Abstract
Purpose. The purpose of this study was to explore how 2 important stakeholder groups of Southern California business education, regional faculty and employers of accounting graduates, defined and assessed critical thinking skills. Methods. A literature review identified 2 key variables—conceptualization and operational assessment of critical thinking. To identify how 2 stakeholder groups of management education see critical thinking in action, participants were sampled from regionally and nationally accredited institutions of higher education and from employers within the private and public accounting sector across Southern California. Findings. Little to no consensus was found within respondent groups or between them with regard to how critical thinking is conceptualized. Consensus was found both within respondent groups and between them in regard to a lack of specific mechanisms by which critical thinking might be assessed. Some consensus was found between respondent groups regarding cross application of skills as evidence of critical thinking. Overall, neither group could provide specific examples of critical thinking in action. Conclusions. The study's findings highlight a need for more targeted research to offset the current experimental approach to teaching critical thinking in management education. While different perspectives of critical thinking were anticipated between educators and employers, little evidence emerged from this study to support this speculation. Suggested areas for future management education research include (a) the creation of more effective instruments, designed around professional competencies, to determine how a larger pool of employers rank skills they would like to see in new hires; (b) a focus on distinguishing between a learner's innate skills and what can be learned in a classroom environment; (c) additional research to determine how "soft skills," such as critical thinking, are best assessed in the classroom and in the workplace; (d) the role of computer-based instruction in relation to respondents' claims that there is an increased need for critical thinking partly due to advances in technology; and (e) gaining a better understanding of the transfer of critical thinking to help students become aware of their role in effectively transferring skills across different contexts.