critical thinking student wheel

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.

Eight Instructional Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking

• Share article

(This is the first post in a three-part series.)

The new question-of-the-week is:

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

This three-part series will explore what critical thinking is, if it can be specifically taught and, if so, how can teachers do so in their classrooms.

Today’s guests are 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.

You might also be interested in The Best Resources On Teaching & Learning Critical Thinking In The Classroom .

Current Events

Dara Laws Savage is an English teacher at the Early College High School at Delaware State University, where she serves as a teacher and instructional coach and lead mentor. Dara has been teaching for 25 years (career preparation, English, photography, yearbook, newspaper, and graphic design) and has presented nationally on project-based learning and technology integration:

There is so much going on right now and there is an overload of information for us to process. Did you ever stop to think how our students are processing current events? They see news feeds, hear news reports, and scan photos and posts, but are they truly thinking about what they are hearing and seeing?

I tell my students that my job is not to give them answers but to teach them how to think about what they read and hear. So what is critical thinking and how can we integrate it into the classroom? There are just as many definitions of critical thinking as there are people trying to define it. However, the Critical Think Consortium focuses on the tools to create a thinking-based classroom rather than a definition: “Shape the climate to support thinking, create opportunities for thinking, build capacity to think, provide guidance to inform thinking.” Using these four criteria and pairing them with current events, teachers easily create learning spaces that thrive on thinking and keep students engaged.

One successful technique I use is the FIRE Write. Students are given a quote, a paragraph, an excerpt, or a photo from the headlines. Students are asked to F ocus and respond to the selection for three minutes. Next, students are asked to I dentify a phrase or section of the photo and write for two minutes. Third, students are asked to R eframe their response around a specific word, phrase, or section within their previous selection. Finally, students E xchange their thoughts with a classmate. Within the exchange, students also talk about how the selection connects to what we are covering in class.

There was a controversial Pepsi ad in 2017 involving Kylie Jenner and a protest with a police presence. The imagery in the photo was strikingly similar to a photo that went viral with a young lady standing opposite a police line. Using that image from a current event engaged my students and gave them the opportunity to critically think about events of the time.

Here are the two photos and a student response:

F - Focus on both photos and respond for three minutes

In the first picture, you see a strong and courageous black female, bravely standing in front of two officers in protest. She is risking her life to do so. Iesha Evans is simply proving to the world she does NOT mean less because she is black … and yet officers are there to stop her. She did not step down. In the picture below, you see Kendall Jenner handing a police officer a Pepsi. Maybe this wouldn’t be a big deal, except this was Pepsi’s weak, pathetic, and outrageous excuse of a commercial that belittles the whole movement of people fighting for their lives.

I - Identify a word or phrase, underline it, then write about it for two minutes

A white, privileged female in place of a fighting black woman was asking for trouble. A struggle we are continuously fighting every day, and they make a mockery of it. “I know what will work! Here Mr. Police Officer! Drink some Pepsi!” As if. Pepsi made a fool of themselves, and now their already dwindling fan base continues to ever shrink smaller.

R - Reframe your thoughts by choosing a different word, then write about that for one minute

You don’t know privilege until it’s gone. You don’t know privilege while it’s there—but you can and will be made accountable and aware. Don’t use it for evil. You are not stupid. Use it to do something. Kendall could’ve NOT done the commercial. Kendall could’ve released another commercial standing behind a black woman. Anything!

Exchange - Remember to discuss how this connects to our school song project and our previous discussions?

This connects two ways - 1) We want to convey a strong message. Be powerful. Show who we are. And Pepsi definitely tried. … Which leads to the second connection. 2) Not mess up and offend anyone, as had the one alma mater had been linked to black minstrels. We want to be amazing, but we have to be smart and careful and make sure we include everyone who goes to our school and everyone who may go to our school.

As a final step, students read and annotate the full article and compare it to their initial response.

Using current events and critical-thinking strategies like FIRE writing helps create a learning space where thinking is the goal rather than a score on a multiple-choice assessment. Critical-thinking skills can cross over to any of students’ other courses and into life outside the classroom. After all, we as teachers want to help the whole student be successful, and critical thinking is an important part of navigating life after they leave our classrooms.

‘Before-Explore-Explain’

Patrick Brown is the executive director of STEM and CTE for the Fort Zumwalt school district in Missouri and an experienced educator and author :

Planning for critical thinking focuses on teaching the most crucial science concepts, practices, and logical-thinking skills as well as the best use of instructional time. One way to ensure that lessons maintain a focus on critical thinking is to focus on the instructional sequence used to teach.

Explore-before-explain teaching is all about promoting critical thinking for learners to better prepare students for the reality of their world. What having an explore-before-explain mindset means is that in our planning, we prioritize giving students firsthand experiences with data, allow students to construct evidence-based claims that focus on conceptual understanding, and challenge students to discuss and think about the why behind phenomena.

Just think of the critical thinking that has to occur for students to construct a scientific claim. 1) They need the opportunity to collect data, analyze it, and determine how to make sense of what the data may mean. 2) With data in hand, students can begin thinking about the validity and reliability of their experience and information collected. 3) They can consider what differences, if any, they might have if they completed the investigation again. 4) They can scrutinize outlying data points for they may be an artifact of a true difference that merits further exploration of a misstep in the procedure, measuring device, or measurement. All of these intellectual activities help them form more robust understanding and are evidence of their critical thinking.

In explore-before-explain teaching, all of these hard critical-thinking tasks come before teacher explanations of content. Whether we use discovery experiences, problem-based learning, and or inquiry-based activities, strategies that are geared toward helping students construct understanding promote critical thinking because students learn content by doing the practices valued in the field to generate knowledge.

An Issue of Equity

Meg Riordan, Ph.D., is the chief learning officer at The Possible Project, an out-of-school program that collaborates with youth to build entrepreneurial skills and mindsets and provides pathways to careers and long-term economic prosperity. She has been in the field of education for over 25 years as a middle and high school teacher, school coach, college professor, regional director of N.Y.C. Outward Bound Schools, and director of external research with EL Education:

Although critical thinking often defies straightforward definition, most in the education field agree it consists of several components: reasoning, problem-solving, and decisionmaking, plus analysis and evaluation of information, such that multiple sides of an issue can be explored. It also includes dispositions and “the willingness to apply critical-thinking principles, rather than fall back on existing unexamined beliefs, or simply believe what you’re told by authority figures.”

Despite variation in definitions, critical thinking is nonetheless promoted as an essential outcome of students’ learning—we want to see students and adults demonstrate it across all fields, professions, and in their personal lives. Yet there is simultaneously a rationing of opportunities in schools for students of color, students from under-resourced communities, and other historically marginalized groups to deeply learn and practice critical thinking.

For example, many of our most underserved students often spend class time filling out worksheets, promoting high compliance but low engagement, inquiry, critical thinking, or creation of new ideas. At a time in our world when college and careers are critical for participation in society and the global, knowledge-based economy, far too many students struggle within classrooms and schools that reinforce low-expectations and inequity.

If educators aim to prepare all students for an ever-evolving marketplace and develop skills that will be valued no matter what tomorrow’s jobs are, then we must move critical thinking to the forefront of classroom experiences. And educators must design learning to cultivate it.

So, what does that really look like?

Unpack and define critical thinking

To understand critical thinking, educators need to first unpack and define its components. What exactly are we looking for when we speak about reasoning or exploring multiple perspectives on an issue? How does problem-solving show up in English, math, science, art, or other disciplines—and how is it assessed? At Two Rivers, an EL Education school, the faculty identified five constructs of critical thinking, defined each, and created rubrics to generate a shared picture of quality for teachers and students. The rubrics were then adapted across grade levels to indicate students’ learning progressions.

At Avenues World School, critical thinking is one of the Avenues World Elements and is an enduring outcome embedded in students’ early experiences through 12th grade. For instance, a kindergarten student may be expected to “identify cause and effect in familiar contexts,” while an 8th grader should demonstrate the ability to “seek out sufficient evidence before accepting a claim as true,” “identify bias in claims and evidence,” and “reconsider strongly held points of view in light of new evidence.”

When faculty and students embrace a common vision of what critical thinking looks and sounds like and how it is assessed, educators can then explicitly design learning experiences that call for students to employ critical-thinking skills. This kind of work must occur across all schools and programs, especially those serving large numbers of students of color. As Linda Darling-Hammond asserts , “Schools that serve large numbers of students of color are least likely to offer the kind of curriculum needed to ... help students attain the [critical-thinking] skills needed in a knowledge work economy. ”

So, what can it look like to create those kinds of learning experiences?

Designing experiences for critical thinking

After defining a shared understanding of “what” critical thinking is and “how” it shows up across multiple disciplines and grade levels, it is essential to create learning experiences that impel students to cultivate, practice, and apply these skills. There are several levers that offer pathways for teachers to promote critical thinking in lessons:

1.Choose Compelling Topics: Keep it relevant

A key Common Core State Standard asks for students to “write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence.” That might not sound exciting or culturally relevant. But a learning experience designed for a 12th grade humanities class engaged learners in a compelling topic— policing in America —to analyze and evaluate multiple texts (including primary sources) and share the reasoning for their perspectives through discussion and writing. Students grappled with ideas and their beliefs and employed deep critical-thinking skills to develop arguments for their claims. Embedding critical-thinking skills in curriculum that students care about and connect with can ignite powerful learning experiences.

2. Make Local Connections: Keep it real

At The Possible Project , an out-of-school-time program designed to promote entrepreneurial skills and mindsets, students in a recent summer online program (modified from in-person due to COVID-19) explored the impact of COVID-19 on their communities and local BIPOC-owned businesses. They learned interviewing skills through a partnership with Everyday Boston , conducted virtual interviews with entrepreneurs, evaluated information from their interviews and local data, and examined their previously held beliefs. They created blog posts and videos to reflect on their learning and consider how their mindsets had changed as a result of the experience. In this way, we can design powerful community-based learning and invite students into productive struggle with multiple perspectives.

3. Create Authentic Projects: Keep it rigorous

At Big Picture Learning schools, students engage in internship-based learning experiences as a central part of their schooling. Their school-based adviser and internship-based mentor support them in developing real-world projects that promote deeper learning and critical-thinking skills. Such authentic experiences teach “young people to be thinkers, to be curious, to get from curiosity to creation … and it helps students design a learning experience that answers their questions, [providing an] opportunity to communicate it to a larger audience—a major indicator of postsecondary success.” Even in a remote environment, we can design projects that ask more of students than rote memorization and that spark critical thinking.

Our call to action is this: As educators, we need to make opportunities for critical thinking available not only to the affluent or those fortunate enough to be placed in advanced courses. The tools are available, let’s use them. Let’s interrogate our current curriculum and design learning experiences that engage all students in real, relevant, and rigorous experiences that require critical thinking and prepare them for promising postsecondary pathways.

Critical Thinking & Student Engagement

Dr. PJ Caposey is an award-winning educator, keynote speaker, consultant, and author of seven books who currently serves as the superintendent of schools for the award-winning Meridian CUSD 223 in northwest Illinois. You can find PJ on most social-media platforms as MCUSDSupe:

When I start my keynote on student engagement, I invite two people up on stage and give them each five paper balls to shoot at a garbage can also conveniently placed on stage. Contestant One shoots their shot, and the audience gives approval. Four out of 5 is a heckuva score. Then just before Contestant Two shoots, I blindfold them and start moving the garbage can back and forth. I usually try to ensure that they can at least make one of their shots. Nobody is successful in this unfair environment.

I thank them and send them back to their seats and then explain that this little activity was akin to student engagement. While we all know we want student engagement, we are shooting at different targets. More importantly, for teachers, it is near impossible for them to hit a target that is moving and that they cannot see.

Within the world of education and particularly as educational leaders, we have failed to simplify what student engagement looks like, and it is impossible to define or articulate what student engagement looks like if we cannot clearly articulate what critical thinking is and looks like in a classroom. Because, simply, without critical thought, there is no engagement.

The good news here is that critical thought has been defined and placed into taxonomies for decades already. This is not something new and not something that needs to be redefined. I am a Bloom’s person, but there is nothing wrong with DOK or some of the other taxonomies, either. To be precise, I am a huge fan of Daggett’s Rigor and Relevance Framework. I have used that as a core element of my practice for years, and it has shaped who I am as an instructional leader.

So, in order to explain critical thought, a teacher or a leader must familiarize themselves with these tried and true taxonomies. Easy, right? Yes, sort of. The issue is not understanding what critical thought is; it is the ability to integrate it into the classrooms. In order to do so, there are a four key steps every educator must take.

• Integrating critical thought/rigor into a lesson does not happen by chance, it happens by design. Planning for critical thought and engagement is much different from planning for a traditional lesson. In order to plan for kids to think critically, you have to provide a base of knowledge and excellent prompts to allow them to explore their own thinking in order to analyze, evaluate, or synthesize information.
• SIDE NOTE – Bloom’s verbs are a great way to start when writing objectives, but true planning will take you deeper than this.

QUESTIONING

• If the questions and prompts given in a classroom have correct answers or if the teacher ends up answering their own questions, the lesson will lack critical thought and rigor.
• Script five questions forcing higher-order thought prior to every lesson. Experienced teachers may not feel they need this, but it helps to create an effective habit.
• If lessons are rigorous and assessments are not, students will do well on their assessments, and that may not be an accurate representation of the knowledge and skills they have mastered. If lessons are easy and assessments are rigorous, the exact opposite will happen. When deciding to increase critical thought, it must happen in all three phases of the game: planning, instruction, and assessment.

TALK TIME / CONTROL

• To increase rigor, the teacher must DO LESS. This feels counterintuitive but is accurate. Rigorous lessons involving tons of critical thought must allow for students to work on their own, collaborate with peers, and connect their ideas. This cannot happen in a silent room except for the teacher talking. In order to increase rigor, decrease talk time and become comfortable with less control. Asking questions and giving prompts that lead to no true correct answer also means less control. This is a tough ask for some teachers. Explained differently, if you assign one assignment and get 30 very similar products, you have most likely assigned a low-rigor recipe. If you assign one assignment and get multiple varied products, then the students have had a chance to think deeply, and you have successfully integrated critical thought into your classroom.

Thanks to Dara, Patrick, Meg, and PJ 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

Critical Thinking Student Wheel available from Mentoring Minds | review by The Curriculum Corner | This wheel is a great tool for lesson planning using Bloom’s Taxonomy!

• Our Mission

An Inside Look at Webb’s Depth of Knowledge

The creator of the well-known framework explains how it helps teachers evaluate the cognitive complexity of a task or assignment—and clears up some misconceptions about it.

Question: What is the 37th digit in the number pi? (No calculator or googling allowed!)

Coming up with the 37th digit of pi is a very difficult task. But it’s not a complex task. In our classrooms, it’s important that we know what makes a task complex versus difficult so that we can effectively address the rigor or depth of K–12 academic expectations. One of us (Norman Webb) developed the Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework in the late 1990s precisely for this purpose: to categorize expectations and tasks according to the complexity of engagement required.

DOK provides a common language that can be used to determine the degree to which the complexity of cognitive engagement, explicit in academic standards, is being translated into appropriate learning opportunities and assessment tasks. Because today’s academic standards emphasize conceptual understanding and authentic application of disciplinary practice, evaluating complexity of engagement is more important than ever. This article explores how teachers and administrators can use DOK to work more efficiently, effectively, and purposefully when they design curriculum.

DOK IN THE CLASSROOM 

In general, lessons and courses are anchored in academic standards. Even for coursework that is not standards-based, teachers design curriculum based on learning objectives. To use DOK in your practice, start by looking at the standards (or other learning objectives) that anchor a lesson. What is the complexity of cognitive engagement required for success? When interpreting a standard, you can use the full DOK definitions for a specific content area. These general key questions can also help:

DOK 1: Is the focus on recall of facts or reproduction of taught processes?

DOK 2: Is the focus on relationships between concepts and ideas or using underlying conceptual understanding?

DOK 3: Is the focus on abstract inference or reasoning, nonroutine problem-solving, or authentic evaluative or argumentative processes that can be completed in one sitting?

DOK 4: Is the focus at least with the complexity of DOK 3, but iterative, reflective work and extended time are necessary for completion?

