p-sig. (exact)
TOT_PRE, PENCRISAL pre-test; RD_PRE, Deductive reasoning pre-test; RI_PRE, Inductive reasoning pre-test; RP_PRE, Practical reasoning pre-test; TD_PRE, Decision making pre-test; SP_PRE, Problem solving pre-test; TOT_POST, PENCRISAL post-test; RD_ POST, Deductive reasoning post-test; RI_ POST, Inductive reasoning post-test; RP_ POST, Practical reasoning post-test; TD_ POST, Decision making post-test; SP_ POST, Problem solving post-test; Min, minimum, Max, maximum, Asym, asymmetry; and Kurt, kurtosis.
Description of metacognition measurement (MAI).
Variables | Min. | Max. | Media | Asym. | Kurt. | K-S p-sig (exact) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TOT_MAI_PRE | 89 | 145 | 233 | 192.13 | 16.636 | −0.071 | 0.275 | 0.557 |
Decla_PRE | 89 | 22 | 37 | 30.58 | 3.391 | −0.594 | −0.152 | 0.055 |
Proce_PRE | 89 | 9 | 19 | 14.52 | 2.018 | −0.560 | 0.372 | 0.004 |
Condi_PRE | 89 | 8 | 23 | 18.04 | 3.003 | −0.775 | 0.853 | 0.013 |
CONO_PRE | 89 | 44 | 77 | 63.15 | 6.343 | −0.384 | 0.044 | 0.445 |
Plani_PRE | 89 | 10 | 31 | 24.35 | 4.073 | −0.827 | 0.988 | 0.008 |
Orga_PRE | 89 | 26 | 48 | 38.20 | 4.085 | −0.307 | 0.331 | 0.022 |
Moni_PRE | 89 | 15 | 35 | 25.24 | 3.760 | −0.436 | 0.190 | 0.005 |
Depu_PRE | 89 | 14 | 25 | 20.71 | 2.144 | −0.509 | 0.310 | 0.004 |
Eva_PRE | 89 | 12 | 28 | 20.49 | 3.310 | −0.178 | −0.044 | 0.176 |
REGU_PRE | 89 | 97 | 160 | 128.99 | 12.489 | −0.070 | 0.043 | 0.780 |
OT_MAI_POST | 89 | 138 | 250 | 197.65 | 17.276 | −0.179 | 0.969 | 0.495 |
Decla_POST | 89 | 23 | 39 | 31.21 | 3.492 | −0.407 | 0.305 | 0.020 |
Proce_POST | 89 | 8 | 20 | 15.24 | 2.116 | −0.723 | 0.882 | 0.001 |
Condi_POST | 89 | 0 | 24 | 18.85 | 2.874 | −0.743 | 0.490 | 0.029 |
CONO_ POST | 89 | 44 | 82 | 65.30 | 6.639 | −0.610 | 1.014 | 0.153 |
Plani_ POST | 89 | 12 | 33 | 25.51 | 3.659 | −0.539 | 0.994 | 0.107 |
Orga_ POST | 89 | 27 | 48 | 39.40 | 4.150 | −0.411 | 0.053 | 0.325 |
Moni_ POST | 89 | 17 | 35 | 26.44 | 3.296 | −0.277 | 0.421 | 0.143 |
Depu_ POST | 89 | 15 | 24 | 20.40 | 2.245 | −0.214 | −0.531 | 0.023 |
Eva_ POST | 89 | 12 | 29 | 20.60 | 3.680 | −0.083 | −0.098 | 0.121 |
REGU_PRE | 89 | 94 | 168 | 132.35 | 12.973 | −0.227 | 0.165 | 0.397 |
TOT_MAI_PRE, MAI pre-test; Decla_PRE, Declarative pre-test; Proce_PRE, Procedural pre-test; Condi_PRE, Conditional pre-test; CONO_PRE, Knowledge pre-test; Plani_PRE, Planning pre-test; Orga_PRE, Organization pre-test; Moni_PRE, Monitoring pre-test; Depu_PRE, Troubleshooting pre-test; Eva_PRE, Evaluation pre-test; REGU_PRE, Regulation pre-test; TOT_MAI_POST, MAI post-test; Decla_ POST, Declarative post-test; Proce_ POST, Procedural post-test; Condi_ POST, Conditional post-test; CONO_ POST, Knowledge post-test; Plani_ POST, Planning post-test; Orga_POST, Organization post-test; Moni_ POST, Monitoring post-test; Depu_ POST, Troubleshooting post-test; Eva_ POST, Evaluation post-test; and REGU_ POST, Regulation post-test;
As we see in the description of all study variables, the evidence is that the majority of them adequately fit the normal model, although some present significant deviations which can be explained by sample size.
