do they teach critical thinking in school

Professors say they teach critical thinking. But is that what students are learning?

Suzanne Cooper. " Do we teach critical thinking? A mixed methods study of faculty and student perceptions of teaching and learning critical thinking at three professional schools . February 21, 2024

Faculty Authors

Suzanne Cooper

What’s the issue.

The ability to think critically is an essential skill for professionals, including doctors, government officials, and educators. But are instructors at professional schools teaching it, or do they just think they are? Approaches to teaching and assessing critical thinking skills vary substantially across academic disciplines and are not standardized. And little data exists on how much students are learning—or even whether they know their instructors are trying to teach them critical thinking. 

What does the research say? 

The researchers, including Suzanne Cooper, the Edith M. Stokey Senior Lecturer in Public Policy at HKS, compared instructors’ approaches to teaching critical thinking with students’ perceptions of what they were being taught. They surveyed instructors and conducted focus groups with students at three professional schools (Harvard Medical School, Harvard Kennedy School, and the Harvard Graduate School of Education). 

The researchers found that more than half (54%) of faculty surveyed said they explicitly taught critical thinking in their courses (27% said they did not and 19% were unsure). When the researchers talked to students, however, the consensus was that critical thinking was primarily being taught implicitly. One student said discussions, debates, and case study analyses were viewed as opportunities “for critical thinking to emerge” but that methods and techniques were not a specific focus. The students were also generally unable to recall or define key terms, such as “metacognition” (an understanding of one’s own thought process) and “cognitive biases” (systematic deviations from norms or rationality in which individuals create their own subjective reality). 

Based on their findings, the researchers recommend that faculty should be required to teach critical thinking explicitly and be given specific approaches and definitions that are appropriate to their academic discipline. They also recommend that professional schools consider teaching core critical thinking skills, as well as skills specific to their area of study.   

More from HKS

Developing a rehabilitation program that works for incarcerated people, the link between poor housing conditions and covid-19 infection, parents play a role in leading boys and girls down different paths of study.

Get smart & reliable public policy insights right in your inbox. 

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

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

Eight Instructional Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking

• Share article

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

The new question-of-the-week is:

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

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

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

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

Current Events

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

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

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

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

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

Here are the two photos and a student response:

F - Focus on both photos and respond for three minutes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Before-Explore-Explain’

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

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

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

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

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

An Issue of Equity

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

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

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

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

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

So, what does that really look like?

Unpack and define critical thinking

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

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

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

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

Designing experiences for critical thinking

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

1.Choose Compelling Topics: Keep it relevant

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

2. Make Local Connections: Keep it real

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

3. Create Authentic Projects: Keep it rigorous

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

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

Critical Thinking & Student Engagement

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

QUESTIONING

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

TALK TIME / CONTROL

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

Thanks to Dara, Patrick, Meg, and PJ for their contributions!

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

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

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

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

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

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

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

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

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

The Will to Teach

Critical Thinking in the Classroom: A Guide for Teachers

In the ever-evolving landscape of education, teaching students the skill of critical thinking has become a priority. This powerful tool empowers students to evaluate information, make reasoned judgments, and approach problems from a fresh perspective. In this article, we’ll explore the significance of critical thinking and provide effective strategies to nurture this skill in your students.

Why is Fostering Critical Thinking Important?

Strategies to cultivate critical thinking, real-world example, concluding thoughts.

Critical thinking is a key skill that goes far beyond the four walls of a classroom. It equips students to better understand and interact with the world around them. Here are some reasons why fostering critical thinking is important:

• Making Informed Decisions:  Critical thinking enables students to evaluate the pros and cons of a situation, helping them make informed and rational decisions.
• Developing Analytical Skills:  Critical thinking involves analyzing information from different angles, which enhances analytical skills.
• Promoting Independence:  Critical thinking fosters independence by encouraging students to form their own opinions based on their analysis, rather than relying on others.

Creating an environment that encourages critical thinking can be accomplished in various ways. Here are some effective strategies:

• Socratic Questioning:  This method involves asking thought-provoking questions that encourage students to think deeply about a topic. For example, instead of asking, “What is the capital of France?” you might ask, “Why do you think Paris became the capital of France?”
• Debates and Discussions:  Debates and open-ended discussions allow students to explore different viewpoints and challenge their own beliefs. For example, a debate on a current event can engage students in critical analysis of the situation.
• Teaching Metacognition:  Teaching students to think about their own thinking can enhance their critical thinking skills. This can be achieved through activities such as reflective writing or journaling.
• Problem-Solving Activities:  As with developing problem-solving skills , activities that require students to find solutions to complex problems can also foster critical thinking.

As a school leader, I’ve seen the transformative power of critical thinking. During a school competition, I observed a team of students tasked with proposing a solution to reduce our school’s environmental impact. Instead of jumping to obvious solutions, they critically evaluated multiple options, considering the feasibility, cost, and potential impact of each. They ultimately proposed a comprehensive plan that involved water conservation, waste reduction, and energy efficiency measures. This demonstrated their ability to critically analyze a problem and develop an effective solution.

Critical thinking is an essential skill for students in the 21st century. It equips them to understand and navigate the world in a thoughtful and informed manner. As a teacher, incorporating strategies to foster critical thinking in your classroom can make a lasting impact on your students’ educational journey and life beyond school.

1. What is critical thinking? Critical thinking is the ability to analyze information objectively and make a reasoned judgment.

2. Why is critical thinking important for students? Critical thinking helps students make informed decisions, develop analytical skills, and promotes independence.

3. What are some strategies to cultivate critical thinking in students? Strategies can include Socratic questioning, debates and discussions, teaching metacognition, and problem-solving activities.

4. How can I assess my students’ critical thinking skills? You can assess critical thinking skills through essays, presentations, discussions, and problem-solving tasks that require thoughtful analysis.

5. Can critical thinking be taught? Yes, critical thinking can be taught and nurtured through specific teaching strategies and a supportive learning environment.

Related Posts

7 simple strategies for strong student-teacher relationships.

Getting to know your students on a personal level is the first step towards building strong relationships. Show genuine interest in their lives outside the classroom.

Connecting Learning to Real-World Contexts: Strategies for Teachers

When students see the relevance of their classroom lessons to their everyday lives, they are more likely to be motivated, engaged, and retain information.

Encouraging Active Involvement in Learning: Strategies for Teachers

Active learning benefits students by improving retention of information, enhancing critical thinking skills, and encouraging a deeper understanding of the subject matter.

Collaborative and Cooperative Learning: A Guide for Teachers

These methods encourage students to work together, share ideas, and actively participate in their education.

Experiential Teaching: Role-Play and Simulations in Teaching

These interactive techniques allow students to immerse themselves in practical, real-world scenarios, thereby deepening their understanding and retention of key concepts.

Project-Based Learning Activities: A Guide for Teachers

Project-Based Learning is a student-centered pedagogy that involves a dynamic approach to teaching, where students explore real-world problems or challenges.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Our Mission

Boosting Critical Thinking Across the Curriculum

Visible thinking routines that encourage students to document and share their ideas can have a profound effect on their learning.

In my coaching work with schools, I am often requested to model strategies that help learners think deeply and critically across multiple disciplines and content areas. Many teachers are looking to adapt research-based methods to help students think about content in meaningful ways by making connections to previous learning, asking relevant questions, displaying understanding through learning artifacts , and identifying their challenges with the material.

Educator Alfred Mander said, “Thinking is skilled work. It is not true that we are naturally endowed with the ability to think clearly and logically—without learning how and without practicing.”

Visible thinking routines can be an excellent and simple way to start using systematic but flexible approaches to teaching thinking dispositions to young people at any grade level. Focusing on thinking types, powerful routines can strengthen learners’ ability to analyze, synthesize (design), and question effectively. Classroom teachers want these skills to become habits, making students the most informed stakeholder in their own learning.

Not to be confused with visible learning research by John Hattie , Visible Thinking is a research-based initiative by Harvard’s Project Zero with more than 30 routines aimed at making learning the consequence of good thinking dispositions . Students begin to comprehend content through thinking routines composed of short questions or a series of steps. During routines, their learning becomes visible because their ideas are documented, voiced, discussed with others, and reflected on.

For example, the routine See, Think, Wonder can be used to get students to analyze and interpret graphs, text, infographics, or video during the entry event of project-based learning units or daily lessons. Guiding students to have rich and lively discussions about their thoughts, interpretations, and wonderings (questions) can help teachers decide on appropriate lessons and next steps.

Another effective visible thinking routine is Connect, Extend, Challenge (CEC). Learners can use CEC to organize, clarify, and simplify complex information on graphic organizers. The graphic organizer becomes a kinesthetic activity for creating an informational artifact that students can refer to as the lesson or unit progresses.

Here are some creative but simple ways to carry out these two routines across multiple classrooms.

See, Think, Wonder

See, Think, Wonder can be leveraged as a thinking routine to launch engagement and inquiry in daily lessons by introducing an interesting object (graphic, artifact, etc.). The idea is for students to think carefully about why the object looks or is a certain way. Teachers introduce the following question prompts to guide students’ thinking:

• What do you see?
• What do you think about that?
• What does it make you wonder?

When the routine is new, sometimes young children may not know where to begin expressing themselves—this is where converting the above question prompts into sentence stems, “I see…,” “I think…,” and “I wonder…,” comes into play. For students struggling with analytical skills, it’s empowering for them to accept themselves where they currently are—learning how to analyze critically can be achieved over time and with practice. Teachers can help them build confidence with positive reinforcement .

Adapt the routine to meet the needs of your kids, which may be to have them work individually or to engage with classmates. I use it frequently—especially when introducing emotionally compelling graphics to students learning about environmental issues (e.g., the UN’s Goals for Sustainable Development) and social issues . This is useful in helping them better understand how to interpret graphs, infographics, and what’s happening in text and visuals. Furthermore, it also promotes interpretations, analysis, and questioning.

Content teachers can use See, Think, Wonder to get learners thinking critically by introducing graphics that reinforce essential academic information and follow up the routine with lessons and scaffolds to support students’ ideas and interpretations.

Connect, Extend, Challenge

CEC is a powerful visible learning routine to help students connect previous learning to new learning and identify where they are struggling in various educational concepts. Taking stock of where they are stuck in the material is as vital as articulating their connections and extensions. Again, they might struggle initially, but here’s where front-loading vocabulary and giving them time to talk through challenges can help.

A good place to introduce CEC is after students have analyzed or observed something new. This works as a natural next step to have them dig deeper with reflection and use what they learned in the analysis process to create their own synthesis of ideas. I also like to use CEC after engaging them in the See, Think, Wonder routine and at the end of a unit.

Again, learners can work individually or in small groups. Teachers can also have them move into the routine after reading an article or some form of targeted informational text where the learning is critical to moving forward (e.g., proportional relationships, measurement, unit conversion). Regardless of your approach, Project Zero suggests having learners reflect on the following question prompts:

• How is the _____ connected to something you already know?
• What new ideas or impressions do you have that extended your thinking in new directions?
• What is challenging or confusing? What do you need to improve your understanding?