Evaluating the complexity of an expectation or task. When using DOK to evaluate educational materials, think about the degree of processing of concepts and skills required. For example, recalling the names of the state capitals is a low-complexity task. Retrieving bits of information from memory requires a minimal degree of processing of concepts. Either it’s in there and can be accessed… or it’s not. Similarly, correctly executing a multistep protocol is a simple task: There are specific steps to follow, and the protocol is either completed correctly… or not. As another example, we may ask students to use the standard algorithm to add two three-digit numbers or to follow specific, ordered steps to properly focus a microscope.

In contrast, tasks that require abstract reasoning and nonroutine problem-solving are highly complex. For example, tasks that involve analyzing multiple alternative solutions with consideration of constraints and trade-offs or building original evidential arguments require significantly more processing of concepts and skills than do tasks that must be completed via recall.

For example, we may ask students to develop an engineering design solution to a problem they identify. We could have students write or present a research-based argument about what time school should start and end, taking into account different perspectives of students, families, and staff. Overall, complexity of cognitive engagement depends on multiple factors, including the degree of processing required, the degree of intricacies (interconnected parts), and the extent to which the work is concrete versus abstract.

Appropriate use of DOK differentiates difficulty from complexity. Although complex tasks (like analyzing alternative solutions or building an evidential argument) are likely to be difficult, many difficult tasks (like correctly following a multistep protocol or memorizing state capitals) are not complex. Overall, difficulty depends on multiple factors, including the amount of effort required, the opportunity for error, and the opportunity to learn. “What does a fossa eat?” is a very simple question. But for someone who has never had the opportunity to learn what a fossa eats, it is also a very difficult question—unanswerable, in fact.

Use of DOK can help ensure that tasks that are intended to be complex are, indeed, complex (and not just difficult). It is also important to recognize when difficulty is inherent to a task. For example, long division and use of standard English punctuation may be difficult, but they are also tasks that students are typically expected to master. 

AVOIDING MISINTERPRETATIONS OF DOK

As DOK has become a widely used tool in the United States and beyond, a variety of  misinterpretations have inevitably emerged. For example, a frequently reproduced and highly misleading graphic (known to some as “the DOK wheel” and to others as the “wheel of misfortune”) attributes verbs to the different levels of DOK. This graphic suggests that a verb can be used to determine the complexity of engagement required by an expectation or task.

For instance, according to this graphic, the verb identify indicates a DOK 1. That could surely work in some cases—imagine having students “identify the circle in a group of shapes.” But now imagine having students “identify a strategy for addressing attendance issues using data from multiple sources.” Obviously, the complexity of these two tasks is significantly different despite using the same verb. To determine complexity, we need to look beyond the verb and consider the full scope of an expectation or task.

Another common misrepresentation is seen in progression or stair-step models that depict DOK as a hierarchy like Bloom’s or Maslow’s. But learning does not necessarily progress “up” from simple to complex. Consider mathematics: We often have students work conceptually with an idea before we introduce a more simple, rote approach. For example, we typically have students work with manipulables and form conceptual constructs of the idea of area before we introduce the equation l x w = a .

If you have ever used project-based learning (PBL), you have likely seen that a student may dive into work on a DOK 3 problem only to discover a simultaneous need for a DOK 1 task, like looking up a definition or taking a measurement. In fact, the use of a complex problem to motivate a need-to-know for lower-complexity goals is a core rationale for use of PBL.

Misrepresenting learning as progressing from simple to complex can be harmful if students who struggle with low-complexity tasks are held back from the rich, engaging, complex educational opportunities that we know promote learning. Ensuring access to complex learning opportunities for all students is foundational to the equity-focused goals of standards-based systems.

Incorporating DOK into practice can start by using the simple questions included here to ensure clearly and commonly understood learning targets. Then, the same process can be applied to the questions, tasks, and prompts we use in lessons and assessments. By defining and naming the DOK of the different components, we can work with greater focus and  intentionality to check that the complexity of engagement explicit within those learning targets is carried through in the classroom.

And, by the way, the 37th digit of pi is 4.

Webb's Depth of Knowledge

May 11, 2023

Explore Webb's Depth of Knowledge, a framework to analyze cognitive demand. Understand its four levels and how to apply them in educational settings.

Main, P (2023, May 11). Webb's Depth of Knowledge. Retrieved from https://www.structural-learning.com/post/webbs-depth-of-knowledge

What is Webb's Depth of Knowledge?

Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) is a system designed to categorize activities based on the complexity of thinking required to complete them. It serves as a framework for educators to create more cognitively engaging and challenging tasks . DOK is essential for educators since it helps them to identify the cognitive demand of activities and make informed decisions on how to design effective learning experiences for their students.

The four levels of DOK range from simple recall to conceptual understanding and metacognition .

Webb's Depth of Knowledge is an essential tool for educators aiming to create an engaging and challenging learning experience for their students. It helps educators to design tasks that require students to engage in higher-order thinking and promote the complexity of thinking required to apply their understanding to the real world. With DOK, educators can focus on student learning and apply cognitive rigor to create activities that promote knowledge application and student success.

What are the 4 levels of Webb's Depth of Knowledge?

Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) is a framework used by educators to categorize tasks and assignments based on the level of cognitive effort required to complete them. This framework provides a helpful tool for designing and evaluating tasks that require deeper thinking and understanding. DOK is particularly useful for standardized assessments, where tasks are structured to test various levels of rigor.

There are four levels of Webb's Depth of Knowledge, each building on the previous level and requiring greater levels of cognitive complexity. The first level is recall , which requires learners to simply recall information from memory. This may involve basic knowledge such as terms, definitions, or historical facts.

At the second level, learners must demonstrate understanding of a concept or skill. This includes activities such as explaining a concept, interpreting data to support a claim, or summarizing key ideas from a text.

The third level of DOK requires learners to apply their knowledge and understanding in different contexts. This may involve analyzing primary sources to make an argument, developing a research question, or creating a project that integrates multiple disciplines.

Finally, the fourth level of DOK requires learners to engage in critical thinking , synthesize information and evaluate arguments. This includes activities such as evaluating sources of information, synthesizing information from multiple sources to create new knowledge, developing original ideas and solutions, or evaluating the validity of an argument.

It is essential to recognize that each level of DOK builds upon the previous level. At the first level, learners must recall basic knowledge, and at the second level, they must demonstrate understanding of the concept. In the third level, they must apply their knowledge in different contexts before finally engaging in critical thinking and synthesis at the highest level.

To further clarify the levels, consider a complex concept, such as climate change. At the recall level, learners might be asked to define climate change or name the greenhouse gases. At the understanding level, they might be asked to explain the causes of climate change or interpret data.

At the application level, learners might be asked to apply their knowledge by creating a proactive plan to reduce carbon emissions. Finally, at the highest level, learners might synthesize information from multiple sources to develop a solution to mitigate the negative effects of climate change.

Webb's DOK is a powerful tool for educators, creating a common language for discussing levels of cognitive complexity, designing instructional activities , and evaluating student progress. By considering the four levels of rigor, educators can craft learning experiences that meet students where they are and move them towards greater depth of knowledge.

What exactly do we mean by 'Depth of Knowledge'?

Depth of knowledge (DOK) is a concept used to assess the level of cognitive complexity required for students to complete a specific task. It was first introduced in 1997 by Dr. Norman Webb and involves categorizing tasks based on their cognitive demand. This allows teachers to better understand what students are capable of and design appropriate learning experiences to develop deeper understanding.

While the DOK wheel is a commonly used tool, it is not the same as depth of knowledge itself. The wheel simply displays different cognitive resource demands which allow teachers to more easily identify the DOK level required for a given activity.

Webb's 1997 study provides a framework for categorizing DOK into four levels of rigor. Each level builds on the previous one, and requires learners to engage in greater levels of cognitive complexity.

It is important to note that the DOK levels are not fixed and may vary depending on age group, subject, and context. By using DOK, teachers can create tasks that challenge students and encourage deeper learning.

What is the Learning Theory behind Webb's DOK?

The Webb learning theory , also known as Webb's depth of knowledge (DOK) framework, was developed by Dr. Norman Webb in 1997. Dr. Webb is a respected education researcher and psychologist who has devoted his career to exploring the complexities of learning and cognition.

Dr. Webb's motivation for developing the DOK framework was to provide educators with a clear and useful tool for measuring and promoting deeper student learning. The framework is designed to help teachers and learners identify the level of rigor required to complete a particular task or assignment, from basic recall to complex and nuanced thinking.

The DOK framework is different from other learning taxonomies, such as Bloom's Taxonomy, in that it focuses less on the type of cognitive task and more on the level of rigor required to complete it. This means that the DOK framework is useful not just for designing and evaluating assessments, but also for guiding instructional practices that promote deeper learning.

At its core, the DOK framework consists of four levels of increasing rigor. Level 1 tasks require students to recall basic information. Level 2 tasks involve some degree of comprehension or application of concepts and skills. Level 3 tasks require students to apply their knowledge and understanding in new and varied contexts. Finally, level 4 tasks require students to engage in higher-order thinking, such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation.

One of the key benefits of the DOK framework is its ability to promote deeper student learning. By focusing on the level of rigor required to complete a task, it encourages teachers and learners to engage in more complex and nuanced thinking. This means that students are able to develop their capacity for critical thinking, problem-solving, and cognitive flexibility, all of which are essential skills for success in today's complex and rapidly changing world.

The Webb learning theory, or the DOK framework, provides educators with a valuable tool for measuring and promoting deeper student learning. Its emphasis on the level of rigor required for a task or assignment, rather than the type of cognitive task, makes it a useful tool for designing effective assessments and promoting instructional practices that encourage complex and nuanced thinking.

Comparing Bloom's Taxonomy and Webb's Depth of Knowledge

Bloom's Taxonomy and Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) are two well-known learning frameworks used by educators to promote deeper student learning. While they share some similarities, there are also some important conceptual differences that set them apart.

One of the key differences between Bloom's Taxonomy and Webb's DOK is their conceptual approach. Bloom's Taxonomy focuses on different types of cognitive tasks, from basic recall to more complex and abstract thinking, while Webb's DOK focuses on the level of rigor required to complete a particular task or assignment. This means that Bloom's Taxonomy is more focused on the type of thinking required, while Webb's DOK is more focused on the level of cognitive complexity required to complete a task.

Another significant difference between the two models is their alignment with academic standards. Bloom's Taxonomy is designed to align with content standards, which means that it focuses on specific subject matter and the level of thinking required to master it. In contrast, Webb's DOK is aligned with performance standards, which are broader and more encompassing and focus on what students should be able to do with the knowledge they have acquired.

Despite these differences, both models share some similarities. For example, both frameworks emphasize the importance of promoting higher-order thinking skills, such as analysis, synthesis, and evaluation, and both can be implemented in the classroom to guide instructional practices that promote deeper student learning.

To implement Bloom's Taxonomy in the classroom, teachers might present students with a variety of tasks that require different levels of thinking and cognition. For example, a level 1 task might involve asking students to recall basic information from a text, while a level 3 task might involve asking them to analyze and evaluate the author's argument.

Similarly, to implement Webb's DOK, teachers might use a wheel chart or rubric to assess the level of rigor required to complete a particular task or assignment and provide students with feedback that encourages them to engage in deeper and more complex thinking.

The strengths of each method are different. Bloom's Taxonomy is useful for promoting critical thinking and problem-solving skills in specific subject areas. On the other hand, Webb's DOK is ideal for promoting cognitive complexity across a wide range of subject areas and assignments. By using both methods together, teachers can create a more robust and comprehensive approach to promoting deeper student learning.

In conclusion, while there are some conceptual differences between Bloom's Taxonomy and Webb's Depth of Knowledge, both frameworks are effective tools for promoting higher-order thinking skills and can be implemented in the classroom in a variety of ways. By understanding the strengths and differences of each method, educators can create a more effective and comprehensive approach to promoting student learning and cognitive complexity.

How does Webb's Depth of Knowledge increase Academic Rigor?

Introducing rigorous instruction in the classroom is one of the most effective ways of helping students develop critical thinking skills and acquire knowledge that they can apply in real-world contexts. Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) is a framework that focuses on increasing rigor in classroom instruction by assessing the cognitive complexity of tasks and assignments. By understanding the four levels of rigor within the DOK framework, educators can design activities and assessments that help their students develop progressively more complex and sophisticated thinking skills.

Application of the DOK Levels

Educators can implement Webb's DOK in their classroom instruction by designing activities and assessments that align with each level. For example, teachers can design Level 1 tasks that focus on simple recall of information, such as asking students to identify key vocabulary words or concepts from a reading passage.

Level 2 tasks might involve applying knowledge and skills to new situations, such as asking students to use mathematical equations to solve real-world problems.

Level 3 tasks are more complex and may require students to analyze and synthesize information from multiple sources or use multiple strategies to complete a task. An example of a Level 3 task might be asking students to compare and contrast the arguments of two different authors on a controversial issue.

Finally, Level 4 tasks involve extended thinking that goes beyond the classroom, such as asking students to use their knowledge and skills to analyze and solve complex real-world problems. For example, a Level 4 task might involve working on a project that requires students to evaluate the environmental impact of a new development in their community.

The DOK framework helps educators increase rigor in classroom instruction by assessing the cognitive complexity of tasks and assignments. By designing activities and assessments that align with each level of rigor, teachers can create a learning environment that promotes critical thinking, problem-solving, and the acquisition of knowledge and skills that prepare students for successful futures.

Implementing Webb's DOK in Classroom Instruction

Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework is a pedagogical tool used to design and align activities, assessments, and instructional delivery. The framework's four levels of complexity that are designed to challenge students' critical thinking, problem-solving, and metacognitive skills . Understanding and implementing Webb's DOK in classroom instruction is essential for designing lessons that challenge and foster students' thinking skills at the appropriate level of rigor.

To implement Webb's DOK in classroom instruction, teachers can design activities and assessments that align with each level of complexity. For example, teachers can design Level 1 tasks that focus on simple recall of information such as asking students to identify key vocabulary words or concepts from a reading passage. Activities that challenge Level 2 thinking might involve applying knowledge and skills to new situations such as asking students to use mathematical equations to solve real-world problems.

Level 3 tasks are more complex and often require students to analyze and synthesize information from multiple sources or use multiple strategies to complete a task. Teachers can design activities and assessments that challenge Level 3 thinking by asking students to compare and contrast arguments of two different authors on a controversial issue or to evaluate data from scientific experiments to draw conclusions.

Finally, Level 4 tasks involve extended thinking that goes beyond the classroom. Teachers can challenge students' critical thinking skills by providing authentic learning experiences such as working on a project that requires students to analyze and solve real-world problems. For example, students could evaluate the environmental impact of a new development in their community or design solutions for reducing traffic congestion in their city.

Teachers can use Webb's DOK to design lesson plans that challenge students at appropriate levels of rigor. By using the framework, teachers can align instructional delivery, activities, and assessments to maximize student engagement and learning outcomes. Teachers can also use DOK to differentiate instruction and accommodations for students with diverse learning needs. Activities can be modified to meet the unique learning needs of individual students based on their entry-level knowledge, learning styles, and learning challenges.

It is also important for students to use DOK to monitor their own learning progress . By understanding the levels of complexity, students can monitor their growth in critical thinking and problem-solving abilities. Students can use DOK to set growth targets, reflect on their learning progress, and identify areas of strength and weakness.

Teachers can incorporate active learning strategies such as authentic learning experiences, cooperative learning, and problem-based learning activities to challenge students at various levels of complexity. By implementing Webb's DOK framework, teachers can promote a rich learning environment that challenges and enhances students' thinking skills, resulting in deep learning and retention of knowledge .

Subject-Based Examples of DOK

The versatility of the DOK model makes it an excellent tool for educators to incorporate into lesson planning, regardless of the subject. By understanding the different levels of cognitive rigor required at each stage, teachers can create activities and assessments that challenge their students' critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Let's explore some subject-based examples of how teachers can effectively apply the DOK framework in their lesson planning:

In ELA, teachers can use the DOK framework to create reading and writing activities that align with all four of Webb's levels of complexity. For example, at Level 1, students could be asked to recall specific details from a text, such as identifying the main characters or setting. Level 2 tasks can challenge students to apply their knowledge of literary devices to analyze the text, such as identifying symbols or interpreting metaphors.

