about the world
Seven dimensions evaluated for the 3 different components of each C.
Aspects of the overall educational program teaching, emphasizing, and promoting the 4Cs | |
Availability and access to different means, materials, space, and expertise, digital technologies, mnemonic and heuristic methods, etc. to assist in the proper use and exercise of the 4Cs | |
Actual student and program use of available resources promoting the 4Cs | |
Critical reflection and metacognition on the process being engaged in around the 4Cs | |
The formal and informal training, skills, and abilities of teachers/trainers and staff and their program of development as promoters of the 4Cs | |
Use and integration of the full range of resources external to the institution available to enhance the 4Cs | |
Availability of resources for students to create and actualize products, programs, events, etc. that require the exercise, promotion, or manifestation of the 4Cs |
* Educational-level dependent and potentially less available for younger students or in some contexts.
The grid itself can be used in several important and different ways by different educational stakeholders: (1) by the institution itself in its self-evaluation and possible preparation for a certification or labelization process, (2) as an explicit list of criteria for external evaluation of the institution and its 4Cs-related programs, and (3) as a potential long-term development targeting tool for the institution or the institution in dialogue with the labelization process.
Dropping the component of “creative person” that is not relevant at the institutional level, this evaluation grid is based on Rhodes’ ( 1961 ) classic “4P” model of creativity, which remains the most concise model today ( Lubart and Thornhill-Miller 2019 ). The three “P” components retained are: creative process , creative environment , and creative product . Creative process refers to the acquisition of a set of tools and techniques that students can use to enhance the creativity of their thinking and work. Creative environment (also called “Press” in earlier literature) is about how the physical and social surroundings of students can help them be more creative. Finally, creative product refers to the evaluation of actual “productions” (e.g., a piece of art, text, speech, etc.) generated through the creative process.
Our evaluation grid divides critical thinking into three main components: critical thinking about the world , critical thinking about oneself (self-reflection), as well as critical action and decision making . The first component refers to having an evidence-based view of the exterior world, notably by identifying and evaluating sources of information and using them to question current understandings and solve problems. Self-reflection refers to thinking critically about one’s own life situation, values, and actions; it presupposes the autonomy of thought and a certain distance as well as the most objective observation possible with regard to one’s own knowledge (“meta-cognition”). The third and final component, critical action and decision making, is about using critical thinking skills more practically in order to make appropriate life decisions as well as to be open to different points of view. This component also addresses soft skills and attitudes such as trusting information.
Our evaluation framework for critical thinking was in part inspired by Barnett’s “curriculum for critical being” (2015), whose model distinguishes two axes: one defined by the qualitative differences in the level of criticality attained and the second comprised of three different domains of application: formal knowledge, the self, and the world. The first two components of our framework (and the seven dimensions on which they are rated) reflect and encompass these three domains. Similar to Barrett’s proposal, our third rubric moves beyond the “skills-plus-dispositions” model of competency implicit in much theorizing about critical thinking and adds the importance of “action”—not just the ability to think critically and the disposition to do so, but the central importance of training and practicing “critical doing” ( Barnett 2015 ). Critical thinking should also be exercised collectively by involving students in collective thinking, facilitating the exchange of ideas and civic engagement ( Huber and Kuncel 2016 ).
The first component of collaboration skills in the IICD grid is engagement and participation , referring to the active engagement in group work. Perspective taking and openness concerns the flexibility to work with and accommodate other group members and their points of view. The final dimension— social regulation —is about being able to reach for a common goal, notably through compromise and negotiation, as well as being aware of the different types of roles that group members can hold ( Hesse et al. 2015 ; Rusdin and Ali 2019 ; Care et al. 2016 ). (These last two components include elements of leadership, character, and emotional intelligence as sometimes described in other soft-skill and competency-related systems.) Participation, social regulation, and perspective taking have been identified as central social skills in collaborative problem solving ( Hesse et al. 2015 ). Regarding social regulation in this context, recognizing and profiting from group diversity is key ( Graesser et al. 2018 ). When describing an assessment in an educational setting of collaborative problem solving (with a task in which two or more students have to collaborate in order to solve it, each using a different set of resources), two main underpinning skills were described for the assessment: the social skill of audience awareness (“how to adapt one’s own behavior to suit the needs of the task and the partner’s requirements”, Care et al. 2016, p. 258 ) and the cognitive skill of planning and executing (developing a plan to reach for a goal) ( Care et al. 2016 ). The former is included in the perspective taking and openness rubric and the latter in the social regulation component in the IICD grid. Evans ( 2020 ) identified four main collaboration skills consistently mentioned in the scientific literature that are assessed in the IICD grid: the ability to plan and make group decisions (example item from the IICD grid: teachers provide assistance to students to overcome differences and reach a common goal during group work); the ability to communicate about thinking with the group (assessed notably in the meta-reflection strand of the IICD grid); the ability to contribute resources, ideas, and efforts and support group members (included notably in the engagement and participation as well as the social regulation components); and finally, the ability to monitor, reflect, and adapt individual and group processes to benefit the group (example item from the IICD grid: students use perspective-taking tools and techniques in group activities).
The evaluation grid for communication is also composed of three dimensions: message formulation, message delivery, and message and communication feedback . Message formulation refers to the ability to design and structure a message to be sent, such as outlining the content of an argument. Message delivery is about effectively transmitting verbal and non-verbal aspects of a message. Finally, message and communication feedback refers to the ability of students and teachers to understand their audience, analyze their social surroundings, and interpret information in context. Other components of communication skills such as theory of mind, empathy, or emotional intelligence are also relevant and included in the process of applying the grid. Thompson ( 2020 ) proposes a four-component operationalized definition of communication for its assessment in students. First, they describe a comprehension strand covering the understanding and selection of adequate information from a range of sources. Message formulation in the IICD grid captures this dimension through its focus on content analysis and generation. Second, the presentation of information and ideas is mentioned in several different modes, adjusted to the intended audience, verbally as well as non-verbally. The message delivery component of the IICD grid focuses on these points. Third, the authors note the importance of communication technology and its advanced use. The IICD grid also covers the importance of technology use in its tools and techniques category, with, for example, an item that reads: students learn to effectively use a variety of formats of communication (social media, make a video, e-mail, letter writing, creating a document). Finally, Thompson ( 2020 ) describes the recognition of cultural and other differences as an important aspect of communication. The IICD grid aims at incorporating these aspects, notably in the meta-reflection category under each of the three dimensions.
5.1. the 4cs in informal educational contexts.
So far, the focus has been on rather formal ways of nurturing the 4Cs. Although institutions and training programs are perhaps the most significant and necessary avenues of education, they are not the sole context in which 4Cs’ learning and improvement can manifest. One other important potential learning context is game play. Games are activities that are present and participated in throughout human society—by those of all ages, genders, and socio-economic statuses ( Bateson and Martin 2013 ; Huizinga 1949 ; Malaby 2007 ). This informal setting can also provide favorable conditions to help improve the 4Cs ( van Rosmalen et al. 2014 ) and should not be under-appreciated. Games provide a unique environment for learning, as they can foster a space to freely explore possibilities and one’s own potential ( de Freitas 2006 ). We argue that games are a significant potential pathway for the improvement of the 4Cs, and as such, they merit the same attention as more formal ways of learning and developing competencies.
Compared to schools and educational institutions, the focus of IICD’s evaluation framework for games (see International Institute for Competency Development 2021 ) is more narrow. Thus, it is fundamentally different from the institutional grid: games, complex and deep as they can sometimes be, cannot directly be compared to the complexity of a school curriculum and all the programs it contains. The evaluation of a game’s effectiveness for training/improving a given C rests on the following principle: if a game presents affordances conducive to exercising a given skill, engaged playing of that game should help improve that skill.
The game’s evaluation grid is scored based on two criteria. For example, as a part of a game’s rating as a tool for the development of creativity, we determine the game must first meet two conditions. First, whether or not the game allows the opportunity for creativity to manifest itself: if creativity cannot occur in the game, it is obviously not eligible to receive ratings for that C. Second, whether or not creativity is needed in order to perform well in the game: if the players can win or achieve success in the game without needing creativity, this also means it cannot receive a rating for that C. If both conditions are met, however, the game will be considered potentially effective to improve creativity through the practice of certain components of creative behavior. This basic principle applies for all four of the Cs.
As outlined in Table 3 , below, the evaluation grid for each of the four Cs is composed of five components relevant to games that are different for each of the Cs. The grid works as follows: for each of the five components of each C, we evaluate the game on a list of sub-components using two yes/no scales: one for whether it is “possible” for that subcomponent to manifest and one for whether that sub-component is “required for success” in the game. This evaluation is done for all sub-components. After this, each general component is rated on the same two indicators. If 60% (i.e., three out of five) or more sub-components are positively rated as required, the general component is considered required. Then, the game is evaluated on its effectiveness for training and improving each of the 4Cs. If 60% or more components are positively rated as required, the game will be labelized as having the potential to be effective for training and improving the corresponding C.
Five different components evaluated for each C by the 4Cs assessment framework for games.
Originality | Divergent Thinking | Convergent Thinking | Mental Flexibility | Creative Dispositions | |
Goal-adequate judgment/ discernment | Objective thinking | Metacognition | Elaborate eeasoning | Uncertainty management | |
Collaboration fluency | Well-argued deliberation and consensus-based decision | Balance of contribution | Organization and coordination | Cognitive syncing, input, and support | |
Social Interactions | Social cognition | Mastery of written and spoken language | Verbal communication | Non-verbal communication |
The evaluation grid for creativity is based on the multivariate model of creative potential (see Section 2.1.1 and Lubart et al. 2013 for more information) and is composed of four cognitive factors and one conative factor: originality , divergent thinking , convergent thinking , mental flexibility , and creative dispositions . Originality refers to the generation of ideas that are novel or unexpected, depending on the context. Divergent thinking corresponds to the generation of multiple ideas or solutions. Convergent thinking refers to the combination of multiple ideas and the selection of the most creative idea. Mental flexibility entails changing perspectives on a given problem and breaking away from initial ideas. Finally, creative dispositions concerns multiple personality-related factors conducive to creativity, such as openness to experience or risk taking.
The evaluation grid for critical thinking echoes Halpern’s ( 1998 ) as well as Marin and Halpern’s ( 2011 ) considerations for teaching this skill, that is, taking into consideration thinking skills, metacognition, and dispositions. The five components of the critical thinking grid are: goal-adequate discernment, objective thinking, metacognition, elaborate reasoning, and uncertainty management. Goal-adequate discernment entails the formulation of inferences and the discernment of contradictions when faced with a problem. Objective thinking corresponds to the suspension of one’s own judgment and the analysis of affirmations and sources in the most objective manner possible. Metacognition, here, is about questioning and reassessing information, as well as the awareness of one’s own cognitive biases. Elaborate reasoning entails reasoning in a way that is cautious, thorough, and serious. Finally, uncertainty management refers to the dispositional propensity to tolerate ambiguity and accept doubt.
The evaluation grid for collaboration is based on the quality of collaboration (QC) method ( Burkhardt et al. 2009 ; see Section 2.4.2 for more details) and is composed of the following five components: collaboration fluidity, well-argued deliberation and consensus-based decision, balance of contribution, organization and coordination, and cognitive syncing, input, and support. Collaboration fluidity entails the absence of speech overlap and the presence of a good flow in terms of turns to speak. Well-argued deliberation and consensus-based decision is about contributing to the discussion and task at hand, as well as participating in discussions and arguments, in order to obtain a consensus. Balance of contribution refers to having equal or equivalent contributions to organization, coordination, and decision making. Organization and coordination refers to effective management of roles, time, and “deadlines”, as well as the attribution of roles depending on participants’ skills. Finally, cognitive syncing, input, and support is about bringing ideas and resources to the group, as well as supporting and reinforcing other members of the group.
The five components used to evaluate communication in games include both linguistic, pragmatic, and social aspects. Linguistic skills per se are captured by the mastery of written and spoken language component. This component assesses language comprehension and the appropriate use of vocabulary. Pragmatic skills are captured by the verbal and non-verbal communication components and refer to the efficient use of verbal and body signals in the context of the game to achieve one’s communicative goals ( Grassmann 2014 ; Matthews 2014 ). Finally, the grid also evaluates social skills with its two last components, social interactions and social cognition, which, respectively, refer to the ability to interact with others appropriately—including by complying with the rules of the game—and to the understanding of other people’ mental states ( Tomasello 2005 ).
Each of the 4Cs is a broad, multi-faceted concept that is the subject of a tremendous amount of research and discussion by a wide range of stakeholders in different disciplines, professions, and parts of the educational establishment. The development of evaluation frameworks to allow support for the 4Cs to be assessed and publicly recognized, using a label, is an important step for promoting and fostering these skills in educational contexts. As illustrated by IICD’s 4Cs Framework for educational institutions and programs, as well as its games/activities evaluation grid, the specific criteria to detect support for each C can vary depending upon the educational context (e.g., formal and institutional level or informal and at the activity level). Yet considering the 4Cs together highlights some additional observations, current challenges, and opportunities for the future that are worthy of discussion.