Next, to verify whether there were significant differences in the metacognition variable based on measurements before and after the intervention, we contrasted medians for samples related with Student’s t -test (see Table 3 ).
Comparison of the METAKNOWLEDGE variable as a function of PRE-POST measurements.
Variables | Mean Difference (CI 95%) | value | gl. | p-sig. (bilateral) | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
TOT_MAI | Pre. | 89 | 192.13 | 16.636 | −8.152_−2.882 | −4.161 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 197.65 | 17.276 | |||||
Decla | Pre. | 89 | 30.58 | 3.391 | −1.235_−0.023 | −2.063 | 88 | 0.042 |
Post. | 89 | 31.21 | 3.492 | |||||
Proce | Pre. | 89 | 14.52 | 2.018 | −1.210_−0.228 | −2.911 | 88 | 0.005 |
Post. | 89 | 15.24 | 2.116 | |||||
Condi. | Pre. | 89 | 18.04 | 3.003 | −1.416_−0.202 | −2.65 | 88 | 0.010 |
Post. | 89 | 18.85 | 2.874 | |||||
CONO | Pre. | 89 | 63.15 | 6.343 | −3.289_−1.025 | −3.787 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 65.3 | 6.639 | |||||
Plan | Pre. | 89 | 24.35 | 4.073 | −1.742_−0.573 | −3.934 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 25.51 | 3.659 | |||||
Orga | Pre. | 89 | 38.2 | 4.085 | −2.054_−0.350 | −2.803 | 88 | 0.006 |
Post. | 89 | 39.4 | 4.15 | |||||
Moni | Pre. | 89 | 25.24 | 3.76 | −1.924_−0.480 | −3.308 | 88 | 0.001 |
Post. | 89 | 26.44 | 3.296 | |||||
TS | Pre. | 89 | 20.71 | 2.144 | −0.159_−0.766 | 1.303 | 88 | 0.196 |
Post. | 89 | 20.4 | 2.245 | |||||
Eval | Pre. | 89 | 20.49 | 3.31 | −0.815_−0.613 | −0.282 | 88 | 0.779 |
Post. | 89 | 20.6 | 3.68 | |||||
REGU | Pre. | 89 | 128.99 | 12.489 | −5.364_−1.356 | −3.331 | 88 | 0.001 |
Post. | 89 | 132.35 | 12.973 |
The results show that there are significant differences in the metaknowledge scale total and in most of its dimensions, where all the post medians for both the scale overall and for the three dimensions of the knowledge factor (declarative, procedural, and conditional) are higher than the pre-medians. However, in the cognition regulation dimension, there are only significant differences in the total and in the planning, organization, and monitoring dimensions. The medians are also greater in the post-test than the pre-test. However, the troubleshooting and evaluation dimensions do not differ significantly after intervention.
Finally, for critical thinking skills, the results show significant differences in the scale total and in the five factors regarding the measurement time, where performance medians rise after intervention (see Table 4 ).
Comparison of the CRITICAL THINKING variable as a function of PRE-POST measurements.
Variables | N | M | SD | Student’s -test | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mean difference (CI 95%) | value | gl. | p-sig. (bilateral) | |||||
TOT | Pre. | 89 | 25.146 | 5.436 | −8.720_−6.246 | −12.023 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 32.629 | 5.763 | |||||
RD | Pre. | 89 | 2.978 | 3.391 | −2.298_−1.364 | −7.794 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 4.809 | 3.492 | |||||
RI | Pre. | 89 | 4.213 | 1.627 | −1.608_−0.706 | −5.097 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 5.371 | 1.547 | |||||
RP | Pre. | 89 | 18.04 | 2.248 | −1.416_−0.202 | −10.027 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 18.85 | 2.295 | |||||
TD | Pre. | 89 | 63.15 | 1.796 | −3.083_−2.063 | −6.54 | 88 | 0.000 |
Post. | 89 | 65.3 | 1.748 | |||||
SP | Pre. | 89 | 24.35 | 2.058 | −1.135_−0.213 | −2.906 | 88 | 0.005 |
Post. | 89 | 25.51 | 1.812 |
These results show how metacognition improves due to CT intervention, as well as how critical thinking also improves with metacognitive intervention and CT skills intervention. Thus, it improves how people think about thinking as well as about the results achieved, since metacognition supports decision-making and final evaluation about proper strategies to solve problems.
