critical thinking and student learning

• Our Mission

Helping Students Hone Their Critical Thinking Skills

Used consistently, these strategies can help middle and high school teachers guide students to improve much-needed skills.

Critical thinking skills are important in every discipline, at and beyond school. From managing money to choosing which candidates to vote for in elections to making difficult career choices, students need to be prepared to take in, synthesize, and act on new information in a world that is constantly changing.

While critical thinking might seem like an abstract idea that is tough to directly instruct, there are many engaging ways to help students strengthen these skills through active learning.

Make Time for Metacognitive Reflection

Create space for students to both reflect on their ideas and discuss the power of doing so. Show students how they can push back on their own thinking to analyze and question their assumptions. Students might ask themselves, “Why is this the best answer? What information supports my answer? What might someone with a counterargument say?”

Through this reflection, students and teachers (who can model reflecting on their own thinking) gain deeper understandings of their ideas and do a better job articulating their beliefs. In a world that is go-go-go, it is important to help students understand that it is OK to take a breath and think about their ideas before putting them out into the world. And taking time for reflection helps us more thoughtfully consider others’ ideas, too.

Teach Reasoning Skills 

Reasoning skills are another key component of critical thinking, involving the abilities to think logically, evaluate evidence, identify assumptions, and analyze arguments. Students who learn how to use reasoning skills will be better equipped to make informed decisions, form and defend opinions, and solve problems. 

One way to teach reasoning is to use problem-solving activities that require students to apply their skills to practical contexts. For example, give students a real problem to solve, and ask them to use reasoning skills to develop a solution. They can then present their solution and defend their reasoning to the class and engage in discussion about whether and how their thinking changed when listening to peers’ perspectives. 

A great example I have seen involved students identifying an underutilized part of their school and creating a presentation about one way to redesign it. This project allowed students to feel a sense of connection to the problem and come up with creative solutions that could help others at school. For more examples, you might visit PBS’s Design Squad , a resource that brings to life real-world problem-solving.

Ask Open-Ended Questions 

Moving beyond the repetition of facts, critical thinking requires students to take positions and explain their beliefs through research, evidence, and explanations of credibility. 

When we pose open-ended questions, we create space for classroom discourse inclusive of diverse, perhaps opposing, ideas—grounds for rich exchanges that support deep thinking and analysis. 

For example, “How would you approach the problem?” and “Where might you look to find resources to address this issue?” are two open-ended questions that position students to think less about the “right” answer and more about the variety of solutions that might already exist. 

Journaling, whether digitally or physically in a notebook, is another great way to have students answer these open-ended prompts—giving them time to think and organize their thoughts before contributing to a conversation, which can ensure that more voices are heard. 

Once students process in their journal, small group or whole class conversations help bring their ideas to life. Discovering similarities between answers helps reveal to students that they are not alone, which can encourage future participation in constructive civil discourse.

Teach Information Literacy 

Education has moved far past the idea of “Be careful of what is on Wikipedia, because it might not be true.” With AI innovations making their way into classrooms, teachers know that informed readers must question everything. 

Understanding what is and is not a reliable source and knowing how to vet information are important skills for students to build and utilize when making informed decisions. You might start by introducing the idea of bias: Articles, ads, memes, videos, and every other form of media can push an agenda that students may not see on the surface. Discuss credibility, subjectivity, and objectivity, and look at examples and nonexamples of trusted information to prepare students to be well-informed members of a democracy.

One of my favorite lessons is about the Pacific Northwest tree octopus . This project asks students to explore what appears to be a very real website that provides information on this supposedly endangered animal. It is a wonderful, albeit over-the-top, example of how something might look official even when untrue, revealing that we need critical thinking to break down “facts” and determine the validity of the information we consume. 

A fun extension is to have students come up with their own website or newsletter about something going on in school that is untrue. Perhaps a change in dress code that requires everyone to wear their clothes inside out or a change to the lunch menu that will require students to eat brussels sprouts every day. 

Giving students the ability to create their own falsified information can help them better identify it in other contexts. Understanding that information can be “too good to be true” can help them identify future falsehoods. 

Provide Diverse Perspectives 

Consider how to keep the classroom from becoming an echo chamber. If students come from the same community, they may have similar perspectives. And those who have differing perspectives may not feel comfortable sharing them in the face of an opposing majority. 

To support varying viewpoints, bring diverse voices into the classroom as much as possible, especially when discussing current events. Use primary sources: videos from YouTube, essays and articles written by people who experienced current events firsthand, documentaries that dive deeply into topics that require some nuance, and any other resources that provide a varied look at topics. 

I like to use the Smithsonian “OurStory” page , which shares a wide variety of stories from people in the United States. The page on Japanese American internment camps is very powerful because of its first-person perspectives. 

Practice Makes Perfect 

To make the above strategies and thinking routines a consistent part of your classroom, spread them out—and build upon them—over the course of the school year. You might challenge students with information and/or examples that require them to use their critical thinking skills; work these skills explicitly into lessons, projects, rubrics, and self-assessments; or have students practice identifying misinformation or unsupported arguments.

Critical thinking is not learned in isolation. It needs to be explored in English language arts, social studies, science, physical education, math. Every discipline requires students to take a careful look at something and find the best solution. Often, these skills are taken for granted, viewed as a by-product of a good education, but true critical thinking doesn’t just happen. It requires consistency and commitment.

In a moment when information and misinformation abound, and students must parse reams of information, it is imperative that we support and model critical thinking in the classroom to support the development of well-informed citizens.

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

In this EdWeek blog, an experiment in knowledge-gathering, Ferlazzo will address readers’ questions on classroom management, ELL instruction, lesson planning, and other issues facing teachers. Send your questions to [email protected]. Read more from this blog.

Integrating Critical Thinking Into the Classroom

• Share article

(This is the second post in a three-part series. You can see Part One here .)

The new question-of-the-week is:

What is critical thinking and how can we integrate it into the classroom?

Part One ‘s guests were Dara Laws Savage, Patrick Brown, Meg Riordan, Ph.D., and Dr. PJ Caposey. Dara, Patrick, and Meg were also guests on my 10-minute BAM! Radio Show . You can also find a list of, and links to, previous shows here.

Today, Dr. Kulvarn Atwal, Elena Quagliarello, Dr. Donna Wilson, and Diane Dahl share their recommendations.

‘Learning Conversations’

Dr. Kulvarn Atwal is currently the executive head teacher of two large primary schools in the London borough of Redbridge. Dr. Atwal is the author of The Thinking School: Developing a Dynamic Learning Community , published by John Catt Educational. Follow him on Twitter @Thinkingschool2 :

In many classrooms I visit, students’ primary focus is on what they are expected to do and how it will be measured. It seems that we are becoming successful at producing students who are able to jump through hoops and pass tests. But are we producing children that are positive about teaching and learning and can think critically and creatively? Consider your classroom environment and the extent to which you employ strategies that develop students’ critical-thinking skills and their self-esteem as learners.

Development of self-esteem

One of the most significant factors that impacts students’ engagement and achievement in learning in your classroom is their self-esteem. In this context, self-esteem can be viewed to be the difference between how they perceive themselves as a learner (perceived self) and what they consider to be the ideal learner (ideal self). This ideal self may reflect the child that is associated or seen to be the smartest in the class. Your aim must be to raise students’ self-esteem. To do this, you have to demonstrate that effort, not ability, leads to success. Your language and interactions in the classroom, therefore, have to be aspirational—that if children persist with something, they will achieve.

Use of evaluative praise

Ensure that when you are praising students, you are making explicit links to a child’s critical thinking and/or development. This will enable them to build their understanding of what factors are supporting them in their learning. For example, often when we give feedback to students, we may simply say, “Well done” or “Good answer.” However, are the students actually aware of what they did well or what was good about their answer? Make sure you make explicit what the student has done well and where that links to prior learning. How do you value students’ critical thinking—do you praise their thinking and demonstrate how it helps them improve their learning?

Learning conversations to encourage deeper thinking

We often feel as teachers that we have to provide feedback to every students’ response, but this can limit children’s thinking. Encourage students in your class to engage in learning conversations with each other. Give as many opportunities as possible to students to build on the responses of others. Facilitate chains of dialogue by inviting students to give feedback to each other. The teacher’s role is, therefore, to facilitate this dialogue and select each individual student to give feedback to others. It may also mean that you do not always need to respond at all to a student’s answer.

Teacher modelling own thinking

We cannot expect students to develop critical-thinking skills if we aren’t modeling those thinking skills for them. Share your creativity, imagination, and thinking skills with the students and you will nurture creative, imaginative critical thinkers. Model the language you want students to learn and think about. Share what you feel about the learning activities your students are participating in as well as the thinking you are engaging in. Your own thinking and learning will add to the discussions in the classroom and encourage students to share their own thinking.

Metacognitive questioning

Consider the extent to which your questioning encourages students to think about their thinking, and therefore, learn about learning! Through asking metacognitive questions, you will enable your students to have a better understanding of the learning process, as well as their own self-reflections as learners. Example questions may include:

• Why did you choose to do it that way?
• When you find something tricky, what helps you?
• How do you know when you have really learned something?

‘Adventures of Discovery’

Elena Quagliarello is the senior editor of education for Scholastic News , a current events magazine for students in grades 3–6. She graduated from Rutgers University, where she studied English and earned her master’s degree in elementary education. She is a certified K–12 teacher and previously taught middle school English/language arts for five years:

Critical thinking blasts through the surface level of a topic. It reaches beyond the who and the what and launches students on a learning journey that ultimately unlocks a deeper level of understanding. Teaching students how to think critically helps them turn information into knowledge and knowledge into wisdom. In the classroom, critical thinking teaches students how to ask and answer the questions needed to read the world. Whether it’s a story, news article, photo, video, advertisement, or another form of media, students can use the following critical-thinking strategies to dig beyond the surface and uncover a wealth of knowledge.

A Layered Learning Approach

Begin by having students read a story, article, or analyze a piece of media. Then have them excavate and explore its various layers of meaning. First, ask students to think about the literal meaning of what they just read. For example, if students read an article about the desegregation of public schools during the 1950s, they should be able to answer questions such as: Who was involved? What happened? Where did it happen? Which details are important? This is the first layer of critical thinking: reading comprehension. Do students understand the passage at its most basic level?

Ask the Tough Questions

The next layer delves deeper and starts to uncover the author’s purpose and craft. Teach students to ask the tough questions: What information is included? What or who is left out? How does word choice influence the reader? What perspective is represented? What values or people are marginalized? These questions force students to critically analyze the choices behind the final product. In today’s age of fast-paced, easily accessible information, it is essential to teach students how to critically examine the information they consume. The goal is to equip students with the mindset to ask these questions on their own.

Strike Gold

The deepest layer of critical thinking comes from having students take a step back to think about the big picture. This level of thinking is no longer focused on the text itself but rather its real-world implications. Students explore questions such as: Why does this matter? What lesson have I learned? How can this lesson be applied to other situations? Students truly engage in critical thinking when they are able to reflect on their thinking and apply their knowledge to a new situation. This step has the power to transform knowledge into wisdom.

Adventures of Discovery

There are vast ways to spark critical thinking in the classroom. Here are a few other ideas:

• Critical Expressionism: In this expanded response to reading from a critical stance, students are encouraged to respond through forms of artistic interpretations, dramatizations, singing, sketching, designing projects, or other multimodal responses. For example, students might read an article and then create a podcast about it or read a story and then act it out.
• Transmediations: This activity requires students to take an article or story and transform it into something new. For example, they might turn a news article into a cartoon or turn a story into a poem. Alternatively, students may rewrite a story by changing some of its elements, such as the setting or time period.
• Words Into Action: In this type of activity, students are encouraged to take action and bring about change. Students might read an article about endangered orangutans and the effects of habitat loss caused by deforestation and be inspired to check the labels on products for palm oil. They might then write a letter asking companies how they make sure the palm oil they use doesn’t hurt rain forests.
• Socratic Seminars: In this student-led discussion strategy, students pose thought-provoking questions to each other about a topic. They listen closely to each other’s comments and think critically about different perspectives.
• Classroom Debates: Aside from sparking a lively conversation, classroom debates naturally embed critical-thinking skills by asking students to formulate and support their own opinions and consider and respond to opposing viewpoints.

Critical thinking has the power to launch students on unforgettable learning experiences while helping them develop new habits of thought, reflection, and inquiry. Developing these skills prepares students to examine issues of power and promote transformative change in the world around them.

‘Quote Analysis’

Dr. Donna Wilson is a psychologist and the author of 20 books, including Developing Growth Mindsets , Teaching Students to Drive Their Brains , and Five Big Ideas for Effective Teaching (2 nd Edition). She is an international speaker who has worked in Asia, the Middle East, Australia, Europe, Jamaica, and throughout the U.S. and Canada. Dr. Wilson can be reached at [email protected] ; visit her website at www.brainsmart.org .

Diane Dahl has been a teacher for 13 years, having taught grades 2-4 throughout her career. Mrs. Dahl currently teaches 3rd and 4th grade GT-ELAR/SS in Lovejoy ISD in Fairview, Texas. Follow her on Twitter at @DahlD, and visit her website at www.fortheloveofteaching.net :

A growing body of research over the past several decades indicates that teaching students how to be better thinkers is a great way to support them to be more successful at school and beyond. In the book, Teaching Students to Drive Their Brains , Dr. Wilson shares research and many motivational strategies, activities, and lesson ideas that assist students to think at higher levels. Five key strategies from the book are as follows:

• Facilitate conversation about why it is important to think critically at school and in other contexts of life. Ideally, every student will have a contribution to make to the discussion over time.
• Begin teaching thinking skills early in the school year and as a daily part of class.
• As this instruction begins, introduce students to the concept of brain plasticity and how their brilliant brains change during thinking and learning. This can be highly motivational for students who do not yet believe they are good thinkers!
• Explicitly teach students how to use the thinking skills.
• Facilitate student understanding of how the thinking skills they are learning relate to their lives at school and in other contexts.

Below are two lessons that support critical thinking, which can be defined as the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment.

Mrs. Dahl prepares her 3rd and 4th grade classes for a year of critical thinking using quote analysis .

During Native American studies, her 4 th grade analyzes a Tuscarora quote: “Man has responsibility, not power.” Since students already know how the Native Americans’ land had been stolen, it doesn’t take much for them to make the logical leaps. Critical-thought prompts take their thinking even deeper, especially at the beginning of the year when many need scaffolding. Some prompts include:

• … from the point of view of the Native Americans?
• … from the point of view of the settlers?
• How do you think your life might change over time as a result?
• Can you relate this quote to anything else in history?

Analyzing a topic from occupational points of view is an incredibly powerful critical-thinking tool. After learning about the Mexican-American War, Mrs. Dahl’s students worked in groups to choose an occupation with which to analyze the war. The chosen occupations were: anthropologist, mathematician, historian, archaeologist, cartographer, and economist. Then each individual within each group chose a different critical-thinking skill to focus on. Finally, they worked together to decide how their occupation would view the war using each skill.

For example, here is what each student in the economist group wrote:

• When U.S.A. invaded Mexico for land and won, Mexico ended up losing income from the settlements of Jose de Escandon. The U.S.A. thought that they were gaining possible tradable land, while Mexico thought that they were losing precious land and resources.
• Whenever Texas joined the states, their GDP skyrocketed. Then they went to war and spent money on supplies. When the war was resolving, Texas sold some of their land to New Mexico for $10 million. This allowed Texas to pay off their debt to the U.S., improving their relationship.
• A detail that converged into the Mexican-American War was that Mexico and the U.S. disagreed on the Texas border. With the resulting treaty, Texas ended up gaining more land and economic resources.
• Texas gained land from Mexico since both countries disagreed on borders. Texas sold land to New Mexico, which made Texas more economically structured and allowed them to pay off their debt.

This was the first time that students had ever used the occupations technique. Mrs. Dahl was astonished at how many times the kids used these critical skills in other areas moving forward.

Thanks to Dr. Auwal, Elena, Dr. Wilson, and Diane for their contributions!

Please feel free to leave a comment with your reactions to the topic or directly to anything that has been said in this post.