One very important issue for understanding the 4Cs and their educational implementation that can be simultaneously a help and a hindrance for teaching them—and also a challenge when assessing them—is their multidimensionality and interrelatedness. In other words, the 4Cs are not entirely separate entities but instead, as Figure 2 shows, should be seen as four interlinked basic “elements” for future-oriented education that can help individuals in their learning process and, together, synergistically “bootstrap” the development of their cognitive potentials. Lamri and Lubart ( 2021 ), for example, found a certain base level of creativity was a necessary but not sufficient condition for success in managerial tasks, but that high-level performance required a combination of all four Cs. Some thinkers have argued that one cannot be creative without critical thinking, which also requires creativity, for example, to come up with alternative arguments (see Paul and Elder 2006 ). Similarly, among many other interrelationships, there is no collaboration without communication—and even ostensibly individual creativity is a “collaboration” of sorts with the general culture and precursors in a given field. As a result, it ranges from impossible to suboptimal to teach (or teach towards) one of the 4Cs without involving one or more of the others, and this commingling also underscores the genuine need and appropriateness of assessing them together.
“‘Crea-Critical-Collab-ication’: a Dynamic Interactionist Model of the 4Cs”. (Illustration of the interplay and interpenetration of creativity, critical thinking, collaboration, and communication shown in dimensional space according to their differing cognitive/individual vs. social/interpersonal emphases; (© 2023, Branden Thornhill-Miller. All Rights Reserved. thornhill-miller.com; accessed on 20 January 2023)).
From this perspective, Thornhill-Miller ( 2021 ) proposed a “dynamic interactionist model of the 4Cs” and their interrelated contributions to the future of education and work. Presented in Figure 2 , this model is meant to serve as a visual and conceptual aid for understanding the 4Cs and their interrelationships, thereby also promoting better use and understanding of them in pedagogical and policy settings. In addition to suggesting the portmanteau of “crea-critical thinking” as a new term to describe the overlap of much of the creative and critical thinking processes, the title of this model, “Crea-Critical-Collab-ication”, is a verbal representation of the fluid four-way interrelationship between the 4Cs visually represented in Figure 2 (a title meant to playfully repackage the 4Cs for important pedagogical and policy uses). This model goes further to suggest some dimensional differences in emphases that, roughly speaking, also often exist among the 4Cs: that is to say, the frequently greater emphasis on cognitive or individual elements at play in creativity and critical thinking in comparison to the social and interpersonal aspects more central to communication and collaboration ( Thornhill-Miller 2021 ).
Similarly focused on the need to promote a phase change towards future-oriented education, Lucas ( 2019 ) and colleagues have suggested conflating creative thinking and critical thinking in order to propose “3Cs” (creative thinking, communication, and collaboration) as new “foundational literacies” to symmetrically add to the 3Rs (Reading, wRiting, and aRithmetic) of previous educational eras. Although we applaud these efforts, from our applied research perspective, we believe that the individual importance of, and distinct differences between, creative thinking and critical thinking support preserving them both as separate constructs in order to encourage the greatest development of each of them. Moreover, if only three categories were somehow required or preferable, one could argue that uniting communication and collaboration (as “collab-ication” suggests) might be preferable—particularly also given the fact that substantial aspects of communication are already covered within the 3Rs. In any case, we look forward to more such innovations and collaborations in this vibrant and important area of work at the crossroads between research, pedagogy, and policy development.
The rich literature in each of the 4Cs domains shows the positive effects of integrating these dimensions into educational and professional curricula. At the same time, the complexity of their definitions makes them difficult to assess, both in terms of reliability (assessment must not vary from one measurement to another) and of validity (tests must measure that which they are intended to measure). However, applied research in this area is becoming increasingly rigorous, with a growing capacity to provide the necessary tools for evidence-based practice. The development of these practices should involve interdisciplinary teams of teachers and other educational practitioners who are equipped and trained accordingly. Similarly, on the research side, further exploration and clarification of subcomponents of the 4Cs and other related skills will be important. Recent efforts to clarify the conceptual overlap and hierarchical relations of soft skills for the future of education and work, for example, have been helpful and promising (e.g., Joie-La Marle et al. 2022 ; Lamri et al. 2022 ). But the most definitive sort of taxonomy and measurement model that we are currently lacking might only be established based on the large-scale administration of a comprehensive battery of skill-measuring psychometric tests on appropriate cross sections of society.
The rapid development and integration of new technologies will also aid and change the contexts, resources, and implementation of the 4Cs. For example, the recent developments make it clear that the 4Cs will be enhanced and changed by interaction with artificially intelligence, even as 4Cs-related skills will probably, for the same reason, increasingly constitute the core of available human work in the future (see, e.g., Ross 2018 ). Similarly, research on virtual reality and creativity suggest that VR environments assist and expand individual and collaborative creativity ( Bourgeois-Bougrine et al. 2022 ). Because VR technologies offer the possibility of enhanced and materially enriched communication, collaboration, and information availability, they not only allow for the enhancement of creativity techniques but also for similar expansions and improvements on almost all forms of human activity (see Thornhill-Miller and Dupont 2016 )—including the other three Cs.
Traditional educational approaches cannot meet the educational needs of our emergent societies if they do not teach, promote, and assess in line with the new learner characteristics and contexts of the 21st century ( Sahin 2009 ). The sort of future-oriented change and development required by this shift in institutional practices, programming, and structure will likely meet with significant resistance from comfortably entrenched (and often outdated) segments of traditional educational and training establishments. Additional external evaluation and monitoring is rarely welcome by workers in any context. We believe, however, that top-down processes from the innovative and competition-conscious administrative levels will be met by bottom-up demands from students and education consumers to support these institutional changes. And we contend that efforts such as labelizing 4C processes will serve to push educators and institutions towards more relevant offerings, oriented towards the future of work and helping build a more successful future for all.
In the end, the 4Cs framework seems to be a manageable, focused model for modernizing education, and one worthy of its growing prevalence in the educational and research marketplace for a number of reasons. These reasons include the complexity and cumbersome nature of larger alternative systems and the 4Cs’ persuasive presence at the core of a number of early and industry-driven frameworks. In addition, the 4Cs have benefitted from their subsequent promotion by organizations such as the OECD and the World Economic Forum, as well as some more direct support from recent empirical research. The promotion, teaching, and assessment of the 4Cs will require a complex social intervention and mobilization of educational resources—a major shift in pedagogy and institutional structures. Yet the same evolving digital technologies that have largely caused the need for these massive, rapid changes can also assist in the implementation of solutions ( van Laar et al. 2017 ). To the extent that future research also converges on such a model (that has already been found pedagogically useful and policy-friendly by so many individuals and organizations), the 4Cs framework has the potential to become a manageable core for 21st century skills and the future of education and work—one that stakeholders with various agendas can already begin building on for a better educational and economic future together.
This research received no external funding.
Conceptualization, B.T.-M. and T.L.; writing—original draft preparation, B.T.-M., A.C., M.M., J.-M.B., T.M., S.B.-B., S.E.H., F.V., M.A.-L., C.F., D.S., F.M.; writing—review and editing, B.T.-M., A.C., T.L., J.-M.B., C.F.; visualization, B.T.-M.; supervision, B.T.-M., T.L.; project administration, B.T.-M., T.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Not applicable.
Data availability statement, conflicts of interest.
B.T.-M. and T.L. are unpaid academic co-founder and project collaborator for the International Institute for Competency Development, whose labelization frameworks (developed in cooperation with Afnor International and the LaPEA lab of Université Paris Cité and Université Gustave Eiffel) are used as examples in this review. S.E.H. and M.A.-L. are employees of AFNOR International. No funding was received to support this research or article, which reflects the views of the scientists and researchers and not their organizations or companies.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Cite this content as:.
Creativity and critical thinking are key skills for complex, globalised and increasingly digitalised economies and societies. While teachers and education policy makers consider creativity and critical thinking as important learning goals, it is still unclear to many what it means to develop these skills in a school setting. To make it more visible and tangible to practitioners, the OECD worked with networks of schools and teachers in 11 countries to develop and trial a set of pedagogical resources that exemplify what it means to teach, learn and make progress in creativity and critical thinking in primary and secondary education. Through a portfolio of rubrics and examples of lesson plans, teachers in the field gave feedback, implemented the proposed teaching strategies and documented their work. Instruments to monitor the effectiveness of the intervention in a validation study were also developed and tested, supplementing the insights on the effects of the intervention in the field provided by the team co-ordinators.
What are the key elements of creativity and critical thinking? What pedagogical strategies and approaches can teachers adopt to foster them? How can school leaders support teachers' professional learning? To what extent did teachers participating in the project change their teaching methods? How can we know whether it works and for whom? These are some of the questions addressed in this book, which reports on the outputs and lessons of this international project.
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.
(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 .
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.
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.
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.
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.
QUESTIONING
TALK TIME / CONTROL
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.
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.
Edweek top school jobs.
Discover the world's research
Join the 150,000+ facilitators using SessionLab.
A step-by-step guide to planning a workshop, 54 great online tools for workshops and meetings, how to create an unforgettable training session in 8 simple steps.
In a fast-moving world, being able to find new perspectives and create innovation is an increasingly valuable skill . Creative thinkers are often at the forefront of driving change, solving problems, and developing new ideas. Not only that, but those who bring creative thinking to how they work are often happier, more productive, and resilient too!
So you might be asking yourself, how can I develop my creative thinking skills and think more creatively at work? Whether you want to supercharge your interpersonal skills, advance your career or be happier and more satisfied in the work you do, it pays to learn to think more creatively.
For many people, creative thinking is the key that unlocks solutions, promotes diverse thinking, and leads to better relationships and job satisfaction. So how can you get started with creative thinking? As passionate believers in the value of creative thinking, we’re here to help and truly think unleashing your creativity can be key to your personal development!
In this post we’ll define what creative thinking is, highlight the benefits, explore 19 key creative thinking skills and give you some examples of how to apply them in the workplace . Let’s dig in!
Why is creative thinking important, what are the benefits of creative thinking.
Creative thinking is the ability to approach a problem or challenge from a new perspective, alternative angle, or with an atypical mindset. This might mean thinking outside of the box, taking techniques from one discipline and applying them to another, or simply creating space for new ideas and alternative solutions to present themselves through dialogue, experimentation, or reflection.
Bear in mind that the number of different creative approaches is as vast as the number of creative thinkers – if an approach helps you see things differently and approaching a challenge creatively, follow that impulse.
While there are some proven methods and guidelines that can help you be a better creative thinker, remember that everyone can be creative and finding what works for you is what is important, not the terminology or specific framework.
One misapprehension about creative thinking is that you have to be skilled at more traditional creative skills like drawing or writing. This isn’t true. What’s important is that you are open to exploring alternative solutions while employing fresh techniques and creative approaches to what you’re working on.
You don’t need to be a great artist or even work in a traditionally creative field – we believe everyone is capable of creative thinking and that it enriches your personal and professional lives when you learn to be more creative.
Another misconception about creative thinking is that it applies only to the ideation or technically creative parts of the process. All aspects of our lives and interactions with people and challenges can benefit from creative thinking – from the ability to see things differently.
At work, thinking creatively might mean finding better ways to communicate, improve your working practices, or developing and implementing fresh solutions too.
Creative thinking is important because it drives new ideas, encourages learning, and creates a safe space for experimentation and risk-taking.
As organizations and people grow, they often develop tried and tested ways of operating. While it’s important to have solid working practices and processes, unswerving dedication to the norm can lead to stagnation and a lack of innovation and growth.
Creative thinking is important because it drives new ideas, encourages learning and creates a safe space for experimentation and risk-taking. Simply put, creativity and creative thinking are part of what helps businesses and individuals succeed and grow .
Whether your team or business thinks of itself as a creative one, you can’t afford to miss out on the benefits of creative thinking if you want to grow , deliver change, and help your team bring their best selves to work.
Using creative thinking skills at work creates b enefits not only in the ways we solve problems but also in how we approach everything from communication to self-fulfillment, task management, and growth . Bringing a culture of creative thinking into a workshop or group is often the job of a talented facilitator but whatever your role, there are benefits to thinking more creatively. Let’s explore some of the benefits of thinking creatively at work and in your everyday life!
Empathy and creative thinking go hand-in-hand. By practicing creative thinking skills and regularly looking for new ideas and points of view, you can actively become better at understanding your colleagues, customers, and even your family and friends. One of the major barriers to having productive and meaningful relationships is an unwillingness to see things from a perspective other than your own or failing to understand how another person is feeling.
By developing this skill, you can engage more meaningfully and honestly with people, ideas, and perspectives in all aspects of life. What’s more, because of the benefits that creative thinking can bring, you’ll actively want to see things from new perspectives and be more empathic : something that’s fundamental to creating real change.
Assumptions can be harmful in both our personal and professional lives. Whether it’s making assumptions about why someone is behaving the way they are in a workshop or what features will make your customers happiest, holding onto incorrect or inadequately formed assumptions can be problematic . It can create difficulty and tension in relationships and what’s more, it can lead to the development or introduction of solutions that are simply unfit for purpose.
Using creative thinking skills to challenge assumptions, build clarity, and see things from new perspectives can be transformative. If an assumption someone else makes feels incorrect, think about why and try to find out more. If someone challenges an assumption you hold, be open and listen.
