college level critical thinking

Thinking and Analysis

Critical thinking skills.

The essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks, but in how it thinks. —Christopher Hitchens, author and journalist

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Define critical thinking
• Describe the role that logic plays in critical thinking
• Describe how critical thinking skills can be used to problem-solve
• Describe how critical thinking skills can be used to evaluate information
• Identify strategies for developing yourself as a critical thinker

Critical Thinking

Thinking comes naturally. You don’t have to make it happen—it just does. But you can make it happen in different ways. For example, you can think positively or negatively. You can think with “heart” and you can think with rational judgment. You can also think strategically and analytically, and mathematically and scientifically. These are a few of multiple ways in which the mind can process thought.

What are some forms of thinking you use? When do you use them, and why?

As a college student, you are tasked with engaging and expanding your thinking skills. One of the most important of these skills is critical thinking. Critical thinking is important because it relates to nearly all tasks, situations, topics, careers, environments, challenges, and opportunities. It’s a “domain-general” thinking skill—not a thinking skill that’s reserved for a one subject alone or restricted to a particular subject area.

Great leaders have highly attuned critical thinking skills, and you can, too. In fact, you probably have a lot of these skills already. Of all your thinking skills, critical thinking may have the greatest value.

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is clear, reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do. It means asking probing questions like, “How do we know?” or “Is this true in every case or just in this instance?” It involves being skeptical and challenging assumptions, rather than simply memorizing facts or blindly accepting what you hear or read.

Imagine, for example, that you’re reading a history textbook. You wonder who wrote it and why, because you detect certain biases in the writing. You find that the author has a limited scope of research focused only on a particular group within a population. In this case, your critical thinking reveals that there are “other sides to the story.”

Who are critical thinkers, and what characteristics do they have in common? Critical thinkers are usually curious and reflective people. They like to explore and probe new areas and seek knowledge, clarification, and new solutions. They ask pertinent questions, evaluate statements and arguments, and they distinguish between facts and opinion. They are also willing to examine their own beliefs, possessing a manner of humility that allows them to admit lack of knowledge or understanding when needed. They are open to changing their mind. Perhaps most of all, they actively enjoy learning, and seeking new knowledge is a lifelong pursuit.

This may well be you!

No matter where you are on the road to being a critical thinker, you can always more fully develop and finely tune your skills. Doing so will help you develop more balanced arguments, express yourself clearly, read critically, and glean important information efficiently. Critical thinking skills will help you in any profession or any circumstance of life, from science to art to business to teaching. With critical thinking, you become a clearer thinker and problem solver.

The following video, from Lawrence Bland, presents the major concepts and benefits of critical thinking.

Activity: Self-Assess Your Critical Thinking Strategies

• Assess your basic understanding of the skills involved in critical thinking.
• Visit the Quia Critical Thinking Quiz page and click on Start Now (you don’t need to enter your name). Select the best answer for each question, and then click on Submit Answers. A score of 70 percent or better on this quiz is considering passing.
• Based on the content of the questions, do you feel you use good critical thinking strategies in college? In what ways might you improve as a critical thinker?

Critical Thinking and Logic

Critical thinking is fundamentally a process of questioning information and data. You may question the information you read in a textbook, or you may question what a politician or a professor or a classmate says. You can also question a commonly-held belief or a new idea. With critical thinking, anything and everything is subject to question and examination for the purpose of logically constructing reasoned perspectives.

What Is Logic, and Why Is It Important in Critical Thinking?

The word logic comes from the Ancient Greek logike , referring to the science or art of reasoning. Using logic, a person evaluates arguments and reasoning and strives to distinguish between good and bad reasoning, or between truth and falsehood. Using logic, you can evaluate ideas or claims people make, make good decisions, and form sound beliefs about the world. [1]

Questions of Logic in Critical Thinking

Let’s use a simple example of applying logic to a critical-thinking situation. In this hypothetical scenario, a man has a PhD in political science, and he works as a professor at a local college. His wife works at the college, too. They have three young children in the local school system, and their family is well known in the community. The man is now running for political office. Are his credentials and experience sufficient for entering public office? Will he be effective in the political office? Some voters might believe that his personal life and current job, on the surface, suggest he will do well in the position, and they will vote for him. In truth, the characteristics described don’t guarantee that the man will do a good job. The information is somewhat irrelevant. What else might you want to know? How about whether the man had already held a political office and done a good job? In this case, we want to ask, How much information is adequate in order to make a decision based on logic instead of assumptions?

The following questions, presented in Figure 1, below, are ones you may apply to formulating a logical, reasoned perspective in the above scenario or any other situation:

• What’s happening? Gather the basic information and begin to think of questions.
• Why is it important? Ask yourself why it’s significant and whether or not you agree.
• What don’t I see? Is there anything important missing?
• How do I know? Ask yourself where the information came from and how it was constructed.
• Who is saying it? What’s the position of the speaker and what is influencing them?
• What else? What if? What other ideas exist and are there other possibilities?

Problem-Solving with Critical Thinking

For most people, a typical day is filled with critical thinking and problem-solving challenges. In fact, critical thinking and problem-solving go hand-in-hand. They both refer to using knowledge, facts, and data to solve problems effectively. But with problem-solving, you are specifically identifying, selecting, and defending your solution. Below are some examples of using critical thinking to problem-solve:

• Your roommate was upset and said some unkind words to you, which put a crimp in the relationship. You try to see through the angry behaviors to determine how you might best support the roommate and help bring the relationship back to a comfortable spot.
• Your campus club has been languishing on account of lack of participation and funds. The new club president, though, is a marketing major and has identified some strategies to interest students in joining and supporting the club. Implementation is forthcoming.
• Your final art class project challenges you to conceptualize form in new ways. On the last day of class when students present their projects, you describe the techniques you used to fulfill the assignment. You explain why and how you selected that approach.
• Your math teacher sees that the class is not quite grasping a concept. She uses clever questioning to dispel anxiety and guide you to new understanding of the concept.
• You have a job interview for a position that you feel you are only partially qualified for, although you really want the job and you are excited about the prospects. You analyze how you will explain your skills and experiences in a way to show that you are a good match for the prospective employer.
• You are doing well in college, and most of your college and living expenses are covered. But there are some gaps between what you want and what you feel you can afford. You analyze your income, savings, and budget to better calculate what you will need to stay in college and maintain your desired level of spending.

Problem-Solving Action Checklist

Problem-solving can be an efficient and rewarding process, especially if you are organized and mindful of critical steps and strategies. Remember, too, to assume the attributes of a good critical thinker. If you are curious, reflective, knowledge-seeking, open to change, probing, organized, and ethical, your challenge or problem will be less of a hurdle, and you’ll be in a good position to find intelligent solutions.

Evaluating Information with Critical Thinking

Evaluating information can be one of the most complex tasks you will be faced with in college. But if you utilize the following four strategies, you will be well on your way to success:

• Read for understanding by using text coding
• Examine arguments
• Clarify thinking
• Cultivate “habits of mind”

Read for Understanding Using Text Coding

When you read and take notes, use the text coding strategy . Text coding is a way of tracking your thinking while reading. It entails marking the text and recording what you are thinking either in the margins or perhaps on Post-it notes. As you make connections and ask questions in response to what you read,  you monitor your comprehension and enhance your long-term understanding of the material.

With text coding, mark important arguments and key facts. Indicate where you agree and disagree or have further questions. You don’t necessarily need to read every word, but make sure you understand the concepts or the intentions behind what is written. Feel free to develop your own shorthand style when reading or taking notes. The following are a few options to consider using while coding text.

See more text coding from PBWorks and Collaborative for Teaching and Learning .

Examine Arguments

When you examine arguments or claims that an author, speaker, or other source is making, your goal is to identify and examine the hard facts. You can use the spectrum of authority strategy for this purpose. The spectrum of authority strategy assists you in identifying the “hot” end of an argument—feelings, beliefs, cultural influences, and societal influences—and the “cold” end of an argument—scientific influences. The following video explains this strategy.

Clarify Thinking

When you use critical thinking to evaluate information, you need to clarify your thinking to yourself and likely to others. Doing this well is mainly a process of asking and answering probing questions, such as the logic questions discussed earlier. Design your questions to fit your needs, but be sure to cover adequate ground. What is the purpose? What question are we trying to answer? What point of view is being expressed? What assumptions are we or others making? What are the facts and data we know, and how do we know them? What are the concepts we’re working with? What are the conclusions, and do they make sense? What are the implications?

Cultivate “Habits of Mind”

“Habits of mind” are the personal commitments, values, and standards you have about the principle of good thinking. Consider your intellectual commitments, values, and standards. Do you approach problems with an open mind, a respect for truth, and an inquiring attitude? Some good habits to have when thinking critically are being receptive to having your opinions changed, having respect for others, being independent and not accepting something is true until you’ve had the time to examine the available evidence, being fair-minded, having respect for a reason, having an inquiring mind, not making assumptions, and always, especially, questioning your own conclusions—in other words, developing an intellectual work ethic. Try to work these qualities into your daily life.

Developing Yourself As a Critical Thinker

Critical thinking is a desire to seek, patience to doubt, fondness to meditate, slowness to assert, readiness to consider, carefulness to dispose and set in order; and hatred for every kind of imposture. —Francis Bacon, philosopher

Critical thinking is a fundamental skill for college students, but it should also be a lifelong pursuit. Below are additional strategies to develop yourself as a critical thinker in college and in everyday life:

• Reflect and practice : Always reflect on what you’ve learned. Is it true all the time? How did you arrive at your conclusions?
• Use wasted time : It’s certainly important to make time for relaxing, but if you find you are indulging in too much of a good thing, think about using your time more constructively. Determine when you do your best thinking and try to learn something new during that part of the day.
• Redefine the way you see things : It can be very uninteresting to always think the same way. Challenge yourself to see familiar things in new ways. Put yourself in someone else’s shoes and consider things from a different angle or perspective.  If you’re trying to solve a problem, list all your concerns: what you need in order to solve it, who can help, what some possible barriers might be, etc. It’s often possible to reframe a problem as an opportunity. Try to find a solution where there seems to be none.
• Analyze the influences on your thinking and in your life : Why do you think or feel the way you do? Analyze your influences. Think about who in your life influences you. Do you feel or react a certain way because of social convention, or because you believe it is what is expected of you? Try to break out of any molds that may be constricting you.
• Express yourself : Critical thinking also involves being able to express yourself clearly. Most important in expressing yourself clearly is stating one point at a time. You might be inclined to argue every thought, but you might have greater impact if you focus just on your main arguments. This will help others to follow your thinking clearly. For more abstract ideas, assume that your audience may not understand. Provide examples, analogies, or metaphors where you can.
• Enhance your wellness : It’s easier to think critically when you take care of your mental and physical health. Try taking 10-minute activity breaks to reach 30 to 60 minutes of physical activity each day . Try taking a break between classes and walk to the coffee shop that’s farthest away. Scheduling physical activity into your day can help lower stress and increase mental alertness. Also, do your most difficult work when you have the most energy . Think about the time of day you are most effective and have the most energy. Plan to do your most difficult work during these times. And be sure to reach out for help . If you feel you need assistance with your mental or physical health, talk to a counselor or visit a doctor.

Activity: Reflect on Critical Thinking

• Apply critical thinking strategies to your life

Directions:

• Think about someone you consider to be a critical thinker (friend, professor, historical figure, etc). What qualities does he/she have?
• Review some of the critical thinking strategies discussed on this page. Pick one strategy that makes sense to you. How can you apply this critical thinking technique to your academic work?
• Habits of mind are attitudes and beliefs that influence how you approach the world (i.e., inquiring attitude, open mind, respect for truth, etc). What is one habit of mind you would like to actively develop over the next year? How will you develop a daily practice to cultivate this habit?
• Write your responses in journal form, and submit according to your instructor’s guidelines.

The following text is an excerpt from an essay by Dr. Andrew Robert Baker, “Thinking Critically and Creatively.” In these paragraphs, Dr. Baker underscores the importance of critical thinking—the imperative of critical thinking, really—to improving as students, teachers, and researchers. The follow-up portion of this essay appears in the Creative Thinking section of this course.

Thinking Critically and Creatively

Critical thinking skills are perhaps the most fundamental skills involved in making judgments and solving problems. You use them every day, and you can continue improving them.

The ability to think critically about a matter—to analyze a question, situation, or problem down to its most basic parts—is what helps us evaluate the accuracy and truthfulness of statements, claims, and information we read and hear. It is the sharp knife that, when honed, separates fact from fiction, honesty from lies, and the accurate from the misleading. We all use this skill to one degree or another almost every day. For example, we use critical thinking every day as we consider the latest consumer products and why one particular product is the best among its peers. Is it a quality product because a celebrity endorses it? Because a lot of other people may have used it? Because it is made by one company versus another? Or perhaps because it is made in one country or another? These are questions representative of critical thinking.

The academic setting demands more of us in terms of critical thinking than everyday life. It demands that we evaluate information and analyze myriad issues. It is the environment where our critical thinking skills can be the difference between success and failure. In this environment we must consider information in an analytical, critical manner. We must ask questions—What is the source of this information? Is this source an expert one and what makes it so? Are there multiple perspectives to consider on an issue? Do multiple sources agree or disagree on an issue? Does quality research substantiate information or opinion? Do I have any personal biases that may affect my consideration of this information?

It is only through purposeful, frequent, intentional questioning such as this that we can sharpen our critical thinking skills and improve as students, learners and researchers.

—Dr. Andrew Robert Baker,  Foundations of Academic Success: Words of Wisdom

Resources for Critical Thinking

• Glossary of Critical Thinking Terms
• Critical Thinking Self-Assessment
• Logical Fallacies Jeopardy Template
• Fallacies Files—Home
• Thinking Critically | Learning Commons
• Foundation for Critical Thinking
• To Analyze Thinking We Must Identify and Question Its Elemental Structures
• Critical Thinking in Everyday Life

Candela Citations

• Critical Thinking Skills. Authored by : Linda Bruce. Provided by : Lumen Learning. License : CC BY: Attribution
• Image of three students. Authored by : PopTech. Located at : https://flic.kr/p/8tXtQp . License : CC BY-SA: Attribution-ShareAlike
• Critical Thinking. Provided by : Critical and Creative Thinking Program. Located at : http://cct.wikispaces.umb.edu/Critical+Thinking . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Thinking Critically. Authored by : UBC Learning Commons. Provided by : The University of British Columbia, Vancouver Campus. Located at : http://www.oercommons.org/courses/learning-toolkit-critical-thinking/view . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Critical Thinking 101: Spectrum of Authority. Authored by : UBC Leap. Located at : https://youtu.be/9G5xooMN2_c . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Image of students putting post-its on wall. Authored by : Hector Alejandro. Located at : https://flic.kr/p/7b2Ax2 . License : CC BY: Attribution
• Foundations of Academic Success. Authored by : Thomas C. Priester, editor. Provided by : Open SUNY Textbooks. Located at : http://textbooks.opensuny.org/foundations-of-academic-success/ . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
• Critical Thinking.wmv. Authored by : Lawrence Bland. Located at : https://youtu.be/WiSklIGUblo . License : All Rights Reserved . License Terms : Standard YouTube License
• "logike." Wordnik. n.d. Web. 16 Feb 2016. ↵
• "Student Success-Thinking Critically In Class and Online."  Critical Thinking Gateway . St Petersburg College, n.d. Web. 16 Feb 2016. ↵

• [email protected]

The Importance of Critical Thinking in Education | Benefits & Strategies

Article 11 Dec 2024 542

In the classroom and beyond, thinking critically can transform how students learn, solve problems, and prepare for their futures. Whether analyzing an argument, tackling a challenge, or assessing the credibility of a source, critical thinking helps students approach situations with clarity and logic. 