Consider contributing a question to be answered in a future post. You can send one to me at [email protected] . When you send it in, let me know if I can use your real name if it’s selected or if you’d prefer remaining anonymous and have a pseudonym in mind.

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

Education Week has published a collection of posts from this blog, along with new material, in an e-book form. It’s titled Classroom Management Q&As: Expert Strategies for Teaching .

Just a reminder; you can subscribe and receive updates from this blog via email (The RSS feed for this blog, and for all Ed Week articles, has been changed by the new redesign—new ones won’t be available until February). And if you missed any of the highlights from the first nine years of this blog, you can see a categorized list below.

• This Year’s Most Popular Q&A Posts
• Race & Racism in Schools
• School Closures & the Coronavirus Crisis
• Classroom-Management Advice
• Best Ways to Begin the School Year
• Best Ways to End the School Year
• Student Motivation & Social-Emotional Learning
• Implementing the Common Core
• Facing Gender Challenges in Education
• Teaching Social Studies
• Cooperative & Collaborative Learning
• Using Tech in the Classroom
• Student Voices
• Parent Engagement in Schools
• Teaching English-Language Learners
• Reading Instruction
• Writing Instruction
• Education Policy Issues
• Differentiating Instruction
• Math Instruction
• Science Instruction
• Advice for New Teachers
• Author Interviews
• Entering the Teaching Profession
• The Inclusive Classroom
• Learning & the Brain
• Administrator Leadership
• Teacher Leadership
• Relationships in Schools
• Professional Development
• Instructional Strategies
• Best of Classroom Q&A
• Professional Collaboration
• Classroom Organization
• Mistakes in Education
• Project-Based Learning

I am also creating a Twitter list including all contributors to this column .

The opinions expressed in Classroom Q&A With Larry Ferlazzo are strictly those of the author(s) and do not reflect the opinions or endorsement of Editorial Projects in Education, or any of its publications.

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

BLOG | PODCAST NETWORK | ADMIN. MASTERMIND | SWAG & MERCH | ONLINE TRAINING

• Meet the Team
• Join the Team
• Our Philosophy
• Teach Better Mindset
• Custom Professional Development
• Livestream Shows & Videos
• Administrator Mastermind
• Academy Online Courses
• EDUcreator Club+
• Podcast Network
• Speakers Network
• EDUpreneur Mastermind
• Free Downloads
• Ambassador Program
• 2024 Cozumel Cruise
• Free Facebook Group
• Professional Development
• Request Training
• Speakers Network Home
• Keynote Speakers

Strategies to Increase Critical Thinking Skills in students

Matthew Joseph October 2, 2019 Blog , Engage Better , Lesson Plan Better , Personalize Student Learning Better

In This Post:

• The importance of helping students increase critical thinking skills.
• Ways to promote the essential skills needed to analyze and evaluate.
• Strategies to incorporate critical thinking into your instruction.

We ask our teachers to be “future-ready” or say that we are teaching “for jobs that don’t exist yet.” These are powerful statements. At the same time, they give teachers the impression that we have to drastically change what we are doing .

So how do we plan education for an unknown job market or unknown needs?

My answer: We can’t predict the jobs, but whatever they are, students will need to think critically to do them. So, our job is to teach our students HOW to think, not WHAT to think.

Helping Students Become Critical Thinkers

My answer is rooted in the call to empower our students to be critical thinkers. I believe that to be critical thinkers, educators need to provide students with the strategies they need. And we need to ask more than just surface-level questions.

Questions to students must motivate them to dig up background knowledge. They should inspire them to make connections to real-world scenarios. These make the learning more memorable and meaningful.

Critical thinking is a general term. I believe this term means that students effectively identify, analyze, and evaluate content or skills. In this process, they (the students) will discover and present convincing reasons in support of their answers or thinking.

You can look up critical thinking and get many definitions like this one from Wikipedia: “ Critical thinking consists of a mental process of analyzing or evaluating information, particularly statements or propositions that people have offered as true. ”

Essential Skills for Critical Thinking

In my current role as director of curriculum and instruction, I work to promote the use of 21st-century tools and, more importantly, thinking skills. Some essential skills that are the basis for critical thinking are:

• Communication and Information skills
• Thinking and Problem-Solving skills
• Interpersonal and Self- Directional skills
• Collaboration skills

These four bullets are skills students are going to need in any field and in all levels of education. Hence my answer to the question. We need to teach our students to think critically and for themselves.

One of the goals of education is to prepare students to learn through discovery . Providing opportunities to practice being critical thinkers will assist students in analyzing others’ thinking and examining the logic of others.

Understanding others is an essential skill in collaboration and in everyday life. Critical thinking will allow students to do more than just memorize knowledge.

Ask Questions

So how do we do this? One recommendation is for educators to work in-depth questioning strategies into a lesson launch.

Ask thoughtful questions to allow for answers with sound reasoning. Then, word conversations and communication to shape students’ thinking. Quick answers often result in very few words and no eye contact, which are skills we don’t want to promote.

When you are asking students questions and they provide a solution, try some of these to promote further thinking:

• Could you elaborate further on that point?
• Will you express that point in another way?
• Can you give me an illustration?
• Would you give me an example?
• Will you you provide more details?
• Could you be more specific?
• Do we need to consider another point of view?
• Is there another way to look at this question?

Utilizing critical thinking skills could be seen as a change in the paradigm of teaching and learning. Engagement in education will enhance the collaboration among teachers and students. It will also provide a way for students to succeed even if the school system had to start over.

[scroll down to keep reading]

Promoting critical thinking into all aspects of instruction.

Engagement, application, and collaboration are skills that withstand the test of time. I also promote the integration of critical thinking into every aspect of instruction.

In my experience, I’ve found a few ways to make this happen.

Begin lessons/units with a probing question: It shouldn’t be a question you can answer with a ‘yes’ or a ‘no.’ These questions should inspire discovery learning and problem-solving.

Encourage Creativity: I have seen teachers prepare projects before they give it to their students many times. For example, designing snowmen or other “creative” projects. By doing the design work or by cutting all the circles out beforehand, it removes creativity options.

It may help the classroom run more smoothly if every child’s material is already cut out, but then every student’s project looks the same. Students don’t have to think on their own or problem solve.

Not having everything “glue ready” in advance is a good thing. Instead, give students all the supplies needed to create a snowman, and let them do it on their own.

Giving independence will allow students to become critical thinkers because they will have to create their own product with the supplies you give them. This might be an elementary example, but it’s one we can relate to any grade level or project.

Try not to jump to help too fast – let the students work through a productive struggle .

Build in opportunities for students to find connections in learning.  Encouraging students to make connections to a real-life situation and identify patterns is a great way to practice their critical thinking skills. The use of real-world scenarios will increase rigor, relevance, and critical thinking.

A few other techniques to encourage critical thinking are:

• Use analogies
• Promote interaction among students
• Ask open-ended questions
• Allow reflection time
• Use real-life problems
• Allow for thinking practice

Critical thinking prepares students to think for themselves for the rest of their lives. I also believe critical thinkers are less likely to go along with the crowd because they think for themselves.

About Matthew X. Joseph, Ed.D.

Dr. Matthew X. Joseph has been a school and district leader in many capacities in public education over his 25 years in the field. Experiences such as the Director of Digital Learning and Innovation in Milford Public Schools (MA), elementary school principal in Natick, MA and Attleboro, MA, classroom teacher, and district professional development specialist have provided Matt incredible insights on how to best support teaching and learning. This experience has led to nationally publishing articles and opportunities to speak at multiple state and national events. He is the author of Power of Us: Creating Collaborative Schools and co-author of Modern Mentoring , Reimagining Teacher Mentorship (Due out, fall 2019). His master’s degree is in special education and his Ed.D. in Educational Leadership from Boston College.

Visit Matthew’s Blog

• Top Courses
• Online Degrees
• Find your New Career
• Join for Free

What Are Critical Thinking Skills and Why Are They Important?

Learn what critical thinking skills are, why they’re important, and how to develop and apply them in your workplace and everyday life.

We often use critical thinking skills without even realizing it. When you make a decision, such as which cereal to eat for breakfast, you're using critical thinking to determine the best option for you that day.

Critical thinking is like a muscle that can be exercised and built over time. It is a skill that can help propel your career to new heights. You'll be able to solve workplace issues, use trial and error to troubleshoot ideas, and more.

We'll take you through what it is and some examples so you can begin your journey in mastering this skill.

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is the ability to interpret, evaluate, and analyze facts and information that are available, to form a judgment or decide if something is right or wrong.

More than just being curious about the world around you, critical thinkers make connections between logical ideas to see the bigger picture. Building your critical thinking skills means being able to advocate your ideas and opinions, present them in a logical fashion, and make decisions for improvement.

Build job-ready skills with a Coursera Plus subscription

• Get access to 7,000+ learning programs from world-class universities and companies, including Google, Yale, Salesforce, and more
• Try different courses and find your best fit at no additional cost
• Earn certificates for learning programs you complete
• A subscription price of $59/month, cancel anytime

Why is critical thinking important?

Critical thinking is useful in many areas of your life, including your career. It makes you a well-rounded individual, one who has looked at all of their options and possible solutions before making a choice.

According to the University of the People in California, having critical thinking skills is important because they are [ 1 ]:

Crucial for the economy

Essential for improving language and presentation skills

Very helpful in promoting creativity

Important for self-reflection

The basis of science and democracy 

Critical thinking skills are used every day in a myriad of ways and can be applied to situations such as a CEO approaching a group project or a nurse deciding in which order to treat their patients.

Examples of common critical thinking skills

Critical thinking skills differ from individual to individual and are utilized in various ways. Examples of common critical thinking skills include:

Identification of biases: Identifying biases means knowing there are certain people or things that may have an unfair prejudice or influence on the situation at hand. Pointing out these biases helps to remove them from contention when it comes to solving the problem and allows you to see things from a different perspective.

Research: Researching details and facts allows you to be prepared when presenting your information to people. You’ll know exactly what you’re talking about due to the time you’ve spent with the subject material, and you’ll be well-spoken and know what questions to ask to gain more knowledge. When researching, always use credible sources and factual information.

Open-mindedness: Being open-minded when having a conversation or participating in a group activity is crucial to success. Dismissing someone else’s ideas before you’ve heard them will inhibit you from progressing to a solution, and will often create animosity. If you truly want to solve a problem, you need to be willing to hear everyone’s opinions and ideas if you want them to hear yours.

Analysis: Analyzing your research will lead to you having a better understanding of the things you’ve heard and read. As a true critical thinker, you’ll want to seek out the truth and get to the source of issues. It’s important to avoid taking things at face value and always dig deeper.

Problem-solving: Problem-solving is perhaps the most important skill that critical thinkers can possess. The ability to solve issues and bounce back from conflict is what helps you succeed, be a leader, and effect change. One way to properly solve problems is to first recognize there’s a problem that needs solving. By determining the issue at hand, you can then analyze it and come up with several potential solutions.

How to develop critical thinking skills

You can develop critical thinking skills every day if you approach problems in a logical manner. Here are a few ways you can start your path to improvement:

1. Ask questions.

Be inquisitive about everything. Maintain a neutral perspective and develop a natural curiosity, so you can ask questions that develop your understanding of the situation or task at hand. The more details, facts, and information you have, the better informed you are to make decisions.

2. Practice active listening.

Utilize active listening techniques, which are founded in empathy, to really listen to what the other person is saying. Critical thinking, in part, is the cognitive process of reading the situation: the words coming out of their mouth, their body language, their reactions to your own words. Then, you might paraphrase to clarify what they're saying, so both of you agree you're on the same page.

3. Develop your logic and reasoning.

This is perhaps a more abstract task that requires practice and long-term development. However, think of a schoolteacher assessing the classroom to determine how to energize the lesson. There's options such as playing a game, watching a video, or challenging the students with a reward system. Using logic, you might decide that the reward system will take up too much time and is not an immediate fix. A video is not exactly relevant at this time. So, the teacher decides to play a simple word association game.

Scenarios like this happen every day, so next time, you can be more aware of what will work and what won't. Over time, developing your logic and reasoning will strengthen your critical thinking skills.

Learn tips and tricks on how to become a better critical thinker and problem solver through online courses from notable educational institutions on Coursera. Start with Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking from Duke University or Mindware: Critical Thinking for the Information Age from the University of Michigan.

Article sources

University of the People, “ Why is Critical Thinking Important?: A Survival Guide , https://www.uopeople.edu/blog/why-is-critical-thinking-important/.” Accessed May 18, 2023.

Keep reading

Coursera staff.

Editorial Team

Coursera’s editorial team is comprised of highly experienced professional editors, writers, and fact...

This content has been made available for informational purposes only. Learners are advised to conduct additional research to ensure that courses and other credentials pursued meet their personal, professional, and financial goals.

Critical Thinking: Facilitating and Assessing the 21st Century Skills in Education

So many times we hear our students say, “Why am I learning this?”

I believe that Critical Thinking is the spark that begins the process of authentic learning. Before going further, we must first develop an idea of what learning is… and what learning is not.  So many times we hear our students say, “Why am I learning this?” The reason they ask is because they have not really experienced the full spectrum of learning, and because of this are actually not learning to a full rewarding  extent! We might say they are being exposed to surface learning and not authentic (real) learning. The act of authentic learning is actually an exciting and engaging concept. It allows students to see real meaning and begin to construct their own knowledge.  Critical Thinking is core to learning. It is rewarding, engaging, and life long. Without critical thinking students are left to a universe of concepts and memorization.  Yes… over twelve years of mediocrity! When educators employ critical thinking in their classrooms, a whole new world of understanding is opened up.   What are some reasons to facilitate critical thinking with our students? Let me begin:

Ten Reasons For Student Critical Thinking in the classroom

• Allows for necessary inquiry that makes learning exciting
• Provides a method to go beyond memorization to promote understanding.
• Allows students to visualize thoughts, concepts, theories, models & possibilities.
• Promotes curriculum standards, trans-disciplinary ideas & real world connections.
• Encourages a classroom culture of collaboration that promotes deeper thinking.
• Builds skills of problem solving, making implications, & determining consequences.
• Facilitates goal setting, promotion of process, and perseverance to achieve.
• Teaches self reflection and critique, and the ability to listen to others’ thoughts.
• Encourages point of view  while developing persuasive skills.
• Guides interpretation while developing a skill to infer and draw conclusions.

I am excited by the spark that critical thinking ignites to support real and authentic learning in the classroom. I often wonder how much time students spend in the process of critical thinking in the classroom. I ask you to reflect on your typical school day. Are your students spending time in area of surface learning , or are they plunging into the engaging culture of deeper (real) learning?  At the same time … how are you assessing your students? So many times as educators, we are bound by the standards, and we forget the importance of promoting that critical thinking process that makes our standards come alive with understanding. A culture of critical thinking is not automatic, though with intentional planning  it can become a reality. Like the other 21st century skills, it must be built and continuously facilitated. Let’s take a look at how, we as educators, can do this.

Ten Ways to Facilitate Student Critical Thinking in the Classroom and School

• Design Critical Thinking Activities.  (This might include mind mapping, making thinking visible, Socratic discussions, meta-cognitive mind stretches, Build an inquiry wall with students and talk about the process of thinking”
• Provide time for students to collaborate.  (Collaboration can be the button that starts critical thinking. It provides group thinking that builds on the standards. Have students work together while solving multi-step and higher order thinking problems. Sometimes this might mean slow down to increase the learning.)
• Provide students with a Critical Thinking rubric.  (Have them look at the rubric before a critical thinking activity, and once again when they are finished)
• Make assessment of Critical Thinking an ongoing effort.  (While the teacher can assess, have students assess themselves. Self assessment can be powerful)
• Concentrate on specific indicators in a rubric.  (There are various indicators such as; provides inquiry, answers questions, builds an argument etc. Concentrate on just one indicator while doing a lesson. There can even be an exit ticket reflection)
• Integrate the idea of Critical Thinking in any lesson.  ( Do not teach this skill in isolation. How does is work with a lesson, stem activity, project built, etc. What does Critical Thinking look like in the online or blended environment? Think of online discussions.)
• Post a Critical Thinking Poster in the room.  (This poster could be a copy of a rubric or even a list of “I Can Statements”. Point it out before a critical thinking activity.
• Make Critical Thinking part of your formative  and summative assessment.   (Move around the room, talk to groups and students, stop the whole group to make adjustments.)
• Point out Critical Thinking found in the content standards.  (Be aware that content standards often have words like; infer, debate, conclude, solve, prioritize, compare and contrast, hypothesize, and research. Critical Thinking has always been part of the standards. Show your students Bloom’s Taxonomy and post in the room. Where are they in their learning?
• Plan for a school wide emphasis.  (A culture that builds Critical Thinking is usually bigger then one classroom. Develop school-wide vocabulary, posters, and initiatives.)