The general aim of our study was to know whether a critical thinking intervention program can also influence metacognitive processes. We know that our teaching methodology improves cross-sectional skills in argumentation, explanation, decision-making, and problem-solving, but we do not know if this intervention also directly or indirectly influences metacognition. In our study, we sought to shed light on this little-known point. If we bear in mind the centrality of how we think about thinking for our cognitive machinery to function properly and reach the best results possible in the problems we face, it is hard to understand the lack of attention given to this theme in other research. Our study aimed to remedy this deficiency somewhat.
As said in the introduction, metacognition has to do with consciousness, planning, and regulation of our activities. These mechanisms, as understood by many authors, have a blended cognitive and non-cognitive nature, which is a conceptual imprecision; what is known, though, is the enormous influence they exert on fundamental thinking processes. However, there is a large knowledge gap about the factors which make metacognition itself improve. This second research lacuna is what we have partly aimed to shrink here as well with this study. Our guide has been the idea of knowing how to improve metacognition from a teaching initiative and from the improvement of fundamental critical thinking skills.
Our study has shed light in both directions, albeit in a modest way, since its design does not allow us to unequivocally discern some of the results obtained. However, we believe that the data provide relevant information to know more about existing relations between skills and metacognition, something which has seen little contrast. These results allow us to better describe these relations, guiding the design of future studies which can better discern their roles. Our data have shown that this relation is bidirectional, so that metacognition improves thinking skills and vice versa. It remains to establish a sequence of independent factors to avoid this confusion, something which the present study has aided with to be able to design future research in this area.
As the results show, total differences in almost all metaknowledge dimensions are higher after intervention; specifically, we see how in the knowledge factor the declarative, procedural, and conditional dimensions improve in post-measurements. This improvement moves in the direction we predicted. However, the cognitive regulation dimension only shows differences in the total, and in the planning, organization, and regulation dimensions. We can see how the declarative knowledge dimensions are more sensitive than the procedural ones to change, and within the latter, the dimensions over which we have more control are also more sensitive. With troubleshooting and evaluation, no changes are seen after intervention. We may interpret this lack of effects as being due to how everything referring to evaluating results is highly determined by calibration capacity, which is influenced by personality factors not considered in our study. Regarding critical thinking, we found differences in all its dimensions, with higher scores following intervention. We can tentatively state that this improved performance can be influenced not only by interventions, but also by the metacognitive improvement observed, although our study was incapable of separating these two factors, and merely established their relation.
As we know, when people think about thinking they can always increase their critical thinking performance. Being conscious of the mechanisms used in problem-solving and decision-making always contributes to improving their execution. However, we need to go into other topics to identify the specific determinants of these effects. Does performance improve because skills are metacognitively benefited? If so, how? Is it only the levels of consciousness which aid in regulating and planning execution, or do other factors also have to participate? What level of thinking skills can be beneficial for metacognition? At what skill level does this metacognitive change happen? And finally, we know that teaching is always metacognitive to the extent that it helps us know how to proceed with sufficient clarity, but does performance level modify consciousness or regulation level of our action? Do bad results paralyze metacognitive activity while good ones stimulate it? Ultimately, all of these open questions are the future implications which our current study has suggested. We believe them to be exciting and necessary challenges, which must be faced sooner rather than later. Finally, we cannot forget the implications derived from specific metacognitive instruction, as presented at the start of this study. An intervention of this type should also help us partially answer the aforementioned questions, as we cannot obviate what can be modified or changed by direct metacognition instruction.
Ethics statement.
Ethical review and approval was not required for the study on human participants in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The patients/participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.
SR and CS contributed to the conception and design of the study. SR organized the database, performed the statistical analysis, and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. SR, CS, and CO wrote sections of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.
This study was partly financed by the Project FONDECYT no. 11220056 ANID-Chile.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
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.
2560 Accesses
28 Citations
Cooperative learning ; Creative thinking ; Problem-solving
The term “collaborative learning” refers to an instruction method in which students at various performance levels work together in small groups toward a common goal. Collaborative learning is a relationship among learners that fosters positive interdependence, individual accountability, and interpersonal skills. “Critical thinking” involves asking appropriate questions, gathering and creatively sorting through relevant information, relating new information to existing knowledge, reexamining beliefs, reasoning logically, and drawing reliable and trustworthy conclusions.
The advent of revolutionary information and communication technologies has effected changes in the organizational infrastructure and altered the characteristics of the workplace putting an increased emphasis on teamwork and processes that require individuals to pool their resources and integrate specializations. The...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Subscribe and save.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Institutional subscriptions
American Philosophical Association. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. ERIC document ED (pp. 315–423).