In this article, we'll explore why fostering these skills in education is not just a benefit but a necessity. We'll also dive into practical strategies educators can use to cultivate these abilities.

Table of Content

What is critical thinking, why is critical thinking important in education, teaching strategies to foster critical thinking, real-world application of these strategies, challenges in teaching critical thinking, assessing critical thinking skills, real-life impact: a case study.

Critical thinking involves analyzing and evaluating information carefully to make thoughtful, reasoned decisions. Questioning assumptions, recognizing biases, and considering multiple perspectives before reaching conclusions is essential. 

This approach differs significantly from rote memorization, which is solely about recalling information without questioning its source or context. Instead, critical thinking invites active engagement with content, encouraging learners to interpret, analyze, and apply information to real-world situations.

One key benefit of critical thinking is its role in enhancing problem-solving capabilities. By breaking down information into manageable parts, individuals can identify patterns, understand relationships, and evaluate the significance of various elements. For example, when presented with conflicting data, a critical thinker needs to choose more than one source but assesses the validity of each, weighing their reliability and relevance. This process enables them to make informed decisions based on evidence rather than assumptions or incomplete understanding.

Key Aspects of Critical Thinking:

Analyzing Information: Breaking complex data into smaller components to uncover relationships and significance.

Evaluating Evidence: Examining the credibility, reliability, and validity of information or sources.

Problem-Solving: Developing logical solutions by connecting ideas in meaningful ways.

Creative Thinking: Exploring alternative approaches and innovative strategies for addressing challenges.

A practical example can be observed in a student researching climate change. Instead of merely compiling a list of statistics, they might evaluate the credibility of their sources, critically examine varying opinions, and construct an argument supported by evidence. 

For instance, they could compare data from scientific journals with reports from advocacy organizations, discerning the reliability of each and how it shapes public understanding. This analytical approach fosters deeper comprehension and cultivates skills to navigate complex academic, professional, and personal issues.

Critical thinking prepares individuals to handle nuanced, multifaceted challenges confidently and clearly by emphasizing active interpretation and evaluation. It shifts the focus from merely knowing facts to understanding their implications, ultimately equipping learners with the tools to approach problems thoughtfully and effectively.

Incorporating critical thinking into education profoundly impacts students' academic achievements, personal development, and future readiness. It equips them with the skills to navigate a complex, information-driven world. 

Education that prioritizes critical thinking enhances learning by fostering the ability to analyze, evaluate, and synthesize information. It also builds a foundation for thoughtful, independent decision-making.

Encourages Independent Thinking

Critical thinking helps students develop the confidence and ability to question information rather than accept it at face value. This independence enables them to assess the credibility of sources, challenge assumptions, and draw conclusions. When students engage critically, they move beyond passive knowledge absorption and become active participants in their learning journey.

For instance, a student reading about historical events might examine how different authors present the same occurrence. They comprehensively understand the topic by comparing narratives, identifying biases, and analyzing motivations. This process deepens their grasp of history and sharpens their ability to scrutinize other information they encounter.

A 2018 study by the Education Testing Service revealed that only 39% of college graduates demonstrate proficiency in critical thinking. This finding highlights a significant gap in higher education outcomes and emphasizes the need to integrate critical thinking skills into curricula early.

Enhances Academic Performance

Critical thinking significantly improves students' ability to process and understand complex ideas. When students learn to break down concepts, identify relationships, and apply logic, their performance across subjects improves. They are better equipped to approach problems holistically, connect theories with real-world applications, and articulate well-reasoned conclusions.

Consider a history student tasked with analyzing primary sources. Rather than merely memorizing dates and events, they evaluate the context, compare differing accounts, and explore the socio-political factors influencing historical decisions. This analytical approach fosters deeper comprehension and allows them to present nuanced insights, elevating their academic work.

A science student conducting a lab experiment might hypothesize, test variables, and critically interpret results to form evidence-based conclusions. This method reinforces their understanding of scientific principles while cultivating transferable skills like problem-solving and logical reasoning.

Prepares Students for the Workplace

Critical thinking is consistently identified as one of the most sought-after skills by employers. Whether in problem-solving, collaboration, or innovation, the ability to think critically enables individuals to adapt and excel in professional environments. Workplace challenges often involve ambiguous or multifaceted issues requiring analysis, creativity, and sound judgment.

A project manager, for instance, must evaluate competing proposals, anticipate potential risks, and devise strategies that align with organizational goals. Employees with critical thinking skills are better equipped to handle these demands and contribute effectively to their teams and organizations.

According to the National Association of Colleges and Employers, 80% of employers rank critical thinking as a top priority when evaluating job candidates. This highlights the increasing value of these skills in an evolving job market where adaptability and innovation are paramount.

Promotes Lifelong Learning

Critical thinkers are naturally curious and continually seek to learn and adapt. This mindset extends beyond the classroom, encouraging a lifetime of exploration and self-improvement. By questioning established norms, seeking diverse perspectives, and embracing change, lifelong learners remain resilient in a rapidly evolving world.

For example, a graduate who develops critical thinking skills during their education may approach career transitions or technological advancements with a problem-solving mindset. Instead of fearing change, they analyze opportunities, assess risks, and pursue informed decisions. This adaptability enhances personal growth and fosters innovation and leadership in their professional lives.

In a real-life example, a software engineer facing the emergence of new programming languages might critically evaluate their relevance, invest in upskilling, and apply their knowledge creatively to design solutions. This approach ensures they remain competitive and capable in their field.

Fosters Personal Empowerment

Beyond academic and professional contexts, critical thinking empowers individuals to navigate daily challenges and make well-informed choices. From understanding financial options to evaluating news reports, critical thinking provides the tools to discern fact from fiction and act responsibly.

For instance, a consumer deciding on a major purchase might research product reviews, consider expert opinions, and weigh long-term value over immediate gratification. This ability to analyze options and prioritize based on evidence leads to more confident and satisfying decisions.

Building a Foundation for Success

Students are equipped with tools that extend far beyond the classroom by emphasizing critical thinking in education. They become independent learners, capable professionals, and engaged citizens who contribute thoughtfully to their communities. Incorporating strategies like questioning, collaborative projects, and problem-solving exercises ensures these skills are taught and deeply ingrained.

Critical thinking is not just an academic practice but a transformative approach to understanding and engaging with the world. As educators, parents, and policymakers, fostering these skills prepares the next generation to face challenges with clarity, creativity, and confidence—paving the way for a more thoughtful and informed society.

Educators are pivotal in helping students develop critical thinking skills necessary for academic success and lifelong learning. These strategies go beyond traditional teaching methods, emphasizing active engagement, exploration, and collaboration. Here are some effective approaches:

Socratic Questioning

Socratic questioning remains one of the most powerful tools for empowering critical thinking in the classroom. By encouraging students to engage with open-ended questions, teachers prompt deeper exploration of ideas and a more nuanced understanding of concepts. This approach requires students to articulate their thoughts, evaluate evidence, and refine their reasoning.

A literature teacher might ask, "What motivations drive the protagonist's actions? How do these choices reflect the historical or cultural context of the time?" Such questions push students beyond comprehension, analyzing character motivations, historical influences, and societal implications.

Socratic questioning develops analytical skills by challenging students to justify their answers with evidence. This method encourages active participation and fosters a learning environment where curiosity thrives. Instead of simply absorbing information, students are guided to construct their understanding, making the learning process more meaningful.

Problem-Based Learning (PBL)

Problem-based learning places students at the center of real-world challenges, encouraging them to research , collaborate, and propose solutions. This hands-on knowledge bridges the theoretical and practical application gap, making learning relevant and engaging.

In a science class, students might be tasked with designing a model for sustainable energy use in their school. To complete the project, they would research renewable energy technologies, analyze environmental data, and consider economic feasibility. This process compels them to integrate information from multiple sources and think critically about trade-offs and constraints.

PBL enhances critical thinking and builds problem-solving and teamwork skills. Students learn to approach challenges methodically, breaking down complex problems into manageable parts and seeking innovative solutions.

Collaborative Learning

Collaborative learning environments encourage students to collaborate, share ideas, and evaluate diverse perspectives. Group discussions, projects, and peer reviews expose students to various viewpoints, enhancing their ability to assess information and construct balanced arguments critically.

A report published in the Journal of Educational Psychology found that students in collaborative settings were 25% more likely to demonstrate critical thinking skills than those in individual learning environments. This increase is attributed to the exchange of ideas and constructive feedback inherent in group work.

In a history class, students could divide into groups to debate the reasons for a historical conflict. Each group might represent a different perspective, requiring them to research and present arguments while addressing counterarguments posed by their peers.

Collaborative learning builds communication and teamwork skills while fostering an appreciation for diverse perspectives. It also creates a supportive environment where students feel encouraged to question and refine their understanding.

Incorporating Technology

Digital tools have become invaluable in making learning more dynamic and interactive. Simulations, interactive quizzes, discussion forums, and debate platforms are examples of how technology can enhance critical thinking.

Debate platforms allow students to analyze arguments and counterarguments in real-time. For instance, during a unit on environmental policy, students could engage in an online debate, presenting data to support their positions while critiquing opposing views.

Technology allows students to engage actively with content, offering immediate feedback and fostering independent exploration. Simulation tools can replicate real-world scenarios, helping students apply their knowledge to practical problems in a risk-free environment.

When these teaching methods are implemented effectively, the impact extends beyond the classroom. For instance, at a middle school in Oregon, a curriculum emphasizing problem-based learning and collaborative projects resulted in a 20% increase in student participation. Teachers reported that students became more confident in their ability to analyze complex topics and articulate their ideas clearly.

Similarly, in a pilot program using technology to enhance critical thinking, high school students showed a marked improvement in their ability to evaluate the credibility of online information. They developed stronger analytical and decision-making skills by participating in digital discussions and interactive simulations.

Fostering critical thinking in students requires intentional teaching strategies that prioritize active participation, collaboration, and real-world problem-solving. Socratic questioning encourages thoughtful dialogue, problem-based learning bridges theory and practice, collaborative environments nurture diverse perspectives, and technology makes learning dynamic and accessible. By implementing these approaches, educators can equip students with the tools to connect to an increasingly complex world confidently and clearly. These strategies do more than teach content—they inspire a mindset of inquiry and adaptability that prepares students for lifelong success.

Despite critical thinking's many benefits, integrating it into classrooms takes time and effort. From rigid curricula to resource limitations, these hurdles can impede students' development of critical thinking skills. Recognizing these barriers and addressing them strategically is essential for fostering a learning environment that prioritizes analytical and evaluative skills. Below, I have for you the key challenges and potential solutions that are explored.

Curriculum Constraints

One of the most significant obstacles in teaching critical thinking is the dominance of standardized testing in educational systems. These assessments often prioritize rote memorization and recall over analytical skills, leaving little room for activities that foster deep thinking. Teachers may experience pressure to "teach to the test," focusing on meeting benchmarks rather than nurturing intellectual curiosity.

A typical standardized exam in mathematics may require students to solve equations using predetermined formulas. While this approach tests procedural knowledge, it rarely encourages students to explore why those formulas work or how they can be applied creatively to real-world problems.

Teachers can integrate critical thinking exercises into existing frameworks to address this issue. For instance, a math teacher could incorporate word problems that require students to analyze scenarios and determine the most appropriate solution. Similarly, discussions about character motivations or thematic elements can be added to standard lesson plans in literature classes. These small adaptations make room for critical thinking without compromising curriculum requirements.

Resource Limitations

Another challenge is the need for more tools and professional development opportunities available to many educators. Critical thinking requires innovative teaching methods and resources, such as case studies, interactive technologies, and collaborative activities. However, not all schools have the infrastructure or funding to support these initiatives.

Research from the Learning Policy Institute shows that schools investing in teacher training programs experience a notable improvement in both student engagement and teacher effectiveness. For example, when educators receive training in Socratic questioning or project-based learning, they are better equipped to facilitate discussions that promote deeper understanding.

Institutions can address this gap by prioritizing professional development. Workshops, online courses, and peer mentoring programs focused on critical thinking strategies can give teachers the tools they need to succeed. Additionally, partnerships with local organizations or businesses can offer access to resources like guest speakers, case studies, and hands-on learning opportunities.

Student Readiness

Students accustomed to traditional learning methods may find critical thinking challenging at first. This is especially true in environments where passive learning—listening to lectures and memorizing facts—has been the norm. Critical thinking requires active participation, which can feel unfamiliar and intimidating to some learners.

A student asked to evaluate the credibility of multiple sources in a research project may need to be taught how to identify bias or assess evidence. This difficulty can lead to frustration and disengagement.

The gradual introduction of critical thinking tasks can ease the transition. Teachers might begin with simple activities, such as asking students to evaluate and differentiate two concepts, before moving on to more complex tasks like debating ethical dilemmas or designing solutions to real-world problems. Consistent practice and positive reinforcement help build students' confidence and skills.

Effective assessment methods must be implemented to ensure students develop critical thinking skills. These assessments should go beyond traditional exams to evaluate how students apply their thinking meaningfully. Below are some methods that have proven effective:

Performance Tasks

Performance tasks place students in real-world scenarios, requiring them to analyze situations, make decisions, and justify reasoning. These tasks provide insight into how students apply their knowledge and problem-solving abilities.

In a business class, students could be asked to analyze market trends and develop a strategy for launching a new product. This task would involve interpreting data, considering consumer needs, and proposing actionable solutions, all of which would demonstrate critical thinking.

Reflective Journals

Reflective journals encourage students to document their thought processes, including how they approach problems, evaluate options, and make decisions. This practice enhances self-awareness and critical evaluation, providing valuable insights for students and teachers.

By reviewing journal entries, teachers can identify student reasoning patterns, pinpoint improvement areas, and tailor instruction to address specific needs.

Open-Ended Assessments

Open-ended questions allow students to explain their reasoning in detail, offering a clearer picture of their analytical abilities than multiple-choice tests. These assessments challenge students to think deeply, articulate their thoughts, and support their conclusions with evidence.

Instead of asking a science student to name the parts of a cell, an open-ended question might prompt them to explain how a malfunction in one part could affect the entire system. This approach requires students to synthesize information and demonstrate a thorough understanding of the topic.

The benefits of prioritizing critical thinking in education are evident in real-world examples. At a middle school in California, a critical thinking initiative centered around project-based learning was introduced. Over a year, teachers incorporated activities that required students to collaborate on solving real-world problems, such as designing eco-friendly community projects or analyzing historical events from multiple perspectives.

