Age & SMH appearance

I don’t think AUSTHINK ought to write the education sector off as “too hard,” simply because individual schools don’t have discrete funding they could throw at a coherent CT program. Too, the federal perspective the article reflects overstates the focus government has on the underprivileged. While that is true to a degree, there are still high performing, and mid-performing schools within which a CT program would resonate. As an American citizen, I certainly would love to see it.

And beyond corporate, I think government, state and local, is a place to look for CT training traction. Specifically, LE, Intel, DoD Investigative, Justice etc. It is there if pitched right. The thing about “selling” to these actors, though, is demonstrable improvement along agreed upon metrics of CT. How do you measure it anyway? What tests does one use? Some metricized (real word?) variant of Bloom’s Taxonomy, CCTST, what? Numbers matter more than intuitively knowing that CT training generically, and Argument Mapping specifically is the right thing to do.