An example of not being a creative thinker is sticking to a tried and tested approach and sticking to the norm in every situation without considering whether trying something new might not lead to better results.
When looking to solve a problem or create innovative solutions, going outside of what you know and being open to new ideas is not only exciting, but it can create more impactful solutions too. You might even try using problem-solving techniques alongside some of the creative thinking skills below to find the absolute best solutions!
Some processes and working practices can be slow, especially in large organizations with many moving parts – but do they all have to be? Thinking creatively can help you find lean, actionable solutions that you can put into practice quickly and test ahead of bigger changes .
Experimentation and a willingness to take risks are vital to growth and change, and creative thinking helps create a climate conducive to finding and trying quick, effective solutions.
Finding fresh, appropriate solutions to problems can be incredibly satisfying and is a fast-track to finding happiness both in and out of work. Bringing your whole self to a situation and being enabled to think outside of the box is a great way to feel valued and engaged with what you are doing.
Feeling frustrated with how a situation or process at work is going? Try developing and employing your creative thinking skills alongside your colleagues to find a better, happier way to collaborate! Feel unfulfilled or that not all of your skills and interests are being utilized? Consider how you might creatively deploy the skills or talents that make you happy and scratch that itch.
As children, we are encouraged to see things differently and try new things as part of our learning and growing process. There’s no reason we shouldn’t do this as adults too! Trying new things and learning to think creatively can help you find new skills, talents, and things you didn’t even know you were good at.
Staying curious and following what interests you with an open mind is a prime example of what a small change in thinking can achieve. Remember that creative thinking is a gateway to learning and by actively developing your creative toolset, you can grow and discover more in all walks of life – a surefire path to personal development.
It’s easy to get frustrated when problems seem to come thick and fast and existing solutions or methods don’t work. Adversity is something all of us will face at some point in our personal and professional lives but there are ways you can become more able to handle problems when they arise .
A strong suite of creative thinking skills is an important aspect of how we can build resilience and be more flexible when adapting or creating change. By exploring alternative ways of thinking, you’ll be better prepared to face adversity more openly and find alternative ways to resolve challenges in whatever context they emerge.
Creative thinkers are valuable employees at organizations of any size. Whether it’s championing innovation, creating change in policy, or finding better ways to collaborate, people who can effectively solve problems and leverage their creative thinking skills are better positioned for success at work.
Consider how you might plug your skills gap and boost your CV by developing your creative skillset and you won’t just be more successful – you’ll be happier and more engaged at work too!
Whatever your background or role, you are capable of thinking creatively and bringing creativity into your life.
Creative thinking skills are the methods or approaches you might use when trying to solve a problem differently and explore a fresh perspective. While some of these skills might come naturally to you, others might need a more considered, purposeful approach.
For example, you might be a natural visual thinker who is great at presenting and interpreting visual information but you might not be so good at freely experimenting or creating space for reflection. In this case, you might try some brainstorming exercises to loosen up your experimentation muscles or create scheduled time for reflection in your working routine.
While creative professions like artists, writers, or designers may see more obvious uses for creative thinking skills, all professions can benefit from developing and deploying creative thinking . If you find yourself having difficulty at work or in need of inspiration or motivation, finding space to build on your creative skillset is a way to not only move forward but have fun while doing so.
If you think you’re not creative or have no creative thinking skills, we’re here to tell you that whatever your background or role, you are capable of thinking creatively and bringing creativity into your life : you might just need a little push or to reframe how you think about creativity!
Creative thinking skills come in all shapes and sizes, ranging from things like abstract thinking and storytelling to finding ways to radically plan projects or recognize organizational patterns .
In this section, we’ll explore each of the example creative skills below and talk about how you might use them in your personal and professional practice. We’ll also point out some things to watch out for where appropriate so you can make the most out of your new creative skills and avoid potential setbacks.
We’ll also include a method from the SessionLab library that will help you practice and explore each skill, whether alone or with others .
Feel free to read and explore the creative thinking skill which feels most interesting or applicable to you and come back and experiment with others in the future!
Some example creative thinking skills include:
Open-mindedness, lateral thinking.
Challenging norms, lean organization, simplification, radical planning.
Frameworks and rulesets, micro and macro thinking, visual thinking, abstract thinking, storytelling.
Note that this list is not exhaustive, and there are many more ways of thinking creatively – try to see these creative skills as a jumping-off point for seeing things differently and exploring creative thinking at work .
Let’s get started!
A core creative skill is the ability to experiment and try new things, whether that’s in your personal practice, in a closed environment, or even in the field. It can be easy to fall short of implementing new ideas or following through with creative projects because critical judgment or overthinking gets in the way . A good experimenter is a self-starter who makes informed decisions to kickstart projects and test hypotheses.
Think of a painter who throws paint at a canvas and introduces new materials without overthinking or being self-critical. While not everything they try will be perfect, that’s the point – not every experiment needs to be successful in order to teach you something useful. By experimenting, you can try things that might prove useful or will lead you towards new solutions and better ideas. Remember that the act of experimentation is generative and often fun so be sure to give it a try!
One thing to watch out for is being sure to effectively capture the results of your experiments and to continue developing and iterating on the results. Experimentation is a great place to start, but remember that it is part of a larger process. Without effective documentation, you might not trace what delivered the best results and be unable to reproduce the outcomes. Experimentation is a great example of why creative freedom should be paired with a strong process in order to be at its best.
Four-Step Sketch #design sprint #innovation #idea generation #remote-friendly The four-step sketch is an exercise that helps people to create well-formed concepts through a structured process that includes: Review key information Start design work on paper, Consider multiple variations , Create a detailed solution . This exercise is preceded by a set of other activities allowing the group to clarify the challenge they want to solve. See how the Four Step Sketch exercise fits into a Design Sprint
Four-Step Sketch is a great method for promoting experimentation. By following a process that enables quick brainstorming before development, you can help build an experimental mindset that also generates results.
Open-mindedness is a critical element of creativity and one of the best creative thinking skills you can try to build if you’re new to the practice. Being open-minded means being receptive to new ideas, different ways of thinking, and perspectives which are not your own. It means not closing down conversations or ideas prematurely and trying to actively explore what is presented to you.
Imagine that a colleague comes up with an idea that is so far out of the status quo it seems off-the-wall and bizarre. Being open-minded means actively engaging with what is presented and to refrain from forming judgments before first understanding where your colleague is coming from .
Your colleagues’ initial idea might not be perfect, but being open-minded and truly attempting to understand their perspective means you can create dialogue, foster creativity, and move forward as a team.
Being open-minded doesn’t mean accepting every new idea and agreeing wholesale with every different opinion. While you should always try to be open and receptive to new ideas and other perspectives, you should also critically appraise and engage with them as part of a larger creative process. Don’t be so open-minded you have no strong opinions of your own!
Heard, Seen, Respected (HSR) #issue analysis #empathy #communication #liberating structures #remote-friendly You can foster the empathetic capacity of participants to “walk in the shoes” of others. Many situations do not have immediate answers or clear resolutions. Recognizing these situations and responding with empathy can improve the “cultural climate” and build trust among group members. HSR helps individuals learn to respond in ways that do not overpromise or overcontrol. It helps members of a group notice unwanted patterns and work together on shifting to more productive interactions. Participants experience the practice of more compassion and the benefits it engenders.
Open-mindedness is particularly useful when it comes to meaningfully communicating with others. Whether its developing the ability to walk in the shoes of someone else or building empathy and listening skills, Heard, Seen, Respected is a great method to try when learning to be more open-minded.
Lateral thinking is a prime example of how we can creatively solve real-world problems in a measurable and easy-to-understand manner. Deploying lateral thinking means using reasoning or non-traditional logic to find an indirect or out-of-the-box approach to solving a problem.
A simple example might be a challenge like: we need to increase revenue. Traditional thinking might mean considering hiring new salespeople to try and get more direct sales. A lateral approach might mean engaging more with current customers to reduce churn, working with external partners to get new leads, working to get sponsorship, piloting an affiliate scheme or any number of new ways to solve the existing problem.
Broadly speaking, lateral thinking often means stepping back and considering solutions or approaches outside of the immediately obvious.
One potential danger with lateral thinking is spending time to create new solutions to problems that don’t need them. Not every problem needs to be solved laterally and the best solution might actually be the most straightforward. Be sure to tap into existing knowledge and appraise a problem before trying something radical to avoid wasted time or frustration!
The Creativity Dice #creativity #problem solving #thiagi #issue analysis Too much linear thinking is hazardous to creative problem solving. To be creative, you should approach the problem (or the opportunity) from different points of view. You should leave a thought hanging in mid-air and move to another. This skipping around prevents premature closure and lets your brain incubate one line of thought while you consciously pursue another.
Developing your lateral thinking skills comes more naturally to some than others. The Creativity Dice is a great method for getting out of linear thinking habits and moving into different ways of thinking.
Pattern recognition is the ability to recognise existing or emerging patterns and make connections based on the patterns you have discerned . While pattern recognition goes back to our prehistoric roots, being able to spot patterns outside of the ordinary and consider what may not be immediately obvious is a vital creative thinking skill for today.
Consider how meetings between some members of a team might often end in conflict. While it might first seem that these two people just can’t get along, it might actually be that certain emotional triggers are being tripped or the format of the conversation isn’t working. Looking beyond your initial impressions and from a new perspective might let you find a repeating pattern that isn’t immediately obvious.
When trying to spot patterns, try to be mindful of existing biases so you avoid bending what is happening to fit a pattern you might be expecting. Be sure to interpret all data fairly and honestly, even if you believe a pattern is already forming.
Affinity Map #idea generation #gamestorming Most of us are familiar with brainstorming—a method by which a group generates as many ideas around a topic as possible in a limited amount of time. Brainstorming works to get a high quantity of information on the table. But it begs the follow-up question of how to gather meaning from all the data. Using a simple Affinity Diagram technique can help us discover embedded patterns (and sometimes break old patterns) of thinking by sorting and clustering language-based information into relationships. It can also give us a sense of where most people’s thinking is focused
Pattern recognition is a skill that benefits from thoughtful practice. Try starting with a deliberate pattern-finding process like Affinity Map to build the ability to see patterns where they might not first be obvious.
While it might not seem like it at first, being a good listener is a creative thinking skill. It asks that a person not only try to understand what is being said but also to engage with the why and how of the conversation in order to reframe prior thinking and see things from a new perspective.
Deep listening or active listening is not only hearing the words that someone is saying but actively seeking to interpret their intent, understand their position, and create a positive space for further conversation. Not only does this create a deeper conversation for both parties, but this act of engagement and understanding leads to more creative and dynamic results too.
Think of a workplace grievance that one person might have against another. Without actively listening and trying to understand the core issues from the perspective of everyone involved, you might not only fail to solve the issue but actually make staff feel less heard and valued too.
By employing this creative thinking skill in such a conversation you can see things more clearly and find a way to creatively satisfy the needs of everyone involved.
Active Listening #hyperisland #skills #active listening #remote-friendly This activity supports participants to reflect on a question and generate their own solutions using simple principles of active listening and peer coaching. It’s an excellent introduction to active listening but can also be used with groups that are already familiar with it. Participants work in groups of three and take turns being: “the subject”, the listener, and the observer.
Trying to be more present in conversations is a great place to begin building your deep listening and active listening skills . Want to supercharge the process as a group? Try a role-play activity like Active Listening to more thoughtfully see and reflect on how important this skill can be.
Not all established working practices are the best way of doing things. People who practice this creative thinking skill are likely to question the status quo in search of something new which can deliver meaningful change. While any challenge to the established order needs to be conducted respectfully and thoughtfully, thinking of how to go beyond the norm is how innovation occurs and where creative thinkers excel.
When trying to practice this skill, be prepared to question existing methods and frameworks and ask if there might be a better way outside of the limits of the current system.
As with lateral thinking, it’s important to recognize that not everything is a problem that needs to be solved and so you may need to be selective in which norms should be challenged – otherwise, you may never make it out of the front door!
Additionally, challenging the established order often means questioning the work someone else has already done. While this is a necessary part of growth, it should always be done constructively and respectfully.
W³ – What, So What, Now What? #issue analysis #innovation #liberating structures You can help groups reflect on a shared experience in a way that builds understanding and spurs coordinated action while avoiding unproductive conflict. It is possible for every voice to be heard while simultaneously sifting for insights and shaping new direction. Progressing in stages makes this practical—from collecting facts about What Happened to making sense of these facts with So What and finally to what actions logically follow with Now What . The shared progression eliminates most of the misunderstandings that otherwise fuel disagreements about what to do. Voila!
Challenging norms without a considered approach can be ineffective and potentially frustrating. Taking the time to build shared understanding and push in the same direction with What, So What, Now What? is a great way to explore how your existing process is or isn’t working and challenge norms productively.
Creative thinking doesn’t mean being disorganized or chaotic just because you have an abundance of ideas. In order to facilitate creative thinking, it’s important to stay organized and approach the process with the right framework, mindset, and space. As a creative thinking skill, lean organization means considering what you absolutely need to do in order to make things happen, versus what you don’t.
Think of how a large, multi-discipline team might go about organizing themselves for a big project. While it’s vital everyone is aligned and kept up to date, a traditional system of scheduled meetings might not be the most productive. Lean organization means considering the needs of the team, the project and thinking creatively about what you need to stay organized, and keeping unnecessary admin to a minimum.