The results were striking:

Student participation increased by 30%.

Standardized test scores improved by 15%, particularly in subjects that need analytical skills, such as science and social studies.

Teachers reported heightened enthusiasm for learning, with students actively contributing to discussions and demonstrating greater confidence in their abilities.

This case illustrates how even small shifts toward critical thinking can profoundly impact student outcomes, both academically and emotionally. By equipping students with the skills to analyze, evaluate, and solve problems, educators prepare them for success in school, work, and life.

While challenges in teaching critical thinking exist, they are manageable. Educators can create environments where critical thinking thrives by addressing curriculum constraints, investing resources, and supporting students as they adapt to new learning methods. Assessing these skills through performance tasks, reflective journals, and open-ended assessments ensures that students learn and apply their knowledge meaningfully.

Real-world examples, like the success of the California middle school initiative, demonstrate the transformative power of critical thinking education. As educators, overcoming these hurdles means teaching students what to think and empowering them with the tools to think for themselves. This approach ultimately fosters a generation of thoughtful, innovative, and adaptable individuals ready to meet the challenges of an ever-changing world.

Teaching students to think critically prepares them for academic success and informed, thoughtful lives. Educators can cultivate skills that last a lifetime by incorporating questioning, collaboration, and real-world problem-solving into classrooms.

To create a world of empowered learners, let's ask one question: How can we think more critically about teaching?

1. How can parents encourage critical thinking at home? Encourage open-ended conversations, provide puzzles or challenges, and model thoughtful decision-making in daily life.

2. Are critical thinking skills teachable? Absolutely! With consistent practice and the right strategies, anyone can develop critical thinking.

3. How does critical thinking impact career success? It enables professionals to analyze problems, collaborate effectively, and innovate—skills valued in any industry.

4. What are some critical thinking exercises for young learners? Activities like sorting fact from opinion, debating age-appropriate topics, and analyzing simple scenarios help build foundational skills.

5. Why is collaboration essential for critical thinking? It introduces diverse perspectives, challenges students to reassess assumptions, and strengthens their reasoning.

By nurturing critical thinking, we unlock education's potential to create a brighter future for all learners. Let's prioritize this—one question, idea, and solution at a time.

Top 10 Self-Improvement Books for Personal Growth

5 reasons digital literacy is important for educators, digital literacy skills in the 21st century, what is digital literacy importance & benefits explained, why storytelling is a more important skill | benefits & techniques, 16 dominant emotions by clayton makepeace, why storytelling skills are essential for every student, the importance of digital literacy in education | benefits & challenges, why students need digital literacy in the 21st century: essential skills, standardized testing: key features, pros, cons, and alternatives, which countries offer free education, personalized learning: strategies, benefits & future trends, standardized testing: pros, cons, and effective alternatives, nepal education system: structure, reforms, and global insights, china education system: structure, reforms, and global comparisons, the importance of communication skills in academic success, social learning theory: 10 everyday examples you need to know, challenges and solutions in nepal's education system: insights and recommendations.

Improving Critical Thinking Skills in College Students

by Matthew Mahavongtrakul | Mar 6, 2020 | 390X

Erica M. Leung, Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering

“People grow best where they continuously experience an ingenious blend of support and challenge.” -Robert Kegan 1

Cognitive Development of College Students

Most students enter college with the notion that there are right and wrong answers and the road to knowledge is straightforward. 2 Students undergo significant cognitive growth during college, shifting their view of knowledge from objective duality to subjective multiplicity (i.e. there are various opinions, which are all valid). 2 By the time of their graduation, few students reach the cognitive stage of relativism (i.e. not all opinions are equally valid, so facts and context matter), which relies heavily on critical thinking skills to make judgments. 2

This may come as a surprise as instructors tend to expect students to have the same cognitive abilities and critical thinking skills as they do. Instead, college students are just learning how to reframe knowledge. With this in mind, instructors need to meet students where they are in their cognitive development and guide them through the process. A short epistemological belief survey may help in determining students’ stage of cognitive development.

Techniques for Developing Critical Thinking Skills

What is critical thinking? Can it be taught in the classroom? How is it measured? How can instructors help students navigate the road to independent critical thinking? Here are a few promising approaches to facilitate and encourage critical thinking:

• Collaborative learning wherein students learn from each other and work together using activities like discussion boards, case studies, role playing, peer teaching, and group projects. This technique exposes students to different interpretations of information and the diversity of fellow students’ experiences and knowledge. Collaborative learning allows students to discuss information, clarify ideas, and evaluate the validity of others’ ideas in a safe and positive environment. 3-5
• Higher-level thinking questions that prompt students to answer questions like whether they “agree or disagree” and “why”. Well-written questions will challenge students to interpret, analyze, and recognize assumptions before reaching a conclusion. 6 Examples of different levels of questions according to Bloom’s Taxonomy can be viewed here .
• Reflective written assignments that ask students to apply their experiences to different concepts, allowing students to play a more active role in their learning and self-growth. These reflections can encourage students to identify the relevance of the information to their own lives, question the information’s validity, and seek better sources. 6-8 A framework for reflective writing that can help guide students through the process can be found here .
• Open-book assessments that allow students to use notes, textbooks, and/or other resources. These foster intellectual engagement with the material instead of rote memorization, cramming, and anxiety before the exam. Since students are afforded more resources, instructors have an opportunity to ask higher level questions. Overall, these types of assessments simulate a more real-world environment, which promotes problem solving over recall. 9

Although there is debate on its definition, critical thinking is an important outcome of higher education and is highly valued by employers. It is therefore up to the instructor to incorporate ways to improve critical thinking in their students to prepare them for their futures.

• Kegan, R. In over our heads: The mental demands of modern life. (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1994). 
• Black, S. & Allen, J. D. Part 3: College Student Development. TRL 58 , 214-228 (2017). 
• Loes, C. N. & Pascarella, E. T. Collaborative Learning and Critical Thinking: Testing the Link. J. High. Educ. 88 , 726-753 (2017). 
• Gokhale, A. A. Collaborative Learning Enhances Critical Thinking. J. Technol. Educ. 7 , 22-30 (1995). 
• Szabo, Z. & Schwartz, J. Learning methods for teacher education: the use of online discussions to improve critical thinking. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 20 , 79-94 (2011). 
• Walker, S. E. Active Learning Strategies to Promote Critical Thinking. J. Athl. Train. 38 , 263-267 (2003). 
• Mintzberg, H. & Gosling, J. Educating Managers Beyond Borders. Acad. Manag. Learn. Educ. 1 , 64-76 (2002).
• Naber, J. & Wyatt, T. H. The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Educ. Today 34 , 67-72 (2014). 
• Johans, B., Dinkens, A., & Moore, J. A systematic review comparing open-book and closed-book examinations: Evaluating effects on development of critical thinking skills. Nurse Educ. Pract. 27 , 89-94 (2017).

Matthew Mahavongtrakul edited this post on March 6th, 2020.

Recent Posts

• Highlights from UCI Teach Day 2024
• Introducing UCI Spark
• Dean’s Honorees Announced for Celebration of Teaching
• Join Us for UCI Teach Day 2024
• Inclusive Teaching and Beyond: The Need for Institutional Change

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 5: College Level Critical Thinking, Reading and Decision Making

Jeremy Boettinger; openstax.org/books/college-success; and Foundations of Academic Success: Words of Wisdom

Words of Wisdom: Thinking Critically and Creatively

Critical and creative thinking skills are perhaps the most fundamental skills involved in making judgments and solving problems. They are some of the most important skills I have ever developed.  I use them everyday and continue to work to improve them both.

The ability to think critically about a matter—to analyze a question, situation, or problem down to its most basic parts—is what helps us evaluate the accuracy and truthfulness of statements, claims, and information we read and hear. It is the sharp knife that, when honed, separates fact from fiction, honesty from lies, and the accurate from the misleading. We all use this skill to one degree or another almost every day. For example, we use critical thinking every day as we consider the latest consumer products and why one particular product is the best among its peers. Is it a quality product because a celebrity endorses it? Because a lot of other people may have used it? Because it is made by one company versus another? Or perhaps because it is made in one country or another? These are questions representative of critical thinking.

The academic setting demands more of us in terms of critical thinking than everyday life. It demands that we evaluate information and analyze a myriad of issues. It is the environment where our critical thinking skills can be the difference between success and failure. In this environment we must consider information in an analytical, critical manner. We must ask questions—What is the source of this information? Is this source an expert one and what makes it so? Are there multiple perspectives to consider on an issue? Do multiple sources agree or disagree on an issue? Does quality research substantiate information or opinion? Do I have any personal biases that may affect my consideration of this information? It is only through purposeful, frequent, intentional questioning such as this that we can sharpen our critical thinking skills and improve as students, learners, and researchers. Developing my critical thinking skills over a twenty year period as a student in higher education enabled me to complete a quantitative dissertation, including analyzing research and completing statistical analysis, and earning my Ph.D. in 2014.

While critical thinking analyzes information and roots out the true nature and facets of problems, it is creative thinking that drives progress forward when it comes to solving these problems.

Exceptional creative thinkers are people that invent new solutions to existing problems that do not rely on past or current solutions. They are the ones who invent solution C when everyone else is still arguing between A and B. Creative thinking skills involve using strategies to clear the mind so that our thoughts and ideas can transcend the current limitations of a problem and allow us to see beyond barriers that prevent new solutions from being found.

Brainstorming is the simplest example of intentional creative thinking that most people have tried at least once. With the quick generation of many ideas at once we can block-out our brain’s natural tendency to limit our solution-generating abilities so we can access and combine many possible solutions/thoughts and invent new ones. It is sort of like sprinting through a race’s finish line only to find there is new track on the other side and we can keep going, if we choose. As with critical thinking, higher education both demands creative thinking from us and is the perfect place to practice and develop the skill. Everything from word problems in a math class, to opinion or persuasive speeches and papers, call upon our creative thinking skills to generate new solutions and perspectives in response to our professor’s demands. Creative thinking skills ask questions such as—What if? Why not? What else is out there? Can I combine perspectives/solutions? What is something no one else has brought-up? What is being forgotten/ignored? What about ______? It is the opening of doors and options that follows problem-identification.

Consider an assignment that required you to compare two different authors on the topic of education and select and defend one as better. Now add to this scenario that your professor clearly prefers one author over the other. While critical thinking can get you as far as identifying the similarities and differences between these authors and evaluating their merits, it is creative thinking that you must use if you wish to challenge your professor’s opinion and invent new perspectives on the authors that have not previously been considered.

So, what can we do to develop our critical and creative thinking skills? Although many students may dislike it, group work is an excellent way to develop our thinking skills. Many times I have

heard from students their disdain for working in groups based on scheduling, varied levels of commitment to the group or project, and personality conflicts too, of course. True—it’s not always easy, but that is why it is so effective. When we work collaboratively on a project or problem we bring many brains to bear on a subject. These different brains will naturally develop varied ways of solving or explaining problems and examining information. To the observant individual we see that this places us in a constant state of back and forth critical/creative thinking modes.

For example, in group work we are simultaneously analyzing information and generating solutions on our own, while challenging other’s analyses/ideas and responding to challenges to our own analyses/ideas. This is part of why students tend to avoid group work—it challenges us as thinkers and forces us to analyze others while defending ourselves, which is not something we are used to or comfortable with as most of our educational experiences involve solo work. Your professors know this—that’s why we assign it—to help you grow as students, learners, and thinkers!

Performance vs. Learning Goals

As you have discovered in this chapter, much of our ability to learn is governed by our motivations and goals. What has not yet been covered in detail has been how sometimes hidden goals or mindsets can impact the learning process. In truth, we all have goals that we might not be fully aware of, or if we are aware of them, we might not understand how they help or restrict our ability to learn. An illustration of this can be seen in a comparison of a student that has performance -based goals with a student that has learning -based goals.

If you are a student with strict performance goals, your primary psychological concern might be to appear intelligent to others. At first, this might not seem to be a bad thing for college, but it can truly limit your ability to move forward in your own learning. Instead, you would tend to play it safe without even realizing it. For example, a student who is strictly performance-goal-oriented will often only says things in a classroom discussion when they think it will make them look knowledgeable to the instructor or their classmates. For example, a performance-oriented student might ask a question that she knows is beyond the topic being covered (e.g., asking about the economics of Japanese whaling while discussing the book Moby Dick in an American literature course). Rarely will they ask a question in class because they actually do not understand a concept. Instead they will ask questions that make them look intelligent to others or in an effort to “stump the teacher.” When they do finally ask an honest question, it may be because they are more afraid that their lack of understanding will result in a poor performance on an exam rather than simply wanting to learn.

If you are a student who is driven by learning goals, your interactions in classroom discussions are usually quite different. You see the opportunity to share ideas and ask questions as a way to gain knowledge quickly. In a classroom discussion you can ask for clarification immediately if you don’t quite understand what is being discussed. If you are a person guided by learning goals, you are less worried about what others think since you are there to learn and you see that as the most important goal.

Another example where the difference between the two mindsets is clear can be found in assignments and other coursework. If you are a student who is more concerned about performance, you may avoid work that is challenging. You will take the “easy A” route by relying on what you already know. You will not step out of your comfort zone because your psychological goals are based on approval of your performance instead of being motivated by learning.

This is very different from a student with a learning-based psychology. If you are a student who is motivated by learning goals, you may actively seek challenging assignments, and you will put a great deal of effort into using the assignment to expand on what you already know. While getting a good grade is important to you, what is even more important is the learning itself.

If you find that you sometimes lean toward performance-based goals, do not feel discouraged. Many of the best students tend to initially focus on performance until they begin to see the ways it can restrict their learning. The key to switching to learning-based goals is often simply a matter of first recognizing the difference and seeing how making a change can positively impact your own learning.

What follows in this section is a more in-depth look at the difference between performance- and learning-based goals. This is followed by an exercise that will give you the opportunity to identify, analyze, and determine a positive course of action in a situation where you believe you could improve in this area.

What Students Say

• No. Someone has always dictated how and what I learned.
• Yes. I always look for ways to take control of what and how I learned.
• I am uncertain. I never thought about it before.
• No. I have never heard of learning styles.
• Yes. I have heard of learning styles and know my own.
• Yes. I have heard of learning styles, but I don’t think they’re accurate or relate to me.
• Perseverance
• Understanding how I learn
• Good teachers and support

You can also take the anonymous What Students Say surveys to add your voice to this textbook. Your responses will be included in updates.

Students offered their views on these questions, and the results are displayed in the graphs below.

In the past, did you feel like you had control over your own learning?

Fixed vs. Growth Mindset

The research-based model of these two mindsets and their influence on learning was presented in 1988 by Carol Dweck. 7 In Dr. Dweck’s work, she determined that a student’s perception about their own learning accompanied by a broader goal of learning had a significant influence on their ability to overcome challenges and grow in knowledge and ability. This has become known as the Fixed vs. Growth Mindset model. In this model, the performance -goal-oriented student is represented by the fixed mindset, while the learning -goal-oriented student is represented by the growth mindset.

In the following graphic, based on Dr. Dweck’s research, you can see how many of the components associated with learning are impacted by these two mindsets.

