It is a truism in contemporary understandings of semantics that there is no simple one-to-one correspondence between a word and its referent. As Wittgenstein has suggested, we can only know the meaning of a word by understanding the way it is used, and these uses are known often to be variable and highly context-dependent. / The issue of the variable meanings of terms is especially important when the term in question has assumed some centrality within a particular social domain, when its meanings are contested, and when the way the term is interpreted has a major bearing on subsequent social and institutional practices. In contemporary debates about the aims and purposes of higher education one such term is ‘critical thinking’. Whilst there is general unanimity in the higher education literature about the importance of ‘critical thinking’ as an educational ideal, there is surprisingly little agreement about what the term means exactly, as well as what exactly students should be taught in order to be appropriately critical in their field. / This thesis reports an empirical study which investigated conceptions of critical thinking as they are held by academics from a range of humanities disciplines: History, Philosophy, and Literary/Cultural Studies. The broad method used was a ‘textographic’ one, focusing both on how the concept of critical thinking was talked about by informants in interview, and also how it was constructed in a range of texts used by them in their teaching on undergraduate programs. / The study found a good deal of variation in the meaning of the term ‘critical’, not only between the three disciplines, but also within them. This variation was located in a number of areas: in the epistemic entities to which students needed to direct their thinking (e.g. textual vs. phenomenal entities), and in the various analytical modes they were required to adopt (e.g. evaluative vs. interpretative modes). The broad principle to be drawn from these findings is that the nature of one's thinking is indivisible from the object to which that thinking is directed. / The varieties of critical thinking found in the study provide some challenge to certain generic understandings of critical thinking, ones that have assumed increasing influence in higher education debates in recent years. The study concludes by suggesting that the teaching of critical thinking is likely to be more effective if handled within the context of students’ study in the disciplines, as opposed to a generic extra-disciplinary approach. It is also suggested that an important part of becoming a critical thinker in the academy is being able to recognise and to negotiate this variety of critical modes.

It is a truism in contemporary understandings of semantics that there is no simple one-to-one correspondence between a word and its referent. As Wittgenstein has suggested, we can only know the meaning of a word by understanding the way it is used, and these uses are known often to be variable and highly context-dependent. / The issue of the variable meanings of terms is especially important when the term in question has assumed some centrality within a particular social domain, when its meanings are contested, and when the way the term is interpreted has a major bearing on subsequent social and institutional practices. In contemporary debates about the aims and purposes of higher education one such term is ‘critical thinking’. Whilst there is general unanimity in the higher education literature about the importance of ‘critical thinking’ as an educational ideal, there is surprisingly little agreement about what the term means exactly, as well as what exactly students should be taught in order to be appropriately critical in their field. / This thesis reports an empirical study which investigated conceptions of critical thinking as they are held by academics from a range of humanities disciplines: History, Philosophy, and Literary/Cultural Studies. The broad method used was a ‘textographic’ one, focusing both on how the concept of critical thinking was talked about by informants in interview, and also how it was constructed in a range of texts used by them in their teaching on undergraduate programs. / The study found a good deal of variation in the meaning of the term ‘critical’, not only between the three disciplines, but also within them. This variation was located in a number of areas: in the epistemic entities to which students needed to direct their thinking (e.g. textual vs. phenomenal entities), and in the various analytical modes they were required to adopt (e.g. evaluative vs. interpretative modes). The broad principle to be drawn from these findings is that the nature of one's thinking is indivisible from the object to which that thinking is directed. / The varieties of critical thinking found in the study provide some challenge to certain generic understandings of critical thinking, ones that have assumed increasing influence in higher education debates in recent years. The study concludes by suggesting that the teaching of critical thinking is likely to be more effective if handled within the context of students’ study in the disciplines, as opposed to a generic extra-disciplinary approach. It is also suggested that an important part of becoming a critical thinker in the academy is being able to recognise and to negotiate this variety of critical modes.

In this study, I examine the ways in which undergraduate students acquire the discourses of their chosen major. In particular, I focus on the complementary contributions of faculty members and academic librarians in students' acquisition of disciplinary discourses. Grounded in genre theory and Gee's (1996) notion of primary and secondary discourses, the study highlights the complex processes that students undergo to acquire and internalize the discourse of an academic discipline. Using a qualitative case-study approach, I consider the interrelated experiences of five undergraduate students, three faculty members, and two librarians at a small liberal arts college in the Midwest. Data sources include students' written assignments gathered from their major coursework throughout their college careers; interviews with student participants, faculty members, and librarians; observational notes and transcripts of lectures in courses taught by professors from four courses; and course artifacts, including course syllabi and assignment sheets from the four courses. Data from this study highlight the complex matrix of influences undergraduate students experience as they acquire the specialized language of an academic discipline. My data provide insight into the ways in which some students are positioned to take up disciplinary discourses with ease while other students struggle to develop the same level of acquisition and academic fluency. I bring to light the instructional and institutional practices that facilitate student learning and document those instances where instructional opportunities were missed and where unwarranted assumptions compromised student learning. I conclude this study with series of recommendations, most notably, a greater participation by academic librarians in order to enhance the acquisition of disciplinary discourses for undergraduate students. Further, my data suggest that collaborative opportunities between and among faculty members and academic librarians are likely to enhance the effective teaching of disciplinary discourses. Because of librarians' role as simultaneous insiders and outsiders to the academic disciplines, they are uniquely well-positioned to assist students in acquiring the disciplinary discourses. This dissertation suggests that by making visible the cultural expectations and practices of academia, faculty members and librarians can collaborate to assist undergraduate students gain entry into the academic discourse community.