Thinking creatively about organization is something all leaders should practice but any project can benefit from thinking through the process by which it will be accomplished.
MoSCoW #define intentions #create #design #action #remote-friendly MoSCoW is a method that allows the team to prioritize the different features that they will work on. Features are then categorized into “Must have”, “Should have”, “Could have”, or “Would like but won‘t get”. To be used at the beginning of a timeslot (for example during Sprint planning) and when planning is needed.
Lean organization often means being honest and realistic about what is absolutely necessary versus nice to have. MoSCoW is an effective agile framework for planning work and also reframing your approach to organizing time, tasks and more!
Simplifying, presenting or decoding any information is a vital skill when working with others. In a creative thinking context, simplification is the act of seeing what is important about a task or piece of data and stripping away the extraneous parts to see things more clearly.
Some problems can feel unassailable because of their complexity or scale – simplification allows you to reconsider a problem in simple terms and reframe it in a way that means you can approach it productively.
An example of using this creative thinking skill at work might be when presenting the results of a project to the rest of your organization. People working on other teams and in different disciplines could become disengaged if exposed to too many complex moving parts or it might simply be a waste of time to discuss every detail.
By simplifying a project into more succinct terms, you not only can help your group connect with the material swiftly but also boil a project down to its most important elements . This is a great way to creatively re-energize a project and identify where you can make an impact immediately.
6 Words #ufmcs #red teaming This tool is designed to help critical thinkers focus on a core idea by writing a short phrase summarizing their thoughts into a set number of words that are clear, concise, and accurate. This idea is based on a complete short story written by Ernest Hemingway: “For sale, baby shoes – never worn.” Six Words forces people to synthesize their ideas in a succinct and meaningful way, cutting away fluff and distilling the idea to its bare essence.
One way of practicing simplification is by summarising or condensing thoughts, ideas of stories into a more concise, compressed form . 6 Words is a method for cutting away extraneous material from ideas that engages creative thinking and reframing approachably – great for groups!
Any major project requires some measure of planning in order to succeed, especially when working with others. But are there times where overplanning or traditional working processes feel too slow or frustrating for the project at hand? This is where these creative thinking skills come in handy! Radical planning is a way of approaching project planning from an alternative angle in order to generate fast, effective results.
When taking this planning approach, you will often shuffle the order of the normal planning process in order to create alternative outcomes and cut out elements you may not need. For example, with the backcasting workshop activity, the approach is to think of desired outcomes up to twenty years in the future and work backward to figure out how we can make small steps today.
You might also try planning with a mindset of what you and your team can each achieve immediately and in a more experimental fashion with an activity like 15% solutions .
By approaching planning with a creative thinking mindset, you can surface ideas and plans which may not have come up with a more traditional planning process. Another great benefit is to question the normal manner in which your team or organisation approaches planning and can help your team find a method that works best for you!
Backcasting #define intentions #create #design #action Backcasting is a method for planning the actions necessary to reach desired future goals. This method is often applied in a workshop format with stakeholders participating. To be used when a future goal (even if it is vague) has been identified.
Effective collaboration requires us to bring many different skills together, but consciously considering how to be a more effective collaborator is worth mentioning separately. When a creative thinker approaches collaboration, they will try to think of how to use alternative approaches to make the collaborative process more effective while also helping everyone on the team contribute and be heard.
An example is when it comes to getting work done in meetings – if the current process isn’t enabling everyone to collaborate effectively, you might employ creative thinking to try finding an alternative format, consider working asynchronously, or timeboxing parts of your agenda.
The best collaborators also find ways to champion the work of others and create a safe space for everyone to contribute – it might not be enough to assume collaboration will be accomplished when you get people in a room.
Employing this creative thinking skill can make all the difference when it comes to job satisfaction, interpersonal relationships and group outcomes too! Try approaching your collaborative projects more mindfully and see how it changes things for you!
Marshmallow challenge with debriefing #teamwork #team #leadership #collaboration In eighteen minutes, teams must build the tallest free-standing structure out of 20 sticks of spaghetti, one yard of tape, one yard of string, and one marshmallow. The marshmallow needs to be on top. The Marshmallow Challenge was developed by Tom Wujec, who has done the activity with hundreds of groups around the world. Visit the Marshmallow Challenge website for more information. This version has an extra debriefing question added with sample questions focusing on roles within the team.
Working together on a task as a team is an effective way of kickstarting collaborative thinking, especially if you approach the task mindfully . The Marshamllow Challenge with debriefing is a proven method for engaging teamwork and by adding reflection time afterward, your group can share and build on what they learned.
Collecting data might seem like a solely analytical skill, but it is another area where creative thinking can lead to productive, unexpected and transformative results. Approaching the data collection process creatively might mean trying new techniques or sources, or simply reconsidering the how and why of your data collection processes.
Imagine you are running a survey to measure customer happiness. You might try asking traditional survey questions, but find that your response rate is low and furthermore, your approach might be invasive and actively decrease happiness too!
If you were to approach this problem creatively, you might find that using a simplified form, asking for feedback at a different point in the customer journey, or utilizing an alternative measurement scheme delivers the data you are looking for. In many cases, thinking about the questions you are asking from a new point of view is what unlocks a better data collection process.
The key to this creative thinking skill is to try looking at the data collection process from a new, preferably customer-centric perspective while also considering why and how you are collecting data. You will likely find that by asking for input from your customers more creatively, you create space for more creative responses too!
3 Question Mingle #hyperisland #team #get-to-know An activity to support a group to get to know each other through a set of questions that they create themselves. The activity gets participants moving around and meeting each other one-on-one. It’s useful in the early stages of team development and/or for groups to reconnect with each other after a period of time apart.
3 Question Mingle is a get to know you activity that does double duty in demonstrating the power of approaching data collection creatively. By creating their own questions, a group can really think about what they want to know, how they ask questions, and how the results differ. Be sure to give it a try!
Interpretation skills can be varied though in a creative thinking context it means being able to successfully analyze an idea, solution, dataset, or conversation and draw effective conclusions. Great interpreters are people with a desire to listen, understand, and dig deeper in order to make their interpretation fully realised.
One of the ways creative thinking can improve interpretation is in helping us challenge assumptions or initial readings of data in order to consider other possible interpretations and perspectives.
Say your product is having a problem with losing lots of new customers shortly after signing up. You do a survey and people say that they leave because the product isn’t useful to them. Your initial interpretation of that data might be that you’re not the right fit for these customers or that the product needs new features.
If you were to apply creative thinking to the interpretation of this data, you might conduct further research and see that the product is fine, but people didn’t find the right features for them and that your onboarding process needs to be improved.
The key here is interpreting the data from various perspectives and then correlating that with other sources to form an accurate and representative interpretation, rather than going with your initial assumption . By following this process, you might also find that the way you are collecting data is flawed (perhaps not asking the right questions) or that more research and data collection is needed.
So long as you are sure to have data points and analysis to back up your findings, it pays to explore alternative interpretations so you can avoid bias and find the most accurate takeaways .
Fishbone diagram #frame insights #create #design #issue analysis Fishbone diagrams show the causes of a specific event.
Effective interpretation and analysis isn’t possible without a thorough exploration of the problem or topic at hand. Fishbone Diagram is a simple method for not only surfacing insights but framing them in a way that allows for proper and multi-perspective analysis.
Einstein is quoted as saying, “We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.” In this mold, sometimes the best ideas and solutions come from fields and disciplines outside of our own. By considering how someone with a different skillset to your own would solve a problem or deploy solutions, you can often find ideas and techniques you may never have considered.
Consider being tasked with improving employee happiness. A social media manager with a background in illustration and events management would likely try a very different approach to a sales manager who is used to a culture of incentives and bonuses. If you were trying to develop a new product, think of how a developer would approach deciding on key features versus an academic or a customer success manager?
The important thing here is to try and use the perspective, skill set , and approach of another field or discipline to first consider and then solve a problem more fully . Where possible, try and include people from other disciplines in the process and try to avoid making assumptions.
As with all creative thinking skills, being open-minded and sourcing the expertise and opinions of others where necessary is vital when creating true innovation.
Mash-Up Innovation #hyperisland #innovation #idea generation Mash-ups is a collaborative idea generation method in which participants come up with innovative concepts by combining different elements together. In a first step, participants brainstorm around different areas, such as technologies, human needs, and existing services. In a second step, they rapidly combine elements from those areas to create new, fun and innovative concepts. Mash-ups demonstrates how fast and easy it can be to come up with innovative ideas.
Interdisciplinary thinking isn’t just for radical academics. By combining ideas from disparate fields in a fast, fun manner, Mash-Up Innovation is great for building creative thinking skills and generating results in one fell swoop!
All creative thinking skills are about reframing things in a new way of finding alternative approaches. This can often mean abandoning an existing framework and thinking outside of the box. That said , another way of applying creative thinking is by bringing rulesets, constraints, or frameworks to your approach in order to trigger deeper creative work and tap into a problem-solving mindset .
Consider a simple task like trying to generate more customers. With free reign, there are innumerable ways to accomplish this. But what happens if you create a rule like, we cannot spend any money, or, these must be driven by social media alone. In order to accomplish your goal under these conditions, you must think more creatively and deeply, deploying more concentrated problem-solving skills than if you could try any approach you wanted.
Alternatively, you might approach a problem with a framework that forces you to think under specific circumstances or with a rigid set of steps. Six thinking hats is a great workshop activity that asks participants to frame and reframe a problem from six different angles. While it might first seem counterintuitive, the use of rules or frameworks can create fertile ground for creative thinking and lead to more realized solutions!
The Six Thinking Hats #creative thinking #meeting facilitation #problem solving #issue resolution #idea generation #conflict resolution The Six Thinking Hats are used by individuals and groups to separate out conflicting styles of thinking. They enable and encourage a group of people to think constructively together in exploring and implementing change, rather than using argument to fight over who is right and who is wrong.
Not all problems are created equal. Depending on how much it directly affects you, you might see a given problem as being more or less important than your colleagues, leading to a different response and approach to solving the problem. This creative thinking skill is all about being able to switch between seeing the bigger picture while also considering how something might manifest on a smaller scale.
Think of how frustrating it can be when an executive team makes sweeping changes that affect frontline staff in a way they might not have anticipated. Micro and macro thinking means seeing both problems and potential solutions from multiple perspectives and adjusting accordingly.
Another key aspect of applying this approach is knowing the limits of your own knowledge and involving stakeholders from all levels of an organization to inform your ideation and problem-solving process.
If you’ve never worked in support and don’t regularly talk to your support team, you might not understand how a change to helpdesk software could impact your team and your clients – remember that a big part of any change in perspective is doing the research and talking to who will be affected !
Stakeholder Round Robin Brainstorm #idea generation #brainstorming #perspectives #remote-friendly #online A divergent process to generate ideas and understanding from different perspectives.
Learning to practice micro and macro thinking often starts with first listening to and understanding the needs and perspectives of others . Especially those who have varied positions in relation to the problem, solutions, or organization you are working with. Stakeholder Round Robin Brainstorm is an effective method of surfacing insights and perspectives quickly and productively.
Of all the creative thinking skills on this list, visual thinking might be one you are most familiar with. Visual thinking is a method of processing, learning, and presenting information and concepts with visual assets such as images.
Visual thinking is often associated with creative thinking because of the consumption and creation of images at its heart. Don’t let this make you think you have to be able to draw in order to be a visual thinker.
Applying this creative thinking skill means being able to interpret visual information, present concepts in an often simple visual manner, and communicate in a way that is more universally understood. Drawing stick people is actively encouraged!
Visual approaches to problem-solving can help foster shared understanding and help people be more succinct or creative in their ideas. Remember: if an idea is too complex to be put into pictures, perhaps it needs further refinement .
Imagie-ination #idea generation #gamestorming Images have the ability to spark insights and to create new associations and possible connections. That is why pictures help generate new ideas, which is exactly the point of this exercise.
While you might be able to jump straight into direct applications of visual thinking, it can help to try an exercise where you and a group explore using images simply and engagingly. Imagie-ination helps unlock the power of visual thinking as a team while also helping generate ideas too!
Abstraction or abstract thinking is the art of taking things out of their normal context and presenting them in a radical new light . While most creative thinking skills utilise abstraction in some form, it’s worth noting that actively trying to take an idea from one context and place it in another is a creative approach all on its own.
Think of Pablo Picasso’s cubist portraits – by taking something as common as a human face and bringing abstraction to his process, he created something radically different and innovative. You can create a similar effect by recontextualizing ideas, concepts, and problems and by looking at them from different, perhaps even conflicting points of view.
Abstract thinking is often built on engaging with absurdities, paradoxes, and unexpected connections . As such, it can often be fun, wild and surprising, and is a great way to generate creative ideas even in those who might be resistant to other forms of creative thinking. Lean into the weird!
Forced Analogy #divergent thinking #zoom #virtual #remote-friendly People compare something (e.g. themselves, their company, their team) to an object.
Forced Analogy is a quick, fun activity you can use to promote abstract thinking. Comparing one thing to another seemingly unrelated thing asks for a creative approach to context and metaphor and can really unlock a groups divergent thinking process.