The Growth Mindset and Lessons About Failing

Something you may have noticed is that a growth mindset would tend to give a learner grit and persistence. If you had learning as your major goal, you would normally keep trying to attain that goal even if it took you multiple attempts. Not only that, but if you learned a little bit more with each try you would see each attempt as a success, even if you had not achieved complete mastery of whatever it was you were working to learn.

With that in mind, it should come as no surprise that Dr. Dweck found that those people who believed their abilities could change through learning (growth vs. a fixed mindset) readily accepted learning challenges and persisted despite early failures.

Improving Your Ability to Learn

As strange as it may seem, research into fixed vs. growth mindsets has shown that if you believe you can learn something new, you greatly improve your ability to learn. At first, this may seem like the sort of feel-good advice we often encounter in social media posts or quotes that are intended to inspire or motivate us (e.g., believe in yourself! ), but in looking at the differences outlined between a fixed and a growth mindset, you can see how each part of the growth mindset path would increase your probability of success when it came to learning.

Very few people have a strict fixed or growth mindset all of the time. Often we tend to lean one way or another in certain situations. For example, a person trying to improve their ability in a sport they enjoy may exhibit all of the growth mindset traits and characteristics, but they find themselves blocked in a fixed mindset when they try to learn something in another area like computer programming or arithmetic.

In this exercise, do a little self-analysis and think of some areas where you may find yourself hindered by a fixed mindset. Using the outline presented below, in the far right column, write down how you can change your own behavior for each of the parts of the learning process. What will you do to move from a fixed to a growth mindset? For example, say you were trying to learn to play a musical instrument. In the Challenges row, you might pursue a growth path by trying to play increasingly more difficult songs rather than sticking to the easy ones you have already mastered. In the Criticism row, you might take someone’s comment about a weakness in timing as a motivation for you to practice with a metronome. For Success of others you could take inspiration from a famous musician that is considered a master and study their techniques.

Whatever it is that you decide you want to use for your analysis, apply each of the Growth characteristics to determine a course of action to improve.

Applying What You Know about Learning Another useful part of being an informed learner is recognizing that as a college student you will have many choices when it comes to learning. Looking back at the Uses and Gratification model, you’ll discover that your motivations as well as your choices in how you interact with learning activities can make a significant difference in not only what you learn, but how you learn. By being aware of a few learning theories, students can take initiative and tailor their own learning so that it best benefits them and meets their main needs.

Student Profile

“My seating choice significantly affects my learning. Sitting at a desk where the professor’s voice can be heard clearly helps me better understand the subject; and ensuring I have a clear view helps me take notes. Therefore, sitting in the front of the classroom should be a “go to” strategy while attending college. It will keep you focused and attentive throughout the lecture. Also, sitting towards the front of the classroom limits the tendency to be on check my phone.” —Luis Angel Ochoa, Westchester Community College

Making Decisions about Your Own Learning

As a learner, the kinds of materials, study activities, and assignments that work best for you will derive from your own experiences and needs (needs that are both short-term as well as those that fulfill long-term goals). In order to make your learning better suited to meet these needs, you can use the knowledge you have gained about UGT and other learning theories to make decisions concerning your own learning. These decisions can include personal choices in learning materials, how and when you study, and most importantly, taking ownership of your learning activities as an active participant and decision maker. In fact, one of the main principles emphasized in this chapter is that students not only benefit from being involved in planning their instruction, but learners also gain by continually evaluating the actual success of that instruction. In other words: Does this work for me? Am I learning what I need to by doing it this way?

While it may not always be possible to control every component of your learning over an entire degree program, you can take every opportunity to influence learning activities so they work to your best advantage. What follows are several examples of how this can be done by making decisions about your learning activities based on what you have already learned in this chapter.

Make Mistakes Safe

Create an environment for yourself where mistakes are safe and mistakes are expected as just another part of learning. This practice ties back to the principles you learned in the section on grit and persistence. The key is to allow yourself the opportunity to make mistakes and learn from them before they become a part of your grades. You can do this by creating your own learning activities that you design to do just that. An example of this might be taking practice quizzes on your own, outside of the more formal course activities. The quizzes could be something you find in your textbook, something you find online, or something that you develop with a partner. In the latter case you would arrange with a classmate for each of you to produce a quiz and then exchange them. That particular exercise would serve double learning duty, since to create a good quiz you would need to learn the main concepts of the subject, and answering the questions on your partner’s quiz might help you identify areas where you need more knowledge.

The main idea with this sort of practice is that you are creating a safe environment where you can make mistakes and learn from them before those mistakes can negatively impact your success in the course. Better to make mistakes on a practice run than on any kind of assignment or exam that can heavily influence your final grade in a course.

Make Everything Problem Centered

When working through a learning activity, the practical act of problem-solving is a good strategy. Problem-solving, as an approach, can give a learning activity more meaning and motivation for you, as a learner. Whenever possible it is to your advantage to turn an assignment or learning task into a problem you are trying to solve or something you are trying to accomplish.

In essence, you do this by deciding on some purpose for the assignment (other than just completing the assignment itself). An example of this would be taking the classic college term paper and writing it in a way that solves a problem you are already interested in.

Typically, many students treat a term paper as a collection of requirements that must be fulfilled—the paper must be on a certain topic; it should include an introduction section, a body, a closing, and a bibliography; it should be so many pages long, etc. With this approach, the student is simply completing a checklist of attributes and components dictated by the instructor, but other than that, there is no reason for the paper to exist.

Instead, writing it to solve a problem gives the paper purpose and meaning. For example, if you were to write a paper with the purpose of informing the reader about a topic they knew little about, that purpose would influence not only how you wrote the paper but would also help you make decisions on what information to include. It would also influence how you would structure information in the paper so that the reader might best learn what you were teaching them. Another example would be to write a paper to persuade the reader about a certain opinion or way of looking at things. In other words, your paper now has a purpose rather than just reporting facts on the subject. Obviously, you would still meet the format requirements of the paper, such as number of pages and inclusion of a bibliography, but now you do that in a way that helps to solve your problem.

Make It Occupation Related

Much like making assignments problem centered, you will also do well when your learning activities have meaning for your profession or major area of study. This can take the form of simply understanding how the things you are learning are important to your occupation, or it can include the decision to do assignments in a way that can be directly applied to your career. If an exercise seems pointless and possibly unrelated to your long-term goals, you will be much less motivated by the learning activity.

An example of understanding how a specific school topic impacts your occupation future would be that of a nursing student in an algebra course. At first, algebra might seem unrelated to the field of nursing, but if the nursing student recognizes that drug dosage calculations are critical to patient safety and that algebra can help them in that area, there is a much stronger motivation to learn the subject.

In the case of making a decision to apply assignments directly to your field, you can look for ways to use learning activities to build upon other areas or emulate tasks that would be required in your profession. Examples of this might be a communication student giving a presentation in a speech course on how the Internet has changed corporate advertising strategies, or an accounting student doing statistics research for an environmental studies course. Whenever possible, it is even better to use assignments to produce things that are much like what you will be doing in your chosen career. An example of this would be a graphic design student taking the opportunity to create an infographic or other supporting visual elements as a part of an assignment for another course. In cases where this is possible, it is always best to discuss your ideas with your instructor to make certain what you intend will still meet the requirements of the assignment.

Managing Your Time

One of the most common traits of college students is the constraint on their time. As adults, we do not always have the luxury of attending school without other demands on our time. Because of this, we must become efficient with our use of time, and it is important that we maximize our learning activities to be most effective. In fact, time management is so important that there is an entire chapter in this text dedicated to it. When you can, refer to that chapter to learn more about time management concepts and techniques that can be very useful.

Instructors as Learning Partners

In K-12 education, the instructor often has the dual role of both teacher and authority figure for students. Children come to expect their teachers to tell them what to do, how to do it, and when to do it. College learners, on the other hand, seem to work better when they begin to think of their instructors as respected experts that are partners in their education. The change in the relationship for you as a learner accomplishes several things: it gives you ownership and decision-making ability in your own learning, and it enables you to personalize your learning experience to best fit your own needs. For the instructor, it gives them the opportunity to help you meet your own needs and expectations in a rich experience, rather than focusing all of their time on trying to get information to you.

The way to develop learning partnerships is through direct communication with your instructors. If there is something you do not understand or need to know more about, go directly to them. When you have ideas about how you can personalize assignments or explore areas of the subject that interest you or better fit your needs, ask them about it. Ask your instructors for guidance and recommendations, and above all, demonstrate to them that you are taking a direct interest in your own learning. Most instructors are thrilled when they encounter students that want to take ownership of their own learning, and they will gladly become a resourceful guide for you.

Application

Applying What You Know about Learning to What You Are Doing: In this activity, you will work with an upcoming assignment from one of your courses—preferably something you might be dreading or are at least less than enthusiastic about working on. You will see if there is anything you can apply to the assignment from what you know about learning that might make it more interesting.

In the table below are several attributes that college students generally prefer in their learning activities, listed in the far left column. As you think about your assignment, consider whether or not it already possesses the attribute. If it does, go on to the next row. If it does not, see if there is some way you can approach the assignment so that it does follow preferred learning attributes; write that down in the last column, to the far right.

The Hidden Curriculum

The hidden curriculum is a phrase used to cover a wide variety of circumstances at school that can influence learning and affect your experience. Sometimes called the invisible curriculum, it varies by institution and can be thought of as a set of unwritten rules or expectations.

Situation: According to your syllabus, your history professor is lecturing on the chapter that covers the stock market crash of 1929 on Tuesday of next week.

Sounds pretty straightforward and common. Your professor lectures on a topic and you will be there to hear it. However, there are some unwritten rules, or hidden curriculum, that are not likely to be communicated. Can you guess what they may be?

• What is an unwritten rule about what you should be doing before attending class?
• What is an unwritten rule about what you should be doing in class?
• What is an unwritten rule about what you should be doing after class?
• What is an unwritten rule if you are not able to attend that class?

Some of your answers could have included the following:

The expectations before, during, and after class, as well as what you should do if you miss class, are often unspoken because many professors assume you already know and do these things or because they feel you should figure them out on your own. Nonetheless, some students struggle at first because they don’t know about these habits, behaviors, and strategies. But once they learn them, they are able to meet them with ease.

While the previous example may seem obvious once they’ve been pointed out, most instances of the invisible curriculum are complex and require a bit of critical thinking to uncover. What follows are some common but often overlooked examples of this invisible curriculum.

One example of a hidden curriculum could be found in the beliefs of your professor. Some professors may refuse to reveal their personal beliefs to avoid your writing toward their bias rather than presenting a cogent argument of your own. Other professors may be outspoken about their beliefs to force you to consider and possibly defend your own position. As a result, you may be influenced by those opinions which can then influence your learning, but not as an official part of your study.

Other examples of how this hidden curriculum might not always be so easily identified can be found in classroom arrangements or even scheduling. To better understand this, imagine two different classes on the exact same subject and taught by the same instructor. One class is held in a large lecture hall and has over 100 students in it, while the other meets in a small classroom and has fewer than 20 students. In the smaller class, there is time for all of the students to participate in discussions as a learning activity, and they receive the benefit of being able to talk about their ideas and the lessons through direct interaction with each other and the professor. In the larger class, there is simply not enough time for all 100 students to each discuss their thoughts. On the flip side, most professors who teach lecture classes use technology to give them constant feedback on how well students understand a given subject. If the data suggests more time should be spent, these professors discover this in real time and can adapt the class accordingly.

Another instance where class circumstances might heavily influence student learning could be found in the class schedule. If the class was scheduled to meet on Mondays and Wednesdays and the due date for assignments was always on Monday, those students would benefit from having the weekend to finalize their work before handing it in. If the class met on a different day, students might not have as much free time just before handing in the assignment. The obvious solution would be better planning and time management to complete assignments in advance of due dates, but nonetheless, conditions caused by scheduling may still impact student learning.

Working Within the Hidden Curriculum

The first step in dealing with the hidden curriculum is to recognize it and understand how it can influence your learning. After any specific situation has been identified, the next step is to figure out how to work around the circumstances to either take advantage of any benefits or to remove any roadblocks.

To illustrate this, here are some possible solutions to the situations given as examples earlier in this section:

Prevailing Opinions—Simply put, you are going to encounter instructors and learning activities that you sometimes agree with and sometimes do not. The key is to learn from them regardless. In either case, take ownership of your learning and even make an effort to learn about other perspectives, even if it is only for your own education on the matter. There is no better time to expose yourself to other opinions and philosophies than in college. In fact, many would say that this is a significant part of the college experience. With a growth mindset, it is easy to view everything as a learning opportunity.

Classroom Circumstances—These kinds of circumstances often require a more structured approach to turn the situation to your advantage, but they also usually have the most obvious solutions. In the example of the large class, you might find yourself limited in the ability to participate in classroom discussions because of so many other students. The way around that would be to speak to several classmates and create your own discussion group. You could set up a time to meet, or you could take a different route by using technology such as an online discussion board, a Skype session, or even a group text. Several of the technologically based solutions might even be better than an in-class discussion since you do not all have to be present at the same time. The discussion can be something that occurs all week long, giving everyone the time to think through their ideas and responses.

Again, the main point is to first spot those things in the hidden curriculum that might put your learning at a disadvantage and devise a solution that either reduces the negative impact or even becomes a learning advantage.

Chapter 5: College Level Critical Thinking, Reading and Decision Making Copyright © by Jeremy Boettinger; openstax.org/books/college-success; and Foundations of Academic Success: Words of Wisdom is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

An official website of the United States government

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock Locked padlock icon ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Advanced Search
• Journal List

Constructing a critical thinking evaluation framework for college students majoring in the humanities

Shenyu tang, xingyu geng.

• Author information
• Article notes
• Copyright and License information

Edited by: Gregory Siy Ching, Fu Jen Catholic University, Taiwan

Reviewed by: Dinny Devi Triana, Jakarta State University, Indonesia; Daniela Dumitru, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, Romania; Ana Alina Tudoran, Aarhus University, Denmark

*Correspondence: Qi Liu [email protected]

This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

Received 2022 Aug 12; Accepted 2022 Nov 4; Collection date 2022.

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.

Introduction

Education for sustainable development (ESD) has focused on the promotion of sustainable thinking skills, capacities, or abilities for learners of different educational stages. Critical thinking (CT) plays an important role in the lifelong development of college students, which is also one of the key competencies in ESD. The development of a valuable framework for assessing college students’ CT is important for understanding their level of CT. Therefore, this study aimed to construct a reliable self-evaluation CT framework for college students majoring in the humanities.

Exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and Item analysis were conducted to explore the reliability and validity of the CT evaluation framework. Six hundred and forty-two college students majoring in the humanities were collected. The sample was randomly divided into two subsamples ( n 1 = 321, n 2 = 321).

The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the whole scale was 0.909, and the values of the Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for individual factors of the scale ranged from 0.724 to 0.878. Then CFA was conducted within the scope of the validity study of the scale. In this way, the structure of the 7-factor scale was confirmed. Results indicated that the constructed evaluation framework performed consistently with the collected data. CFA also confirmed a good model fitting of the relevant 22 factors of the college students’ CT framework ( χ 2 /df  = 3.110, RMSEA = 0.056, GFI = 0.927, AGFI = 0.902, NFI = 0.923, and CFI = 0.946).