Level 3 tasks can be designed to challenge students to compare and contrast different perspectives in a text or drawing conclusions about character motivations. Finally, at Level 4, students could be asked to complete an extended writing project that requires them to use critical thinking and creativity to explore themes from the text in a real-world context.

In math class, teachers can use DOK to challenge students to apply their understanding of mathematical concepts to real-world problems. At Level 1, students can be asked to recall math facts and basic formulas. As they progress to more complex tasks, students can be asked to apply those facts and formulas to more complex problems, such as calculating the area and volume of three-dimensional shapes.

At Level 3, students could be challenged to use statistical data to analyze trends and make predictions, while Level 4 tasks could require students to apply mathematical principles to real-world scenarios, such as designing a bridge that can withstand certain environmental conditions.

In science classes, teachers can use DOK to challenge students to apply their knowledge to real-world phenomena. At Level 1, students could be asked to recall facts about the laws of physics or ecological systems.

As they progress to higher levels, students can be challenged to analyze and synthesize information from multiple sources to draw connections between various scientific principles. For example, students at Level 3 may be challenged to explain the impact of environmental factors on a specific species or predict the outcome of an experiment based on scientific principles.

Finally, at Level 4, students could be asked to design and execute scientific experiments that address real-world issues, such as developing alternative energy sources or evaluating the impact of climate change on ecosystems.

Assessment Creation:

It is crucial to make sure that students are exposed to tasks at all four levels of DOK to foster comprehensive learning and assess the varying levels of cognitive rigor. By incorporating the DOK framework into assessment creation, teachers can create assessments that accurately measure their students' learning progress.

For example, a math exam could include Level 1 questions on basic concepts and formulas, Level 2 questions that focus on applying those formulas to solve problems, Level 3 questions related to data analysis and synthesis, and finally, Level 4 questions on real-world problem solving and application. This approach ensures that the assessment accurately measures students' cognitive skills at all levels, and teachers can use the results to adjust their instruction accordingly.

In conclusion, teachers can use the DOK framework to design effective lesson plans that challenge students' cognitive abilities across various subjects. The model's versatility makes it a valuable tool for educators who wish to engage their students in meaningful learning experiences and ensure they develop the necessary skills to succeed in real-world contexts.

By incorporating DOK into assessment creation, teachers can also measure students' learning progress comprehensively and adjust their instruction accordingly.

Utilising Webb's DOK in Special Education

Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) is a framework that helps educators structure lessons and assessments based on the complexity of thinking required. When teaching special education students, it is important to utilize DOK to ensure that each student's unique pace and learning needs are taken into account.

One of the key considerations when applying DOK in special education is the individualized learning needs of each student. For example, teachers should consider the student's preferred learning style, communication abilities, and areas of strengths when creating lesson plans. By doing so, teachers can create a tailored learning experience that aligns with each student's strengths and limitations, while also ensuring that each student is challenged at an appropriate level of cognitive complexity.

To ensure that special education students stay engaged throughout the learning process, teachers should aim to create authentic learning experiences that link the concepts being taught to real-world contexts. This can help to give students a sense of purpose, and make the learning process more tangible and relevant. Using adaptive learning platforms with active learning strategies can also help to keep students engaged by providing a level of interactivity that is not possible with traditional teaching methods.

In addition, it is important for teachers to work collaboratively with professional learning coaches to develop DOK materials and lessons that are tailored to the specific needs of the special education student. This can help to ensure that each student is learning at an appropriate level of cognitive complexity, and that each student is being challenged in a way that is appropriate for their individual needs.

Overall, implementing DOK in special education requires a focus on individualized learning, authentic learning experiences, and collaboration with professional learning coaches. By taking these factors into account, teachers can create a rich learning environment that helps special education students achieve their full potential. The use of Solo Taxonomy can also enhance the implementation of DOK in special education.

Key Insights and Further Reading on Webb's DoK

Here are five key papers or research articles discussing Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) and its implications in education:

1. Critical Thinking, Instruction, and Professional Development for Schools in the Digital Age  by H. Coleman, Jeremy Dickerson, Dennis Dotterer (2017)

Summary: This paper emphasizes the use of Webb's DOK as a theoretical guide to create flexible, student-centered instructional models in schools, promoting higher-level critical thinking skills and professional development.

2. Depth of Teachers' Knowledge: Frameworks for Teachers' Knowledge of Mathematics  by V. Holmes (2012)

Summary: The study utilizes Webb's DOK framework as a tool for classifying teachers' knowledge in mathematics, providing a vocabulary for discussing and assessing their understanding at different school levels.

3. Taxonomies in Education: Overview, Comparison, and Future Directions  by J. Irvine (2021)

Summary: Irvine analyzes Webb's DOK as a popular taxonomy in education to compare knowledge, cognition, metacognition, higher-order thinking skills, and affect in learning environments.

4. Lecture Breakup- A Strategy for Designing Pedagogically Effective Lectures for Online Education Systems  by Siddharth Srivastava, Shalini Lamba, T. Prabhakar (2020)

Summary: This article discusses the application of Webb's DOK in designing quality lectures for online education systems, highlighting its relevance in traditional classroom-based teaching.

5. Quantifying Depth and Complexity of Thinking and Knowledge  by Tamal Biswas, Kenneth W. Regan (2015)

Summary: The paper explores Webb's Depth of Knowledge as a qualitative approach to cognitive rigor, assessing depth and complexity in Education Studies.

These papers provide insights into the application and significance of Webb's DOK in various educational contexts, from teacher training programs to online learning environments , emphasizing its role in enhancing critical thinking and understanding at different levels of cognitive complexity.

Frequently Asked Questions about Depth of Knowledge (DOK)

As educators continue to explore new ways of improving student learning, there has been an increased popularity in using Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK) framework. However, this framework can be quite complex and often leads to questions among educators about its purpose, implementation, and how it could benefit student learning.

To address these questions, we have created a Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) section on DOK that aims to provide educators with a comprehensive guide to understanding this framework.

The purpose of this section is to offer essential insights on DOK, provide answers to most frequently asked questions, explain how to implement DOK in a meaningful way, and highlight the benefits for student learning.

Whether you are a teacher or a school administrator, you will likely find this section to be a valuable resource in understanding the different levels of cognitive complexity, the benefits of adopting this framework, how to determine the appropriate DOK level for your students, and how to use DOK to develop assessments and lesson plans that align with state standards.

Q1: What is Webb's Depth of Knowledge (DOK)?

Webb's Depth of Knowledge is a framework that categorizes tasks according to the complexity of thinking required to successfully complete them. It is used to analyze the cognitive expectation demanded by standards, curricular activities, and assessment tasks.

Q2: How many levels are there in Webb's DOK?

Webb's DOK is made up of four levels. Level 1 involves recall and reproduction, Level 2 involves skills and concepts, Level 3 involves strategic thinking, and Level 4 involves extended thinking.

Q3: How does Webb's DOK differ from Bloom's Taxonomy?

While both Bloom's Taxonomy and Webb's DOK are frameworks for classifying learning objectives, they are different in their focus. Bloom's taxonomy is a hierarchy of the different levels of cognitive processing , while Webb's DOK focuses on the complexity of mental processing that must occur to complete a task.

Q4: How can I use Webb's DOK in my teaching?

Webb's DOK can be used to ensure your instruction targets various levels of cognitive demand. By understanding the DOK levels of your teaching activities, you can better align these activities with assessments and learning objectives.

Q5: Can Webb's DOK be used to create assessments?

Yes, Webb's DOK is often used to guide the development of assessments, ensuring that they measure the intended cognitive processes . For example, you might design some questions to target lower DOK levels (e.g., recall of information) and others to target higher DOK levels (e.g., strategic and extended thinking).

Q6: Does Webb's DOK align with Common Core State Standards?

Yes, Webb's DOK has been used in the development of the Common Core State Standards to indicate the level of cognitive demand associated with each standard. The intention is to ensure a good balance of cognitive demands across each grade level.

Enhance outcomes across your school

Download an overview of our classroom toolkit.

We'll send it over now.

Please fill in the details so we can send over the resources.

What type of school are you?

We'll get you the right resource

Is your school involved in any staff development projects?

Are your colleagues running any research projects or courses?

Do you have any immediate school priorities?

Please check the ones that apply.

Download your resource

Thanks for taking the time to complete this form, submit the form to get the tool.

Classroom Practice

Writing Resources

• Getting Started
• Free Writing Support Resources for Students
• DNP Editors - PC744 SQUIRE Paper
• APA, AMA, Citation, References, DOI, Plagiarism/Copyright
• Microsoft Word and Google Docs Tutorials
• Self-Editing

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking and writing.

• Discourse Community
• Information Literacy
• Gathering Information / Literature Review: Synthesis and Paraphrase
• Writing Mechanics: Punctuation, Grammar, Syntax
• Style/Organization: APA, AMA, SQUIRE
• Fee-Based Editing-Proofreading
• Presentations
• RefWorks Reference Management Software
• Resumes and Cover Letters
• To Analyze Thinking We Must Identify and Question its Elemental Structures Elements of Thought presented as a "wheel" model. [Scroll to the Wheel at the bottom of the page.] This is a superb resource for developing ideas and organizing an argument, paper, or presentation. See More below. more... less... By hovering over any element of thought in the wheel, a flyout will appear to help you refine this aspect of your thinking. Also demonstrates how elements of your thinking is integrated with other parts of thought.
• Critical Thinking - Summary Description Excellent five-minute video that describes some of the main principles of critical thinking.
• Defining Critical Thinking The Foundation for Critical Thinking provides structure and definitions for learning to think about your own thinking, a process known as metacognition. This site is recommended in our FNU Introduction to Scholarly Writing Course. It describes concepts involved in critical thinking.
• Critical Thinking "Wheel"_To Analyze Thinking We Must Identify and Question its Elemental Structures Elements of Thought presented as a "wheel" model. Superb resource for developing ideas and organizing an argument, paper, or presentation. See More below. more... less... By hovering over any element of thought in the wheel, a flyout will appear to help you refine this aspect of your thinking. Also demonstrates how elements of your thinking is integrated with other parts of thought.
• Demonstrating critical thinking in writing assignments EXCELLENT VIDEO from Walden University (one hour): Demonstrating critical thinking through writing is one of the tasks of a scholar. This webinar explores some strategies on how to incorporate critical thinking in your writing, highlighting how to use sources to support your own ideas and focusing on creating a thesis statement. NOTE: To view this webinar you must download the free Adobe Connect app. Additional resources, slides, and handouts are available. This instructional content was created by the Walden University Writing Center and is reused under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
• Critical Reading Critical reading is a vital part of the writing process. In fact, reading and writing processes are alike. In both, you make meaning by actively engaging a text. As a reader, you are not a passive participant, but an active constructor of meaning. Exhibiting an inquisitive, "critical" attitude towards what you read will make anything you read richer and more useful to you in your classes and your life. This guide is designed to help you to understand and engage this active reading process more effectively so that you can become a better critical reader. There is a link on this site in the right navigation bar to download a printable version, with this URL: https://writing.colostate.edu/guides/pdfs/guide31.pdf
• Make a claim (thesis/main idea) for an argument and support with evidence This describes how to express a point of view on a subject (a claim or thesis main idea) and support your argument with evidence. This is an essential skill for academic writers.
• UNC Chapel Hill Writing Center Handouts A comprehensive list of handouts and videos on an assortment of topics related to writing and critical thinking. As an example, select "Argument" in the Writing the Paper column. You will see how to construct a thesis statement to present a main idea or claim (your thesis) and back it up with evidence for statements that support your claim.
• << Previous: Self-Editing
• Next: Discourse Community >>
• Last Updated: Mar 7, 2024 12:58 PM
• URL: https://library.frontier.edu/writingresources

• Schools & departments

Critical thinking

Advice and resources to help you develop your critical voice.

Developing critical thinking skills is essential to your success at University and beyond.  We all need to be critical thinkers to help us navigate our way through an information-rich world. 

Whatever your discipline, you will engage with a wide variety of sources of information and evidence.  You will develop the skills to make judgements about this evidence to form your own views and to present your views clearly.

One of the most common types of feedback received by students is that their work is ‘too descriptive’.  This usually means that they have just stated what others have said and have not reflected critically on the material.  They have not evaluated the evidence and constructed an argument.

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is the art of making clear, reasoned judgements based on interpreting, understanding, applying and synthesising evidence gathered from observation, reading and experimentation. Burns, T., & Sinfield, S. (2016)  Essential Study Skills: The Complete Guide to Success at University (4th ed.) London: SAGE, p94.

Being critical does not just mean finding fault.  It means assessing evidence from a variety of sources and making reasoned conclusions.  As a result of your analysis you may decide that a particular piece of evidence is not robust, or that you disagree with the conclusion, but you should be able to state why you have come to this view and incorporate this into a bigger picture of the literature.

Being critical goes beyond describing what you have heard in lectures or what you have read.  It involves synthesising, analysing and evaluating what you have learned to develop your own argument or position.

Critical thinking is important in all subjects and disciplines – in science and engineering, as well as the arts and humanities.  The types of evidence used to develop arguments may be very different but the processes and techniques are similar.  Critical thinking is required for both undergraduate and postgraduate levels of study.

What, where, when, who, why, how?

Purposeful reading can help with critical thinking because it encourages you to read actively rather than passively.  When you read, ask yourself questions about what you are reading and make notes to record your views.  Ask questions like:

• What is the main point of this paper/ article/ paragraph/ report/ blog?
• Who wrote it?
• Why was it written?
• When was it written?
• Has the context changed since it was written?
• Is the evidence presented robust?
• How did the authors come to their conclusions?
• Do you agree with the conclusions?
• What does this add to our knowledge?
• Why is it useful?

Our web page covering Reading at university includes a handout to help you develop your own critical reading form and a suggested reading notes record sheet.  These resources will help you record your thoughts after you read, which will help you to construct your argument. 

Reading at university

Developing an argument

Being a university student is about learning how to think, not what to think.  Critical thinking shapes your own values and attitudes through a process of deliberating, debating and persuasion.   Through developing your critical thinking you can move on from simply disagreeing to constructively assessing alternatives by building on doubts.

There are several key stages involved in developing your ideas and constructing an argument.  You might like to use a form to help you think about the features of critical thinking and to break down the stages of developing your argument.

Features of critical thinking (pdf)

Features of critical thinking (Word rtf)

Our webpage on Academic writing includes a useful handout ‘Building an argument as you go’.

Academic writing

You should also consider the language you will use to introduce a range of viewpoints and to evaluate the various sources of evidence.  This will help your reader to follow your argument.  To get you started, the University of Manchester's Academic Phrasebank has a useful section on Being Critical. 

Academic Phrasebank

Developing your critical thinking

Set yourself some tasks to help develop your critical thinking skills.  Discuss material presented in lectures or from resource lists with your peers.  Set up a critical reading group or use an online discussion forum.  Think about a point you would like to make during discussions in tutorials and be prepared to back up your argument with evidence.

For more suggestions:

Developing your critical thinking - ideas (pdf)

Developing your critical thinking - ideas (Word rtf)

Published guides

For further advice and more detailed resources please see the Critical Thinking section of our list of published Study skills guides.

Study skills guides  

15 Things We Have Learned About Critical Thinking

Here are the key issues to consider in critical thinking..

Posted July 27, 2018

• What Is Cognition?
• Find a therapist near me

Not long after the publication of my book, Critical Thinking: Conceptual Perspectives and Practical Guidelines , by Cambridge University Press, Psychology Today contacted me and asked me to write a blog on the subject. I never thought I would write a blog, but when presented with the opportunity to keep sharing my thoughts on critical thinking on a regular basis, I thought, why not ? Maybe my writing might help educators, maybe they might help students and maybe they might help people in their day-to-day decision-making . If it can help, then it’s worthwhile.

To recap, critical thinking (CT) is a metacognitive process, consisting of a number of sub-skills and dispositions, that, when applied through purposeful, self-regulatory, reflective judgment, increase the chances of producing a logical solution to a problem or a valid conclusion to an argument (Dwyer, 2017; Dwyer, Hogan & Stewart, 2014).