Telling stories or narrativizing a problem can help us not only see things differently but understand where we share common ground with others. Everybody tells stories – whether that’s explaining our employment history, telling colleagues about what happened at the weekend, or when creating user personas and journeys.
Leverage this inclination to help people not only realize they are creative thinkers by nature but to help them share something of themselves too!
As a creative thinking skill, storytelling is about applying our natural proclivity for stories into new situations or thinking about how to reappraise or present material narratively . Think of the basic storytelling concept like the idea that all stories have a beginning, middle, and end – how might we bring this thinking to a tough challenge, a new product, or when solving a customer complaint?
You might even use storytelling tropes like the hero’s journey when exploring ideas or company conflicts. Whichever way you go, remember that stories are a universal element of culture and you have a rich lineage to dip into if you need a new perspective.
Telling Our Stories #hyperisland #team #teambuilding To work effectively together team members need to build relations, show trust, and be open with each other. This method supports those things through a process of structured storytelling. Team members answer questions related to their childhood, young adulthood, and now; then weave them into a story to share with the rest of their team.
Telling Stories in a collaborative space is one of the best ways you can approach creative thinking through narrative . By doing this activity as a team, you can help a group see the benefit of applying storytelling approaches outside of more traditional forms.
How many times have you had a tough problem that you can’t seem to solve so you get frustrated and leave your desk. Then, when you’re on a walk, standing in the supermarket, or falling asleep, a solution seems to arrive out of thin air? Often, you’ll find that creating space to reflect on a problem is an effective way to find a way forward.
The trick with making reflective space work as a larger part of your working practice is knowing when to take time to reflect, building space into your regular schedule, and finding techniques that allow things to surface effectively.
This might mean going for a walk with the intention to be present in noticing the world around you and gaining insights that can help your situation. It might also mean remembering to take time to rest or simply read and give your brain something good to chew on.
I notice, I wonder #design #observation #empathy #issue analysis Learn through careful observation. Observation and intuition are critical design tools. This exercise helps you leverage both. Find clues about the context you’re designing for that may be hidden in plain sight.
In a creative thinking context, reflection often means giving an idea time to unfurl and to resist the temptation to force it – by creating space to observe and reflect with I notice, I wonder you might see new ways of thinking emerge naturally.
At SessionLab, we’ve found many of the above creative thinking skills helpful when finding better ways to collaborate , handle workplace challenges or generate new ideas . Here are just a few small examples of things we’ve done that have benefited from thinking creatively as a team.
Using creative thinking to improve team communication, using creative thinking to improve collaboration.
Remember that creative thinking needn’t be explosive or radical to be useful – a simple shift in mindset or perspective can be all you need to create meaningful and impactful change.
When we began working on a site-wide redesign, we had to deploy a large number of creative thinking skills to make the process smooth and effective.
When first determining how to approach the project and scope the work, we reviewed how we had worked together on large projects in the past. While we saw there was room to improve, finding the best way to proceed and make the changes we needed was no easy task.
Challenging the entire process from start to finish with a creative thinking mindset and trying to stay open to alternative methods where possible was what unlocked the process for us. By reconsidering how we were running meetings, sharing feedback, and collaborating, we were able to identify where we were going wrong and then try alternative approaches more freely.
When it came to implementing solutions, we were also sure to stay open to experimentation while challenging our core assumptions of what would work and wouldn’t. This really helped us refine the working process and tailor it to our particular team and goals.
Another example came with finding a new approach when work stalled on a specific page. For our features page, we began by following the standard approach we had developed – writing the copy and structuring the page first before then following with illustrations and images.
In this case, our existing approach got us to an impasse : it felt difficult for our designer to be creative and find the best way to translate ideas into images if the copy had already been defined and the structure felt too rigid. What we decided to do was to reverse the workflow completely and allow the designer to create design elements before we wrote the copy and implemented too rigid a structure.
Throughout the project, creative thinking allowed us to challenge whether the existing way we did something was the right one and gave us scope to experiment and be open when finding solutions. Not only did this help us solve the immediate problems as they arose but they helped us come up with a great new design too!
Creative thinking can come in extremely handy when it comes to communicating. If one form of communication or working process isn’t working, approaching the discussion with a creative thinking mindset can help resolve the immediate issue and create lasting change in how we converse and work together too.
Like many virtual teams, we faced the challenge of some meetings feeling unproductive . The issues ranged from overrunning, crosstalk, not everyone feeling heard or able to contribute, or getting lost in ancillary discussions that were not productive or necessary. In an online setting, it can be hard to keep everyone on track and for things to run smoothly without accidentally talking over one another or causing frustration.
When it came to crosstalk, we wanted to avoid the frustration of interruption and disruption but also wanted to ensure people did not feel like they couldn’t contribute . Using the finger rules technique in a remote setting allowed people to easily show when they wanted to speak and what they wanted to discuss without disrupting the flow of the meeting.
We also found that the reason some daily meetings felt unproductive was because the meetings were for the purpose of daily updates and there didn’t always feel like there was a lot to say, thus leading to frustration or unproductive time being spent in these meetings.
In this example, we moved to a weekly format while also ensuring that we continue daily check-ins on Slack. This approach meant that we cut down on unnecessary meetings while still ensuring everyone’s needs were met .
This method is an example of creatively approaching a communication problem by thinking outside of the box and being prepared to challenge core assumptions . While we all wanted to stay informed, it really helped to reconsider the methods for staying informed and whether our current approach was the best way to achieve what we needed. It was also useful to reassess how we approached meeting agendas and goal-setting – follow the link for more on that if you’re having difficulty with unproductive meetings!
Remember that creative thinking needn’t be explosive or radical to be useful – a simple shift in mindset or perspective can be all you need to create meaningful and impactful change .
Remember that looking to others and being inspired by how they did things can be as transformative as trying to reinvent the wheel!
A final example is how we approached collaborating on creating the new design. While all projects at SessionLab feature collaboration between multiple parties, in this case we wanted to create space for everyone on the team to contribute.
We found that when trying to collectively brainstorm in a live, remote session, it became difficult for everyone to contribute and reflect on what was being shared by other members of the team effectively .
Some people had been able to prepare less than others, other people were less aware of all the circumstances of the project, or others were less able to switch gears during their working day. This led to some contributions being missed, a messier working process, and a feeling of being rushed – all of which lead to less effective outcomes than we might have hoped for.
In this case, we thought of how asynchronous work , reflection time, and some small process changes might help solve the problems we were running into. We wanted to be able to respond to what was being shared more effectively while also creating space for everyone to contribute in a way that was most productive for them.
Starting the brainstorming session in personal MURAL boards asynchronously and on our own time meant everyone was able to ideate at the time that was best for them and without any distractions . By then encouraging review and reflection on other people’s boards ahead of the main session, we were able to properly take in ideas and let them develop without feeling hurried.
This approach reduced the amount of time we actively spent working together in a meeting while improving the quality of the work . It helped people engage with the process, reduced potential frustration, and also meant we were more able to respond fully to the suggestions of others. This was a great example of how thinking creatively and learning from others can help create better outcomes and a more streamlined process.
It’s also worth noting that reflecting on our conversation with Anja Svetina Nabergoj regarding asynchronous learning and finding inspiration there was part of what helped this process along. Remember that looking to others and being inspired by how they did things can be as transformative as trying to reinvent the wheel!
Whether you find that creative thinking doesn’t come naturally, if your skills need some attention, or even if you just want to try new ways of working, it can be difficult to know where to begin .
Thinking about the creative thinking skills above and considering which you might be missing or could benefit from purposeful attention is a great place to start, though there are also some concrete ways you can approach the process and improve your creative thinking abilities in a pinch. Let’s see how!
Create space for new ideas, look to others for inspiration, throw yourself into new things, encourage creative thinking in others.
All skills get better with practice and creative thinking is no exception. Whether it’s active listening, experimentation or any other creative thinking style, it’s okay to not get it right the first time . The very act of being open to new approaches and perspectives is itself a way to improve your creative thinking skill set. However you try to implement creative thinking, know that exploration, iteration, and practice are fundamental parts of the process.
Try starting small and practice your creative thinking skills in your interpersonal relationships and collaborative projects. Take note of how it goes and try building up to larger and larger implementations of your creative thinking approaches.
A key part of cultivating or improving any new skill is to be fully present and aware when utilizing that skill. Consider how a sculptor needs to be aware of their materials, how they handle the material and place them on the board in order to be truly successful. Being present in the moment is important for any collaborative process, but is an especially vital aspect of creative thinking.
If you find yourself frustrated, excited, engaged, or stuck, make a mental note of how you are feeling and consider how you might do things differently. Staying present and actively engaging with how a situation makes you feel before responding is one of the most effective ways of cultivating and improving your creative thinking – be sure to give it a go!
As with many aspects of creativity, it’s not always effective to force it. Good ideas and finding new approaches can take time and an important part of the creative thinking process is creating space not only for reflection but to rest and allow things to surface. This might mean building more quiet, mindful time into your routine, reading and finding new inspiration, or simply learning to take a break.
While this can be difficult to get into the habit of, it does get easier with time. Try blocking out reflective time in your calendar or letting others know that you are taking the time in order to make it stick and avoid interruptions. Reflective space is important and useful, and by treating it as such, you can help ensure it happens and doesn’t get discarded or forgotten about.
One of the biggest barriers to thinking creatively is simply not being open to what is in front of you. Whether it’s rushing to use an existing solution without investigating alternatives, failing to listen or be present when something new is being presented, or sticking with your existing assumptions, a failure to stay open and reserve judgment can kill creative thinking.
Try to stay open and apply creative thinking without pressure or being overly critical in order to improve those skills and let more creative approaches surface in the future.
One of the best ways to find new perspectives and alternative ways of thinking is by looking to others. Whether it’s finding inspiration from other creative thinkers via conversation, reading and researching new sources, or simply listening and observing, looking outside of yourself is one of the most effective ways you can jolt your creative thinking.
Try finding sources outside of your normal circles, whatever the medium. It can be very easy to get into creative bubbles that might unwittingly exclude new forms of thinking. By broadening your social, creative and critical circles , you can be exposed to all kinds of potentially inspiring or creatively engaging ways of thinking and doing.
It’s hard to create space and an opportunity for new ways of thinking if you stick to the same routines and activities. You’ll often find that trying new things and exposing yourself to new hobbies, skills and approaches can be massively engaging and exciting too.
An important aspect of creative thinking is applying the learnings from one discipline or approach to another. If a developer were to throw themselves into learning how to dance, they might learn something they can apply to their role as a developer.
An open and honest desire to explore new experiences in and outside of your working life is a vital ingredient in the creative thinking process. Try saying yes to doing new things wherever you can find them – being alive to possibility and engaging in the world is a great way of supercharging your creativity!
Creativity is even better when shared. Whether it’s crowdsourcing new ideas, iterating together, or helping others build their creative thinking skills, sharing the experience is often a useful and generative process for all involved.
Try bringing a group together to explore thinking creatively together or run a workshop on developing creative thinking skills in the workplace. Not only will it help your participants with their own creative discovery, but it will also help you develop your own creative skills.
As facilitators and advocates of the power of workshops, we’re passionate about how creative thinking can improve many aspects of a group’s personal and working lives. At its heart, creative thinking is an empathic, generative act, and by bringing those concepts to the fore, we believe everyone can see better outcomes when solving problems, generating ideas or communicating with others.
We hope we’ve given you some great examples of creative thinking at work and how you might discover and nurture your own creative thinking skills . That said, this list is by no means exhaustive and there are many more ways you might try thinking creatively. Think of this post as a jumping-off point for further exploration and creative development!
Do you have any concepts or approaches you’ve used to become a better creative thinker? Did you find any of the creative thinking methods above particularly helpful? We’d love to hear about your experience in the comments below!
James Smart is Head of Content at SessionLab. He’s also a creative facilitator who has run workshops and designed courses for establishments like the National Centre for Writing, UK. He especially enjoys working with young people and empowering others in their creative practice.
Very nice information. Thanks for posting such an informative blog. Creative thinking is an unconventional thinking that looks at an issue from different perspectives. Innovative thinking is a thinking that converts / commercializes a creative idea into practical application.
The Fosbury Flop is a very good example of a creative idea and trend when we apply “the learnings from one discipline or approach [Engineering] to another [High Jump].”
thanks alot…very informative and thoroug
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Going from a mere idea to a workshop that delivers results for your clients can feel like a daunting task. In this piece, we will shine a light on all the work behind the scenes and help you learn how to plan a workshop from start to finish. On a good day, facilitation can feel like effortless magic, but that is mostly the result of backstage work, foresight, and a lot of careful planning. Read on to learn a step-by-step approach to breaking the process of planning a workshop into small, manageable chunks. The flow starts with the first meeting with a client to define the purposes of a workshop.…
Effective online tools are a necessity for smooth and engaging virtual workshops and meetings. But how do you choose the right ones? Do you sometimes feel that the good old pen and paper or MS Office toolkit and email leaves you struggling to stay on top of managing and delivering your workshop? Fortunately, there are plenty of great workshop tools to make your life easier when you need to facilitate a meeting and lead workshops. In this post, we’ll share our favorite online tools you can use to make your life easier and run better workshops and meetings. In fact, there are plenty of free online workshop tools and meeting…
How does learning work? A clever 9-year-old once told me: “I know I am learning something new when I am surprised.” The science of adult learning tells us that, in order to learn new skills (which, unsurprisingly, is harder for adults to do than kids) grown-ups need to first get into a specific headspace. In a business, this approach is often employed in a training session where employees learn new skills or work on professional development. But how do you ensure your training is effective? In this guide, we'll explore how to create an effective training session plan and run engaging training sessions. As team leader, project manager, or consultant,…
Join the 150,000 facilitators using SessionLab
Sign up for free
You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.