These findings revealed that the CT abilities self-evaluation scale was a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the CT abilities of college students in the humanities. Therefore, the college students’ CT self-evaluation framework included three dimensions: discipline cognition (DC), CT disposition, and CT skills. Among them, CT disposition consisted of motivation (MO), attention (AT), and open-mindedness (OM), while CT skills included clarification skills (CS), organization skills (OS), and reflection (RE). Therefore, this framework can be an effective instrument to support college students’ CT measurement. Consequently, some suggestions are also put forward regarding how to apply the instrument in future studies.

Keywords: critical thinking, framework, college students, humanities, reliability and validity

Nowadays, individuals should be equipped with the abilities of identifying problems, in-depth thinking, and generating effective solutions to cope with various risks and challenges caused by the rapid development of science and technology ( Arisoy and Aybek, 2021 ). In this context, critical thinking (CT) is gaining increasing attention. Promoting college students’ CT is an important way of improving their abilities of problem solving and decision making to further enhance their lifelong development ( Feng et al., 2010 ). Although human beings are not born with CT abilities ( Scriven and Paul, 2005 ), they can be acquired through learning and training, and are always sustainable ( Barta et al., 2022 ).

Especially in the field of education, CT should be valued ( Pnevmatikos et al., 2019 ). Students should be good thinkers who possess the abilities of applying critical evaluation, finding, and collating evidence for their views, as well as maintaining a doubting attitude regarding the validity of facts provided by their teachers or other students ( Sulaiman et al., 2010 ). Many countries have regarded the development of students’ CT as one of the fundamental educational goals ( Flores et al., 2012 ; Ennis, 2018 ). CT is helpful for students to develop their constructive, creative, and productive thinking, as well as to foster their independence ( Wechsler et al., 2018 ; Odebiyi and Odebiyi, 2021 ). It also provides the power to broaden their horizons ( Les and Moroz, 2021 ). Meanwhile, when college students have a high level of CT abilities, they will likely perform better in their future careers ( Stone et al., 2017 ; Cáceres et al., 2020 ). Therefore, college students should be capable of learning to access knowledge, solve problems, and embrace different ideas to develop their CT ability ( Ulger, 2018 ; Arisoy and Aybek, 2021 ).

Due to the significant meaningfulness of CT abilities at all education levels and in various disciplines, how to cultivate students’ CT abilities has been the focus of CT-related research ( Fernández-Santín and Feliu-Torruella, 2020 ). Many studies have shown that inquiry-based learning activities or programs are an effective way to exercise and enhance students’ CT abilities ( Thaiposri and Wannapiroon, 2015 ; Liang and Fung, 2020 ; Boso et al., 2021 ; Chen et al., 2022 ). Students not only need the motivation and belief to actively participate in such learning activities and to commit to problem solving, but also need the learning skills to cope with the problems that may be encountered in problem-solving oriented learning activities. These requirements are in line with the cultivation of students’ CT abilities. Meanwhile, research has also indicated that there is an interrelationship between problem solving and CT ( Dunne, 2015 ; Kanbay and Okanlı, 2017 ).

However, another important issue is how to test whether learning activities contribute to improving the level of students’ CT abilities. It is effective to measure students’ CT abilities through using CT measurement instruments. Some CT measurement frameworks have been developed to cope with the need to cultivate CT abilities in teaching and learning activities ( Saad and Zainudin, 2022 ). However, there are still some imperfections in these existing CT evaluation frameworks. For example, most studies on college students’ CT are in the field of science, with very little research on students in the humanities, and even less on specifically developing CT assessment frameworks for college students in the humanities. Only Khandaghi et al. (2011) conducted a study on the CT disposition of college students in the humanities, and the result indicated that their CT abilities were at an intermediate level. However, there are few descriptions of college students’ CT with a background in humanities disciplines. Compared to humanities disciplines, science disciplines seem to place more emphasis on logical and rational thinking, which might cater more to the development of CT abilities ( Li, 2021 ). However, it is also vital for college students in the humanities to engage in rational thinking processes ( Al-Khatib, 2019 ). Hence, it is worth performing CT abilities evaluations of college students in the humanities by constructing a CT evaluation framework specifically for such students. In addition, previous measurements of CT have tended to be constructed according to one dimension of CT only, either CT skills or CT disposition. CT skills and disposition are equally important factors, and the level of CT abilities can be assessed more comprehensively and accurately by measuring both dimensions simultaneously. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to develop a self-evaluation CT framework for college students that integrates both CT skills and disposition dimensions to comprehensively evaluate the CT ability of college students in the humanities.

Literature review

Ct of college students in the humanities.

CT is hardly a new concept, as it can be traced back 2,500 years to the dialogs of Socrates ( Giannouli and Giannoulis, 2021 ). In the book, How We Think, Dewey (1933 , p 9; first edition, 1910) mentioned that thinking critically can help us move forward in our thinking. Subsequently, different explanations of CT have been presented through different perspectives by researchers. Some researchers think that CT means to think with logic and reasonableness ( Mulnix and Mulnix, 2010 ), while others suggest that CT refers to the specific learning process in which learners need to think critically to achieve learning objectives through making decisions and problem solving ( Ennis, 1987 ).

Generally, for a consensus, CT involves two aspects: CT skills and CT disposition ( Bensley et al., 2010 ; Sosu, 2013 ). CT skills refer to the abilities to understand problems and produce reasonable solutions to problems, such as analysis, interpretation, and the drawing of conclusions ( Chan, 2019 ; Ahmady and Shahbazi, 2020 ). CT disposition emphasizes the willingness of individuals to apply the skills mentioned above when there is a problem or issue that needs to be solved ( Chen et al., 2020 ). People are urged by CT disposition to engage in a reflective, inferential thinking process about the information they receive ( Álvarez-Huerta et al., 2022 ), and then in specific problem-solving processes, specific CT skills would be applied. CT disposition is the motivation for critical behavior and an important quality for the learning and use of critical skills ( Lederer, 2007 ; Jiang et al., 2018 ).

For college students, the cultivation of their CT abilities is usually based on specific learning curriculums ( O’Reilly et al., 2022 ). Hence, many studies about students’ CT have been conducted in various disciplines. For example, in science education, Ma et al.’s (2021) study confirmed that there was a significant relationship between CT and science achievement, so they suggested that it might be valuable to consider fostering CT as a considerable outcome in science education. In political science, when developing college students’ CT, teachers should focus on not only the development of skills, but also of meta-awareness ( Berdahl et al., 2021 ), which emphasizes the importance of CT disposition, i.e., learners not only need to acquire CT skills, such as analysis, inference, and interpretation, but also need to have clear cognition of how to apply these skills at a cognitive level. Duro et al. (2013) found that psychology students valued explicit CT training. For students majoring in mathematics, Basri and Rahman (2019) developed an assessment framework to investigate students’ CT when solving mathematical problems. According to the above literature review, there have been many studies on CT in various disciplines, which also reflects the significant importance of CT for the development of students in various disciplines. However, most studies on CT have been conducted in the field of science subjects, such as mathematics, business, nursing, and so on ( Kim et al., 2014 ; Siew and Mapeala, 2016 ; Basri and Rahman, 2019 ), but there have been few studies on the CT of students in the humanities ( Ennis, 2018 ).

There is a widespread stereotype that compared to humanities subjects, science majors are more logical, and so more attention should be paid to their CT ( Lin, 2016 ). This begs the question, are all students in the humanities (e.g., history, pedagogy, Chinese language literature, and so on) sensual or “romantic”? Do they not also need to develop independent, logical, and CT? Can they depend only on “romantic” thinking? This may be a prejudice. In fact, the humanities are subjects that focus on humanities and our society ( Lin, 2020 ). Humanities should be seen as the purpose rather than as a tool. The academic literacy of humanities needs to be developed and enhanced through a long-term, subtle learning process ( Bhatt and Samanhudi, 2022 ), and the significance for individuals is profound. Hence, the subjects of both humanities and sciences play an equally important role in an individual’s lifelong development. As such, what should students majoring in humanities subjects do to develop and enhance their professional competence? Chen and Wei (2021) suggested that individuals in the humanities should have the abilities to identify and tackle unstructured problems to adapt to the changing environments, and this suggestion is in line with a developmental pathway for fostering CT. Therefore, developing their CT abilities is an important way to foster the humanistic literacy of students in the humanities. Specifically, it is important to be equipped with the abilities to think independently and questioningly, to read individually, and to interpret texts in depth and in multiple senses. They also need to learn and understand the content of texts and evaluate the views of others in order to expand the breadth of their thinking ( Barrett, 2005 ). Moreover, they need the ability to analyze issues dialectically and rationally, and to continually reflect on themselves and offer constructive comments ( Klugman, 2018 ; Dumitru, 2019 ). Collegiate CT skills are taught via independent courses or embedded modules ( Zhang et al., 2022 ). The humanities are no exception. Yang (2007) once designed thematic history projects, as independent courses, to foster students’ disposition toward CT concerning the subject of history, and the results showed that the history projects can support learners’ development of historical literacy and CT. In a word, the humanities also play an important role in fostering the development and enhancement of college students’ CT, esthetic appreciation and creativity, and cultural heritage and understanding ( Jomli et al., 2021 ). Having good CT therefore also plays a crucial role in the lifelong development of students in the humanities.

An accurate assessment of the level of CT abilities is an important prerequisite for targeted improvement of students’ CT abilities in special disciplines ( Braeuning et al., 2021 ). Therefore, it might be meaningful to construct a self-evaluation CT framework for college students in the humanities according to their professional traits.

Evaluating college students’ CT

Given that CT can be cultivated ( Butler et al., 2017 ), more attention has been paid to how to improve students’ CT abilities level in instruction and learning ( Araya, 2020 ; Suh et al., 2021 ). However, it is also important to examine how CT can be better assessed. The evaluation of thinking is helpful for students to think at higher levels ( Kilic et al., 2020 ). Although the definitions of CT are controversial ( Hashemi and Ghanizadeh, 2012 ), many researchers have reached a consensus on the main components of CT: skills and disposition ( Bensley et al., 2016 ), and different CT evaluation frameworks have been developed according to one of the two dimensions. For example, Li and Liu (2021) developed a five-skill framework for high school students which included analysis, inference, evaluation, construct, and self-reflection. Meanwhile, in recent years, the assessment of CT disposition has also attracted the interest of a growing number of researchers. Sosu (2013) developed the “Critical Thinking Disposition Scale” (STDS), which included two dimensions: critical openness and reflective skepticism. The specific taxonomies of the evaluation framework of CT skills and dispositions is shown in Table 1 . As illustrated in Table 1 , there are some universal core items to describe CT skills. For the dimension of CT skills, the sub-dimensions of interpretation, analysis, inference, and evaluation are the important components. Those CT skills are usually applied along with the general process of learning activities ( Hsu et al., 2022 ). For instance, at the beginning of learning activities, students should have a clear understanding of the issues raised and the knowledge utilized through applying interpretation skills. Likewise, there are some universal core items to describe CT dispositions, such as open-mindedness, attentiveness, flexibility, curiosity, and so on.

Taxonomies of the evaluation framework of CT skills and dispositions.

For a good critical thinker, it is equally important to have both dispositional CT and CT skills. Students need to have the awareness of applying CT abilities to think about problem-solving and subsequently be able to utilize a variety of CT skills in specific problem-solving processes. Therefore, we argue that designing a CT self-evaluation framework that integrates the two dimensions will provide a more comprehensive assessment of college students’ CT. In terms of CT disposition, motivation, attentiveness, and open-mindedness were included as the three sub-dimensions of CT disposition. Motivation is an important prerequisite for all thinking activities ( Rodríguez-Sabiote et al., 2022 ). Especially in problem-solving-oriented learning activities, the development of CT abilities will be significantly influenced by the motivation level ( Berestova et al., 2021 ). Attentiveness refers to the state of concentration of the learner during the learning process, which reflects the learners’ level of commitment to learning, playing a crucial role in the development of CT abilities during the learning process. Open-mindedness requires learners to keep an open mind to the views of others when engaging in learning activities. The three sub-dimensions have been used to reflect leaners’ disposition to think critically. Especially in the humanities, it is only through in-depth communication between learners that a crash of minds and an improvement in abilities can take place ( Liu et al., 2022 ), and it is therefore essential that learners maintain a high level of motivation, attentiveness, and open-mindedness in this process to develop their CT abilities. In terms of CT skills, three sub-dimensions were also selected to measure the level of learners’ CT skills, namely clarification skills, organization skills, and reflection. In the humanities, it should be essential abilities for students to understand, analyze, and describe the literature and problems comprehensively and exactly ( Chen and Wei, 2021 ). Then, following the ability to extract key information about the problem, to organize and process it, and to organize the information with the help of organizational tools such as diagrams and mind maps. Finally, the whole process of problem solving is reflected upon and evaluated ( Ghanizadeh, 2016 ), and research has shown that reflection learning intervention could significantly improve learners’ CT abilities ( Chen et al., 2019 ).

Research purpose

CT plays an important role in college students’ academic and lifelong career development ( Din, 2020 ). In the current study on college students’ CT measurement, it can be improved in two main ways.

Firstly, the attention to the discipline cognition related to CT in previous studies is insufficient. Generally, students’ CT abilities can be cultivated based on two contexts: the subject-specific instructional context and the general skills instructional context ( Ennis, 1989 ; Swartz, 2018 ). In authentic teaching and learning contexts, the generation and development of CT usually takes place in problem-oriented learning activities ( Liang and Fung, 2020 ), in which students need to achieve their learning objectives by identifying problems and solving them. According to Willingham (2007) , if you are to think critically, you must have a sound knowledge base of the problem or topic of enquiry and view it from multiple perspectives. Due to the difference in nature of the disciplines, the format of specific learning activities should also vary. Hence, an adequate cognition of the discipline is an important prerequisite for learning activities; meanwhile, college students’ cognition level regarding their discipline should also be an important assessment criterion for them to understand their own level of CT abilities. Cognition refers to the acquisition of knowledge through mental activity (e.g., forming concepts, perceptions, judgments, or imagination; Colling et al., 2022 ). Learners’ thinking, beliefs, and feelings will affect how they behave ( Han et al., 2021 ). Analogically speaking, discipline cognition refers to an individual’s understanding of their discipline’s backgrounds and knowledge ( Flynn et al., 2021 ). Cognition should be an important variable in CT instruction ( Ma and Luo, 2020 ). In the current study, we added the dimension of discipline cognition into the self-evaluation CT framework of college students in the humanities. What’s more, in order to represent the learning contexts of humanities disciplines, the specific descriptions of items are concerned with the knowledge of the humanities, (e.g., “I can recognize the strengths and limitations of the discipline I am majoring in.,” and “Through studying this subject, my understanding of the world and life is constantly developing.”).