Google Scholar
Cooper, J., Prescott, S., Cook, L., Smith, L., Mueck, R., & Cuseo, J. (1990). Cooperative learning and college instruction: Effective use of student learning teams . Long Beach: California State University Foundation.
Gokhale, A. A. (1995). Collaborative learning enhances critical thinking. Journal of Technology Education, 7 (1), 22–30.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1989). Cooperation and competition: Theory and research . Edina: Interaction Book Company.
Kollar, I., Fischer, F., & Hesse, F. (2006). Collaboration scripts – A conceptual analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 18 (2), 159–185.
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Download references
Authors and affiliations.
Department of Technology, Illinois State University, Campus Box 5100, Normal, IL, 61790-5110, USA
Dr. Anu A. Gokhale
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Correspondence to Anu A. Gokhale .
Editors and affiliations.
Faculty of Economics and Behavioral Sciences, Department of Education, University of Freiburg, 79085, Freiburg, Germany
Norbert M. Seel
Reprints and permissions
© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC
Cite this entry.
Gokhale, A.A. (2012). Collaborative Learning and Critical Thinking. In: Seel, N.M. (eds) Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_910
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_910
Publisher Name : Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN : 978-1-4419-1427-9
Online ISBN : 978-1-4419-1428-6
eBook Packages : Humanities, Social Sciences and Law
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Policies and ethics
Thursday, September 29 at 1:00pm CT
Download Slides Receive Your Badge
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Aenean commodo ligula eget dolor. Aenean massa. Cum sociis natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Donec quam felis, ultricies nec, pellentesque eu, pretium quis, sem. Nulla consequat massa quis enim.
Donec pede justo, fringilla vel, aliquet nec, vulputate eget, arcu. In enim justo, rhoncus ut, imperdiet a, venenatis vitae, justo. Nullam dictum felis eu pede mollis pretium. Integer tincidunt. Cras dapibus. Vivamus elementum semper nisi. Aenean vulputate eleifend tellus. Aenean leo ligula, porttitor eu, consequat vitae, eleifend ac, enim. Aliquam lorem ante, dapibus in, viverra quis, feugiat a, tellus. Phasellus viverra nulla ut metus varius laoreet. Quisque rutrum. Aenean imperdiet. Etiam ultricies nisi vel augue.
Register Today!
This is a free event, but seats may be limited.
Integer dapibus magna ex, ut egestas nisi elementum quis. Nullam non lacus faucibus, mollis arcu vel, finibus risus.
Please enable Javascript to view this form.
Call to Action Call to Action
Professor Physics and Astronomy, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire
Matt Evans has been teaching physics for over 20 years at the University of Wisconsin – Eau Claire, often exploring new techniques and technologies that can enhance the classroom experience for students, including online homework systems and pre and post-lecture support videos. For the past 17 years, he has been using iClicker systems in his classrooms, often beta-testing new instructor-driven features to help make them serve instructors and students in their classrooms and beyond.
Learn More Call to Action -->
Associate Professor of Educational Psychology, University of Utah
A.J. is an associate professor and associate chair of the Department of Educational Psychology at the University of Utah. She earned a master’s degree in rehabilitation counseling and a Ph.D. in urban education (with a specialization in counseling psychology) from the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. Her research examining factors related to academic success and career development in underrepresented and underserved student populations has led to numerous journal articles, book chapters, conference presentations, workshops, grant proposals, and faculty in-service training sessions. A.J. has extensive teaching, counseling, consulting, and career advising experience in high schools, community colleges, and four-year public and private institutions of higher education. Her passion for teaching motivates her to experiment with innovative teaching methods and develop new and engaging activities and instructional materials. In 2015 she received the University of Utah’s Early Career Teaching Award, and in 2017 she received the College of Education Teaching Award. She is the past president of the Utah Psychological Association and serves on multiple state-level task forces and advisory councils promoting college access, career readiness, and school-based mental health services.