I keep talking about the idea of surface learning and deeper learning. This can best be seen in  Bloom’s Taxonomy. Often we start with Remembering.  This might be essential in providing students the map to the further areas of Bloom’s. Of course, we then find the idea of Understanding. This is where I believe critical thinking begins. Sometimes we need to critically think in order to understand. In fact, you might be this doing right now. I believe that too much time might be spent in Remembering, which is why students get a false idea of what learning really is. As we look at the rest of Bloom’s ( Apply, Analyze, Evaluate, and Create) we can see the deeper learning take place. and even steps toward the transfer and internalization of the learning. Some educators even tip Bloom’s upside down, stating that the Creating at the top will build an understanding. This must be done with careful facilitation and intentional scaffold to make sure there is some surface learning. After-all, Critical Thinking will need this to build on.

I have been mentioning rubrics and assessment tools through out this post. To me, these are essential in building that culture of critical thinking in the classroom. I want to provide you with some great resources that will give your some powerful tools to assess the skill of Critical Thinking.  Keep in mind that students can also self assess and journal using prompts from a Critical Thinking Rubric.

Seven Resources to Help with Assessment and Facilitation of Critical Thinking

• Habits of Mind  – I think this is an awesome place to help teachers facilitate and assess critical thinking and more. Check out the  free resources page  which even has some wonderful posters. One of my favorites is the rubrics found on this  research page . Decide on spending some time because there are a lot of great resources.
• PBLWorks  – The number one place for PBL in the world is at PBLWorks. You may know it as the BUCK Institute or BIE. I am fortunate to be part of their National Faculty which is probably why I rank it as number one. I encourage you to visit their site for everything PBL.  This link brings you to the resource area where you will discover some amazing  rubrics to facilitate Critical Thinking. You will find rubrics for grade bands K-2, 3-5, and 6-12. This really is a great place to start. You will need to sign up to be a member of PBLWorks. This is a wonderful idea, after-all it is free!
• Microsoft Innovative Learning  – This   website  contains some powerful rubrics for assessing the 21st Century skills. The link will bring you to a PDF file with Critical Thinking rubrics you can use tomorrow for any grade level. Check out this  two page document  defining the 4 C’s and a  movie  giving you even more of an explanation.
• New Tech School  – This amazing PBL group of schools provide some wonderful Learning Rubrics in their free area.  Here you will find an interesting collection of rubrics that assesses student learning in multiple areas. These are sure to get you off and started.
• Foundation for Critical Thinking  –  Check out this  amazing page  to help give you descriptors.
• Project Zero  – While it is not necessarily assessment based, you will find some powerful  routines for making thinking visible . As you conduct these types of activities you will find yourself doing some wonderful formative assessment of critical thinking.
• Education Week  – Take a look at this resource that provides some great reasoning and some interesting links that provide a glimpse of critical thinking in the classroom.

Critical Thinking “I Can Statements”

As you can see, I believe that Critical Thinking is key to PBL, STEM, and Deeper Learning. It improves Communication and Collaboration, while promoting Creativity.  I believe every student should have these following “I Can Statements” as part of their learning experience. Feel free to copy and use in your classroom. Perhaps this is a great starting place as you promote collaborative and powerful learning culture!

• I can not only answer questions, but can also think of new questions to ask 
• I can take time to see what I am thinking to promote even better understanding 
• I can attempt to see other peoples’ thinking while explaining my own 
• I can look at a problem and determine needed steps to find a solution 
• I can use proper collaboration skills to work with others productively to build solutions 
• I can set a goal, design a plan, and persevere to accomplish the goal. 
• I can map out strategies and processes that shows the action involved in a task. 
• I can define and show my understanding of a concept, model, theory, or process. 
• I can take time to reflect and productively critique my work and the work of others 
• I can understand, observe, draw inferences, hypothesize and see implications.

cross-posted at  21centuryedtech.wordpress.com

Michael Gorman oversees one-to-one laptop programs and digital professional development for Southwest Allen County Schools near Fort Wayne, Indiana. He is a consultant for Discovery Education, ISTE, My Big Campus, and November Learning and is on the National Faculty for The Buck Institute for Education. His awards include district Teacher of the Year, Indiana STEM Educator of the Year and Microsoft’s 365 Global Education Hero. Read more at  21centuryedtech.wordpress.com .

Tech & Learning Newsletter

Tools and ideas to transform education. Sign up below.

Best VR Headsets for Schools

Best Laptops for Teachers

Educator Edtech Review: Makeblock mBot Neo and Ultimate Robotics & Coding Kits

Most Popular

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

University of Wisconsin Extended Campus

Main Navigation

A framework for increasing critical thinking, student engagement, and knowledge construction in online discussions.

By Laurie Berry July 15, 2022

Posted in: Faculty / Instructional Design / News / Teaching Online / Tips

July 15, 2022

Many faculty at UW Extended Campus use discussion strategies to engage their students and push them into higher levels of learning. From research, we know such strategies are necessary because most discussions do not naturally lead to higher levels of thinking (Darabi et al., 2011). Many instructors we have talked to have noticed this problem in their own courses—discussions can often feel like busywork or small talk. To achieve deeper discussions that show evidence of critical thinking and promote student engagement, research shows that your best bet is to provide the structure to make that happen (Brokensha & Greyling, 2015; Jarosewich et al., 2010). How do you create that structure? The Framework for Student Engagement and Critical Thinking can be used to provide the structure and support that will guide students into a deeper and more meaningful discussion and engage not only with the content but also with their peers. This five-component framework, developed out of research performed by Laurie Berry and Kristin Kowal (Berry & Kowal, 2022), can be used as a guide to help you add more dimension to your discussions.

Framework Component 1: Detailed Instructions and Clear Expectations

What is it.

Just like we can set up someone for success on a cross-country road trip with a good map, we can set up students for success with detailed instructions and clear expectations on how to approach the discussion. Research shows that when clear guidelines are in place, students can reach higher levels of learning (Gao et al., 2009). As instructional designers, we might see a discussion prompt where the instructions are clear enough so students will know what to do and where. However, the part worth pointing out is that the instructions and expectations can go further than one might think. For example, we can enhance a prompt that asks students to participate in the activity (post, reply, and how often) with information about why we are doing it (purpose statement) and specifics of how to be successful in the post. It’s not that most of the instructions are unclear to begin with, but that it’s useful to add a little more direction and detail to start off with since we’re in an asynchronous environment and have limited time. Back to the map metaphor, it’s the difference between a general map that would serve the purpose well for meandering or spontaneity, versus a map with identified tour stops pointed out for someone that has limited time or specific travel goals. The aim is to get students to show evidence that they are thinking more critically. Therefore, adding a purpose statement and criteria for success encourages students to push further and move beyond superficial discussion. An example of how you might include this is shown below.

Below is what clear and detailed instructions might look like in a course:

Framework Component 2: Share Thought Process

The next framework component invites students to share their thought processes in their posts. This is comparable to the think-aloud process, which you might already be using in your courses, or to showing your work, like when solving a math problem. Urging students to share their thought processes of how or why they might have arrived at the answer or conclusion can uncover more detail and depth, which, in turn, can create more opportunities for meaningful discussion. The following is an example of language you can include in your instructions: “Show evidence of critical thinking by sharing your thought process in doing the activity for all to see.” This framework component encourages students to share their thought process from the start.

An effective way to illustrate this would be to apply it to subject domains. For example, students discussing a programming problem on the discussion board would not only provide solutions, but also why they proposed their answer; students working on a case study in a management course would be prompted to share not only their opinions or solutions but how they arrived there. We are asking students to make their thinking visible, not just their solutions.

Framework Component 3: Prompt Discussion with Questions

The third framework component asks students to pose questions to invite more discussion with their peers. Asking students to probe deeper and include questions or share reflections in their posts can uncover areas that they may be struggling with or thinking about. Include language like the following in your instructions: “Ask questions of others in your post or reflect on something you may be struggling with or thinking about.”

By directing students to do this, you will invite others to easily join in the conversation and allow students to engage with both the content and each other. Using this technique, you may even notice the discussion includes elements of problem-solving and critical thinking, which are strong indicators of the students digging deeper into a topic. It can be rare to see students asking questions in their posts. However, when students post questions, it opens the door for others to easily join in the discussion.

Students discussing optimal health and wellbeing might pose questions such as, “How can I best design a wellness program to ensure others will have the time and energy to use it?,” “How does technology impact an individual’s health and wellness?,” or, “Why does the environment play a role in one’s overall wellbeing?” Prompting students to pose questions to their peers not only invites conversation but enables the opportunity to share solutions.

Framework Component 4: Weave Evidence into Post

You may have noticed this, but often when students are directed to use sources within a discussion, they merely post a link at the bottom of their post without referencing or citing it in the body of the discussion. This framework component instructs students to weave evidence or sources into the body of the discussion to allow you and others to quickly identify where or how they learned the information rather than assuming the information is tied to something they may have read. While you want to encourage students to form their own thoughts and opinions, you also want them to be able to support their thinking with evidence. To urge students to cite their source of information within their discussion itself, include language in your instructions such as: “Post an opinion or solution from your point of view and weave in your found evidence to support it.” or “Remember to reference the resources used to provide the evidence.”

Students discussing individuals whom they think portray leadership or powerful influencer characteristics would state their personal claims while weaving in trusted sources to support and justify their thinking. An example post might be, “Oprah Winfrey comes to mind when I think of powerful influencers because according to Evans (2016), she exhibits the following characteristics…” While we are asking students to share their personal thoughts and opinions, we are also asking them to identify and support their reasoning.

Framework Component 5: Reflection

It can be powerful to ask students to reflect on how they might have changed based on a learning experience. Adding a reflection component to your discussions can illuminate where construction of new knowledge has occurred. We recognize that including this component will take more time for students, but it is helpful for them to be able to synthesize not only their thoughts but also the thoughts and perspectives they gain from others. In a discussion post, you can include a reflection component with questions like these to uncover any kind of transformation that has happened during the activity: “Did you learn anything new? Did you change your mind about anything? How have you deepened or expanded your own thinking?”

Students discussing their personal sense of purpose and developing a strategy to help them achieve their goals might include statements such as: “I never thought of it this way, maybe I need to go in a different direction or involve myself in a new community.” or, “I never thought of myself being in this particular role, perhaps this is something I need to consider if I do want to pursue this in more depth.” Encouraging students to reflect on the activity could lead them to creating new connections to both the content and to themselves.

The process of digging deeper and constructing new knowledge commands a level of attention from students that signifies their engagement. Whenever students can interact with content in ways that allow them to construct new meaning, they form a deeper connection to the content itself and are able to interact more meaningfully with others (Brokensha & Greyling, 2015; Galikyan & Admiraal, 2019; Jarosewich et al., 2010; Wang & Chen, 2008).

Download a PDF handout of the Framework for Student Engagement and Critical Thinking to use as a resource.

Berry, L. A., & Kowal, K. B. (2022). Effect of role-play in online discussions on student engagement and critical thinking. Online Learning, 26 (3), 4-21.

Brokensha, S., & Greyling, W. (2015). Dispelling e-myths and pre-empting disappointment: Exploring incongruities between instructors’ intentions and reality in asynchronous online discussions. South African Journal of Higher Education, 29 (4), 50–76.

Darabi, A., Arrastia, M. C., Nelson, D. W., Cornille, T., & Liang, X. (2011). Cognitive presence in asynchronous online learning: A comparison of four discussion strategies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 27, 216–227.

Galikyan, I., & Admiraal, W. (2019). Students’ engagement in asynchronous online discussion: The relationship between cognitive presence, learner prominence, and academic performance. The Internet and Higher Education, 43, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2019.100692

Gao, F., Wang, C. X., & Sun, Y. (2009). A new model of productive online discussion and its implications for research and instruction. Journal of Educational Technology Development and Exchange, 21 (1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.18785/jetde.0201.05

Jarosewich, T., Vargo, L., Salzman, J., Lenhart, L., Krosnick, L., Vance, K., & Roskos, K. (2010). Say what? The quality of discussion board postings in online professional development. New Horizons in Education, 58 (3), 118–132.

Wang, Y.-m., & Chen, V. D.-T. (2008). Essential elements in designing online discussions to promote cognitive presence – A practical experience. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 12 (3-4), 157–177.

About Laurie Berry

Hello! I’m Laurie Berry and I am an instructional designer at UW Extended Campus. I enjoy collaborating with faculty across the UW System to design and develop course content to ensure that all students are able to access and engage in learning experiences.

Outside of work I enjoy hiking, biking, and traveling.

Online Degrees

• Applied Biotechnology
• Applied Computing
• Associate of Arts and Sciences
• Biodiversity Conservation and Management
• BSN@Home RN-BSN
• Cybersecurity
• Data Science
• Healthcare Administration
• Health and Wellness Management
• Health Information Management and Technology
• Information Technology Management
• Sustainable Management

Online Courses

• Independent Learning

Quick Links

• IT Bootcamps
• Talent Generator – Internship Development
• UW Flexible Option
• UW Extended Campus Program Catalog
• UWEX Diversity Statement

University of Wisconsin Extended Campus 780 Regent St., Suite 130 Madison, WI 53715 Phone: 608-800-6762 Fax: 608-265-9396

Open Access is an initiative that aims to make scientific research freely available to all. To date our community has made over 100 million downloads. It’s based on principles of collaboration, unobstructed discovery, and, most importantly, scientific progression. As PhD students, we found it difficult to access the research we needed, so we decided to create a new Open Access publisher that levels the playing field for scientists across the world. How? By making research easy to access, and puts the academic needs of the researchers before the business interests of publishers.

We are a community of more than 103,000 authors and editors from 3,291 institutions spanning 160 countries, including Nobel Prize winners and some of the world’s most-cited researchers. Publishing on IntechOpen allows authors to earn citations and find new collaborators, meaning more people see your work not only from your own field of study, but from other related fields too.

Brief introduction to this section that descibes Open Access especially from an IntechOpen perspective

Want to get in touch? Contact our London head office or media team here

Our team is growing all the time, so we’re always on the lookout for smart people who want to help us reshape the world of scientific publishing.

Home > Books > Teacher Education in the 21st Century - Emerging Skills for a Changing World

Are Teacher Students’ Deep Learning and Critical Thinking at Risk of Being Limited in Digital Learning Environments?

Submitted: 26 September 2020 Reviewed: 22 January 2021 Published: 04 March 2021

DOI: 10.5772/intechopen.96151

Cite this chapter

There are two ways to cite this chapter:

From the Edited Volume

Teacher Education in the 21st Century - Emerging Skills for a Changing World

Edited by Maria Jose Hernández-Serrano

To purchase hard copies of this book, please contact the representative in India: CBS Publishers & Distributors Pvt. Ltd. www.cbspd.com | [email protected]

Chapter metrics overview

818 Chapter Downloads

Impact of this chapter

Total Chapter Downloads on intechopen.com

Total Chapter Views on intechopen.com

The 21st century is quite different from the 20th in regard to the skills people need for work, citizenship, and self-actualisation. Proficiency in the 21st century differs primarily due to the emergence of sophisticated information and communication technologies. In this chapter, we will discuss whether teaching students are sufficiently prepared regarding the need for 21st century skills and how learning in a digital age affects the need for high-level critical thinking. Based on 20 in-depth interviews of Norwegian and New Zealand teaching educators, teaching students’ low critical thinking skills seem to be understood as a global challenge and as connected to the digital revolution. Despite being from different sides of the globe, teaching educators from both countries expressed concern regarding students’ in-depth learning and critical thinking skills in an educational where learning is influenced by digital technology. This article discusses the dilemmas regarding having easier access to greater amounts of information, which requires a different form of critical thinking. We question whether we are and have been preparing students sufficiently for this educational change.