Secondly, the measurement factors of CT skills and disposition should be more specific according to the specific humanities background. In previous studies, researchers tended to measure students’ CT in terms of one of the two dimensions of CT skills. CT thinking skills used to be measured from perspectives such as analysis, interpretation, inference, self-regulation, and evaluation. However, in specific learning processes, how should students concretely analyze and interpret the problems they encounter, and how can they self-regulate their learning processes and evaluate their learning outcomes? Those issues should also be considered to evaluate college students’ levels of CT abilities more accurately. Therefore, the current study attempted to construct a CT framework in a more specific way, and by integrating both dimensions of CT disposition and skills. Therefore, what specific factors would work well as dimensions for evaluating the CT abilities of college students in the humanities? In the current study, firstly, students’ disposition to think critically is assessed in terms of three sub-dimensions: motivation, attention, and open-mindedness, to help students understand the strength of their own awareness to engage in CT ( Bravo et al., 2020 ). Motivation is an important prerequisite for all thinking activities ( Rodríguez-Sabiote et al., 2022 ), and it could contribute to the development of engagement, behavior, and analysis of problems ( Berestova et al., 2021 ). Meanwhile, there was a positive relationship between academic motivation and CT. Therefore, in the current study, motivation is still one of the crucial factors. The sub-dimension of attentiveness was also an important measurement factor, which aimed to investigate the level of the persistence of attention. Attentiveness also has a positive influence on a variety of student behaviors ( Reynolds, 2008 ), while the sub-dimension of open-mindedness mainly assesses college students’ flexibility of thinking, which is also an important factor of CT ( Southworth, 2020 ). A good critical thinker should be receptive of some views that might be challenging to their own prior beliefs with an open-minded attitude ( Southworth, 2022 ). Secondly, college students’ CT skills were then assessed in the following three sub-dimensions of clarification skills, organization skills, and reflection, with the aim of understanding how well students use CT skills in the problem-solving process ( Tumkaya et al., 2009 ). The three sub-dimensions of CT skills selected in this framework are consistent with the specific learning process of problem solving, which begins with a clear description and understanding of the problem, i.e., clarification skills. In the humanities, it should be an essential competence for students to understand, analyze, and describe the literature and problems comprehensively and exactly ( Chen and Wei, 2021 ).

We thus constructed a model for evaluating the CT of college students in the humanities (see Figure 1 ). The proposed evaluation framework incorporates three dimensions: discipline cognition (DC), CT disposition, and CT skills. Among them, CT disposition includes the three sub-dimensions of motivation (MO), attention (AT), and open-mindedness (OM), while CT skills include the three sub-dimensions of clarification skills (CS), organization skills (OS), and reflection (RE). In other words, this study aimed to construct a seven-dimensional evaluation framework and to test whether it is an effective instrument for measuring the CT of college students in the humanities.

A model for evaluating the CT abilities of college students in the humanities.

Materials and methods

Research design.

In order to address the two problems of the existing college students’ CT evaluation frameworks mentioned above, a CT self-evaluation framework for college students in the humanities was preliminarily developed in this study, including the following seven factors: discipline cognition (2 items), motivation (5 items), attentiveness (5 items), open-mindedness (5 items), clarification skills (3 items), organization (3 items), and reflection (4 items).

Then, to ensure the content validity of the measurement framework, four experts who have studied CT and five teachers who have worked in the field of humanities were invited to review all items and give feedback. The research team compared the similarities and differences in expert opinions and made joint decisions. Meanwhile, to ensure the popularity, accuracy, and objectivity of the items, 25 college students majoring in humanities participated in the pretest, and the presentation and description of the items was improved according to their feedback. Finally, a questionnaire consisting of 30 items was constructed, including three items for participants’ socio-demographic information (e.g., gender, grade, and subject), two for discipline cognition, five for motivation, five for attention, five for open-mindedness, three for clarification skills, three for organization skills, and four for reflection (as shown in Table 2 ). For each item, a 5-point Likert-style scale (5 = strongly agree, 4 = agree, 3 = neutral, 2 = disagree, 1 = strongly disagree) was used.

Dimensions and items of the college students’ CTS evaluation framework.

Participants and data collection

In the current study, simple random sampling was adopted and the online questionnaire was uploaded on Questionnaire Star 1 (accessed on 18 March 2022), a professional online survey tool widely used in China ( Sarjinder, 2003 ). The link to the online questionnaire was sent to the teachers in the humanities of some colleges in Jiangsu, China. Then teachers sent the link to their students. In the first part of the questionnaire, students were told that they were participating in an anonymous study, the content of which may be published without any commercial use. If they did not want to participate in the survey, they could quit the website of the online questionnaire. Students who agreed to participate in the survey filled in the questionnaire. In addition, to ensure the reliability of the results of the subsequent data analysis, the ratio of the number of questionnaire items to the number of participants should be 1:5, and the larger the sample size the better ( Gorsuch, 1983 ). Therefore, eventually, 654 college students agreed to take part in the study, and completed the online questionnaire. After deleting those questionnaires with the same answer for all items or overly short response times, the effective number of samples was 642, with an effective rate of 98.2%.

The recruited effective sample comprised 642 participants, of whom 67.4% were female ( n  = 433), and 32.6% were male ( n  = 209). Sophomores ( n  = 215, 33.5%) and juniors ( n  = 249, 38.8%) made up most of the total number of participants. Meanwhile, the current study aimed to construct a CT framework for college students in the humanities field; hence, all participants were students in humanities disciplines, such as history ( n  = 187, 29.1%), educational history ( n  = 78, 12.2%), philosophy ( n  = 97, 15.1%), Chinese language and literature ( n  = 221, 34.4%), and pedagogy ( n  = 59, 9.2%). The specific socio-demographic information is shown in Table 3 .

Socio-demographic profile of respondents.

Data analysis

To construct an evaluation framework of college students’ CT skills and to confirm its reliability and validity, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), and item analysis were carried out. Firstly, 642 samples were randomly assigned to two groups, with 321 samples in each ( Yurdakul et al., 2012 ) to avoid inflation of the Cronbach’s alpha value or other effects ( Devellis, 2011 ). EFA was used to analyze the first group of samples. CFA was applied to the second sample. Firstly, EFA was conducted in order to determine the underlying factor structure of the CT-evaluation framework and to make decisions about item retention ( Kieffer, 1988 ). During this process, principal component analysis (PCA) was applied as an EFA factor extraction technique ( Vogel et al., 2009 ). CFA was then used to confirm the factor structure of the scale using the second group of 321 samples ( Kline, 2005 ). Lastly, all samples were analyzed to test the differentiation and suitability of the items ( Yurdakul et al., 2012 ). SPSS 18.0 and AMOS 24.0 were applied to analyze the collected data.

SPSS 22.0 was used for conducting EFA, and the maximum variance method was adopted for factor rotation.

Reliability analysis of the scale

Prior to the EFA, sample variance and sample size evaluations were conducted. An evaluation of Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was found to be significant, thus confirming homogeneity of variance ( χ 2  = 9162.198; p  < 0.001). Then, the Cronbach’s alpha value ( Pallant, 2007 ) was applied to evaluate the reliability of the scale, and the results showed that the whole scale had good reliability ( α  = 0.909). Specifically, the Cronbach’s alpha values of the seven factors were 0.724 (DC), 0.771 (MO), 0.878 (AT), 0.839 (OM), 0.819 (CL), 0.755 (OR), and 0.878 (RE), indicating their reliability. The Kaiser-Meyer Olkin (KMO) value of the questionnaire was 0.907, showing the appropriateness of the EFA ( Kaiser, 1974 ).

Validity analysis of the scale

To confirm the validity of the evaluation dimensions, the method of PCA was applied to extract factors, and maximum variance rotation was used for the EFA. Seven factors were finally obtained. Kieffer (1988) suggested that two strategies should be applied for EFA. Thus, oblique rotation and orthogonal rotation were both used. If the results of the two methods are similar, the results obtained by the orthogonal rotation method can be used. Therefore, in the current study, two methods were both applied for EFA, namely optimal skew and maximum variance orthogonal rotation. The results of the two methods showed no significant difference. This study thus applied the results of the maximum variance orthogonal rotation method. MO5, OM4, and OM5 were removed since their maximum factor loadings were not in line with their initial evaluation dimension ( Conway and Huffcutt, 2016 ). In addition, the factors with an eigenvalue higher than 1 were picked. Items with a factor loading of less than 0.4 and with inconsistent content were removed through the multiple orthogonal rotations ( Zhao et al., 2021 ). There were 25 items with eigenvalues greater than 1 and independent factor loadings greater than 0.5 which were retained ( Fabrigar et al., 1999 ). Table 4 presents the results of the component transformation matrix. Finally, seven factors were selected, with a cumulative variance contribution of 71.413% ( Conway and Huffcutt, 2016 ). The eigenvalues and cumulative variance contributions of the seven factors are shown in Table 5 .

The factor analysis of college students’ CT framework ( N  = 321).

The eigenvalues and contribution rates of the five factors in the model.

The first-order CFA was adopted to determine the validity, convergence, and identifiability of the framework in this study ( Kline, 2005 ). CFA was used to explore the relationships between each factor, and then to construct the evaluation framework of humanities college students’ CT.

Fitting validity analysis for the framework

As shown in Figure 2 , first-order CFA was conducted. According to Hair et al. (2014) , items that do not meet the standard load (<0.5) must be eliminated. The absolute and relative fitting indexes were applied to verify the framework fit. The Chi-square/ df in this research was 3.651, and the value of RMSEA was 0.044 (<0.08; Liu et al., 2021 ). In addition, the goodness-of-fit index (GFI) and adjusted fitness index (AGFI) were 0.923 and 0.906 respectively, which both met the reference standard proposed by Foster et al. (1993) . Moreover, consistent with Hair et al. (2014) recommendations, the normed fitness index (NFI), comparative fitness index (CFI), incremental fitness index (IFI), and relative fitness index (RFI) were 0.975, 0.982, and 0.972 (>0.9). In addition, the values of simplifying the specification fitness index (PNFI), and streamlining fitness indicator (PGFI) were more than 0.5. Therefore, these results indicated the good fitting validity of the framework ( Table 6 ).

The first-order CFA model.

The fitting index of the evaluation framework.

Convergence validity analysis for the framework

The CFA results are shown in Table 7 . The comprehensive reliability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE) were used to test the construct validity of the framework. According to Hair et al. (2014) , the CR value of all items should be more than 0.7. Thus, the CR of the 22 remaining items was good. What is more, Fornell and Larcker (1981) pointed out that if the AVE is higher than 0.5, the framework shows good convergence validity. Therefore, the results in Table 5 show that this evaluation framework has high validity and is reasonable.

Results of the confirmatory factor analysis.

Discriminant validity analysis of the framework

The discriminant validity of the framework could be ensured by testing the correlation matrix among dimensions. Schumacker and Lomax (2016) proposed that in the structural discriminant validity analysis of tools, the AVE square root of all factors must be more than the absolute value of the Pearson correlation coefficient between two factors in order to be recognized as having discriminant validity. Therefore, as shown in Table 8 , the result of structural discriminant validity analysis indicated that this framework had good discriminant validity.

The results of interrelated coefficient matrix and square roots of AVE.

***Significant at the 0.001 level; **Significant at the 0.01 level; *Significant at the 0.05 level.

Item analysis

Item analysis was conducted to determine how well the items discriminate between college students with high abilities and those with low abilities in terms of CT within the scope of the item validity of the CT-evaluation scale form. In order to accomplish this goal, item discrimination statistics were calculated based on the differences between the lowest group means of 27% and the highest group means of 27% of the participants determined according to the scores of each item and to the total scores of the scale ( Aridag and Yüksel, 2010 ). Therefore, first, the total scores for everyone were calculated by using the scale. This was followed by the calculation of total scores that were then ranked from the highest to the lowest. Of all the participants constituting the study group ( N  = 642), 27% (174) of them who had the highest scores were determined to be the higher group, and 27% of all the participants who had the lowest scores were determined to be the lower group. The independent samples t -test was applied for the purpose of statistically testing the difference between the mean scores of the two groups. The results obtained are presented in Table 9 . Further, items with dimensional Pearson correlation coefficients and standardized factor loadings that did not reach the standard value (less than 0.4 and 0.45 respectively) were eliminated. Finally, for the remaining 22 items, the decisive values were higher than 0.3, and the gross interrelated coefficient between questions and items was higher than 0.4. Overall, the item analysis results showed that the remaining 22 items reached the standard.

t -test results for the item means of the high-low-27% group.

CT is one of the key competencies that college students need to acquire ( Bandyopadhyay and Szostek, 2019 ). This study aimed to construct a self-evaluation CT framework for college students in the humanities. In the initial framework, three dimensions and 27 items were conceived; then EFA was conducted, and items with independent factor loadings below 0.5 were excluded ( Fabrigar et al., 1999 ). As a result, 25 items were retained for CFA. The results showed that three items should be eliminated because of their lower standard load (less than 0.5). Subsequently, the evaluation model with 22 items had an acceptable fitting index; meanwhile, good convergence and discriminant validity of the framework was also shown by calculating CR, AVE, and the square roots of AVE. Finally, to verify the suitability and distinctiveness of the constructed items, item analysis was conducted. The result showed that for the remaining 22 items, the decisive values were higher than 0.3, and the gross interrelated coefficient between questions and items was higher than 0.4, so the remaining 22 items reached the standard. Therefore, the final self-evaluation CT framework is a 22-item instrument, measuring three dimensions and six sub-dimensions: discipline cognition, CT disposition (open-mindedness, motivation, and attentiveness), and CT skills (reflection, organization skills, and clarification skills).

Compared to previous studies about the construction of an assessment framework for CT, this study focused on three important issues: the CT abilities of college students majoring in the humanities was the focus of this study; both CT skills and CT dispositions were included; and more specific dimensions of CT were the core measurement factors. In previous CT assessment frameworks, students in the disciplines of science (mathematics, business, nursing, engineering, etc.) were often the main subjects of study ( Kim et al., 2014 ; Michaluk et al., 2016 ; Siew and Mapeala, 2016 ; Basri and Rahman, 2019 ), while college students majoring in the humanities have received less attention. However, CT as a guide of belief and action ( Gyenes, 2021 ) is an important ability for college students in all fields ( Davies, 2013 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). In humanities subjects, research has shown that independent thinking skills are valuable indicators of students’ discipline-specific abilities in humanities subjects ( Bertram et al., 2021 ). College students in the humanities need CT abilities to identify problems and find critical solutions ( Baş et al., 2022 ). Meanwhile, the assessment instrument developed in this study added the dimension of disciplinary cognition, which is considered a prerequisite to help college students have a clear idea of their subject background. Therefore, the CT assessment framework provided a practical method for teachers and learners in the humanities to investigate the level of their CT abilities. For example, in the discipline of history, thematic history projects could be applied to foster students’ CT abilities in authentic history teaching contexts ( Yang, 2007 ). In order to verify whether the projects help to improve learners’ CT abilities, this CT evaluation framework can be applied before and at the end of the project to determine whether there are differences in learners’ levels of CT abilities before and after learning. Likewise, in philosophy classroom, philosophical whole-class dialog can be useful teaching strategies to activate learners to think critically about moral values ( Rombout et al., 2021 ). Learners in dialogs must take others’ perspectives into account ( Kim and Wilkinson, 2019 ), which is in line with the sub-dimension of open-mindedness in the current CT evaluation framework. Hence, the CT evaluation framework can also be applied in specific disciplines.