CT, if anything, has become more necessary , in this age of information bombardment and the new knowledge economy (Dwyer, Hogan & Stewart, 2014). It allows students to gain a better understanding of complex information (Dwyer, Hogan, & Stewart, 2012; 2014; Gambrill, 2006; Halpern, 2014); it allows them to achieve higher grades and become more employable, informed and active citizens (Barton & McCully, 2007; Holmes & Clizbe, 1997; National Academy of Sciences, 2005); it facilitates good decision-making and problem-solving in social and interpersonal contexts (Ku, 2009); and it decreases the effects of cognitive biases and heuristic -based thinking (Facione & Facione, 2001; McGuinness, 2013).

It’s now been just over a year since I started writing ‘Thoughts on Thinking’. As I consider my thinking and look over my writing during this period, I thought it would be worthwhile to collate and summarise some of the broader learning that has appeared in my writings. So, here’s what we’ve learned:

• We all know CT is important, but it may be the case that many educators, as well as students, don’t really know what researchers mean by "critical thinking" and/or simply haven’t researched it themselves.
• Just as many don’t really know what is meant by "critical thinking", there is also the problem of ensuring consistency across how it is defined/conceptualised, trained and measured , which is no easy task.
• Without adequate training in CT, it may be the case that mature students’ perceptions of how they approach CT do not match their actual ability - despite potentially enhanced autonomy, student responsibility and locus of control , it may be that an over- optimistic outlook on the benefits of experience (and its associated heuristic-based, intuitive judgment) takes centre-stage above and beyond actual ability.
• Social media is many things: entertainment, education , networking and much more. It is also, unfortunately, a vehicle for promoting faulty thinking. Being able to recognise persuasion techniques, illogical argumentation and fallacious reasoning , will allow you to better assess arguments presented to you, and help you to present better arguments.
• Values are unique to each and every individual. Though individuals can certainly share values, there is no guarantee that all of an individual’s values overlap with another’s. On the other hand, using the 'virtue' moniker implies that the individual is right based on some kind of ‘moral correctness’. Though there is nothing wrong with an individual presenting ideas and perspectives that they value, it is ill-conceived and dangerous to treat them as global virtues that everyone else should value too.
• CT is domain-g eneral, but explicit CT training is necessary if educators want to see CT improve and flourish across domains.
• A person with a strong willingness to conduct CT has the consistent internal willingness and motivation to engage problems and make decisions by using reflective judgment . Reflective judgment, the recognition of limited knowledge and how this uncertainty can affect decision-making processes, is an important aspect of critical thinking regarding ‘taking a step back’ and thinking about an argument or problem a little bit longer and considering the basis for the reasons and consequences of responding in a particular way.
• There is a need for general, secondary-school training in bias and statistics. We need to teach CT to the coming generations. When not critically thinking, people don’t listen, and fail to be open-minded and reflect upon the information presented to them; they project their opinions and beliefs regardless of whether or not they have evidence to support their claims.
• Be open-minded towards others. You don’t have to respect them (respect is earned, it’s not a right); but be courteous (sure, we may be in disagreement; but, hey, we’re still civilised people).
• A person said what they said, not how you interpret what they said. If you are unclear as to what has been said, ask for clarification. Asking for clarity is not a sign of weakness; it is a sign of successful problem-solving.
• ‘Proof’ is the dirtiest word in critical thinking. Research and science do not prove things, they can only disprove. Be wary when you hear the word ‘prove’ or any of its variants thrown around; but also, be mindful that people feel safer when they are assured and words like ‘proven’ reinforce this feeling of assuredness.
• Creative thinking isn’t really useful or practical in critical thinking, depending on how you conceptualize it. Critical thinking and creative thinking are very different entities if you treat the latter as something similar to lateral thinking or ‘thinking outside the box’. However, if we conceptualize creative thinking as synthesizing information for the purpose of inferring a logical and feasible conclusion or solution, then it becomes complementary to critical thinking. But then, we are not resorting to creativity alone - all other avenues involving critical thinking must be considered. That is, we can think creatively by synthesizing information we have previously thought about critically (i.e. through analysis and evaluation ) for the purpose of inferring a logical and feasible conclusion or solution. Thus, given this caveat, we can infuse our critical thinking with creative thinking, but we must do so with caution.
• Changing people’s minds is not easy ; and it’s even more difficult when the person you’re working with believes they have critically thought about it. It may simply boil down to the person you’re trying to educate and their disposition towards critical thinking, but the person’s emotional investment in their stance also plays a significant role.
• There is no such thing as good or bad CT – you either thought critically or you didn’t. Those who try it in good faith are likely to want to do it ‘properly’; and so, much of whether or not an individual is thinking critically comes down to intellectual humility and intellectual integrity .
• Finally, there are some general tips that people find useful in applying their critical thinking:
• Save your critical thinking for things that matter - things you care about.
• Do it earlier in your day to avoid faulty thinking resulting from decision fatigue.
• Take a step back and think about a problem a little bit longer, considering the basis for the reasons and consequences of responding in a particular way.
• Play Devil’s Advocate in order to overcome bias and 'auto-pilot processing' through truly considering alternatives.
• Leave emotion at the door and remove your beliefs, attitudes, opinions and personal experiences from the equation - all of which are emotionally charged.

Barton, K., & McCully, A. (2007). Teaching controversial issues where controversial issues really matter. Teaching History, 127, 13–19.

Dwyer, C.P. (2017). Critical thinking: Conceptual perspectives and practical guidelines. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2012). An evaluation of argument mapping as a method of enhancing critical thinking performance in e-learningenvironments. Metacognition and Learning, 7, 219–244.

Dwyer, C.P., Hogan, M.J. & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills & Creativity, 12, 43-52.

Eigenauer, J.D. (2017). Don’t reinvent the critical thinking wheel: What scholarly literature tells us about critical thinking instruction. Innovation Abstracts, 39, 2.

Facione, P. A., & Facione, N. C. (2001). Analyzing explanations for seemingly irrational choices: Linking argument analysis and cognitive science. International Journal of Applied Philosophy, 15(2), 267–286.

Gambrill, E. (2006). Evidence-based practice and policy: Choices ahead. Research on Social Work Practice, 16(3), 338–357.

Halpern, D.F. (2014). Though and knowledge. UK: Psychology Press.

Holmes, J., & Clizbe, E. (1997). Facing the 21st century. Business Education Forum, 52(1), 33–35.

Ku, K. Y. L. (2009). Assessing students’ critical thinking performance: Urging for measurements using multi-response format. Thinking Skills and Creativity,4(1), 70–76.

McGuinness, C. (2013). Teaching thinking: Learning how to think. Presented at the Psychological Society of Ireland and British Psychological Association’s Public Lecture Series. Galway, Ireland, 6th March.

National Academy of Sciences. (2005). National Academy of Engineering Institute of Medicine Rising above the gathering storm: Energising and employingAmerica for a brighter economic future. Committee on prospering in the global economy for the 21st century. Washington, DC.

Christopher Dwyer, Ph.D., is a lecturer at the Technological University of the Shannon in Athlone, Ireland.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• Programs & Services
• Delphi Center

Ideas to Action (i2a)

• Paul-Elder Critical Thinking Framework

Critical thinking is that mode of thinking – about any subject, content, or problem — in which the thinker improves the quality of his or her thinking by skillfully taking charge of the structures inherent in thinking and imposing intellectual standards upon them. (Paul and Elder, 2001). The Paul-Elder framework has three components:

• The elements of thought (reasoning)
• The  intellectual standards that should be applied to the elements of reasoning
• The intellectual traits associated with a cultivated critical thinker that result from the consistent and disciplined application of the intellectual standards to the elements of thought

According to Paul and Elder (1997), there are two essential dimensions of thinking that students need to master in order to learn how to upgrade their thinking. They need to be able to identify the "parts" of their thinking, and they need to be able to assess their use of these parts of thinking.

Elements of Thought (reasoning)

The "parts" or elements of thinking are as follows:

• All reasoning has a purpose
• All reasoning is an attempt to figure something out, to settle some question, to solve some problem
• All reasoning is based on assumptions
• All reasoning is done from some point of view
• All reasoning is based on data, information and evidence
• All reasoning is expressed through, and shaped by, concepts and ideas
• All reasoning contains inferences or interpretations by which we draw conclusions and give meaning to data
• All reasoning leads somewhere or has implications and consequences

Universal Intellectual Standards

The intellectual standards that are to these elements are used to determine the quality of reasoning. Good critical thinking requires having a command of these standards. According to Paul and Elder (1997 ,2006), the ultimate goal is for the standards of reasoning to become infused in all thinking so as to become the guide to better and better reasoning. The intellectual standards include:

Intellectual Traits

Consistent application of the standards of thinking to the elements of thinking result in the development of intellectual traits of:

• Intellectual Humility
• Intellectual Courage
• Intellectual Empathy
• Intellectual Autonomy
• Intellectual Integrity
• Intellectual Perseverance
• Confidence in Reason
• Fair-mindedness

Characteristics of a Well-Cultivated Critical Thinker

Habitual utilization of the intellectual traits produce a well-cultivated critical thinker who is able to:

• Raise vital questions and problems, formulating them clearly and precisely
• Gather and assess relevant information, using abstract ideas to interpret it effectively
• Come to well-reasoned conclusions and solutions, testing them against relevant criteria and standards;
• Think open-mindedly within alternative systems of thought, recognizing and assessing, as need be, their assumptions, implications, and practical consequences; and
• Communicate effectively with others in figuring out solutions to complex problems

Paul, R. and Elder, L. (2010). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools. Dillon Beach: Foundation for Critical Thinking Press.

• SACS & QEP
• Planning and Implementation
• What is Critical Thinking?
• Why Focus on Critical Thinking?
• Culminating Undergraduate Experience
• Community Engagement
• Frequently Asked Questions
• What is i2a?

Copyright © 2012 - University of Louisville , Delphi Center

Critical thinking definition

Critical thinking, as described by Oxford Languages, is the objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgement.

Active and skillful approach, evaluation, assessment, synthesis, and/or evaluation of information obtained from, or made by, observation, knowledge, reflection, acumen or conversation, as a guide to belief and action, requires the critical thinking process, which is why it's often used in education and academics.

Some even may view it as a backbone of modern thought.

However, it's a skill, and skills must be trained and encouraged to be used at its full potential.

People turn up to various approaches in improving their critical thinking, like:

• Developing technical and problem-solving skills
• Engaging in more active listening
• Actively questioning their assumptions and beliefs
• Seeking out more diversity of thought
• Opening up their curiosity in an intellectual way etc.

Is critical thinking useful in writing?

Critical thinking can help in planning your paper and making it more concise, but it's not obvious at first. We carefully pinpointed some the questions you should ask yourself when boosting critical thinking in writing:

• What information should be included?
• Which information resources should the author look to?
• What degree of technical knowledge should the report assume its audience has?
• What is the most effective way to show information?
• How should the report be organized?
• How should it be designed?
• What tone and level of language difficulty should the document have?

Usage of critical thinking comes down not only to the outline of your paper, it also begs the question: How can we use critical thinking solving problems in our writing's topic?

Let's say, you have a Powerpoint on how critical thinking can reduce poverty in the United States. You'll primarily have to define critical thinking for the viewers, as well as use a lot of critical thinking questions and synonyms to get them to be familiar with your methods and start the thinking process behind it.

Are there any services that can help me use more critical thinking?

We understand that it's difficult to learn how to use critical thinking more effectively in just one article, but our service is here to help.

We are a team specializing in writing essays and other assignments for college students and all other types of customers who need a helping hand in its making. We cover a great range of topics, offer perfect quality work, always deliver on time and aim to leave our customers completely satisfied with what they ordered.

The ordering process is fully online, and it goes as follows:

• Select the topic and the deadline of your essay.
• Provide us with any details, requirements, statements that should be emphasized or particular parts of the essay writing process you struggle with.
• Leave the email address, where your completed order will be sent to.
• Select your prefered payment type, sit back and relax!

With lots of experience on the market, professionally degreed essay writers , online 24/7 customer support and incredibly low prices, you won't find a service offering a better deal than ours.

• How to apply critical thinking in learning

Sometimes your university classes might feel like a maze of information. Consider critical thinking skills like a map that can lead the way.

Why do we need critical thinking?  

Critical thinking is a type of thinking that requires continuous questioning, exploring answers, and making judgments. Critical thinking can help you: 

• analyze information to comprehend more thoroughly
• approach problems systematically, identify root causes, and explore potential solutions 
• make informed decisions by weighing various perspectives 
• promote intellectual curiosity and self-reflection, leading to continuous learning, innovation, and personal development 

What is the process of critical thinking? 

1. understand  .

Critical thinking starts with understanding the content that you are learning.

This step involves clarifying the logic and interrelations of the content by actively engaging with the materials (e.g., text, articles, and research papers). You can take notes, highlight key points, and make connections with prior knowledge to help you engage.

Ask yourself these questions to help you build your understanding:  

• What is the structure?
• What is the main idea of the content?  
• What is the evidence that supports any arguments?
• What is the conclusion?

2. Analyze  

You need to assess the credibility, validity, and relevance of the information presented in the content. Consider the authors’ biases and potential limitations in the evidence. 

Ask yourself questions in terms of why and how:

• What is the supporting evidence?  
• Why do they use it as evidence?   
• How does the data present support the conclusions?  
• What method was used? Was it appropriate?  

 3.  Evaluate   

After analyzing the data and evidence you collected, make your evaluation of the evidence, results, and conclusions made in the content.

Consider the weaknesses and strengths of the ideas presented in the content to make informed decisions or suggest alternative solutions:

• What is the gap between the evidence and the conclusion?  
• What is my position on the subject?  
• What other approaches can I use?  

When do you apply critical thinking and how can you improve these skills?   

1. reading academic texts, articles, and research papers.

• analyze arguments
• assess the credibility and validity of evidence
• consider potential biases presented
• question the assumptions, methodologies, and the way they generate conclusions

2. Writing essays and theses

• demonstrate your understanding of the information, logic of evidence, and position on the topic
• include evidence or examples to support your ideas
• make your standing points clear by presenting information and providing reasons to support your arguments
• address potential counterarguments or opposing viewpoints
• explain why your perspective is more compelling than the opposing viewpoints

3. Attending lectures

• understand the content by previewing, active listening , and taking notes
• analyze your lecturer’s viewpoints by seeking whether sufficient data and resources are provided
• think about whether the ideas presented by the lecturer align with your values and beliefs
• talk about other perspectives with peers in discussions

Related blog posts

• A beginner's guide to successful labs
• A beginner's guide to note-taking
• 5 steps to get the most out of your next reading
• How do you create effective study questions?
• An epic approach to problem-based test questions

Recent blog posts

Blog topics.

• assignments (1)
• Graduate (2)
• Learning support (25)
• note-taking and reading (6)
• organizations (1)
• tests and exams (8)
• time management (3)
• Tips from students (6)
• undergraduate (27)
• university learning (10)

Blog posts by audience

• Current undergraduate students (27)
• Current graduate students (3)
• Future undergraduate students (9)
• Future graduate students (1)

Blog posts archive

• December (1)
• November (6)
• October (8)
• August (10)

Contact the Student Success Office

South Campus Hall, second floor University of Waterloo 519-888-4567 ext. 84410

Immigration Consulting

Book a same-day appointment on Portal  or submit an online inquiry  to receive immigration support.

Request an authorized leave from studies for immigration purposes. 

Quick links

Current student resources

SSO staff links

Employment and volunteer opportunities

• Contact Waterloo
• Maps & Directions
• Accessibility

The University of Waterloo acknowledges that much of our work takes place on the traditional territory of the Neutral, Anishinaabeg and Haudenosaunee peoples. Our main campus is situated on the Haldimand Tract, the land granted to the Six Nations that includes six miles on each side of the Grand River. Our active work toward reconciliation takes place across our campuses through research, learning, teaching, and community building, and is co-ordinated within the Office of Indigenous Relations .

Monthly Webinar Q&A Sessions in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online! Read More Here

2024 Events Announced!

Join us online.

Call for Proposals

Present at the 44th annual international conference on critical thinking.

Join the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online!

Free 30-day trial.

Available Now: Liberating the Mind New Book by Dr. Linda Elder

Custom Online Intensive Workshops & Short Courses for Your Institution or Business

The Foundation for Critical Thinking offers customized webinars and six-week online training programs on critical thinking in a multitude of topics, enabling us to custom-design a learning experience for your institution based on your needs and goals.

We need your voice! Submit a proposal to present at The 44th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking . Proposals are due May 19th by midnight PDT.

