Critical Thinking, Knowledge, and Research in Crime Scene Investigation

Speaker describes a disagreement with the university about signage.
Emphasizes the need to research and anticipate what something will look like.
Mentions: “Just two examples of when you need information.” (indicates two illustrative cases, but the examples are not provided in the transcript).

Critical thinking = analyzing the information and asking critical questions.
Distinction between information gathering (knowledge) and applying critical thinking to that information.
The implied role of context and questioning in interpreting information from a scenario (e.g., dispute about signage and a crime scene).

Opening question: What is the difference between the knowledge you are acquiring about a scene and the critical thinking applied to that scene?
Emphasis on not just knowing facts, but also interrogating those facts through critical questions.
The transcript frames critical thinking as an active process that accompanies information gathering.

Example used: you are an investigator going out to investigate a crime scene.
Core inquiry: what is the difference between the knowledge you’re acquiring about the scene and the critical thinking you apply to it?
The speaker points to the need to ask critical questions about the scene, beyond simply collecting facts.
Note: The line “What about the critical thinking? So what questions do you have to ask about” appears cut off, indicating a prompt to generate or consider relevant questions the investigator should pose.

For this part, we should use only the brain (i.e., mental processing).
Instructions: close the iPad or laptop, and flip your phones up.
Purpose: focus cognitive processing without referring to external tools during this portion.

Practical implication: when facing disputes (e.g., university signage) or investigative scenarios (crime scene), information alone is not sufficient without critical questioning.
Conceptual implication: critical thinking acts as a lens to evaluate and interpret information rather than just accumulating data.
The transcript implies a workflow: identify what information is needed, research how it will look or function, then apply critical questions to interpret that information.

The transcript echoes foundational critical-thinking principles: assess information, ask probing questions, and distinguish between data (knowledge) and reasoning (critical thinking).
Although explicit connections to prior lectures aren’t stated, the content aligns with typical coursework on information literacy and investigative reasoning.

Always separate the act of gathering information from the act of evaluating it critically.
In disputes or investigations, define the questions you need to answer through critical inquiry.
When told to focus without tools, trust cognitive analysis and mental models to structure your understanding before reintroducing external inputs.
Expect missing pieces in spoken prompts (e.g., incomplete questions) and be ready to generate the essential questions yourself based on the scenario.