I like to have learners in small groups answer a version of the question prompts in a simple three-column graphic organizer. The graphic organizer can also become a road map for prioritizing the next steps in learning for students of all ages. Here are some visual examples of how I used the activity with educators in a professional development session targeting emotional intelligence skills.

More Visible Thinking Resources

• Project Zero’s Thinking Routine Toolbox : Access to core thinking routines
• Making Thinking Visible: How to Promote Engagement, Understanding, and Independence for All Learners , by Ron Ritchhart, Mark Church, and Karin Morrison
• Creating Cultures of Thinking: The 8 Forces We Must Master to Truly Transform Our Schools , by Ron Ritchhart

Why schools should teach critical thinking

From online misinformation and divisive political discourse to science skepticism, there are many challenges when it comes to making sense of the world around us. Having critical thinking skills is essential in ensuring students can navigate the increasingly complex events and contexts they will encounter throughout their lives.

And in a world calling out for problem-solvers, the value of critical thinking skills is recognized far beyond the classroom walls. Let’s take a look at how prioritizing teaching critical thinking skills benefits students and sets them up for success.

What are critical thinking skills for students?

Critical thinking is the art of clear thinking that is rational and reasoned. Critical thinkers don’t simply accept information at face-value but rather interpret and analyze it to arrive at their own conclusions grounded in evidence. They come at a question from different perspectives, seeking out opposing viewpoints, and questioning their assumptions.

For students, critical thinking skills are relevant across subject areas and crucial in guiding them to become independent thinkers. What’s more, schools are in a good position to help nurture the required skills! Let’s explore their role and the benefits of making critical thinking an educational goal.

Why schools are well-placed to teach critical thinking skills

Developing critical thinking skills is an ongoing process, requiring guidance and deliberate practice. Schools can take a longer-term and systematic approach to teaching critical thinking by integrating it into the curriculum. This provides students with a structured learning environment with access to expert educators who use pedagogy to support students in building on existing skills, promoting transfer , and fostering thinking skills. 

Added to that, domain knowledge is a crucial factor in thinking skills and educators can integrate domain-specific skills to support critical thinking alongside content delivery in the classroom.

How educators can successfully teach critical thinking skills to students

Educators are in a strong position to teach critical thinking skills, whether by cultivating a classroom environment that values inquiry, modeling thinking processes through think-alouds, or giving attention to key skills such as perspective-taking. 

Importantly, educators can foster critical thinking skills in real-world contexts while building curriculum knowledge to emphasize their practical application. 

Using collaborative learning strategies, teachers can expose students to different perspectives or integrate activities that prompt students to justify their thinking, such as through discussion or argument mapping on Kialo Edu . And though developing critical thinking skills takes time, students reap unparalleled benefits that last them a lifetime. 

How students benefit from critical thinking skills

Critical thinking improves student learning outcomes.

Helping students learn how to think critically ensures they aren’t simply passive recipients of information, but rather can interpret and apply their knowledge across subject areas. It is immensely satisfying to watch them learn to take control of their learning, ask important questions, and actively engage with material with a discerning eye. This type of dialogic teaching sets them up to become independent learners. 

Not only that, critical thinking skills also help students become better communicators . Effective communication relies on the ability to organize our thoughts clearly and logically — a central element of developed thinking!

Students hone 21st-century skills with critical thinking

Critical thinking sits alongside creativity, collaboration, and communication as a key 21st-century skill . These skills are vital to helping students respond to the demands of a rapidly changing world, whether that involves dealing with information overload, adapting to new technologies or understanding diverse perspectives in a multi-cultural context.

By working on critical thought in the classroom, students will be better equipped to deal with whatever the future brings. For example, you can encourage students to become active participants in conversations on changes happening around them by having a Kialo discussion on how AI will impact the world .

Students use critical thinking skills to battle against misinformation

To fully benefit from today’s information-rich world, students need to successfully identify and evaluate good sources, assessing the reams of (credible and not-so-credible) content at their fingertips. A combination of information literacy and critical thinking skills makes for a well-rounded skill set, supporting students to come to reasoned conclusions amid the deluge of information available. 

Critical thinking skills complement civic literacy

As another closely intertwined skill set, civic l i teracy works hand-in-hand with critical thinking skills to nurture informed and engaged citizenship. An ability to recognize different points of view, question political and media rhetoric, and understand the broader implications of policy decisions empowers students to participate in meaningful discussions about how society and structures function around them. 

To engage students on these topics, try choosing a Kialo discussion from the Civics and Society section in our Topics Library to help scaffold these complex topics. Students might discuss the relevance of democracy to their lives or debate whether voting should be a civic duty expected of all!

Is democracy a good form of government? — kialo-edu.com

Students can make better decisions with critical thinking skills

The power to make thoughtful, well-informed decisions can positively impact every aspect of our lives, and critical thinking is the linchpin for effective decision-making. A critical thinker makes decisions from a place of objective understanding and sound evidence. Educators can help students weigh up arguments from different perspectives and become aware of cognitive biases , making students better placed to compensate for such influences as groupthink , the availability heuristic and confirmation bias.

To develop decision-making skills in a clear context, try a classic desert island survival discussion. This lighthearted approach can still emphasize real-world applications in making difficult choices around resource allocation . You might even get students to explore their own capacity for decision-making with a discussion on the implications of turning 18 !  

Students can better their problem-solving skills through critical thinking

Problem-solving is a highly complex skill, essential in our personal and professional lives to deal with the inevitable challenges that come our way. And critical thinking is a core component of good problem-solving, helping students systematically approach a problem and ask the right questions to get to the root cause.

By giving students the opportunity to work on true problems in the classroom, teachers can contextualize and model effective problem-solving processes and rational thinking . One approach is to task your students to practice engaging with more than one solution to a given problem, such as exploring an argument map on proposed responses to climate change . Or create your own to get your students exploring challenges in your preferred curricular area.

Critical thinking boosts student creativity

Another 21st-century skill, creativity has the potential to enhance learning and student well-being. Closely intertwined with problem-solving, creative thinking is essential to generating novel and innovative solutions. Those solutions, however, need to be useful and address the underlying issue! 

Students versed in critical thinking can examine their creative ideas, identifying areas for modification or recognizing fundamental flaws that make them unfeasible. Not only that, students can reflect on the outcomes of their ideas to inform future creative processes, enhancing the quality and effectiveness of their ideas beyond the task they’re working on.

Critical thinking helps student self-reflect on their actions

An ability to engage in meaningful reflection is integral for students to develop positive relationships and work towards meaningful goals. These goals can be for an academic achievement, or other personal goals that motivate them. By utilizing critical thinking skills, students are better placed to identify lessons learned from past experiences or to engage in an honest assessment of their personal strengths and weaknesses. 

We’d love to know what benefits you see from working on critical thinking in your classroom! Get in touch at [email protected] , or on any of our social media platforms. And if you haven’t yet tried a class discussion to activate your students’ critical thinking skills, take some inspiration from some of our ready-made debate topics !

Want to try Kialo Edu with your class?

Sign up for free and use Kialo Edu to have thoughtful classroom discussions and train students’ argumentation and critical thinking skills.

Why Schools Need to Change Yes, We Can Define, Teach, and Assess Critical Thinking Skills

Jeff Heyck-Williams (He, His, Him) Director of the Two Rivers Learning Institute in Washington, DC

Today’s learners face an uncertain present and a rapidly changing future that demand far different skills and knowledge than were needed in the 20th century. We also know so much more about enabling deep, powerful learning than we ever did before. Our collective future depends on how well young people prepare for the challenges and opportunities of 21st-century life.

Critical thinking is a thing. We can define it; we can teach it; and we can assess it.

While the idea of teaching critical thinking has been bandied around in education circles since at least the time of John Dewey, it has taken greater prominence in the education debates with the advent of the term “21st century skills” and discussions of deeper learning. There is increasing agreement among education reformers that critical thinking is an essential ingredient for long-term success for all of our students.

However, there are still those in the education establishment and in the media who argue that critical thinking isn’t really a thing, or that these skills aren’t well defined and, even if they could be defined, they can’t be taught or assessed.

To those naysayers, I have to disagree. Critical thinking is a thing. We can define it; we can teach it; and we can assess it. In fact, as part of a multi-year Assessment for Learning Project , Two Rivers Public Charter School in Washington, D.C., has done just that.

Before I dive into what we have done, I want to acknowledge that some of the criticism has merit.

First, there are those that argue that critical thinking can only exist when students have a vast fund of knowledge. Meaning that a student cannot think critically if they don’t have something substantive about which to think. I agree. Students do need a robust foundation of core content knowledge to effectively think critically. Schools still have a responsibility for building students’ content knowledge.

However, I would argue that students don’t need to wait to think critically until after they have mastered some arbitrary amount of knowledge. They can start building critical thinking skills when they walk in the door. All students come to school with experience and knowledge which they can immediately think critically about. In fact, some of the thinking that they learn to do helps augment and solidify the discipline-specific academic knowledge that they are learning.

The second criticism is that critical thinking skills are always highly contextual. In this argument, the critics make the point that the types of thinking that students do in history is categorically different from the types of thinking students do in science or math. Thus, the idea of teaching broadly defined, content-neutral critical thinking skills is impossible. I agree that there are domain-specific thinking skills that students should learn in each discipline. However, I also believe that there are several generalizable skills that elementary school students can learn that have broad applicability to their academic and social lives. That is what we have done at Two Rivers.

Defining Critical Thinking Skills

We began this work by first defining what we mean by critical thinking. After a review of the literature and looking at the practice at other schools, we identified five constructs that encompass a set of broadly applicable skills: schema development and activation; effective reasoning; creativity and innovation; problem solving; and decision making.

We then created rubrics to provide a concrete vision of what each of these constructs look like in practice. Working with the Stanford Center for Assessment, Learning and Equity (SCALE) , we refined these rubrics to capture clear and discrete skills.

For example, we defined effective reasoning as the skill of creating an evidence-based claim: students need to construct a claim, identify relevant support, link their support to their claim, and identify possible questions or counter claims. Rubrics provide an explicit vision of the skill of effective reasoning for students and teachers. By breaking the rubrics down for different grade bands, we have been able not only to describe what reasoning is but also to delineate how the skills develop in students from preschool through 8th grade.

Before moving on, I want to freely acknowledge that in narrowly defining reasoning as the construction of evidence-based claims we have disregarded some elements of reasoning that students can and should learn. For example, the difference between constructing claims through deductive versus inductive means is not highlighted in our definition. However, by privileging a definition that has broad applicability across disciplines, we are able to gain traction in developing the roots of critical thinking. In this case, to formulate well-supported claims or arguments.

Teaching Critical Thinking Skills

The definitions of critical thinking constructs were only useful to us in as much as they translated into practical skills that teachers could teach and students could learn and use. Consequently, we have found that to teach a set of cognitive skills, we needed thinking routines that defined the regular application of these critical thinking and problem-solving skills across domains. Building on Harvard’s Project Zero Visible Thinking work, we have named routines aligned with each of our constructs.

For example, with the construct of effective reasoning, we aligned the Claim-Support-Question thinking routine to our rubric. Teachers then were able to teach students that whenever they were making an argument, the norm in the class was to use the routine in constructing their claim and support. The flexibility of the routine has allowed us to apply it from preschool through 8th grade and across disciplines from science to economics and from math to literacy.