Critical Thinking Podcast

Only in the Center for Critical Thinking Community Online ! Join Drs. Linda Elder and Gerald Nosich, international authorities on critical thinking, as they break new ground in the podcast Critical Thinking: Going Deeper .

Free Webinar: Why a Thriving Democracy Requires Critical Thinking

Join Dr. Linda Elder April 10th at 7:00 p.m. EDT (4:00 p.m. Pacific). This Webinar Q&A will begin to explore how and why critical thinking is essential to flourishing democracies and will discuss some of the intrinsic barriers to cultivating and maintaining democracies.

The 44th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking

Join us for the world's longest-running conference on critical thinking ! The 44th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking takes place July 21 - 26, 2024 and is entirely online with sessions for all backgrounds, experience levels, and time zones.

Full-Semester Courses in Critical Thinking

Fall 2024 Registration Open Now! Study under the guidance of a first-generation Paulian Scholar from the comfort of your home or office! Complete coursework on your own time with continual feedback!

I found that I was fitted for nothing so well as for the study of Truth . . . with desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to consider, carefulness to dispose and set in order . . . being a man that neither affects what is new nor admires what is old, and that hates every kind of imposture.

~ francis bacon (1605), our mission.

For more than 40 years, our goal has been to promote essential change in education and society by cultivating fairminded critical thinking — thinking which embodies intellectual empathy, intellectual humility, intellectual perseverance, intellectual integrity, and intellectual responsibility.

international translations

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Working with sources
• What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Published on May 30, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan . Revised on May 31, 2023.

Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment .

To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources .

Critical thinking skills help you to:

• Identify credible sources
• Evaluate and respond to arguments
• Assess alternative viewpoints
• Test hypotheses against relevant criteria

Table of contents

Why is critical thinking important, critical thinking examples, how to think critically, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about critical thinking.

Critical thinking is important for making judgments about sources of information and forming your own arguments. It emphasizes a rational, objective, and self-aware approach that can help you to identify credible sources and strengthen your conclusions.

Critical thinking is important in all disciplines and throughout all stages of the research process . The types of evidence used in the sciences and in the humanities may differ, but critical thinking skills are relevant to both.

In academic writing , critical thinking can help you to determine whether a source:

• Is free from research bias
• Provides evidence to support its research findings
• Considers alternative viewpoints

Outside of academia, critical thinking goes hand in hand with information literacy to help you form opinions rationally and engage independently and critically with popular media.

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

Critical thinking can help you to identify reliable sources of information that you can cite in your research paper . It can also guide your own research methods and inform your own arguments.

Outside of academia, critical thinking can help you to be aware of both your own and others’ biases and assumptions.

Academic examples

However, when you compare the findings of the study with other current research, you determine that the results seem improbable. You analyze the paper again, consulting the sources it cites.

You notice that the research was funded by the pharmaceutical company that created the treatment. Because of this, you view its results skeptically and determine that more independent research is necessary to confirm or refute them. Example: Poor critical thinking in an academic context You’re researching a paper on the impact wireless technology has had on developing countries that previously did not have large-scale communications infrastructure. You read an article that seems to confirm your hypothesis: the impact is mainly positive. Rather than evaluating the research methodology, you accept the findings uncritically.

Nonacademic examples

However, you decide to compare this review article with consumer reviews on a different site. You find that these reviews are not as positive. Some customers have had problems installing the alarm, and some have noted that it activates for no apparent reason.

You revisit the original review article. You notice that the words “sponsored content” appear in small print under the article title. Based on this, you conclude that the review is advertising and is therefore not an unbiased source. Example: Poor critical thinking in a nonacademic context You support a candidate in an upcoming election. You visit an online news site affiliated with their political party and read an article that criticizes their opponent. The article claims that the opponent is inexperienced in politics. You accept this without evidence, because it fits your preconceptions about the opponent.

There is no single way to think critically. How you engage with information will depend on the type of source you’re using and the information you need.

However, you can engage with sources in a systematic and critical way by asking certain questions when you encounter information. Like the CRAAP test , these questions focus on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

When encountering information, ask:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert in their field?
• What do they say? Is their argument clear? Can you summarize it?
• When did they say this? Is the source current?
• Where is the information published? Is it an academic article? Is it peer-reviewed ?
• Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence? Does it rely on opinion, speculation, or appeals to emotion ? Do they address alternative arguments?

Critical thinking also involves being aware of your own biases, not only those of others. When you make an argument or draw your own conclusions, you can ask similar questions about your own writing:

• Am I only considering evidence that supports my preconceptions?
• Is my argument expressed clearly and backed up with credible sources?
• Would I be convinced by this argument coming from someone else?

If you want to know more about ChatGPT, AI tools , citation , and plagiarism , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• ChatGPT vs human editor
• ChatGPT citations
• Is ChatGPT trustworthy?
• Using ChatGPT for your studies
• What is ChatGPT?
• Chicago style
• Paraphrasing

 Plagiarism

• Types of plagiarism
• Self-plagiarism
• Avoiding plagiarism
• Academic integrity
• Consequences of plagiarism
• Common knowledge

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

You can assess information and arguments critically by asking certain questions about the source. You can use the CRAAP test , focusing on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

Ask questions such as:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

A credible source should pass the CRAAP test  and follow these guidelines:

• The information should be up to date and current.
• The author and publication should be a trusted authority on the subject you are researching.
• The sources the author cited should be easy to find, clear, and unbiased.
• For a web source, the URL and layout should signify that it is trustworthy.

Information literacy refers to a broad range of skills, including the ability to find, evaluate, and use sources of information effectively.

Being information literate means that you:

• Know how to find credible sources
• Use relevant sources to inform your research
• Understand what constitutes plagiarism
• Know how to cite your sources correctly

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search, interpret, and recall information in a way that aligns with our pre-existing values, opinions, or beliefs. It refers to the ability to recollect information best when it amplifies what we already believe. Relatedly, we tend to forget information that contradicts our opinions.

Although selective recall is a component of confirmation bias, it should not be confused with recall bias.

On the other hand, recall bias refers to the differences in the ability between study participants to recall past events when self-reporting is used. This difference in accuracy or completeness of recollection is not related to beliefs or opinions. Rather, recall bias relates to other factors, such as the length of the recall period, age, and the characteristics of the disease under investigation.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved March 20, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, student guide: information literacy | meaning & examples, what are credible sources & how to spot them | examples, applying the craap test & evaluating sources, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Our Future Depends on Critical Thinking

Empower the Next Generation to Think Critically. Teach Them to ThinkUp!

Critical Thinking

Students who are taught to think critically will have the skill set to succeed in the classroom today, build confidence for upcoming assessments, and for the challenges they’ll face in the rapidly evolving future.

The 9 Traits of Critical Thinking™

Each trait contributes to the development of skillful thinking and an environment that supports deeper learning. Students become more effective critical thinkers and problem solvers when they apply the 9 Traits: Adapt, Examine, Create, Communicate, Collaborate, Reflect, Strive, Link, and Inquire.

ThinkUp! Studios

Join Our Critical Thinking Community

This groundbreaking content hub shares the hows and whys of critical thinking. Learn more about lesson plans, teacher tips, innovative ideas for thinking critically, and the latest news about our products from a community of educators committed to critical thinking.

Our Products

We equip educators with the resources to teach students to think critically. ThinkUp! offers educators and students a path for continual growth that leads to improved student achievement and success in the future.

Critical Thinking Success Stories

Hear from Those Who Matter Most: Educators on the Frontlines of Our Future

Success Depends on Critical Thinking

Success at School

Success for Life

Subscribe to join our community of educators and start receiving useful teacher tips, lesson plans, innovative ideas for thinking critically, and the latest news about our products.

We’re Here to Help

Contact Our Customer Support Team

(800) 585-5258

Sorry, your request has been denied.

CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION, AND PEDAGOGY article

The hope wheel: a model to enable hope-based pedagogy in climate change education.

• 1 Department of Education, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
• 2 Oxford Brookes Business School, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, United Kingdom

In response to concerns about climate anxiety and distress, researchers and practitioners in both education and psychology have been investigating the importance of engaging climate hope in Climate Change Education (CCE). Synthesizing recent multidisciplinary research, alongside insights from the development of educational programs, this article proposes a new theoretical model for pedagogies of hope in CCE. The Hope Wheel presents three foundational elements: handrails for educators to hold on to while constructively engaging with climate change (honesty, awareness, spaceholding, action), guardrails for educators to be sensitive to when implementing the handrails (climate anxiety, mis-/disinformation, false hope), and lenses to encourage educators to explore connections between complex societal and planetary challenges (complexity, justice, perspectives, creativity, and empathy). This working model aims to support educators by distilling current learnings from the literature into a visual guide. It depicts essential elements to include, as well as avoid, in order to engage honest, hope-oriented CCE for transformative learning in the face of the climate crisis.

1 Introduction

Educators increasingly acknowledge the importance of engaging with climate change across a broad range of subject areas and its current relevance from both a pupil and planetary perspective ( Edge Research, 2022 ; Teach the Future, 2022 ). There are, however, a number of commonplace barriers, compounded by a lack of adequate resources, that problematize embedding climate education in classrooms, presenting considerable challenges for both teachers and learners alike to navigate ( Howard-Jones et al., 2021 ; Greer et al., 2023 ).

Both the scientific and emotional aspects of climate education need not only evidence-based approaches that are theory-informed, but also require readily navigable, digestible signposting for busy teachers with limited training and capacity. The literature points to overcrowded curricula, ideological considerations, and a lack of expertise and development opportunities that can result in limited confidence to take up the challenges involved in the complex, multidisciplinary nature of CCE efforts ( Rousell and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, 2020 ).

In response to concerns about climate anxiety and distress, many researchers and practitioners in both education and psychology have increasingly acknowledged the need for hope-based approaches, the most prominent of which are those that headline constructive, active, critical and transformative ideas of hope-based learning ( Ojala, 2012 ; Kerret et al., 2016 ; Li and Monroe, 2019 ). Whilst the theoretical framework around the importance of hope in CCE gains traction, operationalizing these concepts can feel both daunting and abstract for educators faced with the practical realities of including climate education in everyday teaching and learning settings.

The evidence-based working model proposed in this Curriculum, Instruction, and Pedagogy (CIP) article aims to bridge the gap between research and practice around how to constructively cultivate hope in the face of the climate crisis with learners of all ages, as well as encourage educator confidence in starting explorative discussions without the expectation of discrete, concrete solutions. We aspire to simplicity and accessibility in the model, while recognizing the complexities and challenges of engaging with a concept like climate hope. The Hope Wheel aims to support the process of transformative learning for the social transformations needed that will necessarily involve moments of discomfort and challenge for both educators and learners ( Mezirow and Taylor, 2009 ).

In response to the complexity of these educational challenges, the Hope Wheel model offers a visual synthesis of foundational “handrails,” “guardrails,” and “lenses” for constructively engaging with climate change across a broad range of subjects and disciplines, thereby facilitating hope-oriented pedagogy for CCE.

2 Background

This article builds on a wide range of scholarship in environmental, sustainability and climate education, as well as relevant theory in environmental/educational psychology and transformative education.

2.1 Climate Change Education (CCE)

As anthropogenic climate change has been acknowledged as an existential threat to human and natural systems ( IPCC, 2023 ), education has been affirmed as a key vector for driving the behavior change necessary for the paradigm change and social transformation needed ( Otto et al., 2020 ; United Nations., 2021 ). Article 14 of the Paris Agreement of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change called for all parties to enhance CCE as a means of limiting global heating to 1.5 degrees Celsius ( United Nations, 2015a ). This is further bolstered by Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 4.7, which states that by 2030, governments must “ensure that all learners acquire the knowledge and skills needed to promote sustainable development” ( United Nations, 2015b ).

Climate Change Education has emerged from a wide range of established educational fields including environmental education (EE), Global Citizenship Education (GCE), Education for Sustainability (EfS) and Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) ( Bourn and Hatley, 2022 ), with a particular emphasis placed on engaging with and envisioning probable, possible and preferable futures ( Kagawa and Selby, 2010 ; Hicks, 2014 ). In a sweeping review of CCE, Reid (2019) documented key trajectories of CCE practice and research, across the cognitive, social-emotional and behavioral dimensions, highlighting the need to engage with “hard truths” of climate change, alongside enabling action to participate in mitigation and adaptation efforts. Reid articulates the challenge for CCE to move beyond climate science literacy to activating “response-ability” ( Sterling and Martin, 2019 ). This requires a “shift in our lifestyles and a transformation of the way we think and act. To achieve this change, we need new skills, values and attitudes that lead to more sustainable societies” ( Reid, 2019 ).

In a systematic review of research evaluating CCE practices, Monroe et al. (2019) identified several essential strategies in CCE, including engaging in deliberative discussions, interacting with scientists, addressing misconceptions, and implementing school or community projects. Headlining the need to address misconceptions is particularly important in countries where climate change is highly politicized and misinformation rampant ( Government Office for Science, 2023 ). Critical thinking skills, as described in the UNESCO (2017) sustainability competencies, are one means of addressing misinformation, as are developing digital, data and information literacies ( Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2018 ).

Also integral to CCE is the relevance of emotions, as reflected in the “bicycle model” of CCE proposed by Cantell et al. (2019) which included an element related to hope and other emotions. The pivotal role of emotions and their impacts in the classroom was further explored by Verlie (2019) , who shifted the role of CCE from “preventing or fixing” to “learning to live” with climate change, a process of acknowledging affects such as loss, anger and grief. This “bearing worlds” is presented as a requirement of climate adaptation, moving CCE toward fostering the knowledge, skills and capacities to navigate change and uncertainty and, importantly, foster empathy for the self and others within this difficult landscape. Here hard truths and hope are explicitly linked to change:

Learning to live-with climate change is therefore a process of bearing worlds, as we simultaneously become more attuned to our enmeshment with the more-than-human, mourn those relationships as they are ruptured, act-with them to cultivate the most promising futures possible, and are ourselves changed throughout the process (2019, 752).

2.2 Climate hope

The concept of hope has a rich, contested and complex history in philosophy, theology and psychology, with Webb (2013) distinguishing five modes of hoping in his review of pedagogies of hope: patient hope, critical hope, sound hope, resolute hope and transformative hope. Pedagogies of hope have also been developed by critical educational theorists such as Freire (2004) and hooks (2003) , who connect hope with individual transformation: “To successfully do the work of unlearning domination, a democratic educator has to cultivate a spirit of hopefulness about the capacity of individuals to change” ( hooks, 2003 , 73).

The field of positive psychology has contributed further understanding through Snyder’s hope theory, which identifies the core hope drivers as goal identification, pathways thinking (waypower), and agency thinking (willpower) (2002).

As a cognitive process connected to both emotional states and behavior, hope is particularly relevant to how educators engage with climate change. Ojala’s exploration of climate and hope, including the factors “trust in self” and “trust in others,” concluded that “constructive hope” is central to environmental engagement in young people ( Ojala, 2012 , 635). This echoes the writings of Macy and Johnstone (2022) on Active Hope, in which they provide a relevant and accessible definition:

Active Hope is a practice. Like tai chi or gardening, it is something we do rather than have. It is a process we can apply to any situation, and it involves three key steps. First, we start from where we are by taking a clear view of reality, acknowledging what we see and how we feel. Second, we identify what we hope for in terms of the direction we’d like things to move in or the values we’d like to see expressed. And third, we take steps to move ourselves or our situation in that direction (2022, 4–5).

Research has applied constructive hope to secondary school climate education, including work confirming the relationship between hope and action competence ( Ojala, 2015 ; Li and Monroe, 2018 ; Finnegan, 2022 ). Finnegan (2023) also explored creative pedagogies–digital storytelling about climate futures–as a means of encouraging hope through positive reappraisal, a cognitive process to support coping and adaptation in which something perceived as negative is re-evaluated and personally meaningful positive steps are identified.

There is also growing interest among researchers in the broad range of emotional responses to climate change and the corresponding interrelationships between wellbeing, learning and action. This includes the importance of acknowledging the impacts of climate anxiety and distress ( Clayton, 2020 ; Hickman et al., 2021 ), as well as recognizing the broad range of climate emotions ( Pihkala, 2022 ). Ojala (2021) connects these broader affective elements to the concepts of pedagogies of discomfort ( Boler and Zembylas, 2002 ) and critical emotional awareness ( Ojala, 2023 ), noting their importance in designing and delivering effective CCE. At the same time, both the intensity of emotional responses to climate change and the very real psychological impacts of traumatic climate change experiences can give educators pause ( Clayton et al., 2023 ).