In addition, in the current CT evaluation framework, both CT skills and CT dispositions were included, and more specific dimensions of CT were the core measurement factors. In terms of CT disposition, it reflects the strength of students’ belief to think and act critically. In the current evaluation instrument, the three sub-dimensions of motivation, open-mindedness, and attentiveness are the evaluation factors. The cultivation of college students’ CT abilities is usually based on specific educational activities. When college students get involved in learning activities, there are opportunities for them to foster their CT abilities ( Liu, 2014 ; Huang et al., 2022 ). An important factor influencing student engagement is motivation ( Singh et al., 2022 ), which has an important effect on college students’ behavior, emotion, and cognitive process ( Gao et al., 2022 ). Hence, it makes sense to regard motivation as a measure factor of CT disposition, and it is crucial for college students to self-assess their motivation level in the first place to help them have a clear insight into their overall level of CT. The sub-dimension of attentiveness was also an important measurement factor, which aimed to investigate the level of the persistence of attention. Attentiveness also has a positive influence on a variety of student behaviors ( Reynolds, 2008 ), while the sub-dimension of open-mindedness mainly assesses college students’ flexibility of thinking, which is also an important factor of CT ( Southworth, 2020 ). A good critical thinker should be receptive of some views that might be challenging to their own prior beliefs with an open-minded attitude ( Southworth, 2022 ). CT skills were then assessed in the following three sub-dimensions of clarification skills, organization skills, and reflection, with the aim of understanding how well students use CT skills in the problem-solving process ( Tumkaya et al., 2009 ). The three sub-dimensions of CT skills selected in this framework are consistent with the specific learning process of problem solving, which begins with a clear description and understanding of the problem, i.e., clarification skills, followed by the ability to extract key information about the problem, to organize and process it, and to organize the information with the help of organizational tools such as diagrams and mind maps. Finally, the whole process of problem solving is reflected upon and evaluated, and research has shown that reflection learning intervention could significantly improve learners’ CT abilities ( Chen et al., 2019 ).

In other words, the self-evaluation framework of college students’ CT constructed in this study focused on the investigation of college students in the humanities, and the descriptions of specific items combined the characteristics of the humanities. What’s more, because there are some differences in the extent to which students apply specific CT skills and are aware of how to use CT to solve problems based on their different disciplinary backgrounds ( Belluigi and Cundill, 2017 ), the construction of the CT assessment framework for college students provides a practical pathway and a more comprehensive instrument for assessing the CT abilities of college students majoring in the humanities, and a research entry point was provided for researchers to better research the CT of college students majoring in the humanities.

Based on a previous literature review of CT, this study further investigated the necessity of college students’ CT to construct a framework for evaluating the CT of college students in the humanities, and to test its effectiveness. The EFA, CFA, and item analysis methods were conducted in this study to construct a three-dimensional college students’ CT self-evaluation framework. The results indicate that the framework constructed in this study has good reliability and validity. Finally, a framework with three dimensions (discipline cognition, CT disposition, and CT skills) and seven sub-dimensions (discipline cognition, motivation, attentiveness, open-mindedness, reflection, organization skills, and clarification skills) totaling 22 items was developed.

Implications

The main significance of this study is reflected in three aspects. Firstly, the current study constructed a CT-evaluation framework for college students majoring in the humanities. The results of the EFA, CFA, and item analysis supported the reliability and validity of the three-dimensional framework which indicates that it consists of discipline cognition, CT disposition, and CT skills. The specific assessment factors not only integrate the two dimensions of CT (skills and disposition), making the assessment framework more comprehensive, but also integrate the dimension of discipline cognition, enabling specific measures to be developed based on specific disciplinary contexts, ensuring that CT is assessed more accurately and relevantly. Second, the CT-evaluation framework can be applied in specific instruction and learning contexts. It is well known that CT has become one of the abilities in the 21st century. In instruction and learning, specific instructional strategies and learning activities should be purposefully applied according to specific humanistic backgrounds. Prior to undertaking specific teaching activities, it is worth having a prerequisite understanding of college students’ level of CT abilities by inviting students to complete the self-evaluation CT competence instrument. Likewise, after the learning activities, it is also an important instrument to evaluate the effectiveness of learning activities in terms of cultivating college students’ CT abilities. Finally, the construction of the CT assessment framework for college students provides a practical pathway for assessing the CT abilities of college students majoring in the humanities, and a research entry point was provided for researchers to better research the CT of these students majoring in the humanities in the future.

Limitations and future work

There are two main limitations of this study. First, the sample in this study was from one area and was selected by random sampling, which cannot cover all the college students in the major. More and larger representative samples will be needed in the future to assess the extent to which the findings are applicable to other population groups to confirm the conclusions of the study. In addition, this evaluation framework of college students’ CT is still in the theoretical research stage and has not yet been put into practice. Therefore, the framework should be practically applied in further research to improve its applicability and usability according to practical feedback.

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.

Ethics statement

Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. Written informed consent for participation was not required for this study in accordance with the national legislation and the institutional requirements.

Author contributions

QL: conceptualization. SL: methodology. SL and ST: writing—original draft preparation. SL, XG, and QL: writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

This study was supported by the School Curriculum Ideological and Political Construction Project (no. 1812200046KCSZ2211).

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 inter.

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.