Kathryn Mancino, a 5th grade teacher at Two Rivers, has deliberately taught three of our thinking routines to students using the anchor charts above. Her charts name the components of each routine and has a place for students to record when they’ve used it and what they have figured out about the routine. By using this structure with a chart that can be added to throughout the year, students see the routines as broadly applicable across disciplines and are able to refine their application over time.

Assessing Critical Thinking Skills

By defining specific constructs of critical thinking and building thinking routines that support their implementation in classrooms, we have operated under the assumption that students are developing skills that they will be able to transfer to other settings. However, we recognized both the importance and the challenge of gathering reliable data to confirm this.

With this in mind, we have developed a series of short performance tasks around novel discipline-neutral contexts in which students can apply the constructs of thinking. Through these tasks, we have been able to provide an opportunity for students to demonstrate their ability to transfer the types of thinking beyond the original classroom setting. Once again, we have worked with SCALE to define tasks where students easily access the content but where the cognitive lift requires them to demonstrate their thinking abilities.

These assessments demonstrate that it is possible to capture meaningful data on students’ critical thinking abilities. They are not intended to be high stakes accountability measures. Instead, they are designed to give students, teachers, and school leaders discrete formative data on hard to measure skills.

While it is clearly difficult, and we have not solved all of the challenges to scaling assessments of critical thinking, we can define, teach, and assess these skills . In fact, knowing how important they are for the economy of the future and our democracy, it is essential that we do.

Jeff Heyck-Williams (He, His, Him)

Director of the two rivers learning institute.

Jeff Heyck-Williams is the director of the Two Rivers Learning Institute and a founder of Two Rivers Public Charter School. He has led work around creating school-wide cultures of mathematics, developing assessments of critical thinking and problem-solving, and supporting project-based learning.

Read More About Why Schools Need to Change

AI in Schools Has Prevailed for a Full Year. What Happens Next?

August 13, 2024

Connections over Consequences: Effective Strategies for Collaborative Problem-Solving with Students

Sanchel Hall

August 6, 2024

Incorporating Leadership Skills into a Student-Centered Classroom

Elizabeth Lennon (she, her)

July 8, 2024

• Grades 6-12
• School Leaders

Win a $1,000 gift certificate of your choice! ✨

What Is Critical Thinking and Why Do We Need To Teach It?

Question the world and sort out fact from opinion.

The world is full of information (and misinformation) from books, TV, magazines, newspapers, online articles, social media, and more. Everyone has their own opinions, and these opinions are frequently presented as facts. Making informed choices is more important than ever, and that takes strong critical thinking skills. But what exactly is critical thinking? Why should we teach it to our students? Read on to find out.

What is critical thinking?

Source: Indeed

Critical thinking is the ability to examine a subject and develop an informed opinion about it. It’s about asking questions, then looking closely at the answers to form conclusions that are backed by provable facts, not just “gut feelings” and opinion. These skills allow us to confidently navigate a world full of persuasive advertisements, opinions presented as facts, and confusing and contradictory information.

The Foundation for Critical Thinking says, “Critical thinking can be seen as having two components: 1) a set of information and belief-generating and processing skills, and 2) the habit, based on intellectual commitment, of using those skills to guide behavior.”

In other words, good critical thinkers know how to analyze and evaluate information, breaking it down to separate fact from opinion. After a thorough analysis, they feel confident forming their own opinions on a subject. And what’s more, critical thinkers use these skills regularly in their daily lives. Rather than jumping to conclusions or being guided by initial reactions, they’ve formed the habit of applying their critical thinking skills to all new information and topics.

Why is critical thinking so important?

Imagine you’re shopping for a new car. It’s a big purchase, so you want to do your research thoroughly. There’s a lot of information out there, and it’s up to you to sort through it all.

• You’ve seen TV commercials for a couple of car models that look really cool and have features you like, such as good gas mileage. Plus, your favorite celebrity drives that car!
• The manufacturer’s website has a lot of information, like cost, MPG, and other details. It also mentions that this car has been ranked “best in its class.”
• Your neighbor down the street used to have this kind of car, but he tells you that he eventually got rid of it because he didn’t think it was comfortable to drive. Plus, he heard that brand of car isn’t as good as it used to be.
• Three independent organizations have done test-drives and published their findings online. They all agree that the car has good gas mileage and a sleek design. But they each have their own concerns or complaints about the car, including one that found it might not be safe in high winds.

So much information! It’s tempting to just go with your gut and buy the car that looks the coolest (or is the cheapest, or says it has the best gas mileage). Ultimately, though, you know you need to slow down and take your time, or you could wind up making a mistake that costs you thousands of dollars. You need to think critically to make an informed choice.

What does critical thinking look like?

Source: TeachThought

Let’s continue with the car analogy, and apply some critical thinking to the situation.

• Critical thinkers know they can’t trust TV commercials to help them make smart choices, since every single one wants you to think their car is the best option.
• The manufacturer’s website will have some details that are proven facts, but other statements that are hard to prove or clearly just opinions. Which information is factual, and even more important, relevant to your choice?
• A neighbor’s stories are anecdotal, so they may or may not be useful. They’re the opinions and experiences of just one person and might not be representative of a whole. Can you find other people with similar experiences that point to a pattern?
• The independent studies could be trustworthy, although it depends on who conducted them and why. Closer analysis might show that the most positive study was conducted by a company hired by the car manufacturer itself. Who conducted each study, and why?

Did you notice all the questions that started to pop up? That’s what critical thinking is about: asking the right questions, and knowing how to find and evaluate the answers to those questions.

Good critical thinkers do this sort of analysis every day, on all sorts of subjects. They seek out proven facts and trusted sources, weigh the options, and then make a choice and form their own opinions. It’s a process that becomes automatic over time; experienced critical thinkers question everything thoughtfully, with purpose. This helps them feel confident that their informed opinions and choices are the right ones for them.

Key Critical Thinking Skills

There’s no official list, but many people use Bloom’s Taxonomy to help lay out the skills kids should develop as they grow up.

Source: Vanderbilt University

Bloom’s Taxonomy is laid out as a pyramid, with foundational skills at the bottom providing a base for more advanced skills higher up. The lowest phase, “Remember,” doesn’t require much critical thinking. These are skills like memorizing math facts, defining vocabulary words, or knowing the main characters and basic plot points of a story.

Higher skills on Bloom’s list incorporate more critical thinking.

True understanding is more than memorization or reciting facts. It’s the difference between a child reciting by rote “one times four is four, two times four is eight, three times four is twelve,” versus recognizing that multiplication is the same as adding a number to itself a certain number of times. When you understand a concept, you can explain how it works to someone else.

When you apply your knowledge, you take a concept you’ve already mastered and apply it to new situations. For instance, a student learning to read doesn’t need to memorize every word. Instead, they use their skills in sounding out letters to tackle each new word as they come across it.

When we analyze something, we don’t take it at face value. Analysis requires us to find facts that stand up to inquiry. We put aside personal feelings or beliefs, and instead identify and scrutinize primary sources for information. This is a complex skill, one we hone throughout our entire lives.

Evaluating means reflecting on analyzed information, selecting the most relevant and reliable facts to help us make choices or form opinions. True evaluation requires us to put aside our own biases and accept that there may be other valid points of view, even if we don’t necessarily agree with them.

Finally, critical thinkers are ready to create their own result. They can make a choice, form an opinion, cast a vote, write a thesis, debate a topic, and more. And they can do it with the confidence that comes from approaching the topic critically.

How do you teach critical thinking skills?

The best way to create a future generation of critical thinkers is to encourage them to ask lots of questions. Then, show them how to find the answers by choosing reliable primary sources. Require them to justify their opinions with provable facts, and help them identify bias in themselves and others. Try some of these resources to get started.

5 Critical Thinking Skills Every Kid Needs To Learn (And How To Teach Them)

• 100+ Critical Thinking Questions for Students To Ask About Anything
• 10 Tips for Teaching Kids To Be Awesome Critical Thinkers
• Free Critical Thinking Poster, Rubric, and Assessment Ideas

More Critical Thinking Resources

The answer to “What is critical thinking?” is a complex one. These resources can help you dig more deeply into the concept and hone your own skills.

• The Foundation for Critical Thinking
• Cultivating a Critical Thinking Mindset (PDF)
• Asking the Right Questions: A Guide to Critical Thinking (Browne/Keeley, 2014)

Have more questions about what critical thinking is or how to teach it in your classroom? Join the WeAreTeachers HELPLINE group on Facebook to ask for advice and share ideas!

Plus, 12 skills students can work on now to help them in careers later ..

You Might Also Like

Teach them to thoughtfully question the world around them. Continue Reading

Copyright © 2024. All rights reserved. 5335 Gate Parkway, Jacksonville, FL 32256

More From Forbes

How to teach critical thinking in k-12.

• Share to Facebook
• Share to Twitter
• Share to Linkedin

Critical thinking too often falls by the wayside in schools because there is a lack of consensus ... [+] about how to teach it, and even what critical thinking is.

One of the age-old goals of education is teaching students “how to think.” But what exactly does that mean? Doesn’t everyone already think on their own? Is thinking — in the abstract — even something you can teach or get better at?

These questions have new resonances in these fraught and sometimes frightening times. New communication technology and media sources seemingly overwhelm our powers of thinking, concentration, and self-control. There is a great deal of speculation that they’ve poisoned our political discourse, polarized democratic electorates, and been leveraged by would-be despots to misinform and gain political power.

Can learning how to think help us overcome these challenges? We at the Reboot Foundation, which I founded to advance critical thinking research and education, think very strongly that the answer is yes. And to that end, we’ve recently released a Teachers’ Guide to Critical Thinking . We worked with some top teachers in different subject areas and grade levels around the country to produce the guide.

We ask a lot of our teachers in the US. They must meet an array of state requirements; they face (often unreasonable) pressure to deliver test scores; they are overworked and underpaid. In many schools, as our survey found , they have little or no time to concentrate on deeper learning goals — like critical thinking skills — that are difficult to measure, but that, in the long run, may impact students’ lives much more than testable knowledge.

In addition to these time constraints and testing pressures, critical thinking too often falls by the wayside because it is not typically taught as a standalone academic subject. There is a lack of consensus about how to teach it and even what critical thinking is. And there aren’t a lot of high-quality materials available to give ideas for how to integrate critical thinking into teaching or advance professional development about it.

10 Free Programming Courses And Certificates In 2024

Nsf budget cuts hamstring chips act and community colleges, university of california, santa cruz faces $111 million budget deficit.

That said, there is actually good reason for not teaching critical thinking as its own subject, and at Reboot we don’t advocate stand-alone critical thinking courses. Research shows that, while critical thinking can be taught, it can’t be taught on its own — at least not effectively. Daniel Willingham, cognitive scientist, writes that attempts to teach general thinking abilities through logical and spatial puzzles, for example, as parts of courses added on to the curriculum are generally unsuccessful. These skills don’t “transfer” to thinking in other domains, but generally remain tied to the logic games where they’re learned.