The critique of false hope has been made by Bendell (2023) and others in the deep adaptation movement. In these circles, those that self-identify as “doomsters” dismiss political and technological climate solutions as “hopium” ( Doig, 2023 ). Instead, they believe that the collapse of civilization is inevitable, with responses ranging from apocalypse prepping to permaculture ( Bromwich, 2020 ). In many ways, the critique of false hope is more related to patient hope ( Webb, 2013 ), hope based in denial ( Ojala, 2012 ), and the misrepresentation of hope as optimism, which educational philosopher Dewey (2008) rejected as encouraging: “a fatalistic contentment with things as they are” (2008, 294). Further distinguishing between hope and optimism, Orr (2007) commented:

Optimism is the recognition that the odds are in your favor; hope is the faith that things will work out whatever the odds. Hope is a verb with its sleeves rolled up. Hopeful people are actively engaged in defying or changing the odds. Optimism leans back, puts its feet up, and wears a confident look knowing that the deck is stacked (2007, 1392).

2.3 Transformative learning

Many of the aforementioned tenets of hope-based learning are supported by the literature on Transformative Learning (TL) theory ( Mezirow, 2000 ; Taylor and Cranton, 2012 ), which underpins the learner-centered, action-oriented, relational approaches to CCE offered by EfS and ESD. These pedagogies champion a holistic and transformational education which “addresses learning content and outcomes, pedagogy and the learning environment… and achieves its purpose by transforming society” ( QAA and Advance HE, 2021 ). The TL process necessarily begins with self-awareness, facilitating change “from the inside out” ( d’Abreu and Cripps, 2023 ) and centers on developing socially and environmentally critical thinking that challenges unsustainable normative behaviors and importantly, “empowers learners to take informed decisions and responsible actions for environmental integrity, economic viability and a just society” ( UNESCO, 2017 ).

Mezirow’s definition of TL highlights this agentive purpose as being both an individual and collective endeavor describing it as:

The process by which we transform our taken-for-granted frames of reference (meaning perspectives, habits of minds, mind sets) to make them more inclusive, discriminating, open, emotionally capable of change, and reflective so that they may generate beliefs and opinions that will prove more true or justified to guide action. Transformative Learning involves participation in constructive discourse to use the experience of others to assess reasons justifying these assumptions, and making an action decision based on the resulting insight ( Mezirow, 2000 : 8).

Mezirow highlights that TL is triggered by “disorienting dilemmas,” highly pertinent in the CE context. A liminality state characterizes transformation from the safety of “established frames of reference” to new experiences or understandings that often involve loss, uncertainty and discomfort ( Taylor and Cranton, 2012 ), mirroring calls to acknowledge and engage with the affective elements of CCE outlined above. Core to TL is engaging with this discomfort, sitting with uncertainty and creating action pathways by consciously “moving from safe to brave spaces” ( Winks, 2018 ). Also critical is the development from individual to collective engagement, multiple perspective taking and relational learning with others and other discipline areas. Drawing on a range of current, relevant multidisciplinary sources that intersect with TL pedagogy, the Hope Wheel aims to enable TL in the CCE context that responds to the complexity and challenges educators and learners face.

3 Pedagogies of hope

The Hope Wheel was designed to bridge the gaps between theory in educational psychology research and classroom practice by translating key elements supporting a climate hope approach into guidelines. The model includes core climate hope concepts organized into the following digestible categories: handrails, guardrails and lenses to guide educator engagement with the challenge and complexity of CCE.

3.1 Methodology

The Hope Wheel is the result of the authors review of the literature, as captured in the Background section above, and their experiences in designing and delivering CCE, which are explored in the Discussion section that follows. As a Curriculum, Instruction and Pedagogy (CIP) article, this model does not represent a systematic review, nor is it the result of longitudinal or experimental studies. Rather, the Hope Wheel reflects a timely synthesis of theory, empirical studies and experience into what the authors intend to be a practical tool for both educators and researchers.

3.2 Handrails

The first handrail highlights the crucial importance of Honesty and telling “hard truths” about climate situations, (contrasting with the mis-/disinformation and false hope guardrails later explored). It signposts that transformative CCE is not just about delivering, deciphering or digesting accurate scientific facts, but needs to be coupled with a solutions-orientated approach to enable hope-based solutions.

The Awareness handrail highlights that self-reflection is core to the transformative learning process and is initiated by developing critical awareness of the nested interconnections linking the self, others and the more-than-human world. Here identifying the relational, situated realities of climate leaning and embedded emotions are important, as is the ability to question normative narratives that present biased, inaccurate or exclusive understandings of climate change dilemmas ( Wals, 2007 ).

The Spaceholding handrail acknowledges that enabling both safe and brave spaces is crucial to protect leaners and the emotional engagement CCE involves, while also empowering their potential agency. Here again, we engage with an important tension–holding a space for emotional reflection and transformation, while deflecting denial, disengagement or disempowerment by creating “safe-enough” spaces for constructive hope in CCE to flourish ( Weintrobe, 2021 ; Hamilton, 2022 ; Singer-Brodowski et al., 2022 ).

Both awareness and spaceholding can support emotional engagement with climate change, critical to empowering hope-based, transformative, action-oriented learning opportunities.

Lastly, the Action handrail headlines moving from merely problematizing issues to creating purposeful pathways through motivating both individual and collective action. Important here is the recognition that individual actions, though essential, need to be scaled up and supported through collective efforts, both to avoid imposing unreasonable burden on learners and to enable both “willpower” and “waypower” ( Snyder, 2002 ). Reflection on individual action and agency must be coupled with recognition that transformative change is a collective endeavor, a lifelong learning process in which we need to collaborate with others for success.

In the Hope Wheel, the handrails are represented as spokes of the wheel, illustrating the integrated nature of the elements in terms of the structural integrity of the wheel. In addition, each spoke highlights two aspects of the handrail which can be understood as in productive tension, which is further explored in Table 1 .

Table 1. Hope Wheel spokes/handrails and educator practices (from-to).

3.3 Guardrails

The guardrails of this model provide the outlines or rim to the Hope Wheel. They aim to guide engagement with the scientific and emotional dimensions of climate education by raising awareness of both what to acknowledge and what to avoid in the classroom.

The Climate anxiety guardrail acknowledges the need for educators to support learner wellbeing and avoid harm while exploring complexity, uncertainty and challenge in CCE issues and the range of emotions this encompasses. To avoid the triggers of climate distress and denial the Hope Wheel draws on trauma-informed practices to safeguard learner wellbeing. Educational psychology establishes the need to create ground rules such as being sensitive to learner lived experiences, giving clear trigger warnings, wellbeing breaks, time out and to make post-session one-to-one support available to learners ( Singer-Brodowski et al., 2022 ). Also critical is to acknowledge and validate the broad range of climate emotions that may surface in a supportive, sensitive and non-judgmental fashion. Enabling and validating emotional engagement is critical to support learning of undoubtedly challenging themes.

The False hope guardrail warns against simplifying or sugarcoating issues in hope-based pedagogy. This supports the honesty handrail by ensuring that solutions and responses are not overly optimistic, simplified or unrealistic and that the distinctions between optimism and hope are examined critically. This guardrail also invites critique of doomist and techno-fix narratives that present disempowering or disingenuous conceptualizations of hope. Also germane to this guardrail is avoiding the pitfall of outsourcing hope by laying the burden of responsibility on individual learners (see more in the Discussion).

The Mis-/Disinformation guardrail highlights the necessity of developing digital, data and research literacy skills to ensure learners can identify false/misleading information, critically evaluate underlying biases and identify robust, reliable and trustworthy sources. This involves actively addressing misconceptions to prevent the spread of misinformation and build critical thinking capacity. This guardrail is related to the honesty handrail, as Frumkin (2022) noted, “Telling the truth means recognizing, naming – and countering the uncomfortable reality of deliberate disinformation promoted by vested interests” (2022, 4). It is also supported by the perspectives lens below that headlines the need for multidisciplinary approaches and acknowledging multiple worldviews.

Additional to the core handrail and guardrail elements are the lenses to enable a holistic, equitable and inclusive understanding of CCE issues. Through these lenses, important cross-cutting themes related to all components of the Hope Wheel are made visible, ensuring a holistic range of critical viewpoints.

The Complexity lens acknowledges the absence of simple, linear, discreet solutions to climate change and notes the need for educators to lean into uncertainty, ambiguity and inherent contradictions. Highlighting that there are no “silver bullet” answers, either scientifically or emotionally, is challenging but essential if we are to respond honestly and authentically to students concerns and needs. Enabling a holistic, systems-thinking perspective ( UNESCO, 2017 ) that explores the interconnected, interdependent tensions in CCE is therefore essential. This encourages a “birds eye view” of issues that considers the relational, contextualized and nested nature of global challenges.

The Justice lens ensures a historical perspective is included, inviting the question: How did we get here? It recognizes the impacts of colonialism and unequal global power structures and the extractivism they unleashed, in both human and environmental terms. This lens ensures the causes, impacts and proposed solutions for climate change are always critiqued from a social justice vantage point, making visible historic social, economic and environmental injustices and how their impacts today, and in the future, are disproportionately and unjustly distributed across social and geographical domains.

The Perspectives lens invites reflection and dialogue on how diverse individuals/communities/geographical locations perceive climate change issues and why. Learning from multiple perspectives and voices is paramount to enabling equitable solution pathways and understanding that climate change impacts are situated and contextual. This includes drawing from a range of subjects, discipline areas and multiple knowledges, and can be achieved by facilitating collaborations. Inclusivity and diversity are engaged through this lens.

The Creativity lens enables “What if…?” thinking opportunities while exploring the potency of creative solutions. Engaging creativity is a hopeful act in and of itself and can access and channel emotional responses toward positive solutions. Visioning is central to this lens, inviting students to envision probable, possible and preferable future scenarios driven by creativity. Encouraging and creating visions for the future–particularly positive, collective visions–underpins hope-based pedagogy, while also allowing expression of, and responses to, a range of climate emotions such as anger, joy and pain.

Lastly, the Empathy lens advances a culture of care, applying care, kindness and empathy to all aspects of this model, to ourselves, to others and to the more-than-human world in response to a “culture of uncare” ( Weintrobe, 2021 ). Reflecting on one’s own and others’ feelings and emotions is encouraged and validated, as is developing knowledge, understanding and care of the natural world.

These lenses therefore are not presented as optional but rather integral to CCE, presenting essential layers through which to engage a holistic pedagogy that is critical, relational and emancipatory ( Wals et al., 2009 ) drawing on multidisciplinary theoretical perspectives and evidence-informed practices.

Figure 1 illustrates the key elements of this model in an abstract manner through the visual metaphor of a wheel in which the handrails are spokes, the guardrails are the rim, and the lenses can be layered on top of the wheel. Table 2 presents each element in the model, questions related to this element that capture the pedagogical approach, and examples and resources for educators.

Figure 1. The Hope Wheel: handrails (spokes), guardrails (rim) and lenses to enable hope-based pedagogy in Climate Change Education.

Table 2. The Hope Wheel: Applying the elements.

To further illustrate the application of the Hope Wheel, Figure 2 indicates how the elements interact – for example, how two handrails relate to one another, and how one or more lenses can be layered upon the handrails–in terms of how an educator might approach program design and evaluation.

Figure 2. The application of the Hope Wheel: an example illustrating (A) the Honesty handrail, (B) the relationships between the Honesty and Action handrails, (C) the layering of the Complexity lens over the Honesty handrail, and (D) the layering of both the Complexity and Justice lenses over the relationship between the Honesty and Action handrails.

4 Discussion

The Hope Wheel uses accessible, visual metaphors to provide guidance for educators in response to calls for bridging the gap between research and teaching for sustainability ( Leal Filho et al., 2023 ). With such a model, even when synthesizing and responding to a broad range of literature, there are subjective decisions on what to include and how to design educational activities for educators. This article also reflects the choices of developing a working model based on a visual metaphor, and it is worth noting that a compass and flower were also considered as a means of illustrating the relationships between the various elements. We welcome other researchers and practitioners to continue to refine and improve this model and metaphor.

By aggregating central current principles from diverse disciplines, The Hope Wheel identifies pedagogical priorities for CCE that can “challenge students to participate actively, think critically and reflect” ( Scarff Seatter and Ceulemans, 2017 , 47). It champions challenging society’s dominant narratives and supports “transgressing the hidden curriculum of unsustainability: toward a relational pedagogy of hope” ( Wals et al., 2009 ).

This process, Wals et al. go on to explain, encompasses three elements; a critical element, enabling the “space to ask bold and disruptive questions about why things are the way they are, to learn how things can be changed but also what keeps them from changing,” as well as exploring dis-/misinformation. A relational element, that connects the personal, inner self with other humans (“those not in sight, those thinking differently”) and the non-human world. Lastly, an emancipatory element that foregrounds agency through “autonomy and self-determination.” The concepts behind a pedagogy of hope are grounded in these tenets and encourage educators to intentionally design opportunities for “transgressive learning” to stimulate a shift in the way the learner sees the world.

Further to this, the Hope Wheel acknowledges the necessity to respond to young people’s well-documented concerns and anxiety around the climate crisis. We argue that this can be done through sensitive, hope-based, action-oriented approaches that protect learner wellbeing while empowering agency through creativity, collective action and a culture of care.

This article represents the first articulation of a theoretical conceptual model, and the authors acknowledge the need for rigorous testing and evaluation. Some current examples of operationalizing this model in practice are shared below, followed by a critique of climate hope.

4.1 Pedagogies of hope in practice

4.1.1 spaces, honesty and awareness handrails operationalized.

Finnegan (2023) used speculative digital storytelling as both an educational intervention and participatory research method. This process–in which secondary school students participated in a series of workshops and produced video “letters from the future”–illustrates many aspects of the pedagogies of hope model. The workshops provided a “safe enough space” for emotionally engaging with climate change, in which difficult discussions were facilitated and honest information about the causes and solutions to climate change were presented. As a shared experience of reflection and support, the workshops also developed self-awareness and world awareness. Finally, the invitation to create a letter from their future self in the year 2050 supported both envisioning and communicating students’ hopes and fears for the future.

An example of informal climate education is the Museum of Climate Hope. 1 A museum trail across seven different institutions was created with supplemental digital content. The museum objects–and species at the garden–were chosen by students, educators, curators and researchers to explore the themes of resilience, innovation and transformation. This educational experience illustrates the handrail of awareness (of self and world) and perspectives lens looking at interdisciplinarity, with institutions and their collections covering humanities, social sciences, and STEM subjects. The Museum of Climate Hope also applied the justice lens by inviting acknowledgment of historic injustices, for example the items in the anthropology and archeology museum include a Hawaiian feather cloak (sustainably harvested from now endangered and extinct species) that was given as a gift to a representative of the British Empire, as well as a reindeer parka from the Evenki people in Siberia. In both cases, themes such as indigenous stewardship of place and the legacies of colonization inform modern understandings of climate vulnerability engaging the perspective and empathy lenses.

As a relatively small-scale pilot engagement project, the Museum of Climate Hope is not presented as proof of the Hope Wheel, but rather as an example of how the components of this model were incorporated into program design and delivery. Future research and evaluation activities are required to explore in more detail the relationship between such interventions and measurements of self-reported climate hope.

Through the relationships developed with schools in the above projects, the Museum of Climate Hope team was invited to deliver an assembly on climate hope to the sixth form (ages 16 to 18) of a local secondary school. This invitation followed a presentation to the same students by a climate scientist who used the opportunity to focus on the hard facts of climate catastrophe, illustrated by visuals of destruction and suffering. Afterward, students complained that the climate scientist misread their needs, and, in trying to wake them up to the climate crisis, only deepened levels of disengagement and despair. In this light, honesty about the situation needs to be balanced with honesty about possible solutions, while at the same time creating safe/brave spaces that lead to increased self-awareness and empower action.