All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .
Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.
Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.
Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.
Original Submission Date Received: .
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.
Please let us know what you think of our products and services.
Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.
Conversations on critical thinking: can critical thinking find its way forward as the skill set and mindset of the century.
Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing, and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning, or communication, as a guide to belief and action. In its exemplary form, it is based on universal intellectual values that transcend subject matter divisions: clarity, accuracy, precision, consistency, relevance, sound evidence, good reasons, depth, breadth, and fairness. It entails the examination of those structures or elements of thought implicit in all reasoning: purpose, problem, or question-at-issue; assumptions; concepts; empirical grounding; reasoning leading to conclusions; implications and consequences; objections from alternative viewpoints; and frame of reference…the development of critical thinking skills and dispositions is a life-long endeavor. The development of critical thinking is included in most conversations related to the development of so-called “21st century skills”. This manuscript is the initial investigation of the discourses around the notion of critical thinking as reflected in four diverse global contexts. It seeks to investigate the current perceptions of critical thinking in the relevant education policies of these different cultural environments if they exist, and, if possible the degree to which critical thinking is articulated. Further study intends to research how, if at all, the rhetoric of critical thinking is actually realized in educational practices and to what degree the development of critical thinking skills can contribute to informed global citizenship. This writing presents the initial investigation of the policyscape in each of the four contexts included in the study. These are captured in the vignettes developed by the participants with academic educational experiences in dissimilar backgrounds. The vignettes are followed by a discussion of the major theories defined and developed by scholars of critical thinking in western tradition and a suggested framework for the possible identification of, and the potential success of teaching and learning around the cognitive capacities of critical thinking in the formal, educational contexts of the countries of those represented by the collaborative team associated with this research project.
3. purpose of the research, 4. historical perspectives of critical thinking.
Reinforcement fosters the repetition of what gets reinforced, regardless of the acting subject’s understanding of the problem that was posed, and of the inherent logic that distinguishes solutions from inadequate responses (p. 17).
…certain actions are reinforced as a result of their outcomes, so learning follows action. And what is learnt is action: the cognitive element is small [ 28 ].
6. methodology.
7.1. history and tradition contexts, 7.2. perceptions and importance of developing critical thinking skills.
There are some cultural barriers, mentioned by the participants, which discourage critical thinking, especially for women. The common social norm expects females to be quiet and this silent trait makes them more appealing to the proposition of marriage. In addition, people feel unease when questions about religion are being asked, not only for Islamiat, but also for Christianity, as this challenges their beliefs.
Promote higher order thinking skills that develop the capacity for self-directed learning, a spirit of inquiry, critical thinking, reasoning and teamwork [ 51 ] (p. 31).
Educational documentation.
We need critical thinkers—Times of India, 13 June 2011; Can India have a future without critical thinkers—Hindustan Times, 26 June 2016; The elephant in the room—Indian Express, 28 July 2017; Critical thinking a post-truth remedy—The Hindu, 30 Jan 2017.
11. results, 11.1. cultural, social, religious and political sensitivities which impact on purposes for teaching critical thinking, 11.2. the nature of critical thinking.
We understand critical thinking to be purposeful, self-regulatory judgment that results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based. [ 101 ]
Collaborative problem solving (CPS) is a critical and necessary skill used in education and in the workforce. While problem solving, as defined in PISA 2012 (OECD, 2010), relates to individuals working alone on resolving problems where a method of solution is not immediately obvious, in CPS, individuals pool their understanding and effort and work together to solve these problems. Collaboration has distinct advantages over individual problem solving because it allows for: (i) an effective division of labour (ii) the incorporation of information from multiple perspectives, experiences and sources of knowledge [ 99 ] enhanced creativity and quality of solutions stimulated by the ideas of other group members.
11.4. pedagogies to support the development of critical thinking, 12. conclusions and implications.
Conflicts of interest.
Click here to enlarge figure
Sellars, M.; Fakirmohammad, R.; Bui, L.; Fishetti, J.; Niyozov, S.; Reynolds, R.; Thapliyal, N.; Liu-Smith, Y.-L.; Ali, N. Conversations on Critical Thinking: Can Critical Thinking Find Its Way Forward as the Skill Set and Mindset of the Century? Educ. Sci. 2018 , 8 , 205. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8040205
Sellars M, Fakirmohammad R, Bui L, Fishetti J, Niyozov S, Reynolds R, Thapliyal N, Liu-Smith Y-L, Ali N. Conversations on Critical Thinking: Can Critical Thinking Find Its Way Forward as the Skill Set and Mindset of the Century? Education Sciences . 2018; 8(4):205. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8040205
Sellars, Maura, Razia Fakirmohammad, Linh Bui, John Fishetti, Sarfaroz Niyozov, Ruth Reynolds, Nisha Thapliyal, Yu-Ling Liu-Smith, and Nosheen Ali. 2018. "Conversations on Critical Thinking: Can Critical Thinking Find Its Way Forward as the Skill Set and Mindset of the Century?" Education Sciences 8, no. 4: 205. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci8040205
Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.
Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals
Information and Learning Sciences
ISSN : 2398-5348
Article publication date: 22 November 2019
Issue publication date: 3 December 2019
This paper aims to present a novel pedagogical model that aims at bridging creativity with computational thinking (CT) and new media literacy skills at low-technology, information-rich learning environments. As creativity, problem solving and collaboration are among the targeted skills in twenty-first century, this model promotes the acquisition of these skills towards a holistic development of students in primary and secondary school settings. In this direction, teaching students to think like a computer scientist, an economist, a physicist or an artist can be achieved through CT practices, as well as media arts practices. The interface between these practices is imagination, a fundamental concept in the model. Imaginative teaching methods, computer science unplugged approach and low-technology prototyping method are used to develop creativity, CT, collaboration and new media literacy skills in students. Furthermore, cognitive, emotional, physical and social abilities are fostered. Principles and guidelines for the implementation of the model in classrooms are provided by following the design thinking process as a methodological tool, and a real example implemented in a primary school classroom is described. The added value of this paper is that it proposes a pedagogical model that can serve as a pool of pedagogical approaches implemented in various disciplines and grades, as CT curriculum frameworks for K-6 are still in their infancy. Further research is needed to define the point at which unplugged approach should be replaced or even combined with plugged-in approach and how this proposed model can be enriched.
This paper presents a pedagogical model that aims at bridging creativity with CT, collaboration and new media literacy skills.
The proposed model follows a pedagogy-driven approach rather a technology-driven one as the authors suggest its implementation in low-tech, information-rich learning environments without computers. The added value of this paper is that it proposes a novel pedagogical model that can serve as a pool of pedagogical approaches and as a framework implemented in various disciplines and grades. A CT curriculum framework for K-6 is an area of research that is still in its infancy (Angeli et al. , 2016), so this model is intended to provide a holistic perspective over this area by focusing how to approach the convergence among CT, collaboration and creativity skills in practice rather than what to teach. Based on literature, the authors explained how multiple moments impact on CT, creativity and collaboration development and presented the linkages among them. Successful implementation of CT requires not only computer science and mathematics but also imaginative capacities involving innovation and curiosity (The College Board, 2012). It is necessary to understand the CT implications for teaching and learning beyond the traditional applications on computer science and mathematics (Kotsopoulos et al. , 2017) and start paying more attention to CT implications on social sciences and non-cognitive skills. Though the presented example (case study) seems to exploit the proposed multiple moments model at optimal level, empirical evidence is needed to show its practical applicability in a variety of contexts and not only in primary school settings. Future studies can extend, enrich or even alter some of its elements through experimental applications on how all these macro/micromoments work in practice in terms of easiness in implementation, flexibility, social orientation and skills improvement.
The added value of this paper is that it joins learning theories, pedagogical methods and necessary skills acquisition in an integrated manner by proposing a pedagogical model that can orient activities and educational scenarios by giving principles and guidelines for teaching practice.
Tsortanidou, X. , Daradoumis, T. and Barberá, E. (2019), "Connecting moments of creativity, computational thinking, collaboration and new media literacy skills", Information and Learning Sciences , Vol. 120 No. 11/12, pp. 704-722. https://doi.org/10.1108/ILS-05-2019-0042
Emerald Publishing Limited
Copyright © 2019, Xanthippi Tsortanidou, Thanasis Daradoumis and Elena Barberá.
Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial & non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode
Developing students’ twenty-first century skills, including creativity, critical thinking and problem solving, has been a dominant concern in our globalized society. Students should take part in the present participatory culture to acquire these skills by becoming creators/prosumers of knowledge rather than being consumers of information ( Gretter and Yadav, 2016 ). Mishra and Yadav (2013) advocated that creativity can be augmented by computational thinking (CT) which constitutes a process of identifying aspects of computation in the world and applying tools and techniques from Computer Science to understand and explain both natural and artificial systems and processes ( Voogt et al. , 2015 ). In this context, computational problems can be solved, computational artifacts can be created and students have the chance to express themselves creatively ( Gretter and Yadav, 2016 ). It is noticeable that there is no clear-cut definition for CT and its curricular infusion in education should be tried by finding similarities and relationships in the discussions about CT. Although it draws on concepts of Computer Science, the two concepts are not identical, since CT refers to problem solving processes that are followed when solving complex problems, generalizing and transferring this process to a wide range of problems. The ability to think computationally involves algorithmic thinking and design-based thinking as well. CT practices include the design and development of computational artifacts, models, simulations and artifacts of natural and artificial phenomena collaboratively and the implementation of computing techniques to solve problems. Therefore, computing can take many forms ranging from creating animations to developing websites ( Voogt et al. , 2015 ). These products entail imagination since enable artistic, scientific and technical creation ( Vygotsky, 2004 ) and can be evaluated by applying aesthetic, mathematical, pragmatic and other criteria. Students can communicate them through written and oral descriptions supported by graphs, visualizations, diagrams, and so forth. Voogt et al. (2015) .
UNESCO advocates the complementary relationship between CT and media and information literacy that can provide teachers with a comprehensive set of skills to allow students to creatively produce content ( Gretter and Yadav, 2016 ). Computation, collaboration and creativity are overarching elements of media arts practices and therefore, it is meaningful to consider the new media skills development of crucial importance. More specifically, computation refers to the role of technology and computer programming. Mitch Resnick argues that although programming is an important tool to help development of CT skills, “computational thinking is more than programming, but only in the same way that language literacy is more than writing” ( National Research Council, 2010 , p. 13). Programming in this context is less about code and more about self-expression ( Grover and Pea, 2013 ), and creativity can be used as a way to tell stories or to create artwork for example. Self-expression means that students can infuse their interests and personal styles into their media artworks. Collaboration emphasizes the social context of media arts practices, since the social participation enables creation and sharing of work and forms peer to peer and mentor to peer forms of collaboration ( Peppler and Kafai , 2007a, 2007b ).
Media arts include sociocultural theories and the involvement of imagination. The sociocultural theory of constructionism serves the aims of (media) arts education since artifacts design and sharing within a community of learners stimulate social participation and active engagement. Consequently, it is important to stress that not only intellectual skills are developed but also social skills and that bidirectional connection between the individual and the community of learners is emerged ( Peppler, 2010 ). Students have to develop their physical, emotional and intellectual abilities as the basis for obtaining media competency ( Hübner, 2015 ) and toward this direction, it is purposeful to incorporate social and intellectual skills development in the model. The new media literacy skills framework proposed by Jenkins et al. (2009) is employed in our pedagogical model, which emphasizes not on mastering the tools use but on intellectual activities performed when someone works with sophisticated technologies ( Dede, 2010 ). In fact these skills, the new media literacy skills, are social skills needed for active engagement in todaý s participatory culture ( Jenkins et al. , 2009 ). Furthermore, CT requires intellectual and social abilities as well, and can be considered integral element of media skills acquisition ( Gretter and Yadav, 2016 ).
Greene (2011) highlighted the central role of aesthetics and imagination in the artistic process because they engage students in building, creating and constructing digital or physical artifacts. The artistic creativity integrates “intangible assets” (“creative milieu”) and the new media arts aid the artistic, individual and social creativity ( Jennings and Giaccardi, 2005 ). In addition, the curricular infusion of CT in schools is still scarce and studies about how it can be cultivated in disciplines other than Computer Science are needed. CT facilitates students to think not only like a computer scientist, but also like an economist, an artist, a physicist, and so forth ( Voogt et al. , 2015 ). Furthermore, media arts as a “metamedium” overlap with sciences, visual arts, animation, film, electronic music, and so forth ( National Research Council, 2003 ) and in this sense, multimodality has significant implications in combining many different modes.