This might seem discouraging, but it also presents schools and teachers with a big opportunity. What’s needed is not necessarily new courses, but a critical thinking focus throughout the curriculum. Some of these changes can happen quickly with tweaks to existing curricula and the incorporation of deeper and more creative thinking exercises.

For example, in our article on teaching critical thinking in science , we advocate for science labs that afford students the opportunity to design their own experiments and test their own hypothesis about how to gain knowledge — rather than simply following recipes to duplicate results already known. Our sample lesson asks students to come up with their own model for describing the motion of coffee filters falling to the ground. Scientific education that fosters this kind of creativity can help the scientific method come alive for students. Instead of seeing it as a set of steps they must carry out or memorize, it becomes a way of thinking that they discover through doing. This also helps strengthen students' intrinsic motivation.

Similarly, in our article on teaching civics , we advise teachers to facilitate in-class debates where students are made responsible for researching topics like the death penalty, developing a knowledge base, and using it to argue for particular positions. Throughout the process, teachers should also give students the opportunity to reflect on their progress in articulating and refining their viewpoints, through explicit journaling projects or in-class discussions. The goal is to develop students’ abilities to reflect on their own learning and begin to develop interests self-consciously and intentionally that will stay with them when they leave the classroom.

Students come to school with natural curiosity and a love of learning, but too often, amid testing priorities and rote curricula, these attributes fall away. In order to best foster the development of natural curiosity into a genuine and abiding interest in learning and knowledge, schools need to give students room to pursue their own interests, develop their own views, and struggle with open-ended questions. They need, in other words, to prioritize critical thinking for teens .

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

Ask the Cognitive Scientist: How Can Educators Teach Critical Thinking?

How does the mind work—and especially how does it learn? Teachers’ instructional decisions are based on a mix of theories learned in teacher education, trial and error, craft knowledge, and gut instinct. Such knowledge often serves us well, but is there anything sturdier to rely on?

Cognitive science is an interdisciplinary field of researchers from psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, philosophy, computer science, and anthropology who seek to understand the mind. In this regular American Educator column, we consider findings from this field that are strong and clear enough to merit classroom application.

I ndividuals vary in their views of what students should be taught, but there is little disagreement on the importance of critical thinking skills. In free societies, the ability to think critically is viewed as a cornerstone of individual civic engagement and economic success.

Despite this consensus, it’s not always clear what’s meant by “critical thinking.” I will offer a commonsensical view. 1 You are thinking critically if (1) your thinking is novel—that is, you aren’t simply drawing a conclusion from a memory of a previous situation; (2) your thinking is self-directed—that is, you are not merely executing instructions given by someone else; and (3) your thinking is effective—that is, you respect certain conventions that make thinking more likely to yield useful conclusions. These would be conventions like “consider both sides of an issue,” “offer evidence for claims made,” and “don’t let emotion interfere with reason.” This third characteristic will be our main concern, and as we’ll see, what constitutes effective thinking varies from domain to domain.

Critical Thinking Can Be Taught

Planning how to teach students to think critically should perhaps be our second task. Our first should be to ask whether evidence shows that explicitly teaching critical thinking brings any benefit.

There are many examples of critical thinking skills that are open to instruction. 2 For example, in one experiment, researchers taught college students principles for evaluating evidence in psychology studies—principles like the difference between correlational research and true experiments, and the difference between anecdote and formal research. 3 These principles were incorporated into regular instruction in a psychology class, and their application was practiced in that context. Compared to a control group that learned principles of memory, students who learned the critical thinking principles performed better on a test that required evaluation of psychology evidence.

But perhaps we should not find this result terribly surprising. You tell students, “This is a good strategy for this type of problem,” and you have them practice that strategy, so later they use that strategy when they encounter the problem.

When we think of critical thinking, we think of something bigger than its domain of training. When I teach students how to evaluate the argument in a set of newspaper editorials, I’m hoping that they will learn to evaluate arguments generally, not just the ones they read. The research literature on successful transfer of learning * to new problems is less encouraging.

Teaching Critical Thinking for General Transfer

It’s a perennial idea—teach something that requires critical thinking, and such thinking will become habitual. In the 19th century, educators suggested that Latin and geometry demanded logical thinking, which would prompt students to think logically in other contexts. 4 The idea was challenged by psychologist Edward Thorndike, who compared scores from standardized tests that high school students took in autumn and spring as a function of the coursework they had taken during the year. If Latin, for example, makes you smart, students who take it should score better in the spring. They didn’t. 5

In the 1960s, computer programming replaced Latin as the discipline that would lead to logical thinking. 6 Studies through the 1980s showed mixed results, 7 but a recent meta-analysis offered some apparently encouraging results about the general trainability of computational thinking. 8 The researchers reported that learning to program a computer yielded modest positive transfer to measures of creative thinking, mathematics, metacognition, spatial skills, and reasoning. It’s sensible to think that this transfer was a consequence of conceptual overlap between programming and these skills, as no benefit was observed in measures of literacy.

Hopeful adults have tried still other activities as potential all-purpose enhancers of intelligence—for example, exposure to classical music (the so-called Mozart effect), 9 learning to play a musical instrument, 10 or learning to play chess. 11 None have succeeded as hoped.

It’s no surprise then that programs in school meant to teach general critical thinking skills have had limited success. Unfortunately, the evaluations of these programs seldom offer a good test of transfer; the measure of success tends to feature the same sort of task that was used during training. 12 When investigators have tested for transfer in such curricular programs, positive results have been absent or modest and quick to fade. 13

Transfer and the Nature of Critical Thinking

We probably should have anticipated these results. Wanting students to be able to “analyze, synthesize, and evaluate” information sounds like a reasonable goal, but those terms mean different things in different disciplines. Literary criticism has its own internal logic, its norms for what constitutes good evidence and a valid argument. These norms differ from those found in mathematics, for example. Thus, our goals for student critical thinking must be domain-specific.

But wait. Surely there are some principles of thinking that apply across fields of study. Affirming the consequent is always wrong, straw-person arguments are always weak, and having a conflict of interest always makes your argument suspect. 14 There are indeed principles that carry across domains of study. The problem is that people who learn these broadly applicable principles in one situation often fail to apply them in a new situation.

The law of large numbers provides an example. It states that a large sample will probably be closer to a “true” estimate than a small sample—if you want to know whether a set of dice is loaded, you’re better off seeing the results of 20 throws rather than two throws. People readily understand this idea in the context of evaluating randomness, but a small sample doesn’t bother them when judging academic performance; if someone receives poor grades on two math tests, observers judge they are simply bad at math. 15

In another classic experiment, researchers administered a tricky problem: a malignant tumor could be treated with a particular ray, but the ray caused a lot of collateral damage to healthy tissue. How, subjects were asked, could the ray be used to destroy the tumor? Other subjects got the same problem, but first read a story describing a military situation analogous to the medical problem. Instead of rays attacking a tumor, rebels were to attack a fortress. The military story offered a perfect analogy to the medical problem, but despite reading it moments before, subjects still couldn’t solve the medical problem. Merely mentioning that the story might help solve the problem boosted solution rates to nearly 100 percent. Thus, using the analogy was not hard; the problem was thinking to use it in the first place. 16

These results offer a new perspective on critical thinking. The problem in transfer is not just that different domains have different norms for critical thinking. The problem is that previous critical thinking successes seem encapsulated in memory. We know that a student has understood an idea like the law of large numbers. But understanding it offers no guarantee that the student will recognize new situations in which that idea will be useful.

Critical Thinking as Problem Recognition

Happily, this difficulty in recognizing problems you’ve solved before disappears in the face of significant practice. If I solve a lot of problems in which the law of large numbers is relevant, I no longer focus on the particulars of the problem—that is, whether it seems to be about cars, or ratings of happiness, or savings bonds. I immediately see that the law of large numbers is relevant. 17 Lots of practice is OK if you’re not in a hurry, but is there a faster way to help students “just see” that they have solved a problem before?

One technique is problem comparison; show students two solved problems that have the same structure but appear to be about different things, and ask students to compare them. 18 In one experiment testing this method, business school students were asked to compare two stories, one involving international companies coping with a shipping problem, and the other concerning two college students planning a spring break trip. In each, a difficult negotiation problem was resolved through the use of a particular type of contract. Two weeks later, students were more likely to use the solution on a novel problem if they had contrasted the stories compared to other students who simply read them. 19 Richard Catrambone developed a different technique to address a slightly different transfer problem. He noted that in math and science classes, students often learned to solve standard problems via a series of fixed, lockstep procedures. That meant students were stumped when confronted with a problem requiring a slight revision of the steps, even if the goal of the steps was the same. For example, a student might learn a method for solving word problems involving work like “Nicola can paint a house in 14 hours, and Carole can do it in 8. How long would it take them to paint one house, working together?” A student who learns a sequence of steps to solve that sort of problem is often thrown by a small change—the homeowner had already painted one-fourth of the house before hiring Nicola and Carole.

Catrambone 20 showed that student knowledge will be more flexible if students are taught to label the substeps of the solution with the goal it serves. For example, work problems are typically solved by calculating how much of the job each worker can do in an hour. If, during learning, that step were labeled so students understood that that calculation was part of deriving the solution, they would know how to solve the problem when a fraction of the house is to be painted.

Open-Ended Problems and Knowledge

Students encounter standard problems that are best solved in a particular way, but many critical thinking situations are unique. There are no routine, reusable solutions for problems like designing a product or planning a strategy for a field hockey match. Nevertheless, critical thinking for open-ended problems is enabled by extensive stores of knowledge about the domain. 21

First, the recognition process described above (“oh, this is that sort of problem”) can still apply to subparts of a complex, open-ended problem. Complex critical thinking may entail multiple simpler solutions from memory that can be “snapped together” when solving complex problems. 22 For example, arithmetic is needed for calculating the best value among several vacation packages.

Second, knowledge impacts working memory. Working memory refers, colloquially, to the place in the mind where thinking happens—it’s where you hold information and manipulate it to carry out cognitive tasks. So, for example, if I said “How is a scarecrow like a blueberry?,” you would retrieve information about scarecrows (not alive, protect crops, found in fields, birds think they are alive) and blueberries (purple, used in pies, small, featured in Blueberries for Sal ) from your memory, and then you’d start comparing these features, looking for overlap. But working memory has limited space; if I added three more words, you’d struggle to keep all five and their associations in mind at once.

With experience, often-associated bits of knowledge clump together and thus take up less room in working memory. In chess, a king, a castle, and three pawns in a corner of the board relate to one another in the defensive position, so the expert will treat them as a single unit. An experienced dancer similarly chunks dance moves allowing him to think about more subtle aspects of movement, rather than crowding working memory with “what I’m to do next.”

Third, knowledge is sometimes necessary to deploy thinking strategies. As noted above, sometimes you have an effective thinking strategy in your memory (for example, apply the law of large numbers) but fail to see that it’s relevant. In other situations, the proper thinking is easily recognized. We can tell students that they should evaluate the logic of the author’s argument when they read an op-ed, and we can tell them the right method to use when conducting a scientific experiment. Students should have no trouble recognizing “Oh, this is that sort of problem,” and they may have committed to memory the right thinking strategy. They know what to do, but they may not be able to use the strategy without the right domain knowledge.

