4), affective (2 and 7), or situated (3, 5, and 6). These findings suggest a stronger relationship between CT behaviors and practice than traditionally reported. A strong relationship between CT and the development of expert practice was also observed. Practitioners perceived all seven factors to be important in high complexity testing environments. In addition, age correlated with a belief that developing expertise is important. There were no significant differences in the way practitioners perceived the importance of CT factors when responses were analyzed by other personal and job variables, i.e., years in practice, practice site, educational level, and gender. Given that these factors span all learning domains, findings support the metaprocess view of CT. Implications are that CT behaviors cannot be learned, or therefore taught, apart from a discipline-related practice setting. This study contributes to learning theory related to transfer and how learning occurs and also provides a basis for measurement of CT in practice settings.