• deep learning
• critical thinking
• digital technology
• teacher education
• digital learning

Author Information

Siri sollied madsen *.

• UiT The Arctic University of Norway, Tromsø, Norway

Steinar Thorvaldsen

Sissel sollied.

*Address all correspondence to: [email protected]

1. Introduction

The 21st century is, according to Dede [ 1 ], quite different from the 20th in regard to the skills people need for work, citizenship, and self-actualisation. Proficiency in the 21st century differs primarily due to the emergence of sophisticated information and communication technologies (ICTs). All over the world, ICT in education has been incorporated into formal national guidelines of the degree requirements of teacher education as an official policy. Digital technology in itself is often seen as a catalyst for educational change, and technology as a symbol for change is often understood as something positive, as investments in technology supports development in society [ 2 ].

Despite the fact that a fifth of the 21st century is behind us, it seems we are not up to speed regarding the skills anticipated as central for our digital era. Furthermore, there is a lack of clarity regarding what 21st century skills really are. The digital revolution is part of the change making 21st century skills different from those learned in schooling through the 20th century. ICT is changing the nature of perennial skills that are valuable in the modern world, as well as creating new contextual skills necessary for digital societies [ 1 ]. The world has changed fundamentally in the last few decades, and in effect, the role of learning and education has changed. Many of the skills needed in past centuries, such as critical thinking and problem solving, are, according to Trilling and Fadel [ 3 ], even more relevant today. How these skills are learned and practiced in everyday life in the 21st century though, is rapidly shifting.

This chapter presents a critical perspective on how learners’ information, media and technology skills can be understood, and how they are connected to learning and innovation skills. Data for this chapter is based on qualitative in-depth interviews of ten teaching educators at the University of Waikato in New Zealand and ten teaching educators from UiT, the Arctic University of Norway. Both countries are facing similar educational challenges when teaching in digital environments, as both must educate teaching students in digital-rich environments with high access to various ICTs and educational resources at home [ 4 ]. The universities are similar in size and student numbers.

This comparative study of Norwegian and New Zealand teaching education has led us to question how we educate students to meet the future and whether the educational systems are adapting sufficiently to new digital learning contexts. Is teaching students’ deep learning and critical thinking at risk of being limited in digital learning environments? In short, are students sufficiently prepared for the future?

2. Different perspectives on skills

2.1 the 3rs—traditional education.

There is widespread agreement among educators and the public about the importance of the traditional fundamental building blocks that underpin student learning. These skills are often referred to as the 3Rs—reading, writing and arithmetic [ 5 ]. These are important skills, but as Crockett et al. [ 6 ] have argued, for students to progress from the foundations of learning, teachers need to expand their thinking outside their ‘primary focus and fixation on the Three Rs (3Rs)—beyond traditional literacy to an additional set of 21 st century fluencies, skills that reflect the times we live in’.

2.2 The 4Cs as common ground for 21st century skills

Critical thinking

Communication

Collaboration

This understanding is based on three influential organisations associated with education, management, and industry developed definitions for 21st century learning. These organisations are the Ministerial Council for Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), the American Management Association (AMA), and AT21CS, a public and private partnership among governments, educators, academics, and industries [ 8 ]. While basic skills such as numeracy and literacy remain essential building blocks for learning, higher order skills such as the 4Cs are equally vital for learning and employment in the 21st century. Keane and Blicbau [ 5 ] write that 21st century skills are about fusing the 3Rs and the 4Cs, but the contextual aspect is also of great importance because context contributes to defining and affecting how different skills are used.

2.3 Twenty-first century skills and digital technology

Students in the 21st century live in a technology- and media-rich environment with access to a wide range of information, powerful digital tools, and the ability to collaborate and communicate with others. This affects what form of critical thinking is required. Fundamental to the development of 21st century skills is the importance of ICT for learning [ 8 ]. A discussion paper prepared for the European Union stated that information and communication technology (ICT) is at the core of 21st century skills. It is regarded as both an argument for the need for these skills, and a tool that can support the acquisition and assessment of them. The rapid development of ICT also requires a whole new set of competences related to ICT and technological literacy [ 9 ].

Keane, Keane, and Blicbau [ 8 ] write that using these technologies in education matter because students need to be prepared this digital world, in which they require a skillset that is broader than the traditional foundations of the 3Rs. Tucker and Courts [ 10 ] claim that teachers who mainly concentrate on a fixed curriculum that focuses on learning through repetition and memorisation find it difficult to connect new technologies to the traditional view of classroom learning.

To be effective, teachers and students need to be able to demonstrate both the 3Rs and the 4Cs in relation to an online world. Government policy has been somewhat based on the assumption that access to technology is the key to achieving success. However, simply providing students with digital technology will not lead to development of these skills. How the teacher utilises these devices in the classroom is important for improved student outcomes [ 5 ]. Dede [ 1 ] claims that we need to move from consensus about the vision of 21st century learning to a thorough understanding of and commitment to the outcomes of 21st century learning. In reality, he claims, the ability to use digital devices in no way means that students know anything about global awareness or health literacy, learning and innovation skills, life and career skills, or even media literacy skills.

There are new skills to master, and they must be understood intertwined with changing contextual skills. Trilling and Fadel [ 3 ] have an extended model, where the 4Cs are part of a skillset called learning and innovation skills. They propose two extended sets of skills: information, media and technology skills; and career and life skills (see Table 1 ).

Three components of 21st century skills [ 3 ].

It is important to keep in mind that digital technology in itself is just a tool. Keane and Blicblau [ 5 ] state that without an understanding of learning theory, the use of transformative technology may actually be ineffectual. So, to have digital competence for learning, technological skills must be understood intertwined with other sets of skills and knowledge, like learning and innovation skills (the 4Cs).

2.4 Twenty-first century skills in today’s education—are we there yet?

This has been an ongoing discussion for centuries, and yet it seems like educational practices and systems are having trouble adapting to the espoused learning theories, required formal policy, and understanding of the need for these skills [ 11 ]. Keane and Blicbau [ 5 ] criticise education for using technology in schools at the enhancement rather than the transformative stage, meaning that tasks could be completed satisfactorily without using technology, and without really changing the task. They claim we need to better provide the appropriate situations that will allow students to develop skills using the 4Cs. Lund [ 12 ] claims that schools either lack a view of technology or operate with a view of technology that is at best reductionist. A central control and management mechanism in schools is a standardised test. These tests provide some insight into students’ learning outcomes, but if used unilaterally, may also risk the development of a limited dynamic practice. As Resnick [ 13 ] writes, when preparing children for the future, how learning outcomes are assessed must be reconsidered. We need to focus on what is most important for children to learn, not what is easiest to measure and evaluate. The same concern is expressed when discussing digital technology and education. If we are only concerned with measuring the effects of the use of technology, instead of examining how digital technology changes the school culture, we risk cultivating a reductionist approach and ignoring possibilities for innovation [ 12 ]. These challenges are not exclusively related to digital practices, as school traditions for learning have in general been criticised for being pacifying. Jordet [ 14 ] writes that Norwegian schools are characterised by sedentary activities where the students are placed in the role of passive recipients of handed down knowledge. Such educational practices give students few opportunities to unfold their relational, meaning-seeking, creative, exploratory, and intentional natures. He states that for schools to be able to contribute to children mastering their lives and becoming participants in work and society, the schools’ traditions, thinking, and practices must be changed to better support students’ self-realising and active natures. Oostveen, Oshawa, and Goodman [ 15 ] found that meaningful learning is far more likely if new technologies are recognised as providing transformative opportunities.

2.5 Digital natives and digital immigrants

Elstad [ 16 ] claims that young people born after 1980 have digital capabilities and are therefore regarded as digital natives, in contrast to older teachers who are described as digital immigrants when born earlier than 1980 [ 17 ]. Digital immigrants are in governing positions in education, both as policymakers and educators. Could important stakeholders’ lack of digital technology be the reason education is not keeping up to date with new learning theories? Most teaching students referenced in this study were born in 1980 or later and are considered digital natives. Prensky describes digital natives as ‘native speakers of technology, fluent in the digital language of computers, video games, and the internet’ [ 18 ]. In this chapter, we present teaching educators’ evaluations of their students and their learning processes. In other words, so-called digital immigrants are evaluating digital natives, but it is not merely their technological skills being evaluated. As mentioned, these skills must be understood as intertwined. Students’ learning and innovation skills, like critical thinking, are intertwined with their information, media, and technology skills, and both sets of skills must be trained. Combined, it creates the need for new contextual skills. Keane, Keane, and Blicblau [ 8 ] write that simply using technology does not guarantee that deep learning will occur. The use of technology needs to align and adapt with our knowledge of learning to be able to operate in a transformative space.

A study of teaching students and their educators showed that teaching educators scored higher on professional digital competence than their students, but were more critical towards the technology in educational contexts than their students [ 2 ]. The differences between teaching educators and teaching students in this study were mostly unrelated to being digital immigrants or natives. They were connected to the complex competence gained through professional practice, regarding the interaction of content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, and technological knowledge [ 19 ].

Knowledge of technology is only one critical component of teachers’ use of technology in their practice; they also need to know how to use it for successful integration in teaching and student learning. Being critical is not necessarily about being behind and not up to date, but about taking steps aside to gain a deeper perspective. Successful teaching is not only about finding the right technology, but also the values, norms, and attitudes that reside within the academic staff in teacher training organisations [ 2 ].

One group of digital natives is defined as Generation Z. Tucker and Courts describe Generation Z as those who were born after 1990 [ 10 ]. This generation is described as ‘technically savvy, well adapted at communicating via the internet, and used to instant action due to the internet technology they have always known’. The traditional education model has, according to Tucker and Courts [ 10 ], been slow to adapt to the learning styles of these students, and researchers across the globe seem to agree on this. What seems more unclear is an understanding of what form of adaptation is needed, and how we get there. How do Generation Z’s learning styles and strategies affect learning processes in education?

2.6 Deep learning and critical thinking

Prestructural understanding is described as incompetence.

Unistructural understanding where relevant aspects can be identified.

Multistructural understanding where aspects are combined and described.

Relational understanding integrated in multistructural understandings. Being able to analyse, apply, argue, and compare aspects of one’s understanding.

Extended abstract is when the learner is able to create, formulate, generate, hypothesise, reflect, and theorise based on a relational understanding.

The higher the levels of understanding in the SOLO taxonomy, the higher the level of critical thinking, creativity, and communication. Critical thinking is the discipline of actively and skilfully conceptualising, applying, analysing, synthesising, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication [ 5 , 8 ]. All these aspects are central for 21st century skills and deep learning.

When teaching educators are asked about students’ learning processes, there is great concern regarding their ability to apply deep learning approaches. This is a complex field with a range of perceptions and understandings. Many of the teaching educators expressed conflicting views, where they addressed challenges and described how digital technology was fostering learning. In this chapter, we focus on the challenges of teaching with digital technology, and not so much on the benefits, which are many.

3.1 First phase: the survey

This study is based on an explanatory sequential design, in which a conducted survey comprises the first phase of a sequence of methods. It is a comparative study involving 64 Norwegian participants from UiT, the Arctic University of Troms, and 44 New Zealand participants from the University of Waikato, with a response rate of 83.8% and 73.4%, respectively. The survey builds on Argyris and Schön’s theory of action [ 23 ] and consists of three main constructs: professional digital competence, professional attitudes towards digital technology in education, and professional application of digital tools.

Based on their results, ten participants from each university were invited to participate in an in-depth qualitative interview.

3.2 Second phase: the interview

The first step in strategically selecting interview participants was to ensure that all participants had high digital competence , with the aim of gathering informed opinions regarding the use of technology in educational contexts. The second step was to select participants within this group of digitally skilled teaching educators based on maximum variation sampling. Maximum variation sampling is a purposeful selection of participants with different perspectives on a phenomenon [ 24 ]. As Creswell [ 24 ] explains, the maximum variation sampling strategy requires defining a category that produces different responses to paint a varied picture of the participants. The category attitudes towards digital technology was used to select five participants who responded more critically and five participants who responded more positively towards digital technology within each country ( Figures 1 and 2 ).

Selection of Norwegian teaching educators.

Selection of New Zealand teaching educators.

A total of 20 semi-structured interviews were conducted to understand and elaborate upon the results of the survey. The transcribed interviews were subsequently analysed using NVivo. One must consider the uncertainty arising when translating from one language to another. The survey, interview guide, and participant statements were translated from Norwegian to English. There are nuances when translating and analysing that may be lost, and these could have influenced the results. An ongoing collaboration with New Zealand researchers throughout the process was very helpful in concept- and language-related clarifications.

4. Deep learning and critical thinking in a digital learning environment

This builds on a comparative study, but findings showed that the challenges experienced were evident in both countries. Despite being from different sides of the globe, teaching educators from both Norway and New Zealand expressed a concern regarding students’ learning in digital contexts. Overall, 13 of the 20 interviewed teaching educators expressed a concern regarding students’ deep learning, critical thinking, and source criticism. They link the students’ lack of learning and innovation skills with their level of digital literacy skills (cf. Trilling and Fadels’ model of 21st century skills). If their learning and innovation skills are not high enough, their use of digital technology seems to be at risk of not being used at a transformative level, and in some instances limits the quality of their learning processes.

4.1 Deep learning?

4.1.1 norwegian teaching educators’ perception of students’ level of learning and learning approaches.

One of the teaching educators was quite astonished that students could be very technically competent without being able to search the web for knowledge. He explained that he had bachelor students not able to find literature, and when he demonstrated, the students were blown away as if it was magic. The ability to make use of keywords when searching for information and relevant articles was poor among students, he said, and he was surprised by the fact that they were not able to use the knowledge they ought to have attained during their education.

Another teaching educator claimed that the students’ learning approaches were superficial and based on surface learning. She explained the reason was that they had not learned or practiced deep learning processes. ‘When asked to read a text, they do not extract what is important and relevant. They just dutifully read to complete the task’. She said it was fine that they were using Google when studying, but the worry was that the content seemed to move straight from the screen and out of their mouths, bypassing the students’ own relevant reflections. Another teaching educator claimed that there was an evident difference between students who had studied media and communication at the senior level in school and those who had not. They understood that there was quite a lot of work involved in being able to utilise the digital tools in a productive way, while the rest was basing their learning processes on a copy-paste strategy. She explained that students tended to express a strategy of searching for readymade abstracts online. This was very unfortunate because the type of learning we want to promote in our teacher education is largely based on reflection, not just reproduction of readymade connections between levels of understanding.

I asked the teaching educators if it was a challenge to get students to engage in deep learning when readymade answers were easily assessable online. The teaching educator replied, ‘Of course’. He explained how he had noticed that students were often using online references instead of the syllabus. ‘It can be the same keywords as is described in our syllabus, but they would rather google it. So, that is when I question what source criticism they have applied to secure their information’. He explained that the students were not concerned with this, and uncritically used this on tests and exams. One critical question to be asked was: When using a traditional lens when assessing the students, what are we measuring as new tools and contexts for learning have transformed learning activities and outcomes? Do we have practices for evaluation that aligns with the new learning activities and intended outcome?

The same teaching educator’s experience with digital tools was that they were not always helpful. Furthermore, he felt it somewhat distorted/disabled the learning processes. This understanding was confirmed by another educator who explained that she thought of digital technology as a detour. ‘Sometimes we use digital technology like PowerPoint, when traditional methods like using a black board can work as a better tool’. She explained that students expressed their preference for educators using PowerPoint, as they found it better not having to write everything down.