For example, principles of scientific reasoning seem to be content free: for example, “a control group should be identical to the experimental group, except for the treatment.” In practice, however, content knowledge is needed to use the principle. For example, in an experiment on learning, you’d want to be sure that the experimental and control groups were comparable, so you’d make sure that proportions of men and women in each group were the same. What characteristics besides sex should you be sure are equivalent in the experimental and control groups? Ability to concentrate? Intelligence? You can’t measure every characteristic of your subjects, so you’d focus on characteristics that you know are relevant to learning. But knowing which characteristics are “relevant to learning” means knowing the research literature in learning and memory.

Experimental evidence shows that an expert doesn’t think as well outside her area of expertise, even in a closely related domain. She’s still better than a novice, but her skills don’t transfer completely. For example, knowledge of medicine transfers poorly among subspecialties (neurologists do not diagnose cardiac cases well), 23 technical writers can’t write newspaper articles, 24 and even professional philosophers are swayed by irrelevant features of problems like question order or wording. 25

How to Teach Students to Think Critically

So what does all this mean? Is there really no such thing as a “critical thinking skill” if by “skill” we mean something generalizable? Maybe, but it’s hard to be sure. We do know that students who go to school longer score better on intelligence tests, and certainly we think of intelligence as all-purpose. 26 Still, it may be that schooling boosts a collection of fairly specific thinking skills. If it increases general thinking skills, researchers have been unable to identify them.

Although existing data favor the specific skills account, 27 researchers would still say it’s uncertain whether a good critical thinker is someone who has mastered lots of specific skills, or someone with a smaller set of yet-to-be-identified general skills. But educators aren’t researchers, and for educators, one fact ought to be salient. We’re not even sure the general skills exist, but we’re quite sure there’s no proven way to teach them directly. In contrast, we have a pretty good idea of how to teach students the more specific critical thinking skills. I suggest we do so. Here’s a four-step plan.

First, identify what’s meant by critical thinking in each domain. Be specific by focusing on tasks that tap skills, not skills themselves. What tasks showing critical thinking should a high school graduate be able to do in mathematics, history, and other subjects? For example, educators might decide that an important aspect of understanding history is the ability to source historical documents; that is, to interpret them in light of their source—who wrote it, for what purpose, and for what intended audience. Educators might decide that a key critical thinking skill for science is understanding the relationship between a theory and a hypothesis. These skills should be explicitly taught and practiced—there is evidence that simple exposure to this sort of work without explicit instruction is less effective. 28

Second, identify the domain content that students must know. We’ve seen that domain knowledge is a crucial driver of thinking skill. What knowledge is essential to the type of thinking you want your students to be able to do? For example, if students are to source documents, they need knowledge of the relevant source; in other words, knowing that they are reading a 1779 letter from General George Clinton written to George Washington with a request for supplies won’t mean much if they don’t have some background knowledge about the American Revolutionary War—that will enable them to make sense of what they read when they look up Clinton and his activities at the time.

The prospect of someone deciding which knowledge students ought to learn—and what they won’t learn—sometimes makes people uneasy because this decision depends on one’s goals for schooling, and goals depend on values. Selection of content is a critical way that values are expressed. 29 Making that choice will lead to uncomfortable tradeoffs. But not choosing is still making a choice. It’s choosing not to plan.

Third, educators must select the best sequence for students to learn the skills. It’s obvious that skills and knowledge build on one another in mathematics and history, and it’s equally true of other domains of skill and knowledge; we interpret new information in light of what we already know.

Fourth, educators must decide which skills should be revisited across years. Studies show that even if content is learned quite well over the course of half of a school year, about half will be forgotten in three years. 30 That doesn’t mean there’s no value in exposing students to content just once; most students will forget much, but they’ll remember something, and for some students, an interest may be kindled. But when considering skills we hope will stick with students for the long term, we should plan on at least three to five years of practice. 31

Some Practical Matters of Teaching Critical Thinking

I’ve outlined a broad, four-step plan. Let’s consider some of the pragmatic decisions educators face as they contemplate the teaching of critical thinking.

Is it all or none ? I’ve suggested that critical thinking be taught in the context of a comprehensive curriculum. Does that mean an individual teacher cannot do anything on his or her own? Is there just no point in trying if the cooperation of the entire school system is not assured?

Obviously that’s not the case; a teacher can still include critical thinking content in his or her courses and students will learn, but it’s quite likely they will learn more, and learn more quickly, if their learning is coordinated across years. It has long been recognized among psychologists that an important factor influencing learning, perhaps the most important factor, is what the student already knows. 32 Teaching will be more effective if the instructor is confident about what his or her students already know.

Student age : When should critical thinking instruction start? There’s not a firm, research-based answer to this question. Researchers interested in thinking skills like problem solving or evidence evaluation in young children (preschool through early elementary ages) have studied how children think in the absence of explicit instruction. They have not studied whether or how young children can be made to think more critically. Still, research over the last 30 years or so has led to an important conclusion: children are more capable than we thought.

The great developmental psychologist Jean Piaget proposed a highly influential theory that suggested children’s cognition moves through a series of four stages, characterized by more and more abstract thought, and better ability to take multiple perspectives. In stage theories, the basic architecture of thought is unchanged for long periods of time, and then rapidly reorganizes as the child moves from one developmental stage to another. 33 A key educational implication is that it’s at least pointless and possibly damaging to ask the child to do cognitive work that is appropriate for a later developmental stage. The last 30 years has shown that, contrary to Piaget’s theory, development is gradual, and does not change abruptly. It has also shown that what children can and cannot do varies depending on the content.

For example, in some circumstances, even toddlers can understand principles of conditional reasoning. For instance, conditional reasoning is required when the relationship of two things is contingent on a third thing. A child may understand that when she visits a friend’s house, she may get a treat like cake or cookies for a snack or she may not. But if her friend is celebrating a birthday, the relation between those two things (a visit and getting cake) becomes very consistent. Yet when conditional reasoning problems are framed in unfamiliar contexts, they confuse even adult physicians. Much depends on the content of the problem. 34

Thus, research tells us that including critical thinking in the schooling of young children is likely to be perfectly appropriate. It does not, however, provide guidance into what types of critical thinking skills to start with. That is a matter to take up with experienced educators, coordinating with colleagues who teach older children in the interests of making the curriculum seamless.

Types of students : Should everyone learn critical thinking skills? The question sounds like a setup, like an excuse for a resounding endorsement of critical thinking for all. But the truth is that, in many systems, less capable students are steered into less challenging coursework, with the hope that by reducing expectations, they will at least achieve “mastery of the basics.” These lower expectations often pervade entire schools that serve students from low-income families. 35

It is worth highlighting that access to challenging content and continuing to postsecondary education is, in nearly every country, associated with socioeconomic status. 36 Children from high socioeconomic status families also have more opportunities to learn at home. If school is the chief or only venue through which low socioeconomic status students are exposed to advanced vocabulary, rich content knowledge, and demands for high-level thinking, it is absolutely vital that those opportunities be enhanced, not reduced.

Assessment : Assessment of critical thinking is, needless to say, a challenge. One difficulty is expense. Claims to the contrary, multiple-choice items do not necessarily require critical thinking, even when items are carefully constructed and vetted, as on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP). One researcher 37 administered items from the history NAEP for 12th-graders to college students who had done well on other standardized history exams. Students were asked to think aloud as they chose their answers, and the researchers observed little critical thinking, but a lot of “gaming” of the questions. Assessing critical thinking requires that students answer open-form questions, and that means humans must score the response, an expensive proposition.

On the bright side, the plan for teaching critical thinking that I’ve recommended makes some aspects of assessment more straightforward. If the skills that constitute “critical thinking” in, say, 10th-grade chemistry class are fully defined, then there is no question as to what content ought to appear on the assessment. The predictability ought to make teachers more confident that they can prepare their students for standardized assessments.

A s much as teaching students to think critically is a universal goal of schooling, one might be surprised that student difficulty in this area is such a common complaint. Educators are often frustrated that student thinking seems shallow. This review should offer insight into why that is. The way the mind works, shallow is what you get first. Deep, critical thinking is hard-won.

That means that designers and administrators of a program to improve critical thinking among students must take the long view, both in the time frame over which the program operates and especially in the speed with which one expects to see results. Patience will be a key ingredient in any program that succeeds.

Daniel T. Willingham is a professor of cognitive psychology at the University of Virginia. He is the author of When Can You Trust the Experts? How to Tell Good Science from Bad in Education and Why Don’t Students Like School? His most recent book is The Reading Mind: A Cognitive Approach to Understanding How the Mind Reads . This article is adapted with permission from his report for the government of New South Wales, “How to Teach Critical Thinking.” Copyright 2019 by Willingham. Readers can pose questions to “Ask the Cognitive Scientist” by sending an email to [email protected] . Future columns will try to address readers’ questions. *For more on the research behind transfer of learning, see “If You Learn A, Will You Be Better Able to Learn B?” in the Spring 2020 issue of American Educator , available here . ( return to article )