Call to Action -->
Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Curricular Innovation & Associate Professor of Practice in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Arizona
Dr. John Pollard is the Associate Dean for Academics for the W.A. Franke Honors College and a Professor of Practice in the Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry at the University of Arizona. John is an award-winning educator who is the co-author of the nationally recognized Chemical Thinking curriculum and associated eBook. In addition, John has authored several popular YouTube and TedEd videos centered around fundamental ideas in general chemistry. He is an expert and advocate for evidence-based instructional practices and spearheaded the Collaborative Learning Space movement on campus where traditional spaces are transformed into classrooms that facilitate active learning. As the Associate Dean for the University of W.A. Franke Honors College, John leads the development of innovative learning experiences for students that include experiential learning opportunities at the Biosphere 2 facility, co-taught interdisciplinary courses, and the implementation of the Collaborative Online International Learning (COIL) methodology classes meant to promote cultural competencies with Honors students. Learning theories and practice are also at the center of John's research as he studies how metacognition, self-reported learning, and group interactions influence learning outcomes during active learning in Collaborative Learning Space environments. He also studies how learning environments can influence the development of interdisciplinary reasoning skills in students.
Jamie Shushan Senior Student & Alumni Affairs Advisor and author of The Pocket Guide to College Success, Harvard University
Jamie H. Shushan has run the Crimson Summer Academy (CSA) at Harvard University for nearly two decades. She works to increase access to higher education for students from disadvantaged backgrounds and helps them succeed once they arrive on campus. In her work at CSA and beyond, she teaches numerous classes focused on college success, engages students in career exploration fieldwork, and serves as an advisor and advocate for students at colleges and universities throughout the United States. Jamie earned her Master’s degree in Higher Education at the Harvard Graduate School of Education in 2006, where she served as an academic and residential advisor for first-year students and worked at the Office of Career Services, participating in counseling, student outreach, and program development. Before joining the Crimson Summer Academy, she worked with the Associate Vice President for Higher Education in the Office of the President, assisting with a number of presidential initiatives and priorities including the creation of the CSA.
||text_1294672||
||text_1294674|| Call To Action -->
Search SkillsYouNeed:
Learning Skills:
Subscribe to our FREE newsletter and start improving your life in just 5 minutes a day.
You'll get our 5 free 'One Minute Life Skills' and our weekly newsletter.
We'll never share your email address and you can unsubscribe at any time.
Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally, understanding the logical connection between ideas. Critical thinking has been the subject of much debate and thought since the time of early Greek philosophers such as Plato and Socrates and has continued to be a subject of discussion into the modern age, for example the ability to recognise fake news .
Critical thinking might be described as the ability to engage in reflective and independent thinking.
In essence, critical thinking requires you to use your ability to reason. It is about being an active learner rather than a passive recipient of information.
Critical thinkers rigorously question ideas and assumptions rather than accepting them at face value. They will always seek to determine whether the ideas, arguments and findings represent the entire picture and are open to finding that they do not.
Critical thinkers will identify, analyse and solve problems systematically rather than by intuition or instinct.
Understand the links between ideas.
Determine the importance and relevance of arguments and ideas.
Recognise, build and appraise arguments.
Identify inconsistencies and errors in reasoning.
Approach problems in a consistent and systematic way.
Reflect on the justification of their own assumptions, beliefs and values.
Critical thinking is thinking about things in certain ways so as to arrive at the best possible solution in the circumstances that the thinker is aware of. In more everyday language, it is a way of thinking about whatever is presently occupying your mind so that you come to the best possible conclusion.
Critical Thinking is:
A way of thinking about particular things at a particular time; it is not the accumulation of facts and knowledge or something that you can learn once and then use in that form forever, such as the nine times table you learn and use in school.
The skills that we need in order to be able to think critically are varied and include observation, analysis, interpretation, reflection, evaluation, inference, explanation, problem solving, and decision making.
Specifically we need to be able to:
Think about a topic or issue in an objective and critical way.
Identify the different arguments there are in relation to a particular issue.
Evaluate a point of view to determine how strong or valid it is.
Recognise any weaknesses or negative points that there are in the evidence or argument.
Notice what implications there might be behind a statement or argument.
Provide structured reasoning and support for an argument that we wish to make.
You should be aware that none of us think critically all the time.
Sometimes we think in almost any way but critically, for example when our self-control is affected by anger, grief or joy or when we are feeling just plain ‘bloody minded’.
On the other hand, the good news is that, since our critical thinking ability varies according to our current mindset, most of the time we can learn to improve our critical thinking ability by developing certain routine activities and applying them to all problems that present themselves.
Once you understand the theory of critical thinking, improving your critical thinking skills takes persistence and practice.
Try this simple exercise to help you to start thinking critically.
Think of something that someone has recently told you. Then ask yourself the following questions:
Who said it?
Someone you know? Someone in a position of authority or power? Does it matter who told you this?
What did they say?
Did they give facts or opinions? Did they provide all the facts? Did they leave anything out?
Where did they say it?
