Differences in critical thinking competence between students in Chinese public and private institutes: Reality or fallacy? Chengbo Wang, Mark Schofield, Xuan Ou, Xiaomei Li, Zhaofang Mao and Wenquan Zhang

Aim of the research The aim of the research was to inform the Chinese and western HEIs in their decisions about strategies to develop and improve their students’ critical thinking (CT) competence The research focuses on the topic on students before their departure to the overseas institutes The findings provide insights and guidance to both home and host institutes * Note: i.e. an exploratory empirical study, due to sample size and coverage

Methodology Literature review Research questions, questionnaire development and pilot test Real world data collection Statistical analysis

Critical thinking (CT) ‘Rationally reasoning to identify and validate the understanding and arguments focusing on certain issues or topics’ [Based on the contentions from Robinson (2011), McPeck (1981, 1984) , Hammer (2011;) and Floyd (2011) ]

Indicators of the CT competence Students’ performance level related to: In-class discussion Group work Case study Debate Note: competence here is considered in relation to the skills not necessarily intellectual competence and ability

Significance of the research (Consider - Globalization of higher education) Strong demand and supply of overseas higher education. These continue driving the expansion of overseas student cohorts in western HEIs Business and management study courses are particularly attractive to many overseas students (Chinese students are the largest group) It is important that western HEIs have an up-to-date understanding of potential Chinese international students’ CT competence level * Note: State of readiness for unfamiliar pedagogies

The students’ CT skills in Chinese public and private HEIs The private HEIs in China have been developing substantially It is contended by researchers (Chen, 2011; Jin and Yin, 2009; Tao, 2010), that these institutes generally have lower level of students performance compared to the public HEIs. The disparity is particularly reflected by their students’ skills in CT There are opposite claims from real world institute (Xi’an Eurasia University, 2015), but little research on this issue has been carried out It is deemed necessary to understand clearly whether there is significant difference in the CT skills between students in private and public HEIs, this can contribute to reaching a thorough and unbiased understanding of the concerned issue

Testable questions explored under the research aim Overarching research question: Is there significant difference on CT skills between students in public HEIs and those in private HEIs? Research question 1: Do students and tutors have significant different perception on the students’ CT performance? Research question 2: Do private HEIs’ students and their public HEIs’ peers have significant difference of self perception on their respective CT performance’s self evaluation Research question 3: Do private HEIs’ tutors and their public HEIs’ peers have significant difference on the evaluation on their respective students’ CT performance

Research findings Students from both public institute and private institute samples do not have significant difference with regard to self perception of their CT competence The tutors in public institute perceive that their students have higher competence level in in-class discussion and group work than their private peers’ perception of their own students The tutors in public institute perceive that their students have higher competence levels in debate than their private peers’ perception of their own students

Research findings With regard to the majority of the CT competence aspects focused on in this research, there is agreement that students did not demonstrate a higher self-evaluation than their tutors’ for both of the two type institutes It is not reasonable to claim students’ self evaluation of themselves is higher than their tutors, as a general phenomenon However based on the tutors’ and the students’ self evaluation, the Chinese HEI students’ CT competence in general is rather low, for both public and private institutes, demonstrated by the average score for the focused indicators lower than 3 in this research

Research findings Approaches employed for cultivating students’ CT competence in the two types of institutes

Recommendations For (the) public institute(s) : it is a good strategy to encourage more intervention/involvement from the tutors’ side for developing more detailed approaches to guide their students in further enhancing the CT skills For (the) private institute(s): the tutors need to encourage the students to be more self-motivated and active to develop action plans to improve their CT capability alongside with the tutors’ facilitation For the western host institutes of Chinese international students: a more appropriate strategy would be the combination of tutors’ facilitation, encouragement and students’ self-engagement while treating these students as a whole, rather than separating them into two groups for respective facilitation …….. Key questions arise as to strategies that would lead to these outcomes

Future research Research to include more institutes at different rankings and students from different year of study, in both public and private higher education sectors Broader sample Explore significance further and generalizability And, Test induction and improvement strategies (interventions) Test self perception/grade change to consequentially explore the efficiency and effectiveness of the intervention

Many thanks. Questions? Please!