4.1.2 New Zealand educators’ perception of students’ level of learning and learning approaches

In New Zealand, teaching educators were also vocal regarding this challenge. One teaching educator explained how she had noticed that students were increasingly entering search words in Google to access what she referred to as ‘easy takeaway knowledge’. The consequence, she explained, was that the students did not have to engage deeply or really work with the content. ‘Students can access it very easily, and it almost replaces thorough research, like reading academic articles,’ she said. She explained how this availability of a lot of information on the internet undermined students’ capacity to read critically, do research, and read academic journals or chapters. She elaborated that this aspect of availability, quick easy access, was undermining the development of academic capacities and serious research for assignments. A critical selection of information takes more time. ‘You have to actually digest those harder articles, and it seems to me that students read less of those […] even if they use them in their assignment it is superficial.’ Another one supported this perception and explained: ‘the easiness of technology creates a false notion of what learning is about, that you don’t have to work for knowledge. I don’t think that’s true. If you look at anyone who is good at something, they have put in a lot of work and practice. I think digital technologies might be kind of responsible for this notion of learning’.

Some research shows that students who often use technology tend to do worse when compared with students who use less of such tools [ 4 , 25 , 26 , 27 ]. Mueller and Oppenheimer [ 28 ] conducted a study in which they concluded that the use of a laptop negatively affected the students’ test results. They focused on the students’ use of laptops instead of traditional writing during lectures. They argued that note taking by hand calls for different cognitive processes than writing on a laptop. One can write faster on a laptop and take more notes. ‘Although more notes are beneficial, at least to a point, if the notes are taken indiscriminately or by mindlessly transcribing content, as is more likely the case on a laptop than when notes are taken longhand, the benefit disappears’ [ 28 ]. Writing by hand is slower, and one cannot take verbatim notes in the same way as with a laptop. Instead, students listen, digest, and summarise so that they can succinctly capture the essence of the information. Taking notes by hand forces the brain to engage in deeper learning, which fosters comprehension and retention [ 29 , 30 , 31 ]. As May points out, ‘even when technology allows us to do more in less time, it does not always foster learning’. This is in line with the teaching educator who claimed that that learning has a tendency to be too easy. When students are copying and pasting from the internet and using digital technology uncritically, they miss out on the constituting process of struggling with individual concepts and developing their 21st century skills, like reflecting, generating, being creative, theorising different concepts, and communicating independent ideas. It seemed like the teaching educators had trouble engaging students in deep learning processes as digital technology created a learning environment that fostered the strategic approach, and they experienced challenges where students attempted to maximise academic achievement with minimum effort. Perhaps they did this unaware of the consequences these approaches could have on their potential learning outcomes.

Deep learning strategies cannot be externally imposed and must be interest-led. Interest can be stimulated by placing less emphasis on curriculum content and more on contextual interpretation, in other words, the 4Cs [ 20 ]. Learning activities need to be interesting and engaging and allow critical reflection and dialogue with peers and mentors [ 32 ].

4.2 Critical thinking?

4.2.1 norwegian teaching educators’ perception of students’ level of critical thinking.

Critical thinking is vital for problem solving, but one teaching educator explained that students’ critical thinking skills were virtually non-existent, and that a lot of effort was put into trying to develop those skills alongside their digital skills. Another explained that as much as digital tools were creating opportunities in teaching, they were also creating challenges. Those challenges were related to teaching students to be critical. When is it useful to use it, and what resources are usable in academic settings?

‘The students’ ability to use and utilise digital tools shocks me, because it is very poor. They are consumers; they are not producers. The job we do here is about making them able to become producers as well, so that they can utilise the learning resources available. They need to be prepared better through high school in relation to the critical use of digital tools; there are many who have major shortcomings. I think it has gotten worse really, because it’s like if it’s not on Facebook or Google, then it does not exist. It’s a little scary. It seems that they are becoming less and less aware that it is just a person who has written this, and that information could have been written with underlying agendas. The critical reflections are something we have to work quite a lot with, and more for each new class just the three years I have been here.’ (translated from interview).

One teaching educator related the challenge to the fact that it was very easy to retrieve information, without necessarily understanding what it means. One can just type in a word or look something up, ‘then you just read exactly what comes out, because you typed in a word’. The problem, she explained, was that the students were not able to see the whole picture. It was noticed in their presentation on exams, or in things they wrote, that they did not fully understand the concepts they were writing about. Their presentation was really just reformulation of something copied from the internet, and was not coherent.

One challenge is related to what extent they understand the concepts they are writing about; another is whether the source is trustworthy. The students were warned both in writing and orally, one teaching educator explained, not to use bloggers’ opinions and secondary interpretations as a basis for academic writing. The students still handed in papers with hardly any syllabus literature or academic references. One teaching educator explained that she had been teaching for so long that she remembered well the time when education was much more book centred.

‘One had to search for and order different articles at the library, and so on. Now it is all online, and that is great. It makes things easier. From that perspective, the students have accepted the possibilities online, and that is good. Nevertheless, there is a negative side to this. I do not find that students’ source criticism has developed or increased according to this change. For instance, I do not accept references to Wikipedia in my papers, even if there is a lot sensible information written there. I encourage them to start there to get an overview. It can function as a platform for relevant references. But they have to be critical regarding what they are basing their arguments on, and the skills to do this are lacking.’

4.2.2 New Zealand teaching educators’ perception of students’ level of critical thinking

The same perception is widespread among the New Zealand teaching educators. One explained that one of the things they were focusing on was critical analysis and information literacy. He said, ‘The information is at our fingertips, but we need to really think about when we’re using it and how it’s being used, and be able to seek out robust information for what we need, and understand exactly what we’re using’. Another participant explained that she had noticed that there was an overreliance on inaccurate media rather than knowing that they could go to a particular resource and have more valid information.

‘So they can’t make those kind of judgements about what is valid and what isn’t valid to cite, because there’s been no role models for them to look at and learn from. So the whole concept to any kind of academic approach to writing, whether it is through social media or other aspects of writing, is a very big learning curve for them… they struggle.’

The same challenge was exemplified by an interaction with another teaching educator and a student.

‘One of my postgraduate students this week wanted to know what I meant by “doing critical review”, which is an instruction for an assignment. And she copied something in, and I said: Where did you get this from? She said: Oh, I got it off Mr. Google, and I’m sort of thinking is this really, you know… This is a postgraduate student who is saying that, and doing that. That is actually pretty problematic. So, you can’t make too many assumptions about where people are at.’

She explained that the biggest challenge was that the students needed to develop their critical perspectives on what they were seeing, and referred to this as ‘very patchy’. She was trying to encourage academic writing, thinking, and discussion, to make students extract knowledge and the underpinning ideas. To ‘have the students in the position where they can tell the good from the bad, the useful from the not so useful information. That has been a problem.’

One teaching educator challenged the notion of students as superficial in their learning because of digital technology; she claimed that the challenge was about the need for a different set of skills.

‘I certainly don’t feel that students are more superficial because they're using them, or because they can access Wikipedia or… I think they need to learn a different set of skills, but I think that once you have developed those skills, I think you can actually get into deeper learning, and I think digital technology enhances those skills. I think we can be superficial in whatever we do. But, it’s not because of digital technology we become superficial.’

Based on what the teaching educators explained, it seems like digital learning environments are enabling advanced multi-structural learning at such a high level that their lack of relational understanding and ability to create extended abstracts have been overlooked. Digital tools make students appear skilled in handling information as they can copy ready-made text online by googling keywords. This apparent skill in writing could be misleading for teachers in their assessment of the student. When students reach higher education, they are perceived as unskilled and uncritical, as higher education reveals a worrying lack of learning strategies that would enable them to reach deeper levels of understanding [ 22 ]. It seems that through primary and secondary education, they develop an imbalance between learning and innovation skills, and information, media, and technology skills [ 3 ]. Furthermore, this imbalance seems to create an asymmetrical reinforcing effect as digital environments make it easy to present multi-structural understanding at a high level, which can disguise the need to work with students’ ability to think critically, a central part of the higher order of thinking in the SOLO taxonomy.

5. What to think of future teacher education?

That ‘everything used to be better’ is a claim made by all generations. One teaching educator pointed out that ‘students in the past have also written things they do not understand themselves. I do not think that is new. Everyone just wants to find the easiest way to a good grade, maybe.’ However, if seeking the easiest way is a fundamental human trait, it is a challenge for teaching and learning now that knowledge is more easily accessible and presented, without engaging critical thinking and deeper cognitive processes. Wajcman [ 33 ] states that ‘Rather than simply saving time, technologies change the nature and meaning of tasks and work activities, as well as creating new material and cultural practices’. We need to adapt to these changing practices and learning activities, and adjust how we educate our students to be prepared in this new learning context. The teaching educators in this study had some suggestions.

5.1 How to adapt, and what not to adapt?

Teaching educators in this study expressed a worry regarding the digital format versus traditional books. As information is more easily accessible, students tend not to read the books and research the greater context information it was gathered from. In a book, you often have to read larger sections to get a grasp of the concepts. When googling keywords, it is easy to find a lot of ‘hits,’ and then mix a selection of copied sections. This can apparently look like a reasonable text, but it is surface learning and without deep understanding of the content. Reading a book will perhaps create deeper learning, even though the text produced is less polished than a copy-paste text from already digested sections online.

‘I mean obviously, students have different skills, but I am thinking that critical thinking skills, reading hard information is definitely undermined, that is what I am thinking. I am noticing that with students.’ (New Zealand teaching educator)

‘I do not think their digital skills have become any higher in the last five years, I think almost on the contrary. They are very good at watching videos and looking for things online, but I do not think they are good at retrieving relevant information. They are not as source-critical as I would like. We probably have a job to do to make them able and skilled.’ (Norwegian teaching educator)

The two skillsets, learning and innovation skills and digital skills, are connected. Students will not flourish in their digital skills if they are not intertwined with the 4Cs. Digital natives and Generation Z have a good technical understanding, but integrating that with the skills of being creative and critical is central to achieving deep learning processes in digital learning environments.

‘They (students) are not able to transfer those skills and understandings into their learning environment. I would say the key thing again here is that the students might come in with skills and abilities, but not necessarily pedagogical understanding of how to actually implement that in their teaching practice. I think that's the key thing that we, initial teacher education lecturers, need to really focus on, and I think we need to come up to the plate and think about the digital literacies our students have… and actually think about being responsive to those as well.’ (New Zealand teaching educator)

One teaching educator who perceived students as getting shallower in their learning was vocal about the value of structuring education around the use of books as well as digital devices.

‘I require them to read a textbook, because I think that doing lectures actually, online, is actually not a satisfactory way to get one’s point across. So instead, what I do is I weave my points across all the ways that I teach each week, so all the things I present, all of my interactions and discussion groups and… I think it works up to a point, but I'm expecting them to read the textbook quite well, really.’

To round up this chapter, I leave the final word to one of the New Zealand teaching educators who summed up most of the main findings in our study.

‘I think digital technology can be a lot more passive at times, and in terms of students, I think they just see technology as providing the answer. I think it is important to challenge them and say, “There may not be an exact answer to the question; you have to keep challenging and questioning.” I sometimes believe they have become a lot more passive, and just accepting what comes via the technology as being the one and only, or the right way of doing things. Rather than challenging. I think it is due to the way the world has shifted. Where it is a lot easier for them to go online and get something, rather than physically having to go somewhere and think about it, like a library or hunt out a book, or… Everything is right there. Therefore, I think that passive learning most probably happens a lot more because of the technology, because they can just access wherever they are. In terms of preparation, coming through from high school, yes, I think there are some definite skills in terms of being critical of information that needs to be taught, prior to coming into higher education. Particularly in the sense of questioning the information they are accepting. I believe some disadvantages are that most probably the students do not challenge enough, they just accept technology, and I think that might be the way technology has been introduced over the years. “Here it is, here is the answer.” “If you don’t know, just google it, and you’ll get something.” So that passive, not questioning, not challenging… I think is a real disadvantage.’

6. Conclusion

It seems that students’ development of critical thinking and deep learning is challenged in digital learning environments. A high level of ICT literacy seems to challenge the lens traditionally used to assess students’ capabilities and needs. Furthermore, ICT skills and learning and innovation skills seem to mutually influence each other, as low learning and innovation skills make the students’ ICT skills stagnate when assessing their critical use of online resources. We find that learning in a digital environment complicates the development of critical thinking, but we also believe that this can be corrected by redefining what it takes to prepare students for the future. For a long time, the focus has been on developing their digital skills. However, it would seem like we have not paid enough attention to what the digital transformation requires of interwoven aspects related to learning in digital societies. We need to develop the traditions in education, where the focus has been on technical skills more than on interdisciplinary competencies. If we are able to better secure and develop students’ abilities to be critical and creative, and to collaborate and communicate, digital learning environments could act as learning resources for all students. Without this skillset, there is a risk of students using digital resources in a way that prohibits deep learning and the development of higher order thinking. Based on the input of the teaching educators, it is essential that education is structured in a way that a lack of the 4Cs is noticed by educators and teachers, and that learning is structured to develop such skills. It is unfortunate if students acquire a high degree of information, media, and technology skills, as digital immigrants do, without the learning and innovation skills required to manoeuvre constructively in the overwhelming and easily accessible landscape of digital learning. Education needs to structure learning that challenges students to connect different skillsets, so new contextual skills and knowledge are developed. Just like critical thinking in digital spaces.

Acknowledgments

The publication charges for this article have been funded by a grant from the publication fund of UiT The Arctic University of Norway.

• 1. Dede C. Comparing Frameworks for 21 st Century Skills. In: Bellanca J, Brandt R, editors. 21 st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn. Bloomington: Solution Tree Press; 2010. p. 51-76
• 2. Thorvaldsen S, Madsen SS. Perspectives on the tensions in teaching with technology in Norwegian teacher education analysed using Argyris and Schön’s theory of action. Educ Inf Technol 2020;25: 5281-5299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-020-10221-4
• 3. Trilling B, Fadel, C. 21 st Century Skills. Learning for Life in our Time. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass; 2009
• 4. OECD, 2010
• 5. Keane T, Blicblau AS. (Trans)formation through educational technologies. Paper presented at the 29th Annual Australasian Society for Computers in Learning in Tertiary Education (ASCILITE 2012), Wellington, New Zealand; 2012
• 6. Crockett L, Jukes I, Churches A. Literacy is not Enough: 21 st Century Fluencies for the Digital Age. Australia: Hawker Brownlow Education; 2012
• 7. Bloom BS, Engelart MD, Furst EJ, Hill WH, Krathwohl DR. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: The Classification of Educational Goals; Handbook I: Cognitive Domain. New York: Longmans, Green; 1956
• 8. Keane T, Keane WF, Blicblau AS. Beyond traditional literacy: Learning and transformative practices using ICT. Educ Inf Technol 2016;21: 769-781. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-014-9353-5
• 9. Voogt J, Pareja Roblin N. A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21 st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies 2012; 44(3): 299-321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2012.668938
• 10. Tucker J, Courts B. Utilizing the internet to facilitate classroom learning. Journal of College Teaching & Learning 2010;7(7)
• 11. Madsen SS, Thorvaldsen S, Archard S. Teacher educators’ perceptions of working with digital technologies. Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy 2018;13(3). https://doi.org/10.18261/issn.1891-943x-2018-03-04
• 12. Lund A. Hva skal vi med IKT i skolen? Bedre skole. 2011
• 13. Resnick. Life long kindergarten. 2018
• 14. Jordet A. Anerkjennelse. I bedre skole. 2020
• 15. Oostveen RV, Muirhead W, Goodman, WM. Tablet PCs and reconceptualizing leaning with technology: A case study in higher education. Interactive Technology and Smart Education 2011;8(2): 78-93
• 16. Elstad E. Educational technology—expectations and experiences: An introductory overview. In E. Elstad (Ed.), Digital expectations and experiences in education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers; 2016. p.3-28
• 17. Prensky M. Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon 2001;9(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
• 18. Prensky M. Listen to the natives. Educational Leadership 2005;63(4): 8-13
• 19. Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for integrating technology in teachers’ knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108(6), 1017-1054
• 20. Warburton K. Deep learning and education for sustainability. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education 2003;4(1): 44-56. https://doi.org/10.1108/14676370310455332
• 21. Tait H, Entwistle N. Identifying students at risk through ineffective study strategies. High Educ 1996; 31: 97-116. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00129109
• 22. Biggs J, Collis K. Evaluating the quality of learning: The SOLO taxonomy. New York: Academic Press; 1982
• 23. Argyris C, Schön DA Organisational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley; 1978
• 24. Creswell JW Qualitative inquiry & research design: choosing among five approaches (3rd ed. ed.). Los Angeles: Sagel; 2013
• 25. Beland LP, Murphy R. Centre for Economic Performance, Discussion Paper No 1350. III Communication: Technology, Distraction & Student Performance. London: Centre for Economic Performance, London School of Economics and Political Science; 2013
• 26. Carter SP, Greenberg K, Walker M. Working Paper #2016.02 The Impact of Computer Usage on Academic Performance: Evidence from a Randomised Trial at the United States Military Academy; 2016. Retrieved from SEII School effectiveness & inequality initiative: https://seii.mit.edu/wpcontent/uploads/2016/05/SEII-Discussion-Paper-2016.02-Payne-Carter-Greenberg-and-Walker-2.pdf
• 27. Elstad E. Introduction. In E. Elstad (Ed.), Digital Expectations and Experiences in Education (pp. VII-X). Rotterdam: Sense Publishers; 2016
• 28. Mueller PA, Oppenheimer DM. The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science 2014;25(6): 1159-1168
• 29. May C. A Learning Secret: Don't Take Notes with a Laptop. Retrieved from https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-learning-secret-don-t-take-notes-with-a-laptop/
• 30. Askvik EO, van der Weel R, van der Meer A. The importance of cursive handwriting over typewriting for learning in the classroom: A high-density EEG study of 12-year-old children and young adults. Frontiers in Psychology 2020. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01810
• 31. van der Meer A, van der Weel R. Only three fingers write, but the whole brain works: A high-density EEG study showing advantages of drawing over typing for learning. Frontiers of Psychology 2017; https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00706
• 32. Archer-Kuhn, Wiederman and Chalifoux, 2020. Student engagement and deep learning in higher education: Reflections on inquiry-based learning on our group study program course in the UK. Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement 2020; 24(2): 107
• 33. Wajcman J. Life in the fast lane? Towards a sociology of technology and time. The British Journal of Sociology 2008; 59(1)

© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Continue reading from the same book

Teacher education in the 21st century.