Was it in public or in private? Did other people have a chance to respond an provide an alternative account?
When did they say it?
Was it before, during or after an important event? Is timing important?
Why did they say it?
Did they explain the reasoning behind their opinion? Were they trying to make someone look good or bad?
How did they say it?
Were they happy or sad, angry or indifferent? Did they write it or say it? Could you understand what was said?
One of the most important aspects of critical thinking is to decide what you are aiming to achieve and then make a decision based on a range of possibilities.
Once you have clarified that aim for yourself you should use it as the starting point in all future situations requiring thought and, possibly, further decision making. Where needed, make your workmates, family or those around you aware of your intention to pursue this goal. You must then discipline yourself to keep on track until changing circumstances mean you have to revisit the start of the decision making process.
However, there are things that get in the way of simple decision making. We all carry with us a range of likes and dislikes, learnt behaviours and personal preferences developed throughout our lives; they are the hallmarks of being human. A major contribution to ensuring we think critically is to be aware of these personal characteristics, preferences and biases and make allowance for them when considering possible next steps, whether they are at the pre-action consideration stage or as part of a rethink caused by unexpected or unforeseen impediments to continued progress.
The more clearly we are aware of ourselves, our strengths and weaknesses, the more likely our critical thinking will be productive.
Perhaps the most important element of thinking critically is foresight.
Almost all decisions we make and implement don’t prove disastrous if we find reasons to abandon them. However, our decision making will be infinitely better and more likely to lead to success if, when we reach a tentative conclusion, we pause and consider the impact on the people and activities around us.
The elements needing consideration are generally numerous and varied. In many cases, consideration of one element from a different perspective will reveal potential dangers in pursuing our decision.
For instance, moving a business activity to a new location may improve potential output considerably but it may also lead to the loss of skilled workers if the distance moved is too great. Which of these is the more important consideration? Is there some way of lessening the conflict?
These are the sort of problems that may arise from incomplete critical thinking, a demonstration perhaps of the critical importance of good critical thinking.
Further Reading from Skills You Need
The Skills You Need Guide for Students
Develop the skills you need to make the most of your time as a student.
Our eBooks are ideal for students at all stages of education, school, college and university. They are full of easy-to-follow practical information that will help you to learn more effectively and get better grades.
Critical thinking is aimed at achieving the best possible outcomes in any situation. In order to achieve this it must involve gathering and evaluating information from as many different sources possible.
Critical thinking requires a clear, often uncomfortable, assessment of your personal strengths, weaknesses and preferences and their possible impact on decisions you may make.
Critical thinking requires the development and use of foresight as far as this is possible. As Doris Day sang, “the future’s not ours to see”.
Implementing the decisions made arising from critical thinking must take into account an assessment of possible outcomes and ways of avoiding potentially negative outcomes, or at least lessening their impact.
It might be thought that we are overextending our demands on critical thinking in expecting that it can help to construct focused meaning rather than examining the information given and the knowledge we have acquired to see if we can, if necessary, construct a meaning that will be acceptable and useful.
After all, almost no information we have available to us, either externally or internally, carries any guarantee of its life or appropriateness. Neat step-by-step instructions may provide some sort of trellis on which our basic understanding of critical thinking can blossom but it doesn’t and cannot provide any assurance of certainty, utility or longevity.
Continue to: Critical Thinking and Fake News Critical Reading
See also: Analytical Skills Understanding and Addressing Conspiracy Theories Introduction to Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP)
Insight • October 7, 2019
By Karen Foster
Over the last few years, we’ve been hearing the word “confidence” used quite a bit.
Whenever we partner with clients on a project, one of the many questions we always ask the business sponsor is, “What do you want your learners to be able to do, or do better, as a result of this program?” Obviously, the responses vary depending on the business’ needs and the learners’ roles and responsibilities. However, one reply we consistently hear across the board is, “We need them to do X with more confidence!”
Well, over the years, I’ve developed a hypothesis that confidence, in and of itself, is not something that can be taught or trained to, but rather is a direct result of how learners are taught or trained. A learner’s confidence comes from really “digging in” to a topic, thinking critically about it and gaining personal experience with it.
Think about it this way. If you go to a restaurant and experience it for yourself—you taste the food, talk with the staff, and relax in its atmosphere—you’re going to have a different level of confidence when you tell your friends it’s awesome as compared to if you had simply been told it was great by others.
It’s important for Learning and Development (L&D) professionals to connect improving a learner’s confidence in (for example) using clinical or economic evidence with training that allows learners to think critically and gain experiences in the targeted knowledge or skills. Unfortunately, in my experience, many training programs don’t do this. Instead, often they follow this pattern:
This is not a recipe for confidence. Why? Because learners are handed everything and not provided an opportunity to think through or engage with the content themselves.