1 www.wjx.cn

• Abrami P., Bernard R. M., Borokhovski E., Wade A., Surkes M. A., Tamim R., et al. (2008). Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: a stage 1 meta-analysis. Rev. Educ. Res. 78, 1102–1134. doi: 10.3102/0034654308326084 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ahmady S., Shahbazi S. (2020). Impact of social problem-solving training on critical thinking and decision making of nursing students. BMC Nurs. 19:94. doi: 10.1186/s12912-020-00487-x, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Al-Khatib O. (2019). A Framework for Implementing Higher-Order Thinking Skills (Problem-Solving, Critical Thinking, Creative Thinking, and Decision-Making) in Engineering & Humanities. Advances in Science and Engineering Technology International Conferences (ASET).
• Álvarez-Huerta A., Muela A., Larrea I. (2022). Disposition toward critical thinking and creative confidence beliefs in higher education students: the mediating role of openness to diversity and challenge. Think. Skills Creat. 43:101003. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101003 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Araya A. E. M. (2020). Critical thinking for civic life in elementary education: combining storytelling and thinking tools/pensamiento critico Para la Vida ciudadanaen educacion primaria: combinando narrativa y herramientas de pensamiento. Educacion 44, 23–43. [ Google Scholar ]
• Aridag N. C., Yüksel A. (2010). Analysis of the relationship between moral judgment competences and empathic skills of university students. Kuram ve Uygulamada Egitim Bilimleri 10, 707–724. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arisoy B., Aybek B. (2021). The effects of subject-based critical thinking education in mathematics on students’ critical thinking skills and virtues. Eur J of Educ Res 21, 99–120. doi: 10.14689/ejer.2021.92.6 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bandyopadhyay S., Szostek J. (2019). Thinking critically about critical thinking: assessing critical thinking of business students using multiple measures. J. Educ. Bus. 94, 259–270. doi: 10.1080/08832323.2018.1524355 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barrett A. (2005). The information-seeking habits of graduate student researchers in the humanities. J Acad Libr 31, 324–331. doi: 10.1016/j.acalib.2005.04.005 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barta A., Fodor L. A., Tamas B., Szamoskozi I. (2022). The development of students critical thinking abilities and dispositions through the concept mapping learning method – a meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 37:100481. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2022.100481 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Baş M. T., Özpulat F., Molu B., Dönmez H. (2022). The effect of decorative arts course on nursing students’ creativity and critical thinking dispositions. Nurse Educ. Today:105584. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2022.105584 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Basri H., Rahman A. A. (2019). Investigating critical thinking skill of junior High School in Solving Mathematical Problem. Int. J. Instr. 12, 745–758. doi: 10.29333/iji.2019.12345a [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bellaera L., Weinstein-Jones Y., Ilie S., Baker S. T. (2021). Critical thinking in practice: the priorities and practices of instructors teaching in higher education. Think. Skills Creat. 41:100856. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100856 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Belluigi D. Z., Cundill G. (2017). Establishing enabling conditions to develop critical thinking skills: a case of innovative curriculum design in environmental science. Environ. Educ. Res. 23, 950–971. doi: 10.1080/13504622.2015.1072802 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bensley D. A., Crowe D. S., Bernhardt P., Buckner C., Allman A. L. (2010). Teaching and assessing critical thinking skills for argument analysis in psychology. Teach. Psychol. 37, 91–96. doi: 10.1080/00986281003626656 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bensley D. A., Rainey C., Murtagh M. P., Flinn J. A., Maschiocchi C., Bernhardt P. C., et al. (2016). Closing the assessment loop on critical thinking: the challenges of multidimensional testing and low test-taking motivation. Think. Skills Creat. 21, 158–168. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2016.06.006 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bentler P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol. Bull. 107, 238–246. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berdahl L., Hoessler C., Mulhall S., Matheson K. (2021). Teaching critical thinking in political science: A case study. J. Political Sci. Educ. 17, 910–925. doi: 10.1080/15512169.2020.1744158 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Berestova A., Kolosov S., Tsvetkova M., Grib E. (2021). Academic motivation as a predictor of the development of critical thinking in students. J. Appl. Res. High. Educ. 14, 1041–1054. doi: 10.1108/JARHE-02-2021-0081 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bertram C., Weiss Z., Zachrich L., Ziai R. (2021). Artificial intelligence in history education. Linguistic content and complexity analyses of student writings in the CAHisT project (computational assessment of historical thinking). Comput. Educ. Artif. Intell 100038:100038. doi: 10.1016/j.caeai.2021.100038 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhatt I., Samanhudi U. (2022). From academic writing to academics writing: transitioning towards literacies for research productivity. Int. J. Educ. Res. 111:101917. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2021.101917 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boso C. M., Van Der Merwe A. S., Gross J. (2021). Students’ and educators’ experiences with instructional activities towards critical thinking skills acquisition in a nursing school. Int J. Afr Nurs Sci 14:100293. doi: 10.1016/j.ijans.2021.100293 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Braeuning D., Hornung C., Hoffmann D., Lambert K., Ugen S., Fischbach A., et al. (2021). Cognitive development. 58:101008. doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2021.101008, [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bravo M. J., Galiana L., Rodrigo M. F., Navarro-Pérez J. J., Oliver A. (2020). An adaptation of the critical thinking disposition scale in Spanish youth. Think. Skills Creat. 38:100748. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100748 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Butler H. A., Pentoney C., Bong M. P. (2017). Predicting real-world outcomes: critical thinking ability is a better predictor of life decisions than intelligence. Think. Skills Creat. 25, 38–46. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.06.005 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cáceres M., Nussbaum M., Ortiz J. (2020). Integrating critical thinking into the classroom: a teacher’s perspective. Think. Skills Creat. 37, 100674–100618. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100674 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chan C. (2019). Using digital storytelling to facilitate critical thinking disposition in youth civic engagement: A randomized control trial. Child Youth Serv. Rev. 107:104522. doi: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2019.104522 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen F., Chen S., Pai H. (2019). Self-reflection and critical thinking: the influence of professional qualifications on registered nurses. Contem Nurs 55, 59–70. doi: 10.1080/10376178.2019.1590154, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen Q., Liu D., Zhou C., Tang S. (2020). Relationship between critical thinking disposition and research competence among clinical nurses: A cross-sectional study. J. Clin. Nurs. 29, 1332–1340. doi: 10.1111/jocn.15201, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen K. L., Wei X. (2021). Boya education in China: lessons from liberal arts education in the U.S. and Hong Kong. Int. J. Educ. Dev. 84:102419. doi: 10.1016/j.ijedudev.2021.102419 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen X., Zhai X., Zhu Y., Li Y. (2022). Exploring debaters and audiences’ depth of critical thinking and its relationship with their participation in debate activities. Think. Skills Creat. 44:101035. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101035 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Colling J., Wollschlager R., Keller U., Preckel F., Fischbach A. (2022). Need for cognition and its relation to academic achievement in different learning environments. Learn. Individ. Differ. 93:1021110. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102110 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Conway J. M., Huffcutt A. I. (2016). A review and evaluation of exploratory factor analysis practices in organizational research. Organ. Res. Methods 6, 147–168. doi: 10.1177/1094428103251541 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Davies M. (2013). Critical thinking and the disciplines reconsidered. High. Educ. Res. Dev. 32, 529–544. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2012.697878 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Devellis R. F. (2011). Scale Development. New York: SAGE Publications, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dewey J. (1933). How We Think. D C Heath, Boston. [ Google Scholar ]
• Din M. (2020). Evaluating university students’ critical thinking ability as reflected in their critical reading skill: A study at bachelor level in Pakistan. Think. Skills Creat. 35:100627. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100627 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dumitru D. (2019). Creating meaning. The importance of arts, humanities and culture for critical thinking development. Stud. High. Educ. 44, 870–879. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1586345 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dunne G. (2015). Beyond critical thinking to critical being: criticality in higher education and life. Int. J. Educ. Res. 71, 86–99. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2015.03.003 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Duro E., Elander J., Maratos F. A., Stupple E. J. N., Aubeeluck A. (2013). In search of critical thinking in psychology: an exploration of student and lecturer understandings in higher education. Psychol. Learn. Teach. 12, 275–281. doi: 10.2304/plat.2013.12.3.275 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Dwyer C. P., Hogan M. J., Stewart I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Think. Skills Creat. 12, 43–52. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2013.12.004 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ennis R. H. (1962). A concept of critical thinking. Harvard Educ Rev 32, 81–111. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ennis R. H. (1987). Critical Thinking and the Curriculum Think Skills Ins: Con. Tec., 40–48. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ennis R. H. (1989). Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res. 18, 4–10. doi: 10.3102/0013189X018003004 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ennis R. H. (2018). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. Springer 37, 165–184. doi: 10.1007/s11245-016-9401-4 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fabrigar L. R., Wegener D. T., Mac Callum R. C., Strahan E. J. (1999). Evaluating the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychol. Method. 4, 272–299. doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.4.3.272 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Facione P. A. (1990). Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction. Research Findings and Recommendations. Available at: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED315423.pdf (Accessed November 3, 2022).
• Facione N. C., Facione P. A., Sanchez C. A. (1994). Critical thinking disposition as a measure of competent clinical judgment: the development of the California critical thinking disposition inventory. J. Nurs. Educ. 33, 345–350. doi: 10.3928/0148-4834-19941001-05, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Feng R. C., Chen M. J., Chen M. C., Pai Y. C. (2010). Critical thinking competence and disposition of clinical nurses in a medical center. J. Nurs. Res. 18, 77–87. doi: 10.1097/JNR.0b013e3181dda6f6 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fernández-Santín M., Feliu-Torruella M. (2020). Developing critical thinking in early childhood through the philosophy of Reggio Emilia. Think. Skills Creat. 37:100686. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100686 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flores K. L., Matkin G. S., Burbach M. E., Quinn C. E., Harding H. (2012). Deficient critical thinking skills among college graduates: implications for leadership. Educ. Philos. Theory 44, 212–230. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00672.x [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Flynn R. M., Kleinknecht E., Ricker A. A., Blumberg F. C. (2021). A narrative review of methods used to examine digital gaming impacts on learning and cognition during middle childhood. Int. J. Child Comput. Int. 30:100325. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcci.2021.100325 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Fornell C., Larcker D. F. (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 18, 39–50. doi: 10.1177/002224378101800312 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Foster J., Barkus E., Yavorsky C. (1993). Understanding and Using Advanced Statistics. New York: SAGE Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gao Q. Q., Cao B. W., Guan X., Gu T. Y., Bao X., Wu J. Y., et al. (2022). Emotion recognition in conversations with emotion shift detection based on multi-task learning. Knowl-based Syst. 248:108861. doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2022.108861 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ghanizadeh A. (2016). The interplay between reflective thinking, critical thinking, self-monitoring, and academic achievement in higher education. High. Educ. 74, 101–114. doi: 10.1007/s10734-016-0031-y [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Giannouli V., Giannoulis K. (2021). Critical thinking and leadership: can we escape modern Circe's spells in nursing? Nursing leadership Toronto. Ont 34, 38–44. doi: 10.12927/cjnl.2021.26456 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gorsuch R. (1983). Factor analysis (2nd ed). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gyenes A. (2021). Student perceptions of critical thinking in EMI programs at Japanese universities: A Q-methodology study. J. Eng Aca Pur 54:101053. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2021.101053 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hair J. F., Black W. C., Babin B. J., Anderson R. E. (2014). Multivariate Data Analysis, 7th Edn. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern D. F. (1998). Teaching critical thinking for transfer across domains: disposition, skills, structure training, and metacognitive monitoring. Am. Psychol. 53, 449–455. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.53.4.449, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Han J., Usher E. L., Brown C. S. (2021). Trajectories in quantitative and humanities self-efficacy during the first year of college. Learn. Individ. Differ. 91:102054. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2021.102054 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hashemi M. R., Ghanizadeh A. (2012). Critical discourse analysis and critical thinking: an experimental study in an EFL context. System 40, 37–47. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2012.01.009 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hsu F. H., Lin I. H., Yeh H. C., Chen N. S. (2022). Effect of Socratic reflection prompts via video-based learning system on elementary school students’ critical thinking skills. Comput. Educ. 183:104497. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104497 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huang Y. M., Silitonga L. M., Wu T. T. (2022). Applying a business simulation game in a flip classroon to enhance engagement, learning achievement, and higher-order thinking skills. Comput. Educ. 183:104497. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104494 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiang J., Gao A., Yang B. Y. (2018). Employees' critical thinking, Leaders' inspirational motivation, and voice behavior the mediating role of voice efficacy. J. Pers. Psychol. 17, 33–41. doi: 10.1027/1866-5888/a000193 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jomli R., Ouertani J., Jemli H., Ouali U., Zgueb Y., Nacef F. (2021). Comparative study of affective temperaments between medical students and humanities students (evaluation by validated temps-a). Eur. Psychiatry 64:S199. doi: 10.1192/j.eurpsy.2021.529 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kaiser H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 39, 31–36. doi: 10.1007/BF02291575 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kanbay Y., Okanlı A. (2017). The effect of critical thinking education on nursing students’ problem-solving skills. Contemp. Nurse 53, 313–321. doi: 10.1080/10376178.2017.1339567, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kember D., Leung D. Y. P., Jones A., Loke A. Y., Mckay J., Sinclair K., et al. (2010). Development of a questionnaire to measure the level of reflective thinking. Asses. Eval. High. Edu. 25, 381–395. doi: 10.1080/713611442 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Khandaghi M. A., Pakmehr H., Amiri E. (2011). The status of college students’ critical thinking disposition in humanities. Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci 15, 1866–1869. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.04.017 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kieffer K. M. (1988). Orthogonal Versus Oblique Factor Rotation: A Review of the Literature Regarding the Pros and Cons. In Proceedings 554 of the Annual Meeting of the 27th Mid-South Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA;4 November 1998, 4-6, 555. Available at: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED427031.pdf (Accessed November 3, 2022).
• Kilic S., Gokoglu S., Ozturk M. A. (2020). Valid and reliable scale for developing programming-oriented computational thinking. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 59, 257–286. doi: 10.1177/0735633120964402 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim D. H., Moon S., Kim E. J., Kim Y. J., Lee S. (2014). Nursing students' critical thinking disposition according to academic level and satisfaction with nursing. Nurs. Educ. Today 34, 78–82. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2013.03.012, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim M.-Y., Wilkinson I. A. G. (2019). What is dialogic teaching? Constructing, deconstructing, and reconstructing a pedagogy of classroom talk. Learn. Cult Soc. Inter 21, 70–86. doi: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.02.003 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kline T. J. B. (2005). Psychological Testing: A Practical Approach to Design and Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, London, New Delhi: Sage Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Klugman C. M. (2018). How health humanities will save the life of the humanities. J. Med. Humanit. 38, 419–430. doi: 10.1007/s10912-017-9453-5 [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lederer J. M. (2007). Disposition toward critical thinking among occupational therapy students. Am. J. Occup. Ther. 61, 519–526. doi: 10.5014/ajot.61.5.519, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Les T., Moroz J. (2021). More critical thinking in critical thinking concepts (?) A constructivist point of view. J Crit Educ Policy Sci 19, 98–124. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li N. (2021). Reasonable or unwarranted? Benevolent gender prejudice in education in China. Asia Pac. Educ. Res 31, 155–163. doi: 10.1007/s40299-020-00546-6 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Li X. Y., Liu J. D. (2021). Mapping the taxonomy of critical thinking ability in EFL. Think. Skills Creat. 41:100880. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100880 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liang W., Fung D. (2020). Development and evaluation of a WebQuest-based teaching programme: students’ use of exploratory talk to exercise critical thinking. Int. J. Educ. Res. 104:101652. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2020.101652, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin S. S. (2016). Science and non-science undergraduate students’ critical thinking and argumentation performance in reading a science news report. Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 12, 1023–1046. doi: 10.1007/s10763-013-9451-7 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin L. (2020). The future of "useless" Liberal arts. Univ. Mon. Rev. Philos. Cult. 47, 93–110. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu O. L., Frankel L., Roohr K. C. (2014). Assessing critical thinking in higher education: current state and directions for next-generation assessment. ETS Res. Rep. Series 2014, 1–23. doi: 10.1002/ets2.12009 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu H., Shao M., Liu X., Zhao L. (2021). Exploring the influential factors on readers' continuance intentions of e-book APPs: personalization, usefulness, playfulness, and satisfaction. Front. Psychol. 12:640110. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.640110, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu T., Zhao R., Lam K.-M., Kong J. (2022). Visual-semantic graph neural network with pose-position attentive learning for group activity recognition. Neurocomputing 491, 217–231. doi: 10.1016/j.neucom.2022.03.066 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ma L., Luo H. (2020). Chinese pre-service teachers’ cognitions about cultivating critical thinking in teaching English as a foreign language. Asia Pac. J. Educ 41, 543–557. doi: 10.1080/02188791.2020.1793733 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Michaluk L. M., Martens J., Damron R. L., High K. A. (2016). Developing a methodology for teaching and evaluating critical thinking skills in first-year engineering students. Int. J. Eng. Educ. 32, 84–99. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mulnix J. W., Mulnix M. J. (2010). Using a writing portfolio project to teach critical thinking skills. Teac. Phi 33, 27–54. doi: 10.5840/teachphil20103313 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Murphy E. (2004). An instrument to support thinking critically about critical in thinking online asynchronous discussions. Aust. J. Educ. Technol. 20, 295–315. doi: 10.14742/ajet.1349 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Nair G. G., Stamler L. L. (2013). A conceptual framework for developing a critical thinking self-assessment scale. J. Nurs. Educ. 52, 131–138. doi: 10.3928/01484834-20120215-01, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O’Reilly C., Devitt A., Hayes N. (2022). Critical thinking in the preschool classroom - a systematic literature review. Think. Skills Creat. 46:101110. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101110 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Odebiyi O. M., Odebiyi A. T. (2021). Critical thinking in social contexts: A trajectory analysis of states’ K-5 social studies content standards. J. Soc. Stud. Res. 45, 277–288. doi: 10.1016/j.jssr.2021.05.002 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pallant J. F. (2007). SPSS Survival Manual: A Step by Step Guide to Data Analysis Using SPSS. 3rd Edn.. Routledge. Region 6th Series, Bangi, 551. [ Google Scholar ]
• Perkins D. N., Jay E., Tishman S. (1993). Beyond Abilities: A Dispositional Theory of Thinking. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (1982), 1-21. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/23087298 (Accessed November 3, 2022).
• Pnevmatikos D., Christodoulou P., Georgiadou T. (2019). Promoting critical thinking in higher education through the values and knowledge education (VaKE) method. Stud. High. Educ. 44, 892–901. doi: 10.1080/03075079.2019.1586340 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Quinn S., Hogan M. J., Dwyer C., Finn P. (2020). Development and validation of the student-educator negotiated critical thinking dispositions scale (SENCTDS). Think. Skills Creat. 38:100710. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100710 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Reynolds S. J. (2008). Moral attentiveness: who pays attention to the moral aspects of life? J. Appl. Psycho. 93, 1027–1041. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1027, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodríguez-Sabiote C., Olmedo-Moreno E. M., Expósito-López J. (2022). The effects of teamwork on critical thinking: A serial mediation analysis of the influence of work skills and educational motivation in secondary school students. Think. Skills Creat. 45:101063. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101063 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rombout F., Schuitema J. A., Volman M. L. L. (2021). Teaching strategies for value-loaded critical thinking in philosophy classroom dialogues. Think. Skills Creat. 43:100991. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2021.100991 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Saad A., Zainudin S. (2022). A review of project-based learning (PBL) and computational thinking (CT) in teaching and learning. Learn. Motiv. 78:101802. doi: 10.1016/j.lmot.2022.101802 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sarjinder S. (2003). “Simple random sampling,” in Advanced Sampling Theory with Application (Dordrecht: Springer; ) [ Google Scholar ]
• Schumacker R. E., Lomax R. G. (2016). A Beginner' s Guide to Structural Equation Modeling (4th Edn..) New York: Routledge. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scriven M., Paul R. (2005). The Critical Thinking Community. Available at: http://www.criticalthinking.org (Accessed November 3, 2022).
• Siew M., Mapeala R. (2016). The effects of problem-based learning with thinking maps on fifth graders’ science critical thinking. J. Balt. Sci. Educ. 15, 602–616. doi: 10.33225/jbse/16.15.602 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Simpson E., Courtney M. (2002). Critical thinking in nursing education: Literature review. Int. J. Nurs. Pract. 8, 89–98. doi: 10.1046/j.1440-172x.2002.00340.x [ DOI ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Singh M., James P. S., Paul H., Bolar K. (2022). Impact of cognitive-behavioral motivation on student engagement. Helyon 8. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e09843 [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sosu E. M. (2013). The development and psychometric validation of a critical thinking disposition scale. Think. Skills Creat. 9, 107–119. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2012.09.002 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Southworth J. (2020). How argumentative writing stifles open-mindedness. Arts Hum. High. Educ. 20, 207–227. doi: 10.1177/1474022220903426 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Southworth J. (2022). A perspective-taking theory of open-mindedness: confronting the challenge of motivated reasoning. Educ. Theory 93, 1027–1041. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.93.5.1027 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stone G. A., Duffy L. N., Pinckney H. P., Templeton-Bradley R. (2017). Teaching for critical thinking: preparing hospitality and tourism students for careers in the twenty-first century. J. Teach. Travel Tour. 17, 67–84. doi: 10.1080/15313220.2017.1279036 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Suh J., Matson K., Seshaiyer P., Jamieson S., Tate H. (2021). Mathematical modeling as a catalyst for equitable mathematics instruction: preparing teachers and young learners with 21st century skills. Mathematics 9:162. doi: 10.3390/math9020162 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sulaiman W. S. W., Rahman W. R. A., Dzulkifli M. A. (2010). Examining the construct validity of the adapted California critical thinking dispositions (CCTDI) among university students in Malaysia. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 7, 282–288. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.10.039 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Swartz R. J. (2018). “Critical thinking, the curriculum, and the problem of transfer,” in Thinking: The Second International Conference. eds. Perkins D. N., Lochhead J., Bishop J. (New York: Routledge; ), 261–284. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thaiposri P., Wannapiroon P. (2015). Enhancing students’ critical thinking skills through teaching and learning by inquiry-based learning activities using social network and cloud computing. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 174, 2137–2144. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.02.013 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Thomas K., Lok B. (2015). “Teaching critical thinking: an operational framework,” in The Palgrave Handbook of Critical Thinking in Higher Education. eds. Davies M., Barnett R. (New York: Palgrave Handbooks; ), 93–106. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tumkaya S., Aybek B., Aldag H. (2009). An investigation of university Students' critical thinking disposition and perceived problem-solving skills. Eurasian J. Educ. Res. 9, 57–74. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ulger K. (2018). The effect of problem-based learning on the creative thinking and critical thinking disposition of students in visual arts education. Interdis. J. Probl-Bas. 12:10. doi: 10.7771/1541-5015.1649 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vogel D. L., Wade N. G., Ascheman P. L. (2009). Measuring perceptions of stigmatization by others for seeking psychological help: reliability and validity of a new stigma scale with college students. J. Couns. Psychol. 56, 301–308. doi: 10.1037/a0014903 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wechsler S. M., Saiz C., Rivas S. F., Vendramini C. M. M., Almeida L. S., Mundim M. C., et al. (2018). Creative and critical thinking: independent or overlapping components? Think. Skills Creat. 27, 114–122. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.003 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Willingham D. T. (2007). Critical thinking: why it is so hard to teach? Am. Fed. Teach. Summer 2007, 8–19. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yang S. (2007). E-critical/thematic doing history project: integrating the critical thinking approach with computer-mediated history learning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 23, 2095–2112. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2006.02.012 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yurdakul I. K., Odabasi H. F., Kiliçer K., Çoklar A. N., Birinci G., Kurt A. A. (2012). The development, validity and reliability of TPACK-deep: A technological pedagogical content knowledge scale. Comput. Educ. 58, 964–977. doi: 10.1016/j.compedu.2011.10.012 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang Q., Tang H., Xu X. (2022). Analyzing collegiate critical thinking course effectiveness: evidence from a quasi-experimental study in China. Think. Skills Creat. 45:101105. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2022.101105 [ DOI ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhao L., He W., Su Y. S. (2021). Innovative pedagogy and design-based research on flipped learning in higher education. Front. Psychol. 12:577002. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.577002, PMID: [ DOI ] [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

• View on publisher site
• PDF (1.5 MB)
• Collections

Similar articles

Cited by other articles, links to ncbi databases.

• Download .nbib .nbib
• Format: AMA APA MLA NLM

Add to Collections