4.1.2 Awareness and action handrails operationalized

Operationalizing the handrails of self-awareness and honesty in the Hope Wheel, d’Abreu (2022a , b) used Freire’s praxis-based pedagogy to engage students to envision change needed around social, economic and environmental challenges. Students were invited to apply theories of culture and communication–for example, Tajfel’s Social Identity Theory ( Tajfel and Turner, 1979 ) and Hall (1989) Cultural Iceberg model (1989)–to their own lived experience to identify issues of prejudice, stereotyping and othering they perceived within their cultural landscapes. Students created a video entitled “My Cultural Identity,” in which they reflected on and identified problematic identity representations within cultures, and suggested ways in which these might be challenged and changed. This invited reflection on self and world identities and envisioning possible solutions to the situation with the aim of enabling hope through the learning process. A “cinema screening” of videos was shown in plenary at the end of the course, collectively sharing these multiple perspectives and communicating possible actions to the issues students identified.

A further example is students in Oxford, UK collaborating with students in Grenoble, France on a COIL project (Co-operative, Online International Learning) in which they researched an issue of social, economic or environmental significance, comparing its causes, impacts and related campaigns in their distinct geographical locations. They conducted research and compared potential individual actions and collective responses locally and shared these with their team members via an online noticeboard. Here honesty around the situation and solutions was required and awareness of self and world was developed. Students worked on topic areas such as ecocide and fast fashion, plastic pollution and food poverty, generating possible solutions and pathways working with the aforementioned guardrails and engaging the lenses of complexity, justice, perspectives and creativity.

4.2 Climate hope pitfalls

This model builds on the premise that active, constructive, and transformative conceptualizations of hope provide a means of purposefully engaging climate change learning. However, it is worth briefly reflecting on more critical approaches to the concept of hope in the context of climate change.

One critique of climate hope could be characterized as imposed or outsourced hope, in which the burden of hope is imposed on others, versus participating in individual and collective action. This imposition of hope was described by Bill McKibben during an interview with climate activist Xiye Bastida: ‘When they say, “You give me hope,” part of what they’re saying is, “I don’t want to feel so bad about myself”’ ( Schwartz, 2023 ).

As captured in the guardrail of false hope, there can be conceptualizations of hope that are disempowering and unproductive. The observations above of outsourcing hope by imposing it on young climate activists raises the question of whose hope, and to what end? When used to justify an avoidance of discomfort and lack of action, this form of hope is not a productive form of engagement with climate change. This sentiment was echoed by Greta Thunberg when she noted that “hope is not passive, hope is not blah, blah, blah…hope is telling the truth and taking action” ( Thunberg, 2021 ).

The Hope Wheel provides a constructive framework for engaging with hope-based pedagogies. Without being prescriptive, the handrails, guardrails and lenses signpost key practical elements and considerations for educators to address in CCE while also identifying some of the potential pitfalls around unhelpful climate hope narratives.

As mentioned above, this Curriculum, Instruction and Pedagogy article is not a systematic review or original research, but rather contribution to the environmental and sustainability education community building on research and practice in educational psychology related to climate change and hope. Researchers and practitioners are invited to apply, adapt and critique the Hope Wheel, with future research necessary to validate the efficacy of this model.

5 Conclusion

Hope doesn’t soothe pain with pleasantries but is a tender reminder that the door to transformation is always open ( Nwulu, 2023 ) 2

A wheel presents a tool with structural integrity due to the intersection of the hub, spokes and rim. We use wheels to travel forward with a desired end destination in mind. The Hope Wheel aims to simplify core tenets in the literature on hope in CCE to support educators. In particular, this model offers guidance on what to include (handrails), what to avoid (guardrails) and important considerations (lenses) when designing and implementing formal and informal learning experiences.

It affirms that educators can create spaces for difficult conversations while protecting learner well-being, support honest explorations of hard climate change truths while addressing misconceptions, and facilitate the journey of self-awareness toward individual and collective action. There is no single model for pedagogies of hope in CCE, and the applications outlined above illustrate some examples of different approaches to implementing these concepts in practice. Educators are invited to reflect on aspects of the wheel they are already applying in their teaching practice and to explore how these might be enhanced or developed.

Learning about climate change can be uncomfortable, but in these moments of discomfort are the seeds of transformation. As educators, we do not need to have all the answers–armed with creativity and care, mindful of different perspectives and climate justice, we can all cultivate hope and equip learners with tools to navigate this time of change and uncertainty.

Author contributions

WF: Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing. Cd: Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author/s.

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of the article. WF received funding from UKRI (EPSRC doctoral studentship).

Acknowledgments

We would wish to thank Tim Favier, Jo Hamilton, Claire Lee, Elizabeth Marks, and Maria Ojala for their insightful conversations, comment and critiques on pedagogies of hope in CCE. We would also like to thank Tina Fawcett and Anya Gleizer for their contributions to the Museum of Climate Hope and the Foundation students at Oxford Brookes Business School.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• ^ The Museum of Climate Hope is a partnership between the Environmental Change Institute (ECI) and the Gardens, Libraries and Museums (GLAM) at the University of Oxford with funding from the Public and Community Engagement with Research seed fund. More information is available at http://climatehope.uk/ .
• ^ Excerpt from “Like Prayer” by Selina Nwulu, a poem presented at the Hope and Action panel at the Everything is Connected season of the Cultural Programme, Humanities Division, University of Oxford, 28 October 2023.

Bendell, J. (2023). Breaking Together: a freedom-loving response to collapse. Bristol: Good Works.

Google Scholar

Boler, M., and Zembylas, M. (2002). “Discomforting Truths: The Emotional Terrain of Understanding Difference,” in Pedagogies of Difference: Rethinking Education for Social Justice , ed. P. Trifonas (New York, NY: Routledge).

Bourn, D., and Hatley, J. (2022). Target 4.7 of the Sustainable Development Goals: Evidence in Schools in England (No. 22), (Development Education Research Centre Research Reports. Development Education Research Centre. London: UCL Institute of Education.

Bromwich, J. E. (2020). The Darkest Timeline. London: The New York Times.

Cantell, H., Tolppanen, S., Aarnio-Linnanvuori, E., and Lehtonen, A. (2019). Bicycle model on climate change education: presenting and evaluating a model. Environ. Educ. Res. 25, 717–731. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2019.1570487

Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Clayton, S. (2020). Climate anxiety: Psychological responses to climate change. J. Anxiety Disord. 74:102263. doi: 10.1016/j.janxdis.2020.102263

PubMed Abstract | Crossref Full Text | Google Scholar

Clayton, S., Sangalang, A., and Anderson, R. (2023). Emotions and perceptions surrounding teaching climate change in the United States: results from a teacher survey. Environ. Educ. Res. [Epub ahead of print].

d’Abreu, C. (2022a). Pedagogies of Purpose: Education for a fairer, fitter future. InForm: A journal for International Foundation Programme professionals. Berkshire: University of Reading.

d’Abreu, C. (2022b). “Moving from safe to brave spaces,” in Presented at the Sustainability in Learning and Teaching Seminar Series, Centre for Educational Development and Innovation , Glasgow.

d’Abreu, C., and Cripps, K. (2023). “From the inside out: orienting the world of work to the work of the world,” in Presented at the Advance HE Sustainability Symposium , Cork.

Dewey, J. (2008). The middle works. 7: 1912 - 1914: [essays, book reviews, encyclopedia articles in the 1912 - 1914 period, and Interest and Effort in Education]. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Doig, T. (2023). Friday essay: if the world’s systems are “already cracking” due to climate change, is there a post-doom silver lining?. Available online at: http://theconversation.com/friday-essay-if-the-worlds-systems-are-already-cracking-due-to-climate-change-is-there-a-post-doom-silver-lining-213890 (accessed November 21, 2023).

Edge Research (2022). The State of Climate Change Education: Findings from a National Survey of Educators. Washington, DC: Edge Research and NAAEE.

Finnegan, W. (2022). Educating for hope and action competence: a study of secondary school students and teachers in England. Environ. Educ. Res. [Epub ahead of print]. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2022.2120963

Finnegan, W. (2023). ‘It’s beautiful, living without fear that the world will end soon’ – digital storytelling, climate futures, and young people in the UK and Ireland. Childrens Geogr. 21, 898–913. doi: 10.1080/14733285.2022.2153329

Freire, P. (2004). Pedagogy of hope: reliving “Pedagogy of the oppressed”. London: Continuum.

Frumkin, H. (2022). Hope, health, and the climate crisis. J. Climate Change Health 5:100115. doi: 10.1016/j.joclim.2022.100115

Government Office for Science (2023). What impact do climate change misinformation and disinformation have?. Available online at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/climate-change-misinformation-impacts/what-impact-do-climate-change-misinformation-and-disinformation-have-html (accessed November 29, 2023).

Greer, K., Sheldrake, R., Rushton, E., Kitson, A., Hargreaves, E., and Walshe, N. (2023). Teaching climate change and sustainability: A survey of teachers in England (Report), UCL Centre for Climate Change and Sustainability Education. London: UCL Centre for Climate Change and Sustainability Education.

Hall, E. T. (1989). Beyond culture, Anchor Books ed. New York: Anchor Books.

Hamilton, J. (2022). “Alchemizing sorrow into deep determination”: Emotional reflexivity and climate change engagement. Front. Clim. 4:786631. doi: 10.3389/fclim.2022.786631

Hickman, C., Marks, E., Pihkala, P., Clayton, S., Lewandowski, R. E., Mayall, E. E., et al. (2021). Climate anxiety in children and young people and their beliefs about government responses to climate change: a global survey. Lancet Planetary Health 5, e863–e873. doi: 10.1016/S2542-5196(21)00278-3

Hicks, D. (2014). Educating for hope in troubled times: climate change and the transition to a post-carbon future. London: Institute of Education Press.

hooks, b. (2003). Teaching community: a pedagogy of hope. New York: Routledge.

Howard-Jones, P., Sands, D., Dillon, J., and Fenton-Jones, F. (2021). The views of teachers in England on an action-oriented climate change curriculum. Environ. Educ. Res. 27, 1660–1680. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2021.1937576

IPCC (2023). AR6 Synthesis Report: Climate Change 2023. Available online at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/syr/ (accessed March 26, 23).

Kagawa, F., and Selby, D. (eds) (2010). Education and climate change: living and learning in interesting times, Routledge research in education. New York: Routledge.

Kerret, D., Orkibi, H., and Ronen, T. (2016). Testing a model linking environmental hope and self-control with students’ positive emotions and environmental behavior. J. Environ. Educ. 47, 307–317.

Leal Filho, W., Frankenberger Silva, F., Salvia, A., Shiel, C., Paço, A., Price, E., et al. (2023). An overview of research trends on sustainability in higher education – an exploratory study. IJSHE 24, 1161–1175. doi: 10.1108/IJSHE-08-2022-0252

Li, C. J., and Monroe, M. C. (2019). Exploring the essential psychological factors in fostering hope concerning climate change. Environ. Educ. Res. 25, 936–954. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2017.1367916

Li, C., and Monroe, M. C. (2018). Development and Validation of the Climate Change Hope Scale for High School Students. Environ. Behav. 50, 454–479. doi: 10.1177/0013916517708325

Macy, J., and Johnstone, C. (2022). Active hope: how to face the mess we’re in with unexpected resilience and creative power. Novato, CA: New World Library.

Mezirow, J. (2000). Learning as transformation: critical perspectives on a theory in progress, 1. ed. ed, The Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Mezirow, J., and Taylor, E. W. (2009). Transformative learning in practice: insights from community, workplace, and higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Monroe, M. C., Plate, R. R., Oxarart, A., Bowers, A., and Chaves, W. A. (2019). Identifying effective climate change education strategies: a systematic review of the research. Environ. Educ. Res. 25, 791–812. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2017.1360842

Nwulu, S. (2023). Like Prayer [Unpublished manuscript].

Ojala, M. (2012). Hope and climate change: the importance of hope for environmental engagement among young people. Environ. Educ. Res. 18, 625–642.

Ojala, M. (2015). Hope in the Face of Climate Change: Associations With Environmental Engagement and Student Perceptions of Teachers’ Emotion Communication Style and Future Orientation. J. Environ. Educ. 46, 133–148. doi: 10.1080/00958964.2015.1021662

Ojala, M. (2021). Safe spaces or a pedagogy of discomfort? Senior high-school teachers’ meta-emotion philosophies and climate change education. J. Environ. Educ. 52, 40–52.

Ojala, M. (2023). Climate-change education and critical emotional awareness (CEA): Implications for teacher education. Educ. Philos. Theory 55, 1109–1120. doi: 10.1080/00131857.2022.2081150

Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development [OECD] (2018). The future of education and skills: Education 2030. Paris: OECD Education Working Papers.

Orr, D. W. (2007). Optimism and hope in a hotter time. Conserv. Biol. 21, 1392–1395. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2007.00836.x

Otto, I. M., Donges, J. F., Cremades, R., Bhowmik, A., Hewitt, R. J., Lucht, W., et al. (2020). Social tipping dynamics for stabilizing Earth’s climate by 2050. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 117, 2354–2365. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1900577117

Pihkala, P. (2022). Toward a taxonomy of climate emotions. Front. Clim. 3:738154. doi: 10.3389/fclim.2021.738154

QAA and Advance HE (2021). Education for Sustainable Development: ESD Guidance 2021. QAA and Advance HE. New York, NY: Gloucester and York.

Reid, A. (2019). Climate change education and research: Possibilities and potentials versus problems and perils? Environ. Educ. Res. 25, 767–790. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2019.1664075

Rousell, D., and Cutter-Mackenzie-Knowles, A. (2020). A systematic review of climate change education: giving children and young people a ‘voice’ and a ‘hand’ in redressing climate change. Childrens Geogr. 18, 191–208. doi: 10.1080/14733285.2019.1614532

Scarff Seatter, C., and Ceulemans, K. (2017). Teaching sustainability in higher education: Pedagogical styles that make a difference. CJHE 47, 47–70. doi: 10.47678/cjhe.v47i2.186284

Schwartz, J. (2023). Two Climate Activists, 40 Years Apart in Age, on the Movement’s Future. New York, NY: The New York Times.

Singer-Brodowski, M., Förster, R., Eschenbacher, S., Biberhofer, P., and Getzin, S. (2022). Facing crises of unsustainability: creating and holding safe enough spaces for transformative learning in higher education for sustainable development. Front. Educ. 7:787490. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2022.787490

Snyder, C. R. (2002). Hope theory: Rainbows in the mind. Psychol. Inquiry 13, 249–275. doi: 10.1207/S15327965PLI1304_01

Sterling, S., and Martin, S. (2019). Climate crisis and the response-ability of universities. Times Higher Education (THE). Available online at: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/climate-crisis-and-response-ability-universities (accessed November 29, 2023).

Tajfel, H., and Turner, J. (1979). “An integrative theory of intergroup conflict,” in The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations , eds W. G. Austin and S. Worchel (Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole Pub.Co).

Taylor, E. W., and Cranton, P. (2012). The handbook of transformative learning: theory, research, and practice, Jossey-Bass higher and adult education series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Teach the Future (2022). Teaching the Future: Research with teachers in England on climate education and the curriculum. London: SOS-UK.

Thunberg (2021). Greta Thunberg at Youth4Climate Summit 2021 in Milan. Milan: Thunberg.

UNESCO (2017). Education for sustainable development goals: learning objectives. Paris: UNESCO.

United Nations (2015a). Paris Agreement (21st Conference of the Parties). Paris: United Nations.

United Nations (2015b). The Sustainable Development Goals. THE 17 GOALS | Sustainable Development. Paris: United Nations.

United Nations. (2021). Co-Chairs conclusions of Education and Environment Ministers Summit at COP26 UN Climate Change Conference (COP26) at the SEC – Glasgow 2021. Available online at: https://ukcop26.org/co-chairs-conclusions-of-education-and-environment-ministers-summit-at-cop26/ (accessed November 8, 2021).

Verlie, B. (2019). Bearing worlds: learning to live-with climate change. Environ. Educ. Res. 25, 751–766. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2019.1637823

Wals, A. E. J. (2007). Learning in a changing world and changing in al learning world: reflexively fumbling towards sustainability. South. Afr. J. Environ. Educ. 24, 35–45.

Wals, A. E. J., van der Hoeven, E. M. M. M., and Blanken, H. (2009). The Acoustics of Social Learning: Designing learning processes that contribute to a more sustainable world. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers.