Another, far more effective approach would be one that encourages learners to truly think about the material. Imagine a program that:
The process described above drives learners to internalize the content far better than simply handing them “pre-digested” material. It gets them to absorb the information and work with it to create, test, and defend key messages. After going through an exercise like that, the learners will be far more confident and effective.
As you work to develop new learning and development programs, remember the link between confidence and critical thinking. By incorporating more critical thinking exercises into your programs, you’ll be able to generate far more confidence and better results in the field.
How to coach it when you can’t see it.
Articles • September 12, 2019
What goes through your mind when someone mentions the word “coaching?” If you’re like most people, you probably think about […]
Articles • August 15, 2019
What does the World Economic Forum have to do with learning and development? Well, if you’re a learning and development (L&D) professional, you might want to take a look at...
Email Newsletter
Sign up for our monthly email to receive a curation of articles, podcasts and resources on learning science, biopharma industry challenges, and learning & development best practices.
We use cookies to provide website functionality and give you the best possible experience. Our Cookie Statement provides more information and explains how to amend your cookie settings.
By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies and similar tracking technologies described in our privacy policy .
Teaching & learning.
As part of its broad-based teaching mission, the AHA develops and shares resources for educators and students. From regional teaching conferences and online programs to pathbreaking research projects, AHA initiatives foster a community grounded in our shared commitment to understanding the past. We support and convene people who share a love of history and historical thinking.
The AHA strives to ensure that every K–12 student has access to high quality history instruction. We create resources for the classroom, advise on state and federal policy, and advocate for the vital importance of history in public education.
Teaching and learning are at the foundation of the AHA’s mission to promote historical thinking in public life. What do students learn in undergraduate history courses? How and why are history majors so successful in a variety of careers?
Many historians will pursue graduate training at some stage in their career. To meet the needs of both students and graduate programs, the AHA creates resources, provides platforms, and convenes conversations about student success from application to completion.
History department chairs are on the front lines of the discipline, defending historians’ work and supporting their professional lives at all stages of their academic careers. The AHA strives to strengthen this work and provide resources and opportunities that make chairs’ work easier and valued. The AHA provides resources and hosts a variety of events and opportunities to benefit department chairs and build community, including webinars, sessions at the annual meeting, and an in-person workshop.
Essential, carefully researched resources by historians providing context for conversations about current events.
What do students learn in introductory history courses? How can historical thinking support student learning and success across the curriculum? Our regional conferences endeavor to strengthen the community of practice focused on introductory history courses, both in secondary and higher education.
June 10, 2024
June 9, 2024
Aha historical collections.
The AHA has made primary sources available for research purposes, along with AHA archival reports and documents.
Vetted Resources compiles in a central location materials and tools that have been professionally vetted by historians, offering instructors access to high-quality materials that meet professional standards
June 20, 2024
June 16, 2024
The history of racism and racist violence: monuments and museums, join the aha.
The AHA brings together historians from all specializations and all work contexts, embracing the breadth and variety of activity in history today.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
This relationship between active learning and improving critical thinking has been reported in other groups around the world. 22, 51, 52 Active‐learning strategies (such as collaborative work in small groups and case studies) improved students' critical thinking skills as measured by the Watson‐Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, which ...
The development of critical thinking has been the topic of many educational articles recently. Numerous instructional methods exist to promote thought and active learning in the classroom, including case studies, discussion methods, written exercises, questioning techniques, and debates. Three methods—questioning, written exercises, and ...
In recent decades, approaches to critical thinking have generally taken a practical turn, pivoting away from more abstract accounts - such as emphasizing the logical relations that hold between statements (Ennis, 1964) - and moving toward an emphasis on belief and action.According to the definition that Robert Ennis (2018) has been advocating for the last few decades, critical thinking is ...
discussions, collaborative projects, and other forms of active-learning to develop habits of critical thinking and respect for the power of careful reasoning and analysis" (p. 119). 1.3 Why Active-Learning as a Means for Developing Critical Thinking Skills Active-learning does not necessarily imply mental activity.
Active learning, where students are ... active and collaborative learning have been shown to have positive effects on critical thinking and lifelong learning (Kilgo, Ezell Sheets, ... The link between high-impact practices and student learning: Some longitudinal evidence. International Journal of Higher Education, 69, 509-525. doi:10.1007 ...