1. D. T. Willingham, “Critical Thinking: Why Is It So Hard to Teach,” American Educator 31, no. 2 (Summer 2007): 8–19. 2. P. C. Abrami et al., “Instructional Interventions Affecting Critical Thinking Skills and Dispositions: A Stage 1 Meta-Analysis,” Review of Educational Research 78, no. 4 (2008): 1102–1134; and R. L. Bangert-Drowns and E. Bankert, “Meta-Analysis of Effects of Explicit Instruction for Critical Thinking,” in Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Boston: 1990), 56–79. 3. D. A. Bensley and R. A. Spero, “Improving Critical Thinking Skills and Metacognitive Monitoring through Direct Infusion,” Thinking Skills and Creativity 12 (2014): 55–68. 4. C. F. Lewis, “A Study in Formal Discipline,” The School Review 13, no. 4 (1905): 281–292. 5. E. L. Thorndike, “The Influence of First-Year Latin upon Ability to Read English,” School and Society 17 (1923): 165–168; and C. R. Broyler, E. L. Thorndike, and E. Woodward, “A Second Study of Mental Discipline in High School Studies,” Journal of Educational Psychology 18, no. 6 (1924): 377–404. 6. S. Papert, “Teaching Children to Be Mathematicians versus Teaching about Mathematics,” International Journal of Mathematical Education in Science and Technology 3, no. 3 (1972): 249–262; and S. Papert, Mindstorms (New York: Basic Books, 1980); see also D. H. Clements and D. F. Gullo, “Effects of Computer Programming on Young Children’s Cognition,” Journal of Educational Psychology 76, no. 6 (1984): 1051–1058; and M. C. Linn, “The Cognitive Consequences of Programming Instruction in Classrooms,” Educational Researcher 14, no. 5 (1985): 14–29. 7. Y.-K. C. Liao and G. W. Bright, “Effects of Computer Programming on Cognitive Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Educational Computing Research 7, no. 3 (1991): 251–268. 8. R. Scherer, F. Siddiq, and B. S. Viveros, “The Cognitive Benefits of Learning Computer Programming: A Meta-Analysis of Transfer Effects,” Journal of Educational Psychology 111, no. 5 (2019): 764–792. 9. J. Pietschnig, M. Voracek, and A. K. Formann, “Mozart Effect-Schmozart Effect: A Meta-Analysis,” Intelligence 38, no. 3 (2010): 314–323. 10. G. Sala and F. Gobet, “When the Music’s Over: Does Music Skill Transfer to Children’s and Young Adolescents’ Cognitive and Academic Skills? A Meta-Analysis,” Educational Research Review 20 (2017): 55–67. 11. G. Sala and F. Gobet, “Do the Benefits of Chess Instruction Transfer to Academic and Cognitive Skills? A Meta-Analysis,” Educational Research Review 18 (2016): 46–57. 12. For example, A. Kozulin et al., “Cognitive Modifiability of Children with Developmental Disabilities: A Multicentre Study Using Feuerstein’s Instrumental Enrichment-Basic Program,” Research in Developmental Disabilities 31, no. 2 (2010): 551–559; D. Kuhn and A. Crowell, “Dialogic Argumentation as a Vehicle for Developing Young Adolescents’ Thinking,” Psychological Science 22, no. 4 (2011): 545–552; and A. Reznitskaya et al., “Examining Transfer Effects from Dialogic Discussions to New Tasks and Contexts,” Contemporary Educational Psychology 37, no. 4 (2012): 288–306. 13. R. Ritchart and D. N. Perkins, “Learning to Think: The Challenges of Teaching Thinking,” in The Cambridge Handbook of Thinking and Reasoning , ed. K. J. Holyoak and R. G. Morrison (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2005), 775–802. 14. R. H. Ennis, “Critical Thinking and the Curriculum,” in Thinking Skills Instruction: Concepts and Techniques , ed. M. Heiman and J. Slomianko (West Haven, CT: NEA Professional Library, 1987), 40–48. 15. C. Jepson, D. H. Krantz, and R. E. Nisbett, “Inductive Reasoning: Competence or Skill?,” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6, no. 3 (1983): 494–501. 16. M. Gick and K. Holyoak, “Analogical Problem Solving,” Cognitive Psychology 12, no. 3 (1980): 306–355; and M. Gick and K. Holyoak, “Schema Induction and Analogical Transfer,” Cognitive Psychology 15, no. 1 (1983): 1–38. 17. For example, Z. Chen and L. Mo, “Schema Induction in Problem Solving: A Multidimensional Analysis,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition 30, no. 3 (2004): 583–600. 18. K. J. Kurtz, O. Boukrina, and D. Gentner, “Comparison Promotes Learning and Transfer of Relational Categories,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition 39, no. 4 (2013): 1303–1310. 19. J. Loewenstein, L. Thompson, and D. Gentner, “Analogical Encoding Facilitates Knowledge Transfer in Negotiation,” Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 6, no. 4 (1999): 586–597. 20. R. Catrambone, “Aiding Subgoal Learning: Effects on Transfer,” Journal of Educational Psychology 87, no. 1 (1995): 5–17; R. Catrambone, “The Subgoal Learning Model: Creating Better Examples to Improve Transfer to Novel Problems,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 127, no. 4 (1998): 355–376; R. Catrambone and K. Holyoak, “Learning Subgoals and Methods for Solving Probability Problems,” Memory & Cognition 18, no. 6 (1990): 593–603; and L. E. Margulieux and R. Catrambone, “Improving Problem Solving with Subgoal Labels in Expository Text and Worked Examples,” Learning and Instruction 42 (2016): 58–71. 21. J. S. North et al., “Mechanisms Underlying Skills Anticipation and Recognition in a Dynamic and Temporally Constrained Domain,” Memory 19, no. 2 (2011): 155–168. 22. K. Koedinger, A. Corbett, and C. Perfetti, “The Knowledge-Learning-Instruction Framework: Bridging the Science-Practice Chasm to Enhance Robust Student Learning,” Cognitive Science 36, no. 5 (2012): 757–798; and N. A. Taatgen, “The Nature and Transfer of Cognitive Skills,” Psychological Review 120, no. 3 (2013): 439–471. 23. R. Rikers, H. Schmidt, and H. Boshuizen, “On the Constraints of Encapsulated Knowledge: Clinical Case Representations by Medical Experts and Subexperts,” Cognition and Instruction 20, no. 1 (2002): 27–45. 24. R. T. Kellogg, “Professional Writing Expertise,” in The Cambridge Handbook of Expertise and Expert Performances , ed. A. Ericsson et al. (Cambridge, UK: Cambridge UP, 2018). 25. E. Schwitzgebel and F. Cushman, “Philosophers’ Biased Judgments Persist Despite Training, Expertise, and Reflection,” Cognition 141 (2015): 127–137. 26. M. Carlsson et al., “The Effect of Schooling on Cognitive Skills,” Review of Economics and Statistics 97, no. 3 (2015): 533–547; S. Ritchie and E. Tucker-Drob, “How Much Does Education Improve Intelligence? A Meta-Analysis,” Psychological Science 29, no. 8 (2018): 1358–1369; and T. Strenze, “Intelligence and Socioeconomic Success: A Meta-Analytic Review of Longitudinal Research,” Intelligence 35, no. 5 (2007): 401–426. 27. S. Ritchie, T. C. Bates, and I. J. Deary, “Is Education Associated with Improvements in General Cognitive Ability, or in Specific Skills?,” Developmental Psychology 51, no. 5 (2015): 573–582. 28. Abrami et al., “Instructional Interventions”; D. F. Halpern, “Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer across Domains: Disposition, Skills, Structure Training, and Metacognitive Monitoring,” American Psychologist 53, no. 4 (1998): 449–455; A. Heijltjes, T. Van Gog, and F. Paas, “Improving Students’ Critical Thinking: Empirical Support for Explicit Instructions Combined with Practice,” Applied Cognitive Psychology 28, no. 4 (2014): 518–530. 29. D. T. Willingham, When Can You Trust the Experts? How to Tell Good Science from Bad in Education (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2012). 30. A. Pawl et al., “What Do Seniors Remember from Freshman Physics?,” Physical Review Special Topics—Physics Education Research 8, no. 2 (2012): 020118. 31. H. P. Bahrick, “Semantic Memory Content in Permastore: Fifty Years of Memory for Spanish Learned in School,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 113, no. 1 (1984): 1–29; and H. P. Bahrick and L. K. Hall, “Lifetime Maintenance of High School Mathematics Content,” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 120, no. 1 (1991): 20–33. 32. D. Ausubel, Educational Psychology: A Cognitive View (New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, 1968). 33. J. Piaget, The Origins of Intelligence in Children (New York: International Universities Press, 1952). 34. D. T. Willingham, “What Is Developmentally Appropriate Practice?,” American Educator 32, no. 2 (2008): 34–39. 35. P. D. Parker et al., “A Multination Study of Socioeconomic Inequality in Expectations for Progression to Higher Education: The Role of Between-School Tracking and Ability Stratification,” American Educational Research Journal 53, no. 1 (2016): 6–32. 36. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Education at a Glance: 2018: OECD Indicators (Paris: OECD Publishing, 2018). 37. M. D. Smith, “Cognitive Validity: Can Multi-Choice Items Tap Historical Thinking Processes?,” American Educational Research Journal 54 (2017): 1256–1287.

[Illustrations by James Yang]

Can We Teach Critical Thinking In Schools?

Can we teach critical thinking in schools? Of course we can. A better question: Are schools designed to teach children to think?

What It Means To Teach Critical Thinking In Schools

by Terry Heick

Preface: This is a transcription of an interview I had recently where I spoke about critical thinking–which is why it reads like someone talking rather than someone writing. I say ‘transcription’ in ‘irony quotes’ because I went back and revised it for clarity and, in places, emphasis.

Also, note that whether or not we can teach someone to think critically and whether or not we can teach it in ‘school’ are two very different questions; at some point, I’ll talk about the former to supplement the brief reflection on the latter below.

Every now and then, I hear someone wonder (out loud or in writing) about whether or not we can teach critical thinking in schools.

I think that’s an odd thing to wonder about–or at least a curious way to frame that as a topic.

But almost immediately I’m reminded of education’s continued infatuation with being both ‘research-based’ and with measuring things.

Of course, measuring of some kind is necessary. There are very few professional fields where metrics don’t exist and there isn’t some kind of evaluation and accountability. Depending on your perspective, there is always some kind of standard to be measured against. There is some sort of clear and objective expectation.

And when that is not being met, it leaves that lets anyone in control know that changes need to be made adjustments need to be made, whether you’re talking about a company’s revenue, whether you’re talking about the success of a design, or an automotive technology or anything like that we need data we need to understand.

But critical thinking resists this sort of resist the sort of mechanisms that that the classrooms are accustomed to. And the classrooms depend on which is, for example, lesson unit design.

Basic assessment patterns. Data reporting, learning feedback, grading systems, the number of students in the classroom.

The length (number of minutes per day, number of days per year, etc.) of each class.

Even the nature of the academic standards themselves.

All of these things necessitate that critical thinking swim upstream.

Of course, each of these could be angled or adjusted to accommodate critical thinking, but the nature of critical thinking makes even this effort difficult. Critical thinking inherently reaches beyond all of those things. It is inherently disruptive. It requires an approach to pedagogy that can be can be unsettling and problematic. And compared to ‘normal learning,’ it can certainly feel like ‘not learning.’

Critical thinking is precise but not always entirely clear. It’s slow and opaque. It’s stopping and starting and retreating and pushing forward again. It’s inquiry and it’s trying to understand and it’s humility. It’s re-wording thoughts and refining theories and it’s improving questions and it’s returning to old questions and looking at our underlying assumptions and seeing which are true and which are not and who gets to decide these truths.

Critical thinking reaches beyond a classroom very quickly.

Critical thinking requires us to be acutely aware of the limits of our normal modes of thinking and suspicious of everything we believe because it knows that without intentional effort and adjustment for all the things we either know badly or don’t know at all, we are at risk of being wrong. And the scale of being wrong is becoming unfathomably large.

It’s true that uncertainty and patience in thinking and delay in judgment and discursiveness and recursion don’t pair well with education as it is. Refining–or even being aware of–one’s own reality-testing mechanisms is not required to ‘do well in school’ but can be devastating if not ‘done well’ while we live.

Critical thinking might be better thought of as a mindset than a skill, as I’ve written about before. (See Critical Thinking Is First A Mindset .)

It’s a willingness and an insistence.

It’s looking at the whole thing and then its parts and then back to the whole thing again, seeing context. And these are things that aren’t very natural and a standards-based, highly academic classroom.

So, whether or not we can measure or teach critical thinking in ‘school,’ I think is an odd thing to consider. It’s like wondering if we can teach art or if we can we teach people how to belong or believe or move. These are very human things absolutely essential to the human experience. Rational, clear, critical thinking has to be somewhere near the core of a life well-lived.

Whether you can teach it or promote it or support it or enhance it or supplement or extend it (as a skill) may not be the best way to frame our thinking. If schools–as they are–don’t promote critical thinking and the transfer of useful knowledge to improve the well-being of children and the communities they live in and depend on, then that school is designed to serve itself, not children.