Published: 16 June 2021

By Catherine Adhiambo Amimo

853 downloads

By Dr Joshua C. Elliott and Dr Craig S. Tunks

662 downloads

By Rachel Farrell and Ciaran Sugrue

802 downloads

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• J Adv Med Educ Prof
• v.2(3); 2014 Jul

The role of critical thinking skills and learning styles of university students in their academic performance

Zohre ghazivakili.

1 Emergency medical services department, Paramedical school, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran;

ROOHANGIZ NOROUZI NIA

2 Educational Development Center, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran;

FARIDE PANAHI

3 Nursing and midwifery school, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran;

MEHRDAD KARIMI

4 Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Public Health School, Tehran, Iran;

HAYEDE GHOLSORKHI

5 Medical school, Alborz University of Medical Sciences, Karaj, Iran;

ZARRIN AHMADI

6 Amirkabir University of Technology(Polytechnic), Tehran, Iran

Introduction: The Current world needs people who have a lot of different abilities such as cognition and application of different ways of thinking, research, problem solving, critical thinking skills and creativity. In addition to critical thinking, learning styles is another key factor which has an essential role in the process of problem solving. This study aimed to determine the relationship between learning styles and critical thinking of students and their academic performance in Alborz University of Medical Science.

Methods: This cross-correlation study was performed in 2012, on 216 students of Alborz University who were selected randomly by the stratified random sampling. The data was obtained via a three-part questionnaire included demographic data, Kolb standardized questionnaire of learning style and California critical thinking standardized questionnaire. The academic performance of the students was extracted by the school records. The validity of the instruments was determined in terms of content validity, and the reliability was gained through internal consistency methods. Cronbach's alpha coefficient was found to be 0.78 for the California critical thinking questionnaire. The Chi Square test, Independent t-test, one way ANOVA and Pearson correlation test were used to determine relationship between variables. The Package SPSS14 statistical software was used to analyze data with a significant level of p<0.05.

Results: Our findings indicated the significant difference of mean score in four learning style, suggesting university students with convergent learning style have better performance than other groups. Also learning style had a relationship with age, gender, field of study, semester and job. The results about the critical thinking of the students showed that the mean of deductive reasoning and evaluation skills were higher than that of other skills and analytical skills had the lowest mean and there was a positive significant relationship between the students’ performance with inferential skill and the total score of critical thinking skills (p<0.05). Furthermore, evaluation skills and deductive reasoning had significant relationship. On the other hand, the mean total score of critical thinking had significant difference between different learning styles.

Conclusion: The results of this study showed that the learning styles, critical thinking and academic performance are significantly associated with one another. Considering the growing importance of critical thinking in enhancing the professional competence of individuals, it's recommended to use teaching methods consistent with the learning style because it would be more effective in this context.

Introduction

The current world needs people with a lot of capabilities such as understanding and using different ways of thinking, research, problem solving, critical thinking and creativity. Critical thinking is one of the aspects of thinking that has been accepted as a way to overcome the difficulties and to facilitate the access to information in life ( 1 ).

To Watson and Glizer, critical thinking is a combination of knowledge, attitude, and performance of every individual. They also believe that there are some skills of critical thinking such as perception, assumption recognition deduction, interpretation and evaluation of logical reasoning. They argue that the ability of critical thinking, processing and evaluation of previous information with new information result from inductive and deductive reasoning of solving problems. Watson and Glizer definition of critical thinking has been the basis of critical thinking tests that are widely used to measure the critical thinking today ( 2 ).

World Federation for Medical Education has considered critical thinking one of the medical training standards so that in accredited colleges this subject is one of the key points. In fact, one of the criteria for the accreditation of a learning institute is the measurement of critical thinking in its students ( 3 ).

In addition to critical thinking, learning style, i.e. the information processing method, of the learners, is an important key factor that has a major role in problem solving. According to David Kolb’s theory, learning is a four-step process that includes concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization and active experimentation. This position represents two dimensions: concrete experience versus abstract thinking, and reflective observation to active experimentation. These dimensions include four learning styles: divergent, convergent, assimilate, and accommodate. According to Kolb and Ferry, the learner needs four different abilities to function efficiently: Learning styles involve several variables such as academic performance of learner, higher education improvement; critical thinking and problem solving ( 4 ).

Due to the importance of learning styles and critical thinking in students' academic performance, a large volume of educational research has been devoted to these issues in different countries. Demirhan, Besoluk and Onder (2011) in their study on critical thinking and students’ academic performance from the first semester to two years later have found that contrary to expectations the students’ critical thinking level reduced but the total mean of students’ scores increased. This is due to the fact that the students are likely to increase adaptive behavior with environment and university and reduce the stress during their education ( 1 ).

In another study over 330 students in Turkey, the students who had divergent learning style, had lower scores in critical thinking in contrast with students who have accommodator learning style ( 5 ).

Also Mahmoud examined the relationship between critical thinking and learning styles of the Bachelor students with their academic performance in 2012. In this study all the nursing students of the university in the semesters four, six and eight were studied. The results did not show any significant relationship between critical thinking and learning styles of nursing students with their academic performance ( 6 ).

Another research by Nasrabadi in 2012 showed a positive relationship between critical thinking attitudes and student's academic achievement. The results showed that there was a significant difference between the levels of critical thinking of assimilating and converge styles. Also converging, diverging, assimilating and accommodating styles had the highest level of critical thinking, respectively ( 4 ). Among other studies we can refer to Sharma’s study in 2011 whose results suggested a relationship between the academic performance and learning styles ( 7 ).

Today university students should not only think but also should think differently and should not only remember the knowledge in their mind but also should research the best learning style among different learning styles. Therefore, the study on the topic of how the students think and how they learn has received great emphasis in recent years. In this regard, with the importance of the subject, researchers attempted to doa research in this area to determine the relationship between critical thinking and learning styles with academic performance of the students at Alborz University of Medical Sciences.

This study is a descriptive-analytic, cross sectional study and investigates the relationship between critical thinking and learning styles with students’ academic performance of Alborz University of Medical Science in 2012. After approval and permission from university’s authorities and in coordination with official faculties, the critical thinking and learning styles questionnaire was given to the undergraduate students in associate degree, bachelor, medicine (second semester and after that). The total number of participants in the study was 216 students with different majors such as medical, nursing and midwifery, and health and medical emergency students. The tool to collect the data was a two-part questionnaire of Kolb's learning styles and California's critical thinking skills test (form B). The Kolb's questionnaire has two parts. The first part asks for demographic information and the second part includes 12 multiple choice questions. The participants respond to the questions with regard to how they learn, and the scores of respondents are ranked from 1 to 4 in which 4 is most consistent with the participants’ learning style 3 to some extent, 2 poorly consistent and 1 not consistent To find the participants’ learning styles, the first choice of all 12 questions were added together and this was repeated for other choices. Thus, four total scores for the four learning styles were obtained, the first for concrete experience learning style, the second for reflective observation of learning style, the third for abstract conceptualization learning style and the forth for active experimentation learning style. The highest score determined the learning style of the participant. The California critical thinking skills test (form B) includes 34 multiple choice questions with one correct answer in five different areas of critical thinking skills, including evaluation, inference, analysis, inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. The answering time was 45 minutes and the final score is 34 and the achieved score in each section of the test varies from 0 to 16. In the evaluation section, the maximum point is 14, in analysis section 9, in inference section 11, in inductive reasoning 16 and in deductive reasoning the maximum point was 14. So there were 6 scores for each participant, which included a critical thinking total score and 5 score for critical thinking skills. Dehghani, Jafari Sani, Pakmehr and Malekzadeh found that the reliability of the questionnaire was 78% in a research. In the study of Khalili et al., the confidence coefficient was 62% and construct validity of all subscales with positive and high correlation were reported between 60%-65%. So this test was reliable for the research. Collecting the information was conducted in two stages. In the first stage, the questionnaires were given to the students and the objectives and importance of the research were mentioned. In the next stage, the students' academic performance was reviewed. After data collection, the data were coded and analyzed, using the SPSS 14 ( SPSS Inc, Chicago, IL, USA) software. To describe the data, descriptive statistics were used such as mean and standard deviation for continues variables and frequency for qualitative variables. Chi Square test, Independent t-test, one way ANOVA and Pearson correlation test were used to determine the relationship between variables at a significant level of p<0.05.

Research hypothesis

• There is a relationship between Alborz University of Medical Sciences students’ learning styles and their demographic information. 
• There is a relationship between Alborz University of Medical Sciences students’ critical thinking and their demographic information. 
• There is a relationship between Alborz University of Medical Sciences students’ academic performance and their demographic information. 
• There is a relationship between Alborz University of Medical Sciences students’ learning styles and their academic performance. 
• There is a relationship between Alborz University of Medical Sciences students’ learning styles and their critical thinking. 

225 questionnaires were distributed of which 216 were completely responded (96%). The age range of the participants was from 16 to 45 with the mean age of (22.44±3.7). 52.8% of participants (n=114) were female, 83.3% (n=180) were single, 30.1% of participants’ (n=65) major was pediatric anesthesiology of OR, 35.2% of participants (n=76) were in fourth semester, 74.5% (n=161) were unemployed and 48.6 % (n=105) had Persian ethnicity.

The range of participants’ average grade points, which were considered as their academic performance, were from 12.51 to 19.07 with a mean of (16.75±1.3). According to Kolbs' pattern, 42.7% (n=85) had the convergent learning style (the maximum percentage) followed by 33.2 % (n= 66) with the assimilating style and only 9.5%, (n= 19) with the accommodating style (the minimum percentage).

Among the 5 critical thinking skills, the maximum mean score belonged to deductive reasoning skill (3.38±1.58) and the minimum mean score belonged to analysis skill (1.67±1.08).

Table 1 shows the frequency distribution and demographic variables and the academic performance of the students. According to the Chi-square (Χ 2 ) p-value, there was a significant relationship between gender and learning style (p=0.032), so that nearly 50 percent of males had the assimilating learning style and nearly 52 percent of the females had the convergent learning style.

The relationship between demographic variable and student’s academic performance with learning styles

The relationship between employment, major and semester of studying with the learning style was significant at a p-value of 0.049, 0.006, 0.009 and 0.001, respectively. The mean and standard deviation of age and students' academic performance in the four learning styles are reported in Table 1 .

Using the one way analysis of variance (One way ANOVA) and comparing the mean age of four groups, we found a significant relation between age and academic performance with learning style (p=0.049).

The students with convergent learning style had a better academic performance than those with other learning styles and in the performance of those with the assimilating learning style the weakest.

Table 2 shows the relationship between the total score of critical thinking skills and each of the demographic variables and academic performance. The results of the t-test and one way ANOVA variance analysis are reported to investigate the relationship between each variable with skills below the mean standard deviation.

Relationships between CCT Skills and demographic variables Using t-test and ANOVA. Pearson Correlation coefficient between age and Student's performance with CCT Skills was reported

* Significant in surface 0.05 

** Significant in surface 0.01

Based on the t-test and ANOVA, p-value of t and F, the mean of total score of critical thinking skills had only significant relationship with students’ major (p=0.020). Also a significant relationship was found between the major of students and gender with inference skill; semester of study with deductive reasoning skill, and ethnicity with 2 skills of inference and deductive reasoning (p<0.05).

Also regarding the relationship between age and the student academic performance with each of the critical thinking skills, the Pearson correlation coefficient results indicated a significant positive relationship but a negative relationship between age and analysis skill, i.e. with the increase of age, the score of analysis skill was reduced (p<0.05). Academic performance of the students had a direct significant relationship with critical thinking total score and inference skill; the more the score, the better the academic performance of students (p<0.05).

Table 3 shows the mean and standard deviation of learning styles score in the 4 groups of learning style. Using ANOVA one way ANOVA, the relationship between learning style and critical thinking skills and the comparison of the mean score for each skill in four styles are reported in the last column of the Table 3 .

The Relationship between critical thinking styles with learning styles

Based on the p-value of ANOVA, the mean of evaluation skill and inductive reasoning skill had a significant difference and the relationship between these two skills with learning style was significant (p<0.05). Also the mean of critical thinking’s total score was significantly different in the four groups and the relationship between total score with learning style was significant, too (p<0.05).

The mean and confidence interval of university students’ performance in four learning  styles

The mean and confidene interval of critical thinking skills

The study findings showed that the popular learning style among the students was the convergent style followed by the assimilating style which is consistent with Kolb's theory stating that medical science students usually have this learning style ( 8 ). This result was consistent with the results of other studies ( 9 , 10 ). In Yenice's study in which the student of training teacher were the target of the project, the most frequent learning styles were divergent and assimilating styles and these differences originate from the different target group of study in 2012 ( 11 ).

This study showed a significant relationship between learning style and gender, age, semester and employment. Meyari et al. did not find any significant relationship between learning style, age and gender of the freshman but for the fifth semester students, a significant relationship with age and gender was found ( 10 ). Also in Yenice's study, no relationship with learning style, gender, semester and age was found.

Furthermore, in the first semester divergent style, in the second semester assimilating style and in the third and fourth semester divergent style were accounted for the highest percentage. Also in the group age of 17-20 years the assimilating style and the age of 21-24 years the divergent style were dominant styles ( 11 ).

In the present study, it was found a significant positive relationship between convergent learning style and academic performance. Also in the study of Pooladi et al. the majority of the students had convergent style and they also found a significant relationship between learning style, total mean score and the mean of practical courses ( 12 ). Nasrabadi et al. found that students with the highest achievement were those with convergent style with a significant difference with those with divergent style ( 4 ). But the results are inconsistent to Meyari et al.’s ( 10 ).

In this study, the obtained mean score from the critical thinking questionnaire was (7.15±2.41) that was compared with that in the study of Khalili and Hoseinzadeh which was to validate and make reliable the critical thinking skills questionnaire of California (form B) in the Iranian nursing students; the mean of total score was about the 11th percentile of this study ( 13 ).

In other words, the computed score for critical thinking of the students participating was lower than 11 score that is in the 50th percentile and of course is lower than normal range.

