When we discuss the word critical, its meaning changes depending on the context, as it can refer to how important something is, or it might mean describing the negative side of a book, a film, or an experience. In criminal justice, we are using critical thinking to express the idea of having a questioning mind and not taking things at face value.
Critical thinking is a skill that is crucial in all areas of criminal justice, from officers on the street to Federal magistrate judges and Supreme Court justices. They need to ask the right questions when weighing up a situation, consider the perspectives of everyone involved and use factual evidence to form an opinion. In essence, critical thinking involves questioning with an open mind and learning as a result.
How can critical thinking aid learning?
Even before criminal justice professionals qualify, using critical thinking can be an enormous benefit at university. When practiced regularly, this form of analysis can help students interpret the data or evidence they are presented with and understand the reasoning behind different points of view. In terms of their decision-making, it will enable them to fully develop their arguments and be ready to explain these clearly to others. Furthermore, they will have the ability to cite evidence when it comes to justifying their opinion.
People thinking about criminology study in Canada can take a look at the combined honors BA in Criminology and Policing at Wilfrid Laurier University. This online program readies students for many different careers in justice or criminology, and no previous experience in law enforcement is needed. During the course, critical thinking will allow students to combine their thoughts and theories with those of their classmates and those of more established researchers and criminal law professionals.
Questioning in a meaningful way
Critical thinking is central to how many law officials practice, as it involves asking meaningful questions that allow them to recognize a situation more clearly. They will use the answers they receive to understand what has happened or is happening, to analyze the situation in more depth, and then to evaluate it. For instance, when approaching a piece of physical evidence, they will begin with the questions: ‘what, why, where, and who?’ This is to help them gain some background knowledge and put the evidence into context.
Alternatively, if they are considering a situation instead, the process of thinking it through will be slightly different. They might ask questions that allow them to establish what the problem is really about, who is being affected by it, who it involves, and where and when it is taking place. Asking witnesses these questions means they are unlikely to provide yes or no answers. Rather, they will have to be descriptive in their responses enabling an investigator to move on to the next stage of critical thinking – analysis.
Analyzing the findings
At this stage, the questions asked will take on a new form. They will be characterized by words and phrases such as: ‘what if, why did, and how?’ In this way, an investigator can get closer to the heart of the matter. They can unearth the causes behind a problem, the reasons it happened, and the processes which took place beforehand. They might consider the contributing factors, how they related to each other, and what the outcome might be if one factor was changed or removed. In this way, this incident is broken down into smaller parts, and each element is considered in relation to the others. The answers become more complex and allow for the next stage – evaluation.
Evaluating the situation
Evaluation can be considered the final stage in the critical thinking process. It leads to a resolution or a conclusion, depending on the situation. Questions are still important, but again they are different in structure. They could take the form of: ‘what next? or ‘so what?’ Then the investigator decides what the implications of the evidence are and what is significant in a situation before sharing their findings.
This is a basis for the process of critical thinking rather than a list of instructions. Many people in criminal justice will frequently shift between the different stages, getting the facts straight in their minds before feeling confident enough to move on. Occasionally, after establishing what the evidence is showing, it may seem irrelevant, so different questions will need to be asked. There are many ways to approach critical questioning in law enforcement, but in general, people who apply this skill share some characteristics.
What traits do all critical thinkers share?
Whether they are trying to solve a problem, understand a situation, or interpret evidence, critical thinkers study, evaluate and take apart its key elements. Before a person has gained experience in this process, it can be extremely challenging because much of the initial work is done alone. It involves being self-motivated but also disciplined and receptive to new ideas. Like most skills, this can be learned, but people with the following character traits may take to it more intuitively.
Deep thinkers
People who regularly check the information they are given and are aware of their own biases are thinking deeply about themselves and those around them. As a result, they can put themselves in another person’s position and consider the perspectives of others. Along with empathy, they can make independent decisions rather than relying on what they are told by others.
A curious approach
When people are naturally curious and questioning, they may be better at anticipating a problem and taking action in advance. Moreover, they strive to look for the truth in a situation, even if that means admitting they were at fault. This often leads to regularly evaluating their performance and identifying areas of strength, and weaknesses that need improvement.