If we ‘can’t teach’ critical thinking, then that might be where we start a collective inquiry into ‘what’ we are and what we’re hoping to accomplish. That reality might illuminate some of the architectural flaws in our systems of teaching and learning. Can we ‘teach’ creativity? Empathy? Mindset? Is ‘teach’ the right word or is it simply the case that these are talents that can be revealed (if they exist) but not created (if they don’t)? Surely, we can all agree that these concepts can be taught if literary symbolism or philosophy or design can be taught (and it’s clear that they can).

Put another way, if the way we do things can’t facilitate the growth of careful, rational, critical thinking in people who will need to bring this kind of thinking to bear on our biggest challenges and opportunities as a human species, I would say that’s a problem not with the evasiveness, but with the underlying assumptions and designs of formal, western education.

If we want to even begin to explore re-shaping the future of learning, we might make sure that correcting our deficit in critical thinking was central to that kind of effort. Propaganda, misinformation, extremism,

Can we teach critical thinking in schools? Of course we can.

Do we make gestures toward that kind of effort now? It seems clear that we do.

Are schools designed to teach children to think? Is this what school is meant to ‘do’?

The answer here also seems clear.

Founder & Director of TeachThought

How to Teach Critical Thinking

How to teach, critical thinking.

Teaching critical thinking is imperative. Every minute of life in the modern world, we are confronted with information and misinformation, advertising and distractions, complexity and ambiguity. Making sense of it all — distilling it, separating the important from the trivial — requires skill, patience, and practice. It requires, in brief, critical thinking. Yet we largely do not teach our children how to do it. Reboot’s guide for teachers contains resources for teaching critical thinking to students of all ages, in any subject, including math, science, literature, civics, writing, and philosophy. The guide — written with teachers, for teachers — is an invaluable resource for teaching the skills needed to be engaged and informed global citizens.

1. Teaching Critical Thinking: How to Inspire Better Reasoning

2. critical reading: developing critical thinking through literature.

Literature is a great way to get students thinking critically. By considering open-ended questions, interrogating multiple perspectives, and connecting texts to the world at large, students develop essential interpretive skills.

3. Critical Thinking in Science: How to Foster Scientific Reasoning Skills

Scientific reasoning and scientific method are cornerstones of critical thinking. This article offers tips for integrating critical thinking into both small-group activities for younger students and labs for older students.

4. Teaching Argumentative Writing: Critical Thinking and the Importance of Revision

Writing and thinking are intimately connected processes. Teaching argumentative writing, especially through structured feedback and revision, helps students develop important analytical skills.

5. Teaching Mathematical Reasoning: Critical Thinking Through Problem-Solving and Modeling​

Traditional mathematical education can gets bogged down in rote application of formulas and tools. Our article on mathematical reasoning leverages open-ended problem-solving and modeling activities to get students thinking more deeply about math — and the world around them.

6. Teaching Media Literacy: How to Help Students Navigate the News

Media literacy is an absolute must for today’s young people. As they navigate the rise of fake news and misinformation, disruptive changes to media, and endless tech-based distractions, students need tools to think critically about information and media.

7. Teaching Civics: How to Cover Society and Politics in Contentious Times

8. philosophy and critical thinking: the value of asking the deep questions.

Although not typically taught in K-12, philosophy can develop critical thinking skills. It helps students to reflect deeply and abstractly on their own values and knowledge, and to build connections between subjects.

Lindsey Jansen on Reboot's Teachers' Guide

Watch Illinois Teacher of the Year Lindsey Jensen describe the value of Reboot’s Teachers’ Guide to Critical Thinking. 

How to Teach Critical Thinking: A Roundtable Discussion

Reboot teacher network.

These outstanding teachers offered feedback and shared their ideas as we developed the content for this guide. All are former teachers of the year for their state or county. We are very grateful for their insights

• Susan Barry, 11-12th grade English/Language Arts, New Jersey
• Katherine Bassett,  CEO, Tall Poppy, LLC
• David Bosso, 9th-12th grade Social Studies, Connecticut
• Allan D. Bruner, 8th-12th grade Statistics, Biology, Chemistry, and Earth Sciences, Oregon
• Whitney Crews, 4th-6th grade Gifted and Talented, Science, and Social Studies, Texas
• Michael Dunlea, 3rd grade, New Jersey
• Mohsen Ghaffari, 5th grade, Utah
• Marguerite Izzo, 5th grade English/Language Arts and Social Studies, New York
• Lindsey Jensen, 12th grade English/Language Arts, Illinois
• Rebecca Mieliwocki, 7th grade English/Language Arts, California
• Amanda Miliner, 4th grade and Assistant Principal, Georgia
• Susanne Mitko, 7th-8th grade History and Social Studies, Missouri
• Michelle Pearson, 7th-8th grade History, Social Studies, and Humanities, Colorado
• Mary Eldredge Sandbo, 10th-12th grade Biology, North Dakota

We are also very grateful to two external expert reviewers who generously offered their feedback on the guide: Dr. Benjamin Motz , Research Scientist in the Department of Psychological and Brain Science at Indiana University, and Dr. Andrew Shtulman , Professor of Cognitive Science and Psychology at Occidental College.

Neither the reviewers nor the members of the Reboot Teacher Network are responsible for the content of the guide.

To download the PDF of the Teachers’ Guide

(please click here)

Privacy Overview

Developing critical thinking skills in the classroom

April 29, 2021

Critical thinking skills in the classroom: A teacher's guide to developing higher-order thinking and student reasoning.

Main, P (2021, April 29). Developing critical thinking skills in the classroom. Retrieved from https://www.structural-learning.com/post/what-is-critical-thinking

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is important in every aspect of our lives. It helps us make decisions, solve problems , and learn new information. But how do we develop these skills in school?

In order to become a well-rounded person who has developed critical thinking skills, students must first understand the importance of developing these skills. This means teaching students how to analyze data, evaluate arguments, and draw conclusions from evidence.

This article will help teachers teach critical thinking skills in the class room. We'll look at how to teach critical thinking skills using examples from history, science, math, literature, and art.

Critical thinking has been defined and re-defined by many teachers over the years and it's one of those essential abilities we want our students to develop. However, looking at the breakdown of the term as the two words that comprise it provides a simple, yet accurate definition.

The Critical Thinking process involves the use of the mind to incorporate prior experience and basic knowledge about a subject matter in order to reach conclusions. Critical thinking has a few definitions. In this article we are focused on what critical thinking looks like in the classroom.

We are interested in how we can make more logical and accurate thinking a classroom habit that every school can adopt. To examine the topic of critical thinking we have to look beyond the purely philosophical perspective and explore the latest cognitive science . For example, we now know the importance that knowledge plays in developing critical thinking, you can't have one without the other. Expert thinking is a domain specific skill and the subject disciplines act as a catalyst for enhancing this life long skill. We also know the importance of retrieval practice in developing higher order thinking.

Low stakes quizzing is not just rote learning, it plays an important part in freeing up our working memory to do more of the creative work. If we no longer have to strain to remember the facts and figures, our mental capacities can be put to work in more creative ways . Within the article we will also put forward some ideas about how to promote critical and creative thinking across your school.

Logical reasoning is one of the three main components of critical thinking. This component requires students to think critically about a problem and then apply logic to solve it. Students must understand the difference between logical and illogical arguments and recognize when someone is using logical fallacies.

Why critical thinking is important

Critical thinking is a process that is often viewed as a more intense version of just plain old thinking. In education, critical thinking is a disciplined process that has stuck around for a while now – but how is this coveted skill really different from just plain old thinking? Frankly, sometimes, it's not. The two terms can be used interchangeably, and often are.

Consider a teacher who is urging a student “think harder” or “think differently”. What the teacher is actually saying is: “think critically in order to reach a more complex solution”. We are not always conscious of the multitude of cognitive actions at our disposal, the Universal Thinking Framework addresses this issue by providing child-friendly explanations of the various ways in which we can think.

These can be chained together to create a logical inquiry that any student can follow. The idea being that over time, children begin to develop critical thinking dispositions that cause reflective thinking and advance the mental process. Increasing our repertoire of cognitive actions improves a students decision making process as they are simply more aware of the directions their learning could move in.

We have divided the various types of thinking using these key questions:

• How do I get started?
• How should I organise my ideas?
• How do I know this?
• How can I communicate my understanding?
• What can I do with my new knowledge and understanding?

All of the sections provide teachers with a systematic approach to encourage reflective thinking . The questions that are posed to the learner are designed to break down a complex process into basic skills. These thinking skills, over time can be mastered and understood. Having the different types of thinking available to both educators and students means that logical thinking can be achieved more readily and can eventually become an attitude of mind. The mental actions are accompanied by critical thinking questions . Teachers can use critical thinking questions to promote rational thinking. 

Reflective thinking is employed when a solution is needed, or in school when there is a connection that needs to be drawn between two or more concepts. Therefore, critical thinking is, in essence, the thought processes that result from disapproval of the solutions and connections that already exist, or a lack thereof.

Mental skills or learning behaviours?

School leaders love to see and hear teachers incorporating the idea of crosscutting concepts into their daily instruction. That is, concepts and skills can be used and developed in more than one subject matter, and therefore more than one class. I don't think I have ever had an administrator who has not asked me how I plan to collaborate with my colleagues in order to make instruction more meaningful and applicable to my students' lives.

Upon further consideration of this popular interview question, there should really only ever be one acceptable response to such a question – “I will make it a priority to routinely engage my students in the practice of critical thinking so that they can grow that skill and use it in other classes as well as outside of the school” … or something along those lines.

It remains true that practice leads to confidence and increased ability. Therefore, as students learn what the process of thinking critically feels like for them, they will be able to replicate that feeling by replicating their actions in other classes. When critical thinking is used as a part of the daily routine, it becomes less scary to use that skill when faced with a problem, regardless of the subject matter .

Critical thinking is, therefore, a crosscutting concept to be planned for and incorporated into a teacher's daily lesson plans as well as the scope and sequence of a course. If you want a practical way of integrating critical thinking into your lessons, our mental modelling approach using the building block method might be a good place to start. The playful approach encourages children to organise their ideas and in doing so, engage in critical reasoning.

Principles of critical thinking

Despite its value in all subjects , one uncertainty that educators run into is the idea of what Daniel T. Willingham (2019) calls transfer. That is, whether or not the ability to think critically in one subject or in relation to one problem will automatically lead to similar abilities in other subjects or problems. As Willingham (2019) explains, the research on this idea is not necessarily all in agreement. Consequently, educators are faced with a task that seems to be in flux and altogether unanswered. While frustrating, this is not necessarily a new ask for educators.

Some scholars claim that the ability to think critically in one subject will naturally transfer to all other subjects , which is why it is so inherently valuable as a skill. Others argue that this is not the case, and that is why it is crucial to intentionally teach students how to think critically in all situations and across all subjects. With this quality still largely disagreed upon, it is difficult to know how best to proceed when attempting to teach and develop critical thinking skills.

Do students ever possess a true foundation of critical thinking skills and abilities, or do they regress back to a point of utter confusion with the introduction to each new problem? How can educators make these skills stick for their students ? What do students need to understand in order to be able approach problems from a critical thinking perspective regardless of the discipline or subject matter? How can we train students to recycle prior experience and previous solutions when faced with new problems?