Hariri and Bagherinezhad had shown that the computed score for Bachelor and Master students of Health faculty was also lower than the norm in Iran ( 14 ). Also Mayer and Dayer came to a similar conclusion in critical thinking skill in the Agricultural university of Florida’s students in 2006 ( 15 ).

But in Gharib et al.’s study, the total score of critical thinking test among the freshman and senior of Health-care management was in normal range ( 16 ). Wangensteen et al., found that the critical thinking skills of the newest graduate nursing students were relatively high in Sweden in 2010 ( 17 ).

In this study, students of all levels (Associate, Bachelor and PhD) with various fields of study participated but other studies have been limited to certain graduate courses that may explain the differences in levels of special critical thinking skills score in this study. In this study we found a significant relationship between total score of critical thinking and major of the students. This result is consistent with Serin et al. ( 18 ).

It was found a significant relationship between major of participants, gender and inference skill, semester and deductive reasoning skill, ethnicity and both inference and deductive reasoning skills.

In the Yenice's study significant relationship between critical thinking, group of age, gender and semester was seen ( 11 ). In Wangensteen et al.’s ( 17 ) study in the older age group, the level of critical thinking score increased. In Serin et al.’s ( 18 ) study the level of communication skills in girls was better than that in boys. And also a significant relationship was found between critical thinking and academic semester, but in Mayer and Dayer’s study no significant relationship between critical thinking levels and gender was found ( 4 , 15 ).

The results also showed that the total score of critical thinking and analytical skills of students and their performance had a significant relationship. Nasrabady et al.’s study also showed that there was a positive relationship between critical thinking reflection attitude and academic achievement ( 4 ). This is contradictory with what Demirhan, Bosluk and Ander found ( 6 , 15 ).

The results of the relationship between learning style and critical thinking indicated that the relationship between evaluation and inductive reasoning was significant to learning style (p<0.05). The relationship of critical thinking total score with learning style was also significant (p<0.05). Thus the total score for those with the conforming style of critical skills was more than that with other styles. But in the subgroup of inference skills, those with the convergent style had a higher mean than those with other styles.

Yenice found a negative relationship between critical thinking score and divergent learning style and a positive relation between critical thinking score and accommodating style ( 11 ).

Siriopoulos and Pomonis in their study compared the learning style and critical thinking skills of students in two phases: at the beginning and end of education and came to this conclusion that the learning style of students changed in the second phase.

For example, the divergent, convergent and accommodating styles languished and the assimilating style (combination of abstract thinking and reflective observation) was noticeably strengthened. However, those with converging learning style had higher levels of critical thinking.

The level of students’ critical thinking was lower in all international standards styles. Perhaps it was because of widely used teacher-centered teaching methods (lectures) in that university ( 19 ).

The results in the study of Nasrabady et al. showed that there was a significant difference between the level of learners’ critical thinking and divergent and assimilating styles ( 4 ).

Those with converging, diverging, assimilating and accommodating styles had the highest level of critical thinking, respectively.

Also there was a positive significant relationship between the reflective observation method and critical thinking and also a negative significant relationship between the abstract conceptualization method and critical thinking ( 4 ). But in another study that Mahmud has done in 2012, he did not find any significant relationship between learning style, critical thinking and students’ performance ( 6 ).

The results of this study showed that the students’ critical thinking skills of this university aren't acceptable. Also learning styles, critical thinking and academic performance have significant relationship with each other. Due to the important role of critical thinking in enhancing professional competence, it is recommend using teaching methods which are consistent with the learning styles.

Acknowledgment

This study is based on a research project that was approved in Research Deputy of Alborz University of Medical sciences. We sincerely appreciate all in Research Deputy of Alborz University of Medical sciences who supported us financially and morally and all students and colleagues who participated in this study.

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

References:

Advertisement

T/E design based learning: assessing student critical thinking and problem solving abilities

• Published: 07 July 2020
• Volume 32 , pages 267–285, ( 2022 )

Cite this article

• Susheela Shanta   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-2387-6318 1 &
• John G. Wells   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9730-577X 2  

3007 Accesses

33 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The research presented is of an investigation into the critical thinking (CT) and problem solving (PS) abilities used by high school technology and engineering (T/E) students when attempting to achieve a viable solution for an authentic engineering design-no-make challenge presented outside the context of the classroom in which their STEM content was first learned. Five key abilities were identified and assessed as indicators of a student’s ability to problem solving within the context of authentic engineering design. Findings from data analyses indicates T/E students who acquire STEM content through T/E design base learning demonstrate significantly better CT and PS abilities in designing an engineering solution compared with a hypothesized mean for students receiving their STEM content via traditional classroom instruction. Furthermore, student abilities associated with selecting and utilizing relevant science and math content and practices, and communicating logical reasoning in their design solution were found to be critical to successful problem solving.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Exploring the factors that influence the career decision of STEM students at a university in South Africa

Ethel Ndidiamaka Abe & Vitallis Chikoko

Opportunities and Challenges of STEM Education

Study choice and career development in stem fields: an overview and integration of the research.

Cathy van Tuijl & Juliette H. Walma van der Molen

Atman, C. J., & Bursic, K. M. (1998). Verbal protocol analysis as a method to document engineering student design processes. Journal of Engineering Education, 87, 121–132.

Google Scholar  

Ball, J. L., & Christensen, B. T. (2019). Advancing an understanding of design cognition and design metacognition: Progress and prospects. Design Studies, 65, 35–59.

Barak, M., & Assal, M. (2018). Robotics and STEM learning: students’ achievements in assignments according to the P3 Task Taxonomy—practice, problem solving, and projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education , 28 , 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9385-9 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Barak, M., & Assal, M. (2018). Robotics and STEM learning: Student achievements in assignments according to the P3 task taxonomy-practice, problem solving and projects. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28, 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-016-9385-9 .

Barlex, D. (2003). Considering the impact of design and technology on society—The experience of the Young Foresight project. In J. R. Dakers & M. J. Devries (Eds.), The place of design and technology in the curriculum PATT conference 2003 (pp. 142–147). Glasgow: University of Glasgow.

Barlex, D. M., & Trebell, D. (2008). Design-without-make: Challenging the conventional approach to teaching and learning in a design and technology classroom. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 18 (2), 119–138.

Becker, K., & Mentzer, N. (2015). Engineering design thinking: High school students’ performance and knowledge. In Interactive collaborative learning (ICL), 2015 international conference on (pp. 5–12).

Bransford, J. D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R. R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience and school . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 32–42.

Brown, A. L., & Kane, M. J. (1988). Preschool children can learn to transfer: Learning to learn and learning from example. Cognitive Psychology, 20 (4), 493–523. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(88)90014-X .

Budny, D., LeBold, W., & Bjedov, G. (1998). Assessment of the impact of freshman engineering courses. Journal of Engineering Education, 87 (4), 405–411.

Cajas, F. (2001). The science/technology interaction: Implications for science literacy. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 38 (7), 715–729.

Chi, T. H., Feltovich, P. J., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5 (2), 121–152.

Cumming, G. (2014). The new statistics: Why and how. Psychological Science, 25 (1), 7–29.

Daugherty, J., Mentzer, N., & Kelley, T. (2011, April). Technology design and engineering design: Is there a difference? Paper presented at IAJC-ASEE joint international conference, Harford, CT .

Docktor, J. (2009). Development and validation of a physics problem solving assessment rubric (doctoral dissertation). University of Minnesota, Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota.

Docktor, J., & Heller, K. (2009). Robust assessment instrument for student problem solving. In Proceedings of the NARST 2009 annual meeting . Retrieved from http://groups.physics.umn.edu/physed/People/Docktor/research.htm#Research_Documents .

Docktor, J. L., Dornfeld, J., Frodermann, E., Heller, K., Hsu, L., Jackson, K. A., et al. (2016). Assessing student written problem solutions: A problem-solving rubric with application to introductory physics. Physical Review Physics Education Research , 12 , 301–318.

Efron, B. (1994). Missing data, imputation and the bootstrap. Journal of American Statistics Association, 89, 463–479.

Felder, R. M., & Brent, R. (2016). Teaching and learning STEM: A practical guide . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Festinger, L. (1962). A theory of cognitive dissonance (Vol. 2). Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Fortus, D., Dershimer, R. C., Krajcik, J., Marx, R. W., & Mamlok-Naaman, R. (2004). Design based science and student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 41 (10), 1081–1110.

Gagne, R. M., Wager, W. W., Golas, K. C., & Keller, J. M. (2004). Principles of instructional design (5th ed.). Independence: Cengage Learning.

Gero, J. S., & Kan, J. (2016). Empirical results from measuring design creativity: Use of an augmented coding scheme in protocol analysis. Paper presented at the 4th international conference on design creativity, Atlanta, Georgia .

Hayes, J. R. (1989). The complete problem solver (2nd ed.). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Heller, J. I., & Reif, F. (1984). Prescribing effective human problem solving processes: Problem description in physics. Cognition and Instruction, 1 (2), 177–216.

Heywood, J. (2005). Engineering education: Research and development in curriculum and instruction . Hoboken: Wiley.

Huber, M., & Hutchings, P. (2004). Integrative learning: Mapping the terrain . New York: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and Association of American Colleges and Universities.

Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and Ill-structured problem solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45 (1), 65–94.

Jonassen, D. H. (2000). Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48 (4), 63–85.

Jonassen, D. H., Strobel, J., & Lee, C. B. (2006). Everyday problem solving in engineering: Lessons for engineering educators. Journal of Engineering Education, 95 (2), 1–14.

Jonsson, A., & Svingby, G. (2007). The use of scoring rubrics: Reliability, validity and educational consequences. Educational Research Review, 2, 130–144.

Lammi, M. (2011). Characterizing high school students’ systems thinking in engineering design through the function - behavior - structure (FBS) framework. PhD Thesis, Utah State University, Logan, Utah.

Martinez, M. E. (1998). What is problem solving? The Phi Delta Kappan, 79 (8), 605–609.

Middleton, H. (2005). Creative thinking, values and design and technology education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 15, 61–71.

Moskal, B. M., & Leydens, J. A. (2000). Scoring rubric development: Validity and reliability. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 7, 71–81.

National Assessment Governing Board (NAGB). (2009). Science framework for the 2009 national assessment of educational progress . Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM). (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics: Executive summary. Retrieved from https://www.nctm.org/uploadedFiles/Standards_and_Positions/PSSM_ExecutiveSummary.pdf .

National Research Council (NRC). (2009). Engineering in K-12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects . Washington, DC: The National Academies.

Newell, A., & Simon, H. A. (1972). Human problem solving . Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc.

New Assessment Tools for Cross-Curricular Competencies in the Domain of Problem Solving (NATCCC). (2000). Final report of project ERB-SOE2- CT98-2042 . EUROPEAN Commission, L-2926 Luxembourg.

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: for states, by states . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Nicholas, C., & Oak, A. (2020). Make and break details: The architecture of design-build education. Design Studies, 66, 35–53.

Ormrod, J. E. (2012). Human learning . Boston: Pearson.

Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1989). Are cognitive skills context bound? Educational Researcher, 18 (1), 16–25.

Polya, G. (1973). How to solve it . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1945).

Polya, G. (1980). On solving mathematical problems in high school. In S. Krulik & R. Reys (Eds.), Problem-solving in school mathematics: 1980 yearbook (pp. 1–2). Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.

Pope, D., Brown, M., & Miles, S. (2015). Overloaded and underprepared: Strategies for stronger schools and healthy successful kids . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Puente, S. M. G., Eijck, M. V., & Jochems, W. (2013). Exploring the effects of design-based learning characteristics on teachers and students. International Journal of Engineering Education , 29 (2), 491–503.

Puntambekar, S., & Kolodner, J. L. (2005). Towards implementing distributed scaffolding: Helping students learn science from design. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42 (2), 185–217.

Reeff, J. P. (1999). New assessment tools for cross - curricular competencies in the domain of problem solving. Retrieved from http://www.ppsw.rug.nl/~peschar/TSE.pdf , on January 21, 2017.

Shavelson, R., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Li, M., & Ayala, C. C. (2003). Evaluating new approaches to assessing learning . Los Angeles: National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing.

Shavelson, R. J., Ruiz-Primo, M. A., & Wiley, E. W. (2005). Windows into the mind. Higher Education, 49 (4), 413–430.

Steif, P. S., & Dantzler, J. A. (2005). A statics concept inventory: Development and psychometric analysis. Journal of Engineering Education, 94 (4), 363–371.

Stemler, S. E. (2004). A comparison of consensus, consistency, and measurement approaches to estimating interrater reliability. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation, 9, 80–89.

Webb, N. (1997). Research monograph number 6: Criteria for alignment of expectations and assessments on mathematics and science education . Washington, DC: CCSSO.

Wells, J. G. (2010). Research on teaching and learning in science education: Potentials in technology education. In P. A. Reed & J. E. LaPorte (Eds.), 59th Yearbook, 2010: Research in technology education (pp. 192–217). Reston: Council on Technology Teacher Education.

Wells, J. G. (2013). Integrative STEM education at Virginia Tech: Graduate preparation for tomorrow’s leaders. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 72 (5), 28–35.

Wells, J. G. (2016a). Efficacy of the technological/engineering design approach: Imposed cognitive demands within design based biotechnology instruction. Journal of Technology Education, 27 (2), 4–20.

Wells, J. G. (2016b). PIRPOSAL model of integrative STEM education: Conceptual and pedagogical framework for classroom implementation. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 75, 12–19.

Wells, J. G. (2016c). I-STEM ED exemplar: Implementation of the PIRPOSAL© model. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 76, 16–23.

Wells, J. (2017). Design to understand: Promoting higher order thinking through T/E design based Learning. In Proceedings of the technology education New Zealand and international conference on technology education - Asia Pacific (pp. 325–339). TEMS Education Research Center, University of Waikato, New Zealand. ISBN: 978-0-9951039-0-0. https://tenzcon.org/wpcontent/uploads/2017/10/TENZICTE-2017-Proceedings.pdf .

Wells, J. G. (2019). STEM education: The potential of technology education. Chapter 11, in M. Daugherty, & V. Carter (Eds.), The most influential papers presented at the Mississippi Valley technology teacher education conference. Council on Technology and Engineering Teacher Education, 62nd Yearbook, Ball State University, Muncie, IN.

Wells, J., & Ernst, J. (2012/2015). Integrative STEM education . Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Tech: Invent the Future, School of Education. Retrieved from www.soe.vt.edu/istemed/ .

White, B. Y., & Frederiksen, J. R. (1998). Inquiry, modeling, and metacognition: Making science accessible to all students. Cognition and Instruction, 16 (1), 3–118.

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design . Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Governor’s STEM Academy, Roanoke, VA, USA

Susheela Shanta

Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA, USA

John G. Wells

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Susheela Shanta .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Shanta, S., Wells, J.G. T/E design based learning: assessing student critical thinking and problem solving abilities. Int J Technol Des Educ 32 , 267–285 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09608-8

Download citation

Accepted : 26 June 2020

Published : 07 July 2020

Issue Date : March 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09608-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Design based
• Authentic problems
• Critical thinking
• Problem solving
• Student abilities
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Why your students don't do the readings

Dr Sandris Zeivots

Most higher education students do not engage with course readings, but new research suggests that can be fixed by rethinking how and why they are assigned.

Published in the Academy of Management Learning and Education , the research proposes six aspects to consider when seeking meaningful student engagement with readings: usefulness, enjoyment, quantity, access, intent and integration with the course.

Dr Sandris Zeivots said the research was inspired by his work in course co-design at the University of Sydney Business School .

“ Existing research  suggests 70 to 80 percent of students do not engage with course readings. That’s for a whole host of reasons, from time constraints and language barriers to a lack of understanding of the purpose of readings,” Dr Zeivots said.

“Anecdotally, lecturers know most students don’t comply with the system, but we act as though the fault is with the students. This research started by flipping that assumption and asking: what are we trying to achieve with readings? And, how can we better design them so that students will want to engage?”

Dr Zeivots worked with International Business course coordinator Professor Vikas Kumar to redesign the readings in the popular Master of Commerce subject at the Business School.

