The MAPS Handbook
for Critical Thinking
Photo by Juliana Kozoski on Unsplash
MAPS is an organizing framework for critical thinking with digital media. It sets up four modules containing tools to help you think critically about, learn from, and respond to news articles, argumentative essays, research reports, social media posts, podcasts, etc.
Each letter in "MAPS" refers to one of four modules, each of which is briefly described and linked below. Each module contains an introduction, several subsections or chapters to explore, and useful links resources to spur further exploration and thought.
Start off by checking out the Critical Thinking Primer for a broader overview of critical thinking (linked here). Follow up by exploring the contents of the four MAPS modules below.
1. Metacognition
Thinking about & managing your thought
It’s hard to think clearly about what's going on in your own mind. Of course, your mind is all you have for perceiving and interpreting your environment! This module will get you started on understanding & managing common mental tendencies that can inhibit and bias our thinking.
3. People & Context
Who wrote it & where is it published?
Who's responsible for a particular piece of media? How much does it matter who's approved, funded, or published the work? Although it's important to think about contextual information that might sway content, knowing what to do with this information isn't as easy as we often think.
2. Arguments & Claims
What is the author saying? Is it reasonable?
At the core of what you read, watch, & hear is often a claim and an attempt to support that claim. This module will help you identify and evaluate arguments & truth claims. Is the author falling prey to logical mistakes? Does the evidence offered support the author's conclusion?
4. Source Material
What source material is cited?
What's the nature of the source for your info? Is it a high quality source? How do you know? Has the author considered sources that reflect our current understanding or are there errors and biases evident in their selections? When should you dig deeper and move beyond your source?