Assessing students analytical thinking

Critical thinking is a high-level goal that educators everywhere strive toward for their students. Many “teacher moves” exist solely to work toward this purpose. However, repeatedly asking higher-order thinking questions in class and on tests, is merely the method that best demonstrates that the skill of thinking critically has already been developed. That is to say that just asking these types of questions as often as possible is not a sufficient method for the true development of this skill.

When we ask higher-order thinking questions in class or on assessments , we are ultimately trying to analyze whether or not students have that ability; or to what level they have mastered that ability. However, it stands to reason that the only way to develop this skill cannot be to simply ask more of these types of questions more often, since this is just the method of measurement. So, the question now becomes - what are the steps that lead up to a student being able to successfully encounter and respond to these higher-order thinking questions that show their ability to think critically? The answer is actually quite simple– continue to teach and prioritize critical thinking skills in every possible situation, regardless of how many times it has been reviewed.

What about critical thinking dispositions ? It has been argued that this ability is not a distinct cognitive skill but a set of critical thinking dispositions or habits of mind. Ron Ritchart talks through the argument here.

If your school is interested in implementing more critical thinking in your classrooms, you might want to start by sharing some key ideas with your staff. Our professional development approach gives staff access to the principles that underpinned critical thinking. We can help educators measure the impact of the interventions in the classroom.

How can we develop reasoning skills?

Notice that in the answer above, the onus is placed on the educator rather than the student. There is not necessarily a numbered universal list of steps to take when given a critical thinking problem that we can give to students as a road map and post as an anchor chart in the classroom. Quite the opposite, educators are charged with the vague task of teaching students how to access prior knowledge and experience and apply it in a way that will benefit them.

Ultimately, if students can manipulate their understanding and experience into a process and application that works for the task or question at hand, they are able to think critically . However, the ability to think critically in one situation does not predict with any real degree of certainty the same ability in a novel situation, especially one that seems more challenging to a student.

One characteristic that tends to make students believe that one situation is more difficult than another is subject matter. Students are not able to generalize solutions that they have already thought through because the subject matter is so different. Willingham (2019) refers to this as the surface structure of a problem and gives the example of an inability to derive the solution for a medical problem even though it is essentially the same as the solution to military/tactical problem that the group had just worked through.

However, since the surface structure of these problems seems so different, participants were not able to transfer the reasoning behind the solution to the tactical problem to the medical problem.Teachers see this difficulty with students all the time across subjects, which means that the real task for teachers to tackle is teaching students how to recognize the deep structure of a problem.

According to Willingham (2019), strong critical thinkers claim that they are able to recognize the deep structure of problems presented to them in their field of expertise, but not necessarily in other fields. This is both comforting and disconcerting for teachers. It is comforting because it shows that it is normal for it to be a challenge for students to be able to transfer critical thinking skills from one problem to another. However, it is disconcerting because it seems nearly impossible for teachers to be able to overcome this barrier if experts still encounter this barrier regularly.

All things considered, the seemingly realistic approach to the task of developing critical thinking skills in students through consistent practice seems to have a few clearly actionable approaches that are also memorable due to the alliteration they produce: collaboration , comparison and content knowledge. This form of knowledge is certainly important in everyday life. 

Collaborative problem solving skills

Collaboration is the act of working with another person or other people in order to achieve a common goal or solve a common problem. In as many ways as possible, teachers should incorporate collaboration into their lessons. Initially, it may seem as though this practice takes away from the development of independent critical thinking since weaker thinkers can lean on stronger thinkers or just more dominant personalities. However, since subject-matter experts are easily able to identify the deep structure of problems within their area of expertise, it stands to reason that pairing experts together who excel in different areas and presenting them with a complex problem will yield the best results.

Of course, in any given group of students, there may not be identifiable “experts”, however, the idea is that the different perspectives and experiences that students bring with them will intuitively lead them to a problem from different angles . This type of natural exposure to different approaches serves to model for students how it is possible to think differently about a similar problem. With continued modelling and wider exposure, students will gradually learn to intentionally incorporate different ways of thinking and to continue to seek out differing perspectives when searching for a solution to a problem.

Logical thinking and careful thinking are often cited as being ways of thinking critically. The Cornell Critical Thinking Test and Watson Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal both claim to be able to measure critical reasoning and critical thinking ability. 

Comparisons and critical thinking

While telling students what the deep structure of a problem is might seem fairly simple, the fact is that telling does not equate to teaching, nor does it always result in learning, especially when a skill is involved . Therefore, one way to begin to lead students to be able to identify and extract the deep structure of a problem is to have them compare.

When asked to compare two (or more) problems with contrasting surface structures, students are forced to look harder for the similarities. While this may be met with resistance and frustration at first, when coupled with the practice of modelling these types of comparisons, students will begin to understand that there are similarities to be found after all, and how those comparisons can help lead to a practical and applicable solution.

Academic Arguments

Identification, construction , and evaluation of arguments are crucial parts of critical thinking.

People often use the term "argument" to refer to a quarrel between people in everyday life. To a logician or critical thinker, an argument is not a statement, it is a collection of statements , with one being the conclusion and the rest being premise or assumption.

The way students attain in subjects is by reading the views of the academic writing of others. The way students achieve in a formal exam setting is by writing the academic argument of their own. So without academic argument writing we cannot learn, or teach, or persuade. One way of promoting argumentation is by teaching students to create argument maps . This practical approach of developing an analysis of arguments means that students can visualise the main points in an easy-to-understand format. 

Domain Knowledge and critical thinking

Sometimes, educators tend to avoid questions and practice activities that can be labelled as “ basic recall ” because they are said to be low in rigour. However, when attempting to develop critical thinking skills , it should be noted that domain knowledge expertise is achieved through extensive knowledge of the foundational aspects and facts of a topic. Willingham (2019) explains that effective critical thinking about a problem often comes from a place of confidence in the subject matter, which is born from extensive knowledge about it.

Being able to see alternative viewpoints, argument with evidence (and spot bad arguments) and avoid faulty reasoning can become habits of mind that are nurtured throughout a students career. Additionally, sometimes a complex solution is merely the sum of many smaller and more routine solutions. There is value in teaching and focusing on content in school , as it breeds experts. When paired with the challenge of critical thinking in order to solve real-world problems, new interest can also be bred for a subject that students may previously have seen little use for.

Five tips for improving critical thinking in your classroom

Critical thinking abilities are essential skills for students to develop. Here are five tips for improving critical thinking skills in your classroom :

1. Teach Students How to Think Critically

Teaching students how to think critically involves helping them understand the difference between facts and opinions. Facts are true statements that can be proven using evidence. Opinions are beliefs based on personal experiences, feelings, values, and preferences.

Students often confuse facts with opinions. For example, “I am going to the store to buy milk.” This statement contains no opinion. It is simply stating a fact. On the other hand, “Milk tastes good.” This statement expresses an opinion.

When teaching students how to think critically, focus on helping them distinguish between facts and opinions. Helping students learn how to think critically will improve their ability to analyze information and solve problems.

2. Encourage Critical Thinking

Encouraging students to think critically means encouraging them to question everything. If you ask students questions such as “Why did you write that?,” “What makes you say that?,” or “How would you prove that?,” you encourage them to think critically.

Asking questions helps students become better thinkers . Questions allow students to explore issues and come up with answers themselves. Asking questions encourages students to think deeply and analytically.

3. Use Real World Examples

Real world examples are helpful for teaching students how to think. Using real world examples allows students to apply concepts to situations outside of school.

For example, if you teach students how to identify logical fallacies, you can show them how to recognize these errors in arguments. Showing students how to identify logical fallacy gives them practice identifying common mistakes made by others.

4. Provide Feedback

Providing feedback is another effective method for teaching students how to improve their critical thinking skills. Giving students positive and constructive criticism improves their performance.

Giving students negative feedback does not improve their performance . Negative feedback may discourage students from trying again. Positive feedback motivates students to continue working toward success.

#5. Model Good Critical Thinking Skills

Modelling good critical thinking skills is one of the most effective methods for teaching students how to become better thinkers. Teaching students how to think critically requires modeling good critical thinking skills.

Good critical thinking skills include asking open-ended questions, analyzing data, evaluating sources, and recognizing logical fallacies.

By showing students how to think critically and model good critical thinking skills, you can help them develop into successful learners.

In a world where artificial intelligence is on the rise and continuously developing, a humanized value such as critical thinking is increasingly important. Reliance on technology makes life simpler in many ways, but simultaneously makes the possession of certain skills and abilities more attractive to potential employers and more beneficial for individuals who possess them.

Critical thinking allows for creativity when problem-solving and promotes independence and confidence. Should technology ever fail, those who are able to think critically in a variety of situations will be the ones who are valued the most.

Willingham, D. T. (2019). How to Teach Critical Thinking. Education: FutureFrontiers.

http://www.danielwillingham.com/uploads/5/0/0/7/5007325/willingham_2019_nsw_critical_thinking2.pdf

Enhance Learner Outcomes Across Your School

Download an Overview of our Support and Resources

We'll send it over now.

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

What type of school are you?

We'll get you the right resource

Is your school involved in any staff development projects?

Are your colleagues running any research projects or courses?

Do you have any immediate school priorities?

Please check the ones that apply.

Download your resource

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

TeachTales 4+

Where stories spark magic, gt school, inc..

• Offers In-App Purchases

Screenshots

Description.

In TeachTales, kids become the authors of their own learning adventure. With every story they read or create, they'll improve their reading comprehension and critical thinking skills. Kids will love: • Creating their own personalized stories based on their interests and choices • Watching their reading skills grow with every story they complete • Exploring a vast library of AI-generated content tailored to their reading level • Challenging themselves with engaging comprehension questions and quizzes Parents will love: • An engaging platform that makes reading fun and interactive • Personalized content that adapts to each child's reading level and interests • Comprehensive tracking of reading progress and comprehension skills (coming soon!) • A safe, ad-free environment designed by educators and AI experts The app's innovative AI technology generates unlimited, age-appropriate content, ensuring there's always a new tale to explore. From choosing their own adventure to answering thought-provoking questions, the educational journey in TeachTales is as unique as each young reader. The app's adaptive learning system ensures that each child progresses at their own pace, constantly challenging them within their "productive struggle" zone. Behind the scenes, our sophisticated AI algorithms craft stories and questions that align with educational standards while keeping the content fresh and exciting. Parents can easily track their child's reading progress and celebrate their growing skills. Built for young readers, TeachTales is the perfect blend of education and entertainment. Start your child's reading adventure today and watch their love for stories grow!

Version 1.1

Small tweaks and bug fixes.

App Privacy

The developer, GT School, Inc. , indicated that the app’s privacy practices may include handling of data as described below. For more information, see the developer’s privacy policy .

Data Linked to You

The following data may be collected and linked to your identity:

• Contact Info
• User Content
• Identifiers
• Diagnostics

Privacy practices may vary, for example, based on the features you use or your age. Learn More

Information

• Yearly Subscription $89.99
• Monthly Subscription $9.99
• Developer Website
• App Support
• Privacy Policy

More By This Developer

Reading Critters

Magic Academy - Play to Learn