After examining the existing literature and developing their framework, Dr Zeivots and his co-author Ms Courtney Shalavin worked with Professor Kumar, tutors and students over the course of three consecutive semesters – a process that led to half the readings being changed.

They introduced one to two ‘must-read’ pages for each reading that contained the key points, and an unmarked online discussion question to guide students’ approach to each reading and to engage their critical thinking.

Surveys revealed just over half (54 percent) of students reported reading the must-read pages, and engagement with readings increased slightly over the semester, rather than decreased with student fatigue.

Professor Kumar said the discussion questions allowed tutors to engage students on the concepts raised by the readings without the pressure of a grade.

“Involving students in the co-design process produced invaluable feedback. For example, we learned students wanted to learn more about fintech, so we introduced more fintech case studies that aligned with our core teaching concepts.”

Declaration

This research was conducted as part of the Connected Learning at Scale project at the University of Sydney Business School. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Media contact

Harrison vesey.

• +61 479 198 803
• [email protected]

Related articles

Museum as classroom.

The chance to handle museum objects is bringing study to life for students from across the disciplines, with object-based learning preparing for a second semester.

Teaching the joy of learning

Our core purpose remains critical for universities of the future.

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Applying Critical Thinking
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Critical thinking refers to deliberately scrutinizing and evaluating theories, concepts, or ideas using reasoned reflection and analysis. The act of thinking critically involves moving beyond simply understanding information, but also questioning its source, its production, and its presentation in order to expose potential bias or researcher subjectivity [i.e., being influenced by personal opinions and feelings rather than by external determinants ] . Applying critical thinking to investigating a research problem involves actively challenging basic assumptions and questioning the choices and potential motives underpinning how the author designed the study, conducted the research, and arrived at particular conclusions or recommended courses of action.

Mintz, Steven. "How the Word "Critical" Came to Signify the Leading Edge of Cultural Analysis." Higher Ed Gamma Blog , Inside Higher Ed, February 13, 2024; Van Merriënboer, Jeroen JG and Paul A. Kirschner. Ten Steps to Complex Learning: A Systematic Approach to Four-component Instructional Design . New York: Routledge, 2017.

Thinking Critically

Applying Critical Thinking to Research and Writing

Professors like to use the term critical thinking; in fact, the idea of being a critical thinker permeates much of higher education writ large. In the classroom, the idea of thinking critically is often mentioned by professors when students ask how they should approach a research and writing assignment [other approaches your professor might mention include interdisciplinarity, comparative, gendered, global, etc.]. However, critical thinking is more than just an approach to research and writing. It is an acquired skill associated with becoming a complex learner capable of discerning important relationships among the elements of, as well as integrating multiple ways of understanding applied to, the research problem. Critical thinking is a lens through which you holistically interrogate a topic.

Given this, thinking critically encompasses a variety of inter-related connotations applied to writing a college-level research paper:

• Integrated and Multi-Dimensional . Critical thinking is not focused on any one element of research, but instead, is applied holistically throughout the process of identifying the research problem, reviewing the literature, applying methods of analysis, describing the results, discussing their implications, and, if appropriate, offering recommendations for further research. It permeates the entire research endeavor from contemplating what to write to proofreading the final product.
• Humanizes the Research . Thinking critically can help humanize what is being studied by extending the scope of your analysis beyond the traditional boundaries of prior research. The scope of prior research could have involved, for example, sampling homogeneous populations, considering only certain factors related to the investigation of a phenomenon, or limiting the way authors framed or contextualized their study. Critical thinking supports opportunities to incorporate the experiences of others into the research, leading to a more inclusive and representative examination of the topic.
• Non-Linear . This refers to analyzing a research problem in ways that do not rely on sequential decision-making or rational forms of reasoning. Creative thinking relies on intuitive judgement, flexibility, and unconventional approaches to investigating complex phenomena in order to discover new insights, connections, and potential solutions . This involves going back and modifying your thinking as new evidence emerges , perhaps multiple times throughout the research process, and then drawing conclusions from multiple perspectives.
• Normative . This is the idea that critical thinking can be used to challenge prior assumptions in ways that advocate for social justice, equity, and resilience that can lead to research having a more transformative and expansive impact. In this respect, critical thinking can be viewed as a method for breaking away from dominant culture norms so as to produce research outcomes that illuminate previously hidden aspects of exploitation and injustice.
• Power Dynamics . Research in the social sciences often includes examining aspects of power that focus on how it operates, how it can be acquired, and how it can be maintained, thereby shaping social relations, organizations, institutions, and the production and maintenance of knowledge. Thinking critically can reveal how societal structures perpetuate power and influence in ways that marginalizes and oppresses specific groups or communities within the contexts of history , politics, economics, culture, and other factors.
• Reflection . A key component of critical thinking is practicing reflexivity; the act of turning ideas and concepts back onto yourself in order to reveal and clarify your own beliefs, assumptions, and perspectives. Being critically reflexive is important because it can reveal hidden biases you may have that could unintentionally influence how you interpret and validate information. The more reflexive you are, the better able and more comfortable you are in opening yourself up to new modes of understanding.
• Rigorous Questioning . Thinking critically is guided by asking questions that lead to addressing complex concepts, principles, theories, or problems more effectively, and in so doing, help distinguish what is known from from what is not known [or that may be hidden]. Critical thinking involves deliberately framing inquiries not only as hypotheses, but as a way to apply systematic, disciplined,  in-depth forms of questioning concerning the research problem and in relation to your positionality as a researcher.
• Social Change . An overarching goal of critical thinking applied to research and writing is to seek to identify and challenge sources of inequality, exploitation, oppression, and marinalization that contributes to maintaining the status quo within institutions of society. This can include entities, such as, schools, courts, businesses, government agencies, or religious organizations, that have been created and maintained through certain ways of thinking within the dominant culture.

Critical thinking permeates the entire research and writing process. However, it applies especially to the literature review and discussion sections of your paper . In reviewing the literature, it is important to reflect upon specific aspects of a study, such as, determining if the research design effectively establishes cause and effect relationships or provides insight into explaining why certain phenomena do or do not occur, assessing whether the method of gathering data or information supports the objectives of the study, and evaluating if the assumptions used t o arrive at a specific conclusion are evidence-based and relevant to addressing the research problem. That said, an assessment of whether a source is helpful to supporting your arguments, but also, that this assessment involves critically analyzing how the research challenges conventional approaches to research that perpetuate inequalities or hides the voices of others.

Critical thinking applies to the discussion section of your paper because this is where you internalize the results of your study and explain its value and significance. This involves more than summarizing findings and describing outcomes. It includes reflecting on their importance and providing reasoned explanations why your paper helps fill a gap in the literature or expands knowledge and understanding in ways that inform practice. Critical reflection helps you think introspectively about your own beliefs concerning the significance of the findings, but in ways that avoid biased judgment and decision making.

Using Questions to Encourage Critical Thinking

[coming soon]

Behar-Horenstein, Linda S., and Lian Niu. “Teaching Critical Thinking Skills in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature.” Journal of College Teaching and Learning 8 (February 2011): 25-41; Bayou, Yemeserach and Tamene Kitila. "Exploring Instructors’ Beliefs about and Practices in Promoting Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Writing Classes." GIST–Education and Learning Research Journal 26 (2023): 123-154; Butcher, Charity. "Using In-class Writing to Promote Critical Thinking and Application of Course Concepts." Journal of Political Science Education 18 (2022): 3-21; Loseke, Donileen R. Methodological Thinking: Basic Principles of Social Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2012; Mintz, Steven. "How the Word "Critical" Came to Signify the Leading Edge of Cultural Analysis." Higher Ed Gamma Blog , Inside Higher Ed, February 13, 2024; Hart, Claire et al. “Exploring Higher Education Students’ Critical Thinking Skills through Content Analysis.” Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (September 2021): 100877; Lewis, Arthur and David Smith. "Defining Higher Order Thinking." Theory into Practice 32 (Summer 1993): 131-137; Sabrina, R., Emilda Sulasmi, and Mandra Saragih. "Student Critical Thinking Skills and Student Writing Ability: The Role of Teachers' Intellectual Skills and Student Learning." Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences 17 (2022): 2493-2510. Suter, W. Newton. Introduction to Educational Research: A Critical Thinking Approach. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2012; Van Merriënboer, Jeroen JG and Paul A. Kirschner. Ten Steps to Complex Learning: A Systematic Approach to Four-component Instructional Design. New York: Routledge, 2017; Vance, Charles M., et al. "Understanding and Measuring Linear–Nonlinear Thinking Style for Enhanced Management Education and Professional Practice." Academy of Management Learning and Education 6 (2007): 167-185; Yeh, Hui-Chin, Shih-hsien Yang, Jo Shan Fu, and Yen-Chen Shih. "Developing College Students’ Critical Thinking through Reflective Writing." Higher Education Research & Development 42 (2023): 244-259.

• << Previous: Academic Writing Style
• Next: Choosing a Title >>
• Last Updated: Apr 19, 2024 11:16 AM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• myTU for Students
• Towson Online Services
• OneCard/TU ID Card
• Academic Calendar
• University Store
• Graduate Programs
• Application
• Request Information
• Take a Campus Tour
• Housing & Dining
• Tuition info
• Financial Aid
• Family Network
• Family Weekend
• Undergraduate Admissions
• Emergency Text Alerts
• Tiger Connect
• Alumni Events
• Alumni Benefits
• TU Magazine
• Request a Transcript
• Office of Alumni Relations
• myTU for Faculty & Staff
• BTU-Partnerships at Work for Greater Baltimore
• Entrepreneurship at TU
• Center for Applied & Economic Research
• Center for GIS
• Regional Economic Studies Institute
• Dr. Nancy Grasmick Leadership Institute
• Sponsorship & Advertising Opportunities
• Hiring TU Students
• Calendars & Events
• Directories
• Facts & Figures
• Mission & Strategic Plan
• Rankings & Achievements
• Administration
• Commitment to Diversity & Inclusion
• Accessibility
• Sustainability
• Consumer Information & Accreditation
• Undergraduate Studies
• Graduate Studies
• International Initiatives
• Colleges & Departments
• Off-Campus Locations
• Extended & Professional Education
• Summer Session
• Academic Services & Resources
• Commencement
• Graduate Admissions
• Tuition & Expenses
• Counselor & Advisor Resources
• Visit Campus
• Student Involvement
• Student Services & Resources
• Health & Wellbeing
• Safety & Security
• New Student & Family Programs
• Anchor Mission
• BTU-Partnerships for Greater Baltimore
• Entrepreneurship
• Strategic Partnerships & Applied Research
• Community Programs & Resources
• Arts & Culture
• Campus Landmarks & Features
• Planning Events & Conferences at TU
• Admissions & Aid
• Student Life
• Campus & Community

Information For

Critical Thinking

Identify and respond to needs based upon an understanding of situational context and logical analysis of relevant information.

Sample Behaviors

• Make decisions and solve problems using sound, inclusive reasoning and judgment
• Gather and analyze information from a diverse set of sources and individuals to fully understand a problem
• Proactively anticipate needs and prioritize action steps
• Accurately summarize and interpret data with an awareness of personal biases that may impact outcomes
• Effectively communicate actions and rationale, recognizing the diverse perspectives and lived experiences of stakeholders
• Multi-task well in a fast-paced environment

Over the course of  your educational experience at TU, you can gain proficiency with critical thinking through some of the following methods:

• Attend presentations, interactive conferences, and seminars around campus
• Collaborate with other students in and outside of class (join a   student club or organization — could be academic, honors, social or athletic)
• Join the   Undergraduate Research Club
• Practice brainstorming skills
• Attend and explore on- and off-campus conference opportunities
• Seek out opportunities that encourage abstract thinking (Club, organization,   Study Abroad & Away Office   program, interactive seminar)
• Actively participate in solving issues around the community and get involved with community engagement projects
• Find part-time or full-time work opportunities  (find on- and off-campus work through   Handshake  — any experience helps)
• Work as a research assistant to a faculty member
• Take advantage of programs and resources offered by the Office of Research and Creative Inquiry
• Practice and improve research skills (visit the Cook Library help desk for research tips)
• Complete   Internships   and other experiential learning opportunities, such as project-based micro-internships and Forage job simulations (schedule an appointment with the Career Center)
• Complete an independent study
• Conduct an extensive research project- explore a problem in your field and/or community and generate solutions
• Lead a discussion or seminar on campus
• Apply to present at  the annual  Research & Creative Inquiry Forum
• Take on a challenge through the MindSumo crowd sourcing platform
• Participate in a Hack-a-thon

Develop your skills

Linkedin learning.

Develop your critical thinking skills by completing these free LinkedIn Learning courses. Select the course title below, click “Sign in,” and use your TU email to get started.

• Improving Your Thinking
• Developing a Critical Thinking Mindset
• Critical Thinking for More Effective Communication
• Critical Thinking for Better Judgment and Decision-Making
• Making Key Decisions as a Manager
• Making Better Decisions by Thinking in Bets
• Active Listening: The Secret to Effective Communication
• Solving Business Problems
• Prioritizing Effectively as a Leader
• Using Questions to Foster Critical Thinking and Curiosity

Use the following list of action verbs to describe related activities:

• Adapt; adjust; analyze; conclude; consolidate; clarify; critique; determine; diagnose; evaluate; examine; fix; gather; identify; improve; increase; innovate; inspect; investigate; observe; organize; recommend; reflect; research; resolve; review; streamline; summarize; test

Sample Resume Bullet Points

• Researched global poverty to compile presentations for weekly meetings
• Examined client applications to ascertain eligibility for micro-loans
• Organized Honors Speaker Series which incorporates involvement of Honors College alumni and local business representatives
• Analyzed monthly analytical reports, identified areas for improvement and made recommendations based on findings

For additional resume assistance, visit the Career Center's   Resumes   page or schedule an  appointment . 

Interview Questions

Be prepared to answer common critical thinking and problem solving interview questions including:

• Describe a time when you had to make a decision with incomplete information. What did you do?
• Tell me about a time when you made a suggestion to improve the work in an organization or company.
• Tell me about a time when you were particularly effective at prioritizing tasks and completing a project on schedule. 
• Describe a time when you came up with an innovative or creative solution to a problem.
• Describe a situation where you had many alternatives to consider. How did you choose one? 
• Tell me about a time when you had to analyze information and make a recommendation. What was your thought process and how did you support your recommendation? 
• Describe a time when you were caught off guard by an unforeseen problem or obstacle.

Apr 19, 2024

10 Qualities Students Can Learn From Teachers to Become Successful

​passion for learning​.

​Teachers often demonstrate a genuine passion for their subjects, inspiring students to approach learning with enthusiasm and curiosity.​

Image Source: Canva

Effective Communication​

​Teachers communicate complex ideas in a way that is understandable to students, teaching them the importance of clear and concise communication in all areas of life.​

Resilience​

​Teachers face challenges daily and model resilience by adapting to changes, overcoming obstacles, and persisting in their efforts, teaching students the importance of perseverance in achieving goals.​

Time Management​

​Teachers often juggle multiple responsibilities, including lesson planning, grading, and extracurricular activities, teaching students the importance of prioritizing tasks and managing their time efficiently.​

Critical Thinking​

​Teachers encourage students to analyze information critically, question assumptions, and develop evidence-based arguments, fostering a habit of critical thinking that is essential for success in academics and professional life.​

Collaboration

​Teachers often work in teams, sharing ideas and resources to improve student learning outcomes, teaching students the value of collaboration and teamwork in achieving common goals.​

You may also like

Adaptability​.

​Teachers continuously adapt their teaching methods to meet the diverse needs of their students, teaching them the importance of being flexible and adaptable in a rapidly changing world.​

​Teachers demonstrate empathy by understanding and addressing the individual needs of their students, teaching them the importance of empathy in building meaningful relationships and resolving conflicts.​

​Teachers provide constructive feedback to help students improve their skills and knowledge, teaching them the importance of seeking feedback and using it to grow and develop.​

​Lifelong Learning

Teachers model a commitment to lifelong learning by pursuing professional development opportunities and staying updated on current trends and research in education, inspiring students to embrace learning as a lifelong journey.​

Thanks For Reading!

Next: These Indian universities have campuses abroad