Critical thinking mainly aims at assessing the strength and appropriateness of a statement, theory, or idea, through a questioning and perspective-taking process, which may (or not) result in a possibly novel statement or theory. Critical thinking need not lead to an original position to a problem. The most conventional one may be the most ...
1.1. The role of discussion in active learning "Discussion" is known as a crucial instructional method that allows active learning, promotes greater understanding, and facilitates critical thinking in students (Ikuenobe, Citation 2002; Okolo, Ferretti, & MacArthur, Citation 2007; Sautter, Citation 2007).Gage and Berliner (Citation 2002) believe that teaching through discussion fosters the ...
Today the Framework for 21st Century Learning developed by the Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21) is widely recognized and has been used in the U.S., Canada and New Zealand. P21 defines and illustrates the skills and knowledge students need and states that critical thinking is fundamental for twenty-first century success and essential for success in an academic context. The ...
Cultivating Active Learning. Although it may seem counterintuitive-and also counter to conventional modes of instruction in which a teacher imparts information directly to students-educational research and cognitive science strongly suggest that transmission of information intact from one person to another is highly unlikely.
Active learning is a classroom approach that focuses on how the students learn, not just what they learn. This approach ensures they are actively engaged in learning and encourages more complex thought processes. Opportunities provided by you, their teachers, such as enquiry-led tasks and open-ended questions, challenge the students and ...
Field studies indicate the existence of relations between teaching metacognitive strategies and progress in students' higher-order thinking processes ( Schraw, 1998; Kramarski et al., 2002; Van der Stel and Veenman, 2010 ). Metacognition is thus considered one of the most relevant predictors of achieving a complex higher-order thought process.
Abstract. This study looks at whether creativity and critical thinking help students solve problems and improve their grades by mediating the link between 21 st century skills (learning motivation, cooperativity, and interaction with peers, engagement with peers, and a smart classroom environment). The mediating relationship between creativity and critical thinking was discovered using ...
Collaborative learning is a relationship among learners that fosters positive interdependence, individual accountability, and interpersonal skills. "Critical thinking" involves asking appropriate questions, gathering and creatively sorting through relevant information, relating new information to existing knowledge, reexamining beliefs ...
critical thinking. Given that the link between critical thinking and epistemic belief has been well-established in prior literature, there may be a similar link between epistemic belief and argument evaluation. If so, then the existence of such a link may provide deeper insights into how instructors can strengthen the critical
Promoting Critical Thinking Through Active Learning. Thursday, September 29 at 1:00pm CT. Download Slides Receive Your Badge. Research has consistently shown that active learning strategies require students to use and even develop higher-order thinking skills. Bringing active learning into the classroom can have many benefits, including the ...
Critical thinking is the ability to think clearly and rationally, understanding the logical connection between ideas. Critical thinking has been the subject of much debate and thought since the time of early Greek philosophers such as Plato and Socrates and has continued to be a subject of discussion into the modern age, for example the ability ...
This relationship between active learning and improving critical thinking has been reported in other groups around the world. 22, 51, 52 Active-learning strategies (such as collaborative work in small groups and case studies) improved students' critical thinking skills as measured by the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal, which assesses ...
As you work to develop new learning and development programs, remember the link between confidence and critical thinking. By incorporating more critical thinking exercises into your programs, you'll be able to generate far more confidence and better results in the field. Confidence is a by-product of how learners are trained.
Active learning involves learners taking an active role in their learning by participating in activities promoting critical thinking, problem-solving, and decision-making (Kyoungna, Priya, Susan ...
Critical thinking supports a spirit of inquiry to find the best possible evidence for decision making for the most optimum outcomes. (Paul, R. and Elder L., 2008). An excellent example of teaching and learning strategies that exemplify active learning to strengthen critical thinking was described by Wiles, Rose, Curry-Lourenco, & Swift (2015).
The problem with the traditional model of education is that the student is largely receptive. The constructivist model corrects this defect by promoting learning within a highly interaction oriented pedagogy. The problem is that sometimes it combines this with a constructivist view of knowledge, which does not provide an adequate epistemological framework for critical thinking. Even though ...
Abstract: This study looks at whether creativity and critical thinking help students solve problems and improve their grades by mediating the link between 21st century skills (learning motivation, cooperativity, and interaction with peers, engagement with peers, and a smart classroom environment).
Resources for Educators & Students K-12 Education The AHA strives to ensure that every K-12 student has access to high quality history instruction. We create resources for the classroom, advise on state and federal policy, and advocate for the vital importance of history in public education. Learn More Undergraduate Education…