Organized team players
Critical thinkers are usually good collaborators and understand that working towards a shared goal can be beneficial for all. They are logical in their approach and sift through a problem carefully to gain insights that will drive the team forward.
How does critical thinking relate to different areas of criminal justice?
The criminal justice system at the federal, state, and local level is made up of many processes which ensure the right decisions are made and social order is maintained. These systems tend to have three central divisions. This starts with law enforcement, while more serious cases move to adjudication, and finally, in some instances, corrections programs are required. Here is a closer look at how critical thinking is used by the professionals who oversee these structures.
Corrections programs in the justice system
The administering of correctional programs is done by parole officers and correctional officers. People employed in both professions must use critical thinking to carry out their daily tasks. There is no such thing as a typical day when it comes to working in a local jail or federal prison.
To tackle short-term issues and immediate problems that could become worse, such as disturbances amongst prisoners, they have to employ critical thinking techniques. This allows them to act swiftly and appropriately to protect the safety of other inmates and themselves. Their reaction is informed by observations, an assessment of the facts, and any information they can gather. Although some officers are compelled to make choices within seconds, this gives their colleagues more time to take a step back and consider what else needs to be done.
Preventing problems before they occur
To prevent future occurrences or lessen the frequency of this type of incident, critical thinking can be used to resolve conflicts that develop among the prison population. One of the key skills is observation; officers must gauge the emotion of a situation quickly and also spot when trouble may be brewing. This means paying attention to small details that might appear unimportant but take on a deeper significance for the inmates involved.
In the longer term, officers can improve the lives of people in their facility and their conditions through a critical approach. This could involve evaluating the progress of individuals hoping for a reduction in their sentence or finding more effective ways to maintain an orderly environment within the facility.
Overseeing the court system
People who work in the court system and those who oversee legal proceedings frequently depend on their critical thinking abilities. Even when the situation is stressful, because a case is highly charged, lawyers and judges must remain capable of critical thought.
This enables professional adjudicators to manage a trial fairly and make the best decisions on individual cases. Attorneys working in either a defense or a prosecuting position also need great critical thinking skills as they work to prepare a case before presenting it to the court. In each instance, the adjudication professional will use what is often referred to as judicious evaluation. In other words, they question and investigate what they have been presented with, how it makes them feel, and what they think. They know that first impressions can be deceiving and often change under analysis.
Another component of critical thinking for legal professionals is deductive reasoning. This involves understanding the rules in each situation and then scrutinizing the facts concerning these before reaching a specific conclusion. This approach calls for the application of logic and allows a person to use general ideas or rules to make a judgment on an individual case. At the other end of the spectrum, lawyers, in particular, will look for distinctions in rules or laws that would benefit their clients.
Finally, in their daily practice, lawyers must be deft when it comes to analyzing the facts of a case. They are frequently presented with a series of instances and a few documents, then asked by a prospective client to establish a case. After checking through the evidence and researching how this relates to the law, they can present the client with a conclusion. From the start to the end of adjudication, critical thinking is constantly needed.
Policing our streets
Enforcing the law is mainly carried out by police officers who use critical thinking to inform their actions. They must decide whether a law has been broken, determine the best way to respond, and choose when it is right to make an arrest. In more hazardous situations, such as civil unrest or riots, they need to react in a way that calms the problem and allows them to protect their safety, as well as that of the general public. At the detective level, officers use the same skills to gather as much evidence as possible, identify potential suspects and solve crimes.
As they are actively involved with fluid situations on the ground, experience, and knowledge often improve an officer’s critical thinking skills. The police are enforcers of the law, but they are also guardians, and their decision-making in the field needs to reflect this. With experience, officers are more able to interpret a situation or information they are given correctly. They hold back on making assumptions until they have gathered all the facts and pay attention to detail. Instead of thinking they understand the cause of a problem as soon as they arrive, the best officers check their assumptions to ensure they have not inadvertently missed something. In this way, critical thinking keeps officers safe during street operations and nurtures a better relationship between the police and their community.
Bringing critical thinking into the mainstream
When it comes to applying the law, critical thinking is not just about reaching a satisfactory conclusion. It entails a professional understanding of why they reached that conclusion, how their personal biases affected them and how they could manage these more effectively in the future. Critical thinking is best considered an integral part of the criminal justice system, a concept that can be applied to every area rather than a topic to be studied separately.
