OPINION / Critical thinking: How does the Intelligence Community assess this competency?

Noted author and intelligence professional, Mark Lowenthal, asserts, 'The best analytical tool remains a really good analyst.' But how does a bright civilian become a really good analyst? What preparation brings about such a transformation?

It has been reported that, 'an individual's analytic skill results from a combination of innate qualities, acquired experience, and relevant education.' These cognitive attributes include behavioral traits (the ability to perform specific tasks) and knowledge (learned information about precise subjects) obtained via formal education.

On every list of core competencies that I have reviewed since 9/11, critical thinking has been listed as "Priority One" for Intelligence analyst candidates. Throughout the Intelligence Community (IC) there is virtual unanimity and consensus as to the importance of this aptitude.

But is the concept of 'critical thinking' a measurable skill? If so, how can the theory be assessed when reviewing a resume or interviewing a candidate? What set of questions might be asked of a candidate to discern this capacity? What should background investigators and human resource personnel in the Intelligence Community look for to discern the capacity of analyst candidates to think critically? Finally, are educational institutions offering courses that prepare students to become viable IC candidates?

Critical thinking
Critical thinking has been defined as 'a deliberate meta-cognitive (thinking about thinking) and cognitive (thinking) act whereby a person reflects on the quality of the reasoning process simultaneously while reasoning to a conclusion. The thinker has two equally important goals: coming to a solution and improving the way she or he reasons.'

Analytical reasoning
Another important and highly desirable related competency is analytical reasoning. Is it true that intelligence failures can be attributed to, 'systemic organizational surprise resulting from incorrect, missing, discarded, or inadequate hypotheses?,' as one writer wondered. If so, what university courses prepare a student to set forth adequate hypotheses?

Richards Heuer, a distinguished author and intelligence professional, observes that 'Generating and testing hypotheses is a core function of intelligence analysis.'

Transforming concepts into measurable skills
What approaches might lead to achieving the objective of transforming obscure concepts, such as 'critical thinking,' into measurable skills? I suggest that an applicant's university transcript serves more than to simply verify the candidate has been awarded a university degree. A careful assessment of individual courses recorded on the transcript could lead to the transformation of concepts -- like critical thinking -- into skills that can be measured.

At the graduate level, a course that exposes the student to social science research methods used in national security should be required of anyone who aspires to a position as an intelligence analyst. In such a course, students should become familiar with basic types of research design and learn the differences between open source and classified research materials. The student should also be exposed to methods of qualitative and quantitative evaluation.

At the undergraduate university or college level, a three-credit research methods course should consist of an introduction to the use of scientific methods and logic. Topics should include the use of experimental designs, laboratory methods, survey research methods and measurement issues. Science and the scientific approach to problem solving, the logic of causal inferences, problem and hypothesis formulation should also be included.

A three-credit statistics course should include the use of basic quantitative analysis tools and databases. Emphasis should be placed on the application of quantitative, as well as qualitative, methods.

For example, the candidate should be able to explain concisely:
Hypothesis testing;
Research design;
Validity and reliability;
Variables, such as independent, dependent and concomitant;
Type I and Type II error;
Threats to internal and external validity;
Rival causal factors;
Population;
Sampling procedures; and,
Sample size

Of course, this is not the only way to assess competencies. But knowledge of these skills is directly related to intelligence analysis and is measurable. Even if these aptitudes are not specific responsibilities of an individual intelligence analyst, the ability to coherently and concisely explain these constructs are strong, reliable and valid indicators of analytical reasoning and the ability to think critically.

William L. Tafoya, Ph.D., a retired FBI special agent, is Professor and Director of the National Security Graduate Program at the University of New Haven, which can be visited at: http://www.newhaven.edu/nationalsecurity Tafoya can be reached at:
wtafoya@newhaven.edu