The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The Loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia: Portaging Leadership Lessons with a Critical Thinking Model
Abstract
:Business schools have long valued case studies as a tool for both broadening a student's perspective, and provoking them to deeper consideration of complex situations. The challenge with case studies is assuring the portability of the lessons; we don't expect students to see situations imitating those they've studied, hence the goal must instead be habits of mind and principles of action that the student can portage to the circumstances of their professional lives. This article evaluates the suitability of Richard Paul's Critical Thinking model as a template for evaluating engineering enterprise thinking habits and organizational behavior, using the Columbia Accident Investigation Board (CAIB) report as a case study. With minor refinement, Paul's model provides a powerful vocabulary for complicated case study analysis; familiarity with the model provides participants with both a mechanism for analysis and a means for portaging lessons to other professional situations and organizations.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“The lack of quantifiable uncertainty and risk analysis in the report to management ultimately led to the shuttle’s disintegration [59].”
From Adapting modeling and simulation credibility standards to computational systems biology (2023) · cites this paper as [59]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 6
- Bransford John D., 2000, How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School
- Gehman H.W., 2003, Columbia Accident Investigation Board, Report Volume 1
- Moore David T., 2006, Critical Thinking and Intelligence Analysis
- Paul R.W., 2002, Critical Thinking: Tools for Taking Charge of Your Professional and Personal Life
- Paul R.W., 2006, A Miniature Guide to Engineering Reasoning
- Tufte Edward R., 1997, Visual Explanations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Adapting modeling and simulation credibility standards to computational systems biology
Tatka, L. T., Smith, L. P., Hellerstein, J. L., & Sauro, H. M. (2023) · Journal of Translational Medicine · doi:10.1186/s12967-023-04290-5 · Cited by 27
Metadata
- Authors
- Niewoehner, R. J., & Steidle, C. E.
- Affiliations
- United States Naval Academy (US)
- Corresponding author
- Niewoehner, Robert J.
- Venue
- Engineering Management Journal
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-03
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 9-18
- ISSN
- 1042-9247 (ISSN-L)
- 2377-0643
- OpenAlex
- W2033884985
- Cited by
- 16
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 2.83
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Engineering Management Journal (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Education and Critical Thinking Development
- Social Sciences › Education › Management and Marketing Education
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Leadership, Behavior, and Decision-Making Studies
- Keywords
- Space Shuttle Columbia accident, critical thinking model, Richard Paul, case study analysis, leadership, organizational behavior, habits of mind, organizational learning
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia: Portaging Leadership Lessons with a Critical Thinking Model. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/10429247.2009.11431793
- The paper
- Niewoehner, R. J., & Steidle, C. E. (2009). The Loss of the Space Shuttle Columbia: Portaging Leadership Lessons with a Critical Thinking Model. Engineering Management Journal. https://doi.org/10.1080/10429247.2009.11431793