Webb, D. (2013). Pedagogies of Hope. Stud. Philos. Educ. 32, 397–414. doi: 10.1007/s11217-012-9336-1

Weintrobe, S. (2021). Psychological roots of the climate crisis: neoliberal exceptionalism and the culture of uncare, Psychoanalytic horizons. New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic.

Winks, L. (2018). “Discomfort, Challenge and Brave Spaces in Higher Education,” in Implementing Sustainability in the Curriculum of Universities, World Sustainability Series , ed. W. Leal Filho (Cham: Springer International Publishing), doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-70281-0_7

Keywords : climate change, education, pedagogy, hope, education for sustainability

Citation: Finnegan W and d’Abreu C (2024) The hope wheel: a model to enable hope-based pedagogy in Climate Change Education. Front. Psychol. 15:1347392. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1347392

Received: 30 November 2023; Accepted: 26 February 2024; Published: 20 March 2024.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2024 Finnegan and d’Abreu. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: William Finnegan, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Engineering Activities For Middle School Students: Ferris Wheel STEM

Table of Contents

Engineering Activities For Middle School Students: STEM Fun

Get ready to have a blast with these engineering activities designed specifically for middle school students! STEM fun is all about hands-on learning and problem-solving, and these activities are no exception. Whether you’re a future engineer or just love building things, these activities, which can double as a science experiment, are sure to keep you engaged and entertained. So grab your hard hat and get ready to dive into the exciting world of engineering with these STEM fun activities!

The Fascinating Story of George Ferris and the Ferris Wheel 

Discover the amazing tale of George Ferris, the visionary engineer behind the iconic Ferris Wheel. This captivating story takes us back to the late 19th century, when the world was oblivious to the wonders that awaited them. Against all odds, Ferris set out to create a monument that would revolutionize the entertainment industry and stand the test of time. Keep reading to find out the different ways he used engineering projects. Then, grab the FREE engineering activity at the end of this post.

Born in 1859, George Ferris had a passion for engineering and a relentless drive for innovation. Inspired by the Eiffel Tower, which was the star of the 1889 Paris Exposition, he envisioned a colossal wheel that would tower over all other structures. However, his grand ambition was met with skepticism and disbelief from the engineering community.

Undeterred by the naysayers.

Undeterred by the naysayers, Ferris embarked on a mission to bring his revolutionary creation to life. He faced numerous obstacles, from securing funding for his audacious project to convincing authorities of its safety. It took immense determination and persuasive skills, but finally, in 1893, the first Ferris Wheel was unveiled at the World’s Columbian Exposition in Chicago.

Ferris’ commitment to innovation and problem-solving shines through his remarkable accomplishments. He not only designed a structure that could carry thousands of passengers at a time but also ensured their safety with meticulous engineering. His creation showcased the perfect blend of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) principles, making it a thrilling and accessible experience for all.

Embarking on your own engineering adventures, you can draw inspiration from Ferris’ remarkable story. His unwavering dedication and ability to overcome obstacles remind us that no dream is too big or idea too audacious. As you delve into the history and engineering marvels of the Ferris Wheel, prepare to be amazed by the ingenuity and brilliance behind its mechanics, construction, and the science that powers its smooth rotations.

Spark your curiosity and ignite your passion for STEM.

Join us on this virtual journey through time, where you’ll witness the birth of an entertainment icon and unravel the secrets that make the Ferris Wheel a true engineering marvel. Get ready for a fun-filled exploration that will spark your curiosity and ignite your passion for STEM. Whether you’re an aspiring engineer, a science enthusiast, or simply someone who appreciates the wonders of human ingenuity, the Ferris Wheel’s story is sure to leave a lasting impression.

The first activity you can try is building a spaghetti bridge. No Lesson Plans required! This challenge will test your engineering skills as you design and construct a bridge using only spaghetti and glue. You’ll need to think about the materials’ strength and stability to create a bridge that can hold the most weight. It’s a great way to learn about the forces at play in structures and experiment with different designs. Plus, it’s a lot of fun to see how much weight your bridge can support!

Create a Catapult

Another exciting activity is creating a catapult. Using everyday materials like popsicle sticks, rubber bands, and a plastic spoon, you’ll build your own catapult and explore the principles of physics and projectile motion. It’s a fun way to learn about potential and kinetic energy as you launch objects into the air. It’s a hands-on way to understand the science behind projectiles and apply engineering concepts to solve real-world problems. Get ready to launch objects into the air and see how far they can go!

Lastly, you can try building a paper tower. Using only sheets of paper and tape, you’ll challenge yourself to construct the tallest and most stable tower possible. This activity will test your problem-solving skills as you consider balance, stability, and weight distribution. You’ll also get the chance to experiment with different folding and construction techniques to create a tower that can withstand the forces acting upon it. It’s a creative and engaging way to learn about the properties of materials and the importance of structural stability. Middle school and high school students love this challenge.

Get ready to have a blast with these engineering activities designed specifically for middle school students! STEM fun is all about hands-on learning and problem-solving, and these activities are no exception. Whether you’re a future engineer or just love building things, these activities are sure to keep you engaged and entertained. So grab your hard hat and get ready to dive into the exciting world of engineering with these STEM fun activities!

Engaging Middle Schoolers in STEM: Exploring the Engineering Design Process 

Are you looking for a fun and engaging way to introduce middle school students to the exciting world of engineering? Well, look no further! Through easy STEM challenges and hands-on activities, you can ignite their curiosity and inspire a love for STEM. By following the engineering design process for George Ferris, you can encourage students to think critically and problem-solve like real engineers – bolstering their STEM education with simple STEM projects middle school children really enjoy.

Brainstorm, Design, Build & Test

One way to engage middle schoolers in STEM is by challenging them to brainstorm, design, build, and test their own creations. This hands-on approach allows students to apply their knowledge and skills in a practical way. It encourages them to think outside the box and come up with unique solutions to real-world problems. Whether it’s designing a sustainable energy source or building a bridge that can withstand extreme weather conditions, students will develop their creativity and innovation through these engineering challenges. For students interested in STEM careers, project-based learning is a powerful way to exercise creative thinking and practice the scientific method for a science project.

Collaboration and Teamwork

Collaboration and teamwork are also essential aspects of the engineering design process. By working in groups, students learn how to effectively communicate their ideas, listen to others, and compromise when necessary. This fosters a sense of camaraderie and teaches them the importance of collaboration in achieving a common goal. Together, they can tackle complex engineering challenges and learn from one another’s perspectives, setting the foundation for future engineering pursuits. Middle school STEM projects like building a Ferris Wheel based on student’s own design, provide an engineering challenge with simple ingredients for engaging STEM learning. There are project guides and a list of various materials needed for young engineers to get started with a great activity that is sure to get them bonus points at any science fair. 

So, why wait? Engage middle schoolers in STEM today and watch their excitement and passion for engineering grow. By providing hands-on activities, encouraging critical thinking, fostering creativity, and promoting collaboration, you can create an environment that inspires and empowers young minds. The world of engineering awaits, and with your guidance, these students will be well-prepared to tackle its challenges head-on.

Fun and Interactive STEM Activities for Middle Schoolers: Building Your Own Ferris Wheel 

Learn about engineering while having a blast with this hands-on project! Building your own Ferris wheel is a fantastic way for middle schoolers to immerse themselves in the world of STEM. Dive into the world of physics and design as you construct your very own Ferris wheel. This activity will allow you to explore the principles of motion, forces, and gravity while having a great time.

Engage in problem-solving skills as you figure out how to make your creation rotate smoothly. You’ll need to consider the balance, weight distribution, and stability of your Ferris wheel. Experiment with different materials and techniques to find the perfect solution. This will challenge your critical thinking and analytical skills, as you troubleshoot and make adjustments to ensure a smooth rotation.

Get Creative with Materials & Decorations

Get creative with materials and decorations to make your Ferris wheel truly unique. This project allows you to unleash your imagination and make your creation stand out from the rest. Consider incorporating colorful paint, lights, or even small figurines to bring your Ferris wheel to life. The possibilities are endless, so let your creativity run wild!

Challenge yourself by incorporating different mechanical elements into your design. You can experiment with gears, pulleys, or even motors to add an extra level of complexity to your project. This will not only enhance your understanding of engineering principles but also provide a greater sense of accomplishment when you see your creation in action.

Once your Ferris wheel is complete, share it with friends and family for a fun-filled STEM showcase. This is an excellent opportunity to demonstrate your problem-solving skills and explain the scientific concepts behind your creation. You’ll be able to proudly showcase your hard work and inspire others to explore the exciting world of STEM.

So, what are you waiting for? Get ready to embark on an exciting journey of engineering, physics, and creativity with this thrilling Ferris wheel project. Let your imagination soar as you learn, problem-solve, and create. Start building your own Ferris wheel today and enjoy the fun and interactive experience that STEM has to offer!

Creating Excitement for Engineering: How STEM Activities Benefit Middle School Students 

Engaging in STEM activities helps you, as a middle school student, develop problem-solving and critical thinking skills in a fun and interactive way. Through these activities, you can tackle various engineering challenges and projects, allowing you to apply scientific concepts to real-life situations. This hands-on experience not only enhances your understanding of STEM subjects but also boosts your confidence in your abilities. You’ll find yourself developing a true passion for engineering and setting yourself on a path toward future success in the field.

explore different branches of engineering

Participating in engineering activities allows you to explore different branches of engineering, such as civil, mechanical, and electrical. By engaging in these activities, you have the opportunity to discover your interests and potential career paths. Whether you find yourself drawn to designing structures, creating machines, or working with electrical systems, STEM activities give you a taste of what each branch entails. This early exposure helps you make informed decisions about your future education and career choices.

Moreover, STEM activities encourage collaboration and teamwork among you and your peers. Engaging in group projects fosters communication and interpersonal skills that are essential for your future success. As you work together to solve engineering challenges, you learn how to effectively communicate your ideas, listen to others, and compromise when necessary. These skills will not only benefit you in the field of engineering, but also in any future profession or personal endeavor that requires teamwork.

In summary, participating in STEM activities during your middle school years is an exciting way to develop problem-solving and critical thinking skills. Through these activities, you can explore different branches of engineering, discover your interests, and gain a hands-on experience. Additionally, collaborating with your peers helps foster communication and interpersonal skills that are essential for future success. So, dive into the world of engineering and let your passion for STEM subjects flourish!

Fostering Creativity and Critical Thinking Through STEM Exploration for Middle Schoolers.

Engaging in hands-on engineering activities can foster creativity and critical thinking in middle school students. When students are given the opportunity to explore STEM subjects through hands-on activities, they are encouraged to think outside the box and come up with innovative solutions to real-world problems. By building structures with everyday materials and designing simple machines, students are able to ignite a passion for engineering and develop their problem-solving skills. These activities not only allow students to tap into their creativity but also challenge them to think critically and find unique solutions to complex problems. STEM exploration provides a platform for middle schoolers to develop their problem-solving skills and learn to collaborate effectively with their peers. Through group projects and activities, students are encouraged to work together, brainstorm ideas, and communicate their thoughts and opinions. This collaborative approach not only fosters critical thinking but also cultivates important skills such as teamwork, communication, and leadership. By engaging in STEM exploration, middle schoolers are equipped with the necessary tools to become effective problem solvers and collaborators in the future. Encouraging creativity and critical thinking in the classroom paves the way for future engineers and innovators. By providing students with the opportunity to explore STEM subjects and engage in hands-on activities, educators can inspire and nurture young minds. Through these experiences, students are able to develop a passion for STEM and gain valuable skills that will benefit them in their future careers. By fostering creativity and critical thinking, educators can empower middle schoolers to become the next generation of engineers and innovators, who will contribute to solving real-world problems and shaping the future of our society.

Get Your Kids Excited About Famous People In History

Hit the button to start ‘ed-venture’ learning

about George Ferris – The Inventor of The Ferris Wheel   today.

You can unsubscribe anytime. For more details, review our Privacy Policy.

Opt in to receive news and updates.

It’s on it’s way!

  Now, just a couple of things:

1. Confirm your email & add us to your contacts.

2. Keep an eye on your inbox for your Let’s Study Famous Folks Sample Lesson.

3.  Explore More Ways To Use The World as Your Classroom .

Hand-On Ferris Wheel STEM Project for Upper Elementary through High School.

Get ready to have fun learning about the history of the Ferris wheel and the man behind this fun amusement park ride.  Before you are finished, you will even have fun having a go with this Ferris wheel STEM project on your own or with a few friends.  

A Biography & Ferris Wheel STEM Lesson

This STEM lesson, with additional information from the Let’s Study Famous Folks – February Calendar download, is perfect for an alternative Valentine’s Day project for those not interested in the typical ‘mushy, gushy’ or lovey-dovey’ Valentine activities.

In this Lesson, you will:

• Learn about George Ferris.
• Learn about engineering design.  
• Learn about motion, load, and construction.  
• Have fun building on your own or as part of a team.

Start off by learning about George Washington Gale Ferris, Jr . He invented his famous wheel in 1859.  Learn more about the Ferris Wheels . 

Explore Famous Big Wheels

• The London Eye – Take a look at the structure.  Now, enjoy the view from the top .
• The Bellevue Ferris Wheel in Germany – This is a classic version that is often seen at county fairs and European Christmas Markets.
• Singapore Flyer – A similar version to the London Eye.

Books to read

A fun read-aloud and biography is the perfect way to learn about Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) as you layer the learning with hands-on projects. Grab a few engineering books at your local library for engaging science reading.

Build a Big Wheel – Ferris wheel STEM Activity

Build your own wheel.

Get ready to learn how these big wheels have been designed throughout history, and then develop a design for your own Ferris wheel made with pasta. Work individually or as a team to plan your wheel, execute construction, troubleshoot, evaluate your work, and present your project.

Download the entire Build a Big Wheel project and have fun learning about the history & architecture of the Ferris Wheel. 

Ok, so maybe your kids aren’t into pasta and glue anymore. That’s OK because these Ferris wheel STEM projects are awesome. The Ferris wheel K’nex , and Ferris wheel Lego are definitely big hits with older students.

Big Wheel Writing Prompts

When you are finished, you can have fun with writing prompts about {crazy} inventions. Or you can write an essay or a paragraph about the engineering challenges faced during the construction of either the London Eye or the Singapore Flyer. Compare your challenges with creating your wheel with those of the London Eye or Singapore Flyer.

More fun learning opportunities can be found in the Let’s Study Famous Folks – February Calendar . You’ll find 28 days of activities based on famous people born in February,

Grab the Ferris Wheel STEM mini-lesson here

Grab the Let’s Study Famous Folks – February Calendar for more learning fun!

Study Famous Scientists

You may also enjoy

The Latest on the Blog

• Let’s Study Famous Folks – March Calendar of Famous People
• Printable Cornell Note Taking Template | High School
• Summer Mission Trips for Teens: 2024 Planning Guide
• Let’s Study Famous Folks – February Calendar Of Famous People
• Geography Activities for Kids & Teens: Homeschool Resources

Watch CBS News

Man in critical condition after West 7th shooting

By S.E. Jenkins

Updated on: March 17, 2024 / 10:27 PM CDT / CBS Texas

FORT WORTH —  Fort Worth police are busy after another shooting in the West 7th area. 

A man was shot after a verbal altercation along Bledsoe Street just after midnight. He was taken to the hospital in critical condition, and no suspects are in custody yet.

This is at least the third violent crime in the popular entertainment district this year and concerns were already high following the random killing of a TCU student nearby last fall. 

It's gotten to the point where some West 7th residents tell us they're tired of being on edge every single weekend.

"It makes us worry if it's even safe to walk around our neighborhood," West 7th resident Zada Trejo told CBS News Texas previously. "We're actually thinking about possibly leaving after all these incidents happening. It is scary."

In recent months, Fort Worth has tried to boost security in the entertainment district, adding more police units, and cameras and banning open containers. A new safety ambassador patrol program is also on the table but we're told a majority of West 7th property owners will need to opt in for that to be implemented.

• Fort Worth Police Department

Featured Local Savings

More from cbs news.

Teen arrested for late February murder: Sansom Park police

Several arrests made in massive Fort Worth chop shop operation

Fort Worth letter carrier robbed, $150,000 reward offered

Fort Worth Zoo hopeful Jameela will bond with new mom in Cleveland

• Rationality