CRITICAL THINKING AND DECISION MAKING OF SELECTED FACULTY MEMBERS OF BESTLINK COLLEGE OF THE PHILIPPINES

Abstract

This study examines how critical thinking skills relate to decision-making among selected faculty members of Bestlink College of the Philippines and identifies the challenges they face. A correlational research design is used to determine the strength and direction of the relationship between critical thinking and decision‑making competencies. This study uses a stratified sampling technique to select eighty‑one respondents from a total population of 271 full‑time faculty members. The sample size is determined using Slovin’s formula with a 9.33 percent margin of error and a 91.67 percent confidence level. A structured questionnaire validated by subject‑matter experts measures critical thinking dimensions (fairness, relevance, accuracy, clarity, logic) and decision‑making components (choices, alternatives, evaluation). Collected data are analyzed using descriptive statistics and Pearson’s correlation coefficient. Results showed a very strong positive correlation between critical thinking and decision-making (r = 0.89, p < 0.01). Faculty members scored moderately high on critical thinking (mean = 3.42) and decision making (mean = 3.51). High subscale scores were recorded for fairness, relevance, and accuracy in critical thinking, while clarity and logic scored lower. Decision‑making data revealed strengths in systematic analysis for some faculty and heavy reliance on intuition for others. The choices subscale indicated insufficient caution in risk assessment, the alternatives showed preference for intuition over analytical options, and the evaluation highlighted a need to improve source appraisal. These patterns aligned with reported challenges such as intuition overriding analysis, emotional interference, and cognitive overload. The findings highlighted gaps in clarity, logical reasoning, and risk evaluation despite strong overall competencies. As a result, targeted interventions such as critical thinking workshops, decision‑making seminars, and training on source evaluation were recommended to strengthen these skills. Enhancing these competencies was expected to improve faculty effectiveness, instructional quality, and institutional decision outcomes.