The proposed pedagogical model aims at developing the overarching twenty-first century skills of creativity, collaboration and CT which are presented as macromoments. We call it 3 C multiple moments pedagogical model (see Figure 1 ). The three macroments are connected and realized through five micromoments: non-technological, sociocultural, imaginative, multimodal and media. These micromoments refer to specific methods which cultivate the corresponding skills and thus, provide the natural avenues for the implementation of the macromoments.
Imaginative pedagogy is at the center of the model aiming at developing students in a holistic manner, since it unifies the thinking, feeling and doing realms of human nature ( Henriksen et al. , 2016 ). The non-technological micromoment refers to low technology and computer science unplugged approaches, corresponding to the CT macromoment. The socio-cultural micromoment refers to theories that recognize the social context in which the education process is realized and is connected to the collaboration macromoment. The imaginative micromoment entails the imaginative methods and tools that can be incorporated in a low-tech, information rich learning environment, matching with creativity. The media micromoment refers to media arts practices and new media literacy skills, corresponding to all macromoments. The multimodal micromoment spans over all teaching methods and skills accounted for by the 3 C model, involving all three thinking, feeling and doing realms of imaginative pedagogy. As such, it is inherent to the rationale of the model. As we explain in greater detail in the following section, all macromoments and micromoments intertwine, representing more than simple one-to-one relationships between them.
In this section, we elaborate on the micromoments that the pedagogical model draws upon. For each micromoment, we describe its essence and figure out linkages with the other micromoments. This model frames possible educational scenarios and activities, aimed at achieving a holistic approach to teaching practices. The holistic approach of the model is encountered in its content and process. Regarding content, the micromoments are comprised of methods and skills that intend to holistically develop the learner. Imagination serves this goal absolutely by using the thinking, feeling and doing realms of human nature. Regarding process, design-thinking approaches compose phenomena in a holistic constructivist manner. A real example explains this holism in the following sections. This model can be applied in tech-free or low-tech learning contexts, where artistic and hands-on activities are central. The role of imagination and creativity is prominent in low technology, information-rich learning environments since the educational process is free from high-tech products. In addition, social interaction and participation are prerequisites for these activities enhancing practical and participation abilities as well ( Sun, 2017 ). Next section presents the model in more detail.
This micromoment is comprised of both Computer Science Unplugged (CSU) and low-tech prototyping methods. CSU activities promote CT development, which involves problem solving skills; yet, concepts from Computer Science are used to solve real-world problems, independently from using computers ( Wing, 2006 ). CT can be taught through methods that do not use computers or technology and are called CT unplugged methods ( Letonsaari, 2018 ). More specifically, the CSU method exposes children to fundamental computing concepts and presents the kind of thinking that is expected of a computer scientist with the ultimate aim of creating computational models of real world ( Sysło and Kwiatkowska, 2015 ). The CSU pedagogical approach emphasizes on the intellectual and problem-solving nature of computer science. It enhances motivation through challenges and games. Thinking abilities and problem-solving skills are stimulated by trial and error method and hands-on activities with inexpensive materials. Teamwork is promoted and imagination is encouraged through adopting elements of fantasy and storytelling. All these activities can be carried out in classrooms or outdoors ( Nishida et al. , 2009 ; Nishida et al. , 2008 ). Some technical elements of the unplugged approach are: simplicity in implementation, active participation, teamwork towards a common goal, or competition towards finding the best or the fastest solution than another group ( Nishida et al. , 2009 ).
CT shares elements with creative media use since media design and media production are processes requiring programmatic logic ( Jacob and Warschauer, 2018 ). The creative media use is also encountered at low-prototyping methods. A low-tech prototyping method uses art supplies to create low-tech prototypes of technology and generate models ( Alhumaidan et al. , 2015 ) that can be used at educational scenarios ( Westerlund et al. , 2001 ). Indeed, “low-tech tools like crayons, watercolors and paper nourish children’s inner capacities and encourage the child to freely move in, directly relate to, and understand the real world” ( Cordes and Miller, 2000 , p. 74). The low-tech artifacts can be either materials, such as a hammer or a piece of software (computational artifacts), or non-material artifacts, such as a poem, a story, a theory or a scientific experiment. Both types of low-tech artifacts entail and cultivate imagination and can be implemented in several disciplines (arts, computer science, biology, mathematics, and so forth). Students develop technological, social and cognitive skills to construct low-tech artifacts embodying their understanding of concepts that serve as tools for construction, expression and communication of their learning ( Brown, 1992 ).
In the proposed pedagogical model, the presence of social interaction between learner and the significant other(s) is paramount and the processing of information plays a primary role in low-tech, information rich learning environments. The human behavior depends strongly on the cultural and social context and exploits the social circumstances ( Letonsaari, 2018 ). CT is also a non-individualistic act and can be seen as a social, communal practice because we create to share with others. CT should be thought as computational participation, recognized as collaborative, distributed contribution since it is affected by social interaction and context ( Kafai and Burke, 2013 ). Since CT draws upon the cognitive and social realm, it is meaningful to highlight the significant role that sociocultural learning theories play in CT development in terms of information processing, social interaction and participation. Children perceive information and convert it to knowledge through social interaction. Social interaction is necessary element of educational process, facilitating information understanding and elaboration in a changing context (Walter 1994 as cited in Campana, 2018 ).
The social process is acknowledged as part of information construction because information seeking, use and sharing depend on cognitive information process and social interaction. Social constructivism elaborates on this account advocating that internal knowledge construction is affected by social interactions and the enveloping discourses ( McKenzie, 2003 ; Talja et al. , 2005 ). Vygotsky, a prominent proponent of social constructivism, asserts the social environment importance in children' development and learning. The internalization and transformation of social interactions result in cognition changes ( Schunk, 2012 ). Concerning social interactions, the role of significant other can be taken by teacher, parent, a more skilled/knowledgeable peer or even by materials. In the proposed model, the employment of materials is fundamental, particularly in CSU and low-tech prototyping methods, and contributes to information processing activity ( Schunk, 2012 ). In that sense, the significant other illustrates the concept of scaffolding and Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). In practice, scaffolding can take many forms, such as discussion, provision of materials, or designing tasks ( Pritchard, 2008 ). The ZPD differs from learner to learner and reflects the ability of her/him to grasp the logic of scientific concepts ( Fosnot and Perry, 1996 ). Consequently, it is meaningful to take ZPD into account when curricula, activities and materials are developed and provided. Situated learning is another important factor. It points out the importance of connection between people and situations/contexts, stressing that cognitive processes are situated within physical and social contexts. We mentioned previously that CT involves the process of problem solving, transferring and generalizing it to a wide range of problems. Understanding as well as knowledge and skills have more chances to be transferred successfully to other contexts when learning is situated in familiar contexts and learning tasks are authentic and culturally linked ( Pritchard, 2008 ).
The suggested model is also rooted in constructionism learning theory, first proposed by Papert (1987) . Papert’s theory of constructionism advocates that learners physically construct mental models to understand the world around them (“learn by doing approach”) and reconstruct their existing knowledge through inquiry-based active learning. The role of materials is also stressed demonstrating that learning is more effective when learners actively create “external and sharable artifacts” supporting in this way the development of concrete ways of thinking ( Kafai and Resnick, 1996 , p. 4). This learning perspective is fundamentally multimodal in that internal representations and meaning construction occur through engagement with digital, tangible, or even conceptual artifacts, in the real world including sound, text, images, motion and so forth ( Papert and Harel, 1991 ). Two elements of this theory are closely related to imagination: inquiry-based approach and intuitive knowledge. One of the pillars of constructionism learning theory is that learners can be empowered by powerful ideas rooted in intuitive knowledge which they have acquired over a long period of time ( Papert, 2000 ; Bers et al. , 2002 ). Dede et al. (2013) argue that CT must be seen in relation to human knowledge, expertise and intuition, implying that imaginative capacities are also involved. Imagination and inquiry are joined through co-design, foreshadowing the importance of design thinking. Steen (2013) draws upon Dewey's ideas on coordinating processes of joint inquiry and imagination. He asserts that co-design, as a process of collaborative design thinking, combines inquiry as a trajectory from the outside to the inside world whereas imagination follows the reverse trajectory, from the inside to the outside world. From this viewpoint, co-design is a reflective process in which instrumentalities (tangible or conceptual) are brought together in a novel manner so that something new is produced. We elaborate on design thinking in greater detail later in this paper, when we explain a real example of how to use our model to guide design instruction.
Dede et al. (2013) argue that CT must be seen in relation to human knowledge, expertise and intuition. It is noteworthy to say that success in CT requires not only computer science and mathematics, but also imaginative capacities involving innovation and curiosity. In this direction, CT can enhance creativity, one of the overarching skills in twenty-first century, because computing extends the human expression and allows the creation of new forms of expression ( The College Board, 2012 ). As we have already mentioned, CT practices include computational artifacts, which are products that draw upon imaginative capacity. Low-tech prototyping and unplugged methods also enhance creativity and capitalize on imaginative capacities since elements of fantasy and imagination are integral. To elaborate deeper on these elements, we propose the adoption of imaginative teaching methods that can serve as a pool of practices facilitating the ability to imagine and create ( Nielsen, 2006 ). Imagination unifies the three mental operations of cognition, emotion and motivation that correspond to the three learning faculties of thinking, feeling and doing ( Van Alphen, 2011 ). The sense of imaginative micromoment can accomplish the vision of children holistic development. We employ the imaginative teaching methods of storytelling, drama/role play, arts, discussion, exploration, ritual and routine, and empathy ( Nielsen, 2006 ). Furthermore, cognitive tools of story, abstract binary oppositions, jokes and humor, sense of mystery, sense of reality, and sense of wonder promote imagination ( Egan and Judson, 2009 ) and can be easily incorporated into CSU and low-tech prototyping methods. The sociocultural sense of creativity is stressed by Sawyer (2012) advocating that creativity is the generation of products that come from and direct at knowledgeable social communities. These products are evaluated for their suitability, usefulness and value at society ( Sawyer, 2012 ) applying aesthetic, mathematical, pragmatic and other criteria ( Voogt et al. , 2015 ). The proposed pedagogical model emphasizes on collaboration and the importance of social interaction, participation and active engagement of leaners towards a common goal. Creativity can be an individualistic mental process or collective, when no single participant’s contribution determines the creative product. In the case of non-individualistic creative process, distributed creativity or collaborative creativity occurs and corresponds to how collaboration contributes to creativity ( Sawyer and DeZutter, 2009 ). Distributed creativity shares common elements with the collective intelligence skill of media micromoment as well, since the ultimate aim is the collective social creation.
The creation of digital, tangible, or even conceptual artifacts as integral components of both unplugged and low-tech prototyping approaches entail the engagement of thinking, feeling and doing realms. This is necessary since abstract imagination is specified by transforming mental conceptualization of an idea into real world. This learning perspective is fundamentally multimodal including sound, text, images, motion, and so forth ( Papert and Harel, 1991 ).
The curricular integration of different media through visual, auditory and kynesthetic approaches is a challenge that school curricula have to deal with Kosic (2018) . Media arts practice can serve this challenge through the concept of “metamedium”. This involves important implications for connecting multiple types of art forms, which includes making and representation (language, visual, spatial, musical, movement, digital, and so on) ( Peppler, 2010 ; Picciano, 2009 ). In this multimodal learning setting, the educational process involves head, heart and hands learning where the use and development of multiple intelligences and learning styles are encouraged. Gardner’s multiple intelligence theory ( Helding, 2009 ) differentiates nine intelligences: linguistic, logical/mathematical, musical, spatial/visual, kinaesthetic, interpersonal, intrapersonal, naturalistic and existential. Multiple intelligences, such as linguistic, kinaesthetic and naturalistic, can be integrated in the imaginative teaching methods we have proposed as fundamental elements in our model. In addition, logical/mathematical and interpersonal intelligences can be involved through CT and collaboration activities, whereas media arts practices can employ spatial/visual, musical and interpersonal intelligences. In this respect, multiple intelligences theory can approach the educational process in a holistic manner, allowing students to reveal their abilities and inclinations.
Our pedagogical model makes use of the new media literacy skills framework proposed by Jenkins et al. (2009) which emphasizes not on mastering the tools use but on intellectual activities ( Dede, 2010 ). Jenkins et al. (2009) assert that the new media skills are social and cultural skills necessary in todaý s participatory culture since the focus has shifted from “individual expression to community involvement” (p. 7). Students have to develop their physical, emotional and intellectual abilities as the basis for obtaining media competency ( Hübner, 2015 ). All these abilities require the participation of CT (intellectual pillar), imagination and creativity (physical, emotional, intellectual pillars, corresponding to doing, feeling and thinking realms) and collaboration (emotional pillar). Consequently, the new media literacy skills unify all the skills we intend to integrate in our model.
More specifically, play is a new media skill which is closely related to CT because it involves experimentation with the environment, as a problem-solving process. Performance is a media skill which is related to improvisation and discovery, elements that need imagination and creativity. Simulation is a skill related to CSU and low-tech prototyping methods, because real-world models/artifacts are created to interpret real world processes. Appropriation is a skill that can entail the combination of imaginative teaching methods with media arts practices. Multitasking is a skill which is encountered throughout the educational process. Distributed cognition is a skill that refers to tools that expand humans mental capacities, such as a calculator, a ruler, and can complement the creation and refinement of artifacts. Collective intelligence is a skill related to the whole design thinking process, when students have to solve a problem and each member s contribution is pivotal for finding the best solution through sharing and comparing knowledge and experience. Judgment is a necessary skill in information-rich learning environments and is related to the reliability and validity of the information sources that are used. Transmedia navigation is an ability which is closely related to storytelling and multimodality since a story can be encountered in different modalities. Networking is a skill that concerns information searching, synthesizing and disseminating and is connected with work sharing in a social community. Finally, negotiation is an important skill in terms of collaboration, social interaction and participation.
CT, collaboration and creativity are significant aspects of media arts practices. These practices involve complex forms of multimodality such as visual (media images), audio, animated movement, written and kinaesthetic/interactive forms. The engagement with media arts facilitates the acquisition of new media literacy and artistic expression ( Peppler, 2010 ). Learners use their creativity for their self-expression through media and arts practices and value the aesthetic qualities of them ( Kellner and Share, 2007 ). Particularly, CT in the context of media arts practices is less about code and more about creativity or self-expression and include telling stories or creating artwork. Collaboration promotes the social context of media arts practices and its importance for learning and motivation through creating and sharing work ( Peppler and Kafai , 2007a, 2007b ).
In this section, we elaborate on how the described micromoments can come into force. All the three skills, CT, collaboration and creativity, are inherent components of low-tech prototyping, CSU and media arts practices aiming at problem solving, imagination and social skills development. We unify all these micromoments’ relationships and interrrelationships through the proposed model, bringing together the skills that twenty-first century students have to possess in a holistic manner. In principle, the proposed model engages thinking, feeling and doing by tying together multiple micromoments in a holistic manner. Learners engage the thinking realm when they use their imagination for the conceptualization of an idea and their creativity when they put this idea into practice. This realm is related to Papert’s theory of constructionism. More specifically, it considers that intellectual abilities and the development of concrete ways of thinking ( Kafai and Resnick, 1996 , p. 4) are promoted through the CSU approach, problem solving and CT. The feeling realm is engaged when learners have to create a collective work with others and share it within their community, using their imagination in low-tech prototyping methods and artifacts co-construction. This distributive creativity involves the social and emotional life of learners within the context of community of peers, illustrating the presence of social constructivism. This realm also reflects one of the pillars of constructionism learning theory in that learners are empowered by powerful ideas rooted in intuitive knowledge ( Papert, 2000 ; Bers et al. , 2002 ). The doing realm employs Papert’s theory of constructionism and is based on the “learning by doing approach” in that learners physically construct mental models to understand the world around them and reconstruct their existing knowledge through inquiry-based active learning ( Papert, 1987 ). This theory finds its implementation through CSU and low tech prototyping methods. Kinaesthetic skills are also of equal importance with intellectual and social/emotional skills and are integral part in tangible products creation. To foster the applicability of the model, we suggest a methodology for structuring and guiding its implementation in the teaching practice. Firstly, we frame the model by employing the design thinking process ( Scheer et al. , 2012 ; Carroll et al. , 2010 ; Shute et al. , 2017 ). We have decided to follow the process of design thinking as a methodological tool because it is an excellent fit with the targeted skills. Secondly, we suggest some guidelines for macromoments and micromoments implementation and we demonstrate their practical application by giving a real example originated from a teaching practice in a primary classroom.
Problem solving is the common denominator between design thinking and CT. Design thinking requires learners to solve problems as designers ( Razzouk and Shute, 2012 ). Problem solving in CT can take many forms, from solving practical to theoretical and conceptual problems ( Shute et al. , 2017 ). Design thinking encompasses the whole concept of new competences that twenty-first century students have to acquire: resolving complex real-world problems by analyzing and evaluating them in a solution-oriented manner. Design thinking also fosters the ability to imagine without boundaries and limitations, which is an essential part of learning so that students develop creative confidence ( Carroll et al. , 2010 ). Additionally, design thinking effectively serves twenty-first century learning by facilitating interdisciplinary projects and approaching complex problem-solving processes in a holistic constructivist manner. Essentially, design thinking is a constructivist learning design since learning is promoted through experience, complex problem solving, and teamwork ( Scheer et al. , 2012 ; Carroll et al. , 2010 ).
Here, we explain the design thinking process and how it reflects the three realms of thinking, feeling and doing. Particularly, design thinking includes five phases: understanding and observing, synthesizing, ideating, prototyping and testing. The phases follow an iterative cycle. This means that it is possible to repeat the whole process or certain phases or even move from one phase to any other at any point of time; doing so, knowledge is updated and adapted to the context.
The understanding and observing phase involves understanding of the context of the problem as well as of the challenges, feelings and thoughts of others, thus corresponding to the feeling and thinking realms. The second phase of synthesizing involves the definition of the problem and its context so that learners proceed with powerful ideas generation and actionable problem solutions, involving the thinking and feeling realm. The third phase of ideating engages the imaginative capacities of learners towards the transformation of ideas into meaningful insights for solving the problem which, in turn, can lead to actionable solutions. This phase is related to the feeling and thinking realms, since social interaction leads to information processing and collective imagination to a common solution. During the fourth phase of prototyping, abstract imagination and mental concepts of solutions to the problem become tangible and testable through experimentation reflecting the doing realm. The last phase, testing, tries out the feasibility and applicability of the imagined solution to refine the final idea ( Scheer et al. , 2012 ; Carroll et al. , 2010 ). Scaffolding is crucial in all the phases for their successful completion, illustrating the implementation of Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Discussion, provision of materials or designing tasks are forms of scaffolding ( Pritchard, 2008 ) that can be part of all the phases.
The internalization and transformation of social interactions impact on information processing and knowledge construction ( social participation / collaboration ).
CT, collaboration and creativity ultimately lead the learners to holistic development since each skill and all together reflect the intellectual, feeling and doing pillars ( holistic approach ).
The role of the significant “other”, which can take many forms such as teacher, parent, a more skilled/knowledgeable peer, or materials, can extend learner s abilities through discussion, material or activity ( scaffolding ).
The curricular integration of visual, auditory and kinaesthetic approaches, the utilization of thinking, feeling and doing pillars and the meaning making and representation in multiple forms approach the teaching practice holistically ( multimodality ).
Experiential learning situations, which facilitate knowledge construction, can be provided by external and sharable artifacts creation ( inquiry ).
Intuitive knowledge generates powerful ideas and involves CT ( imaginatio n/ creativity ).
Learners internalize the world through imagination and externalize it through inquiry. The reflective process can coordinate them to that end ( co-design ).
The shift from individual expression to community involvement alters the skills, from CT to computational participation and from creativity to distributed/collective creativity ( participatory skills ).
The incorporation of teaching practices that promote thinking in different disciplines, other than Computer Science and Mathematics, can be achieved by engaging the aesthetic qualities and inner capacities of learners ( arts ).
Problem-solving constitutes both the ultimate aim and the instrumentality of fundamental twenty-first century skills' acquisition, which can be attained collaboratively ( collective problem-solving/ CT ).
The common denominators of any teaching practice that intends to follow our pedagogical model are CT, collaboration, creativity, and ultimately new media literacy skills development. It is not necessary to follow all the elements that each micromoment includes, but even if a teaching practice does not adopt all the elements, the above principles are steadfast and applicable to every teaching practice that follows the current model. The nature of the problem, theoretical or practical and the nature of the artifacts, material or non-material, tangible and conceptual or digital are the most important factors that determine the accompanied methods and skills. For example, if the means used is a non-material artifact such as a poem, obviously the accompanied methods and targeted skills will not be the same as in the case of a material artifact such as a windmill. Though in both cases the design thinking process is common, the change of phases or the iterations may be different, so this process is adapted to the nature of the problem and the situation of it.
It is noteworthy to say that the following case study is a real example of teaching practice that comes from a public school. Since public schools function under the pressure of prescribed curricula, different types of schools, not so attached to given curricula, could follow different or innovative teaching practices. This was observed during a pilot study conducted in June 2019. We explain the case study by following the phases of design thinking process and we elaborate on micromoments that are encountered. The example concerned a two-hour project that implemented logical/mathematical intelligence and was completed by students aged 9 and 10 years old during the Indrés lesson. Essentially, this lesson aimed at fostering the most dominant multiple intelligences of students who were divided into three different classrooms every week for two hours according to their inclination, that is to inter/intra-personal intelligence classroom, logical/mathematical intelligence classroom and arts classroom, incorporating musical, spatial/visual and kinaesthetic intelligences. Students were free to choose what classroom wanted to attend each week.
Regarding the context of the example, students were divided into three groups. Each group had to solve a problem and once it was resolved, the next group took on the problem resolution of the previous group. At the end, all the students would have completed all the problems successively. The problem-solving process was considered complete when a real-life model was designed and constructed. The role of the teacher during this process was to facilitate the educational process by intervening when necessary, solving doubts and queries and organizing the timely completion of each problem so that all the students could engage with all the problems. Finally, the group that would have completed the tasks more accurately and correctly would win a prize, a statuette. Three statuettes were given, one for each successful artifact.
We describe the educational process of the example based on the design thinking methodology. More specifically, the example follows five phases:
Phase 1 : Understanding and observing
During this phase, the teacher explains that each group has to solve three different problems through experimentation and model construction. The problems are a damaged windmill, a non-functional current circuit and a defective solar panel. The students have to understand what makes the system non-functional and explain what elements are defective or missing and why these elements are the reason for this defect. Then, they should find solutions to solve these bugs, try out the possible solutions and ultimately describe the correct solution accurately. This process is related to the decomposition of the problem by breaking down the parts of the problem and identifying the steps that they have to follow to solve the problem.
Phase 2: Synthesizing
This phase involves the final definition of the problem and sharing of ideas to find the correct source of defect. The students write individually in a paper what they think about the sources of the problem and then they share their thoughts. The teacher replies to queries and gives prompts to students to keep on investigating the possible sources through discussion and generating powerful ideas so that they proceed with actionable problem solutions.
Phase 3: Ideating
During this phase, students have already discussed the possible sources of the problem and they intend to find the most possible explanations of it with the help of the teacher, excluding the weak explanations, discussing and doing the trial and error method. Students maximize the engagement of their imaginative and thinking abilities towards corresponding possible defects with possible impacts on model function.
Phase 4: Prototyping
This phase includes the conceptualization of possible problem sources and the imaginative resolution, which are transformed into a real-world solution through drawing. Students draw individually the model and think how it should be to function properly by stressing the missing and defective elements. The teacher confirms or explains in detail if the imagined solution is correct or not. The most accurate drawing (conceptual artifact) is choosen after negotiation among the students and teacher s advices to be the tangible and testable model.
Phase 5: Testing
During this phase, students transform their conceptual artifact into a tangible and testable one through experimentation. The model construction is done with inexpensive materials (blocks and other manipulative) to check its feasibility and applicability. In this phase, the aim is to refine the final solution and develop a theory that will explain: why the model was non-functional (problem sources), how they found the solution by recording specific steps (process of collecting the possible solutions), and why it works in contrast to the non-functional model (reasons for tangible artifact s functionality).
After the end of the process, the three groups present their artifacts and the accompanied theory at the whole classroom. The teacher decides which group followed the most scientific, accurate and correct procedure to explain and solve each problem. The winner group gains one of the three statuettes (one for each problem).
When the students have completed all the problems resolution, the four pillars of CT are coming up: they have identified the sources of bugs in a non-functional model by breaking it down in smaller pieces to understand its parts in greater depth (decomposition pillar); each one of the possible sources of defect was analyzed individually, so after the three problems resolution, the identification of similar bugs is much easier (pattern recognition pillar); students were able to reach possible explanations and solutions through social interaction and feedback from peers and teacher s advice, focusing on significant details and excluding irrelevant or weak explanations and solutions (abstraction pillar); the problems were solved by following specific steps or rules of similar logic in all the three problems (algorithms pillar) ( Brackmann et al. , 2016 ).
A problem that should be resolved without computers ( Wing, 2006 ) entails the sense of wonder and sense of reality through experimentation and the imaginative teaching method of exploration ( play skill ).
Students are expected to think like a scientist and designer with the ultimate goal of creating a model of real world ( Sysło and Kwiatkowska, 2015 ) ( simulation skill ).
Motivation is high since the procedure is challenging and students work together striving to find a more accurate and complete solution than other groups ( Nishida et al. , 2009 ) ( collective intelligence ).
Imaginative and thinking abilities are stimulated during the problem-solving process ( Nishida et al. , 2009 ; Nishida et al. , 2008 ) when students have to imagine the model and conceptualize its function by drawing it like a designer (conceptual artifact) and when they have to simulate its function by constructing it like an engineer (tanglible artifact) ( performance and distributed cognition skills ).
Inexpensive materials used in both artifacts feed children inner capacities and encourage them to understand the real world ( Cordes and Miller, 2000 ) and generate models ( Alhumaidan et al. , 2015 ). Understanding and respecting the thoughts of others and sharing ideas through social interactions also indicate the employment of the empathy imaginative teaching method within this community of learners ( collective intelligence and negotiation skills ).
The ultimate objective is to compose a theory reflected by the two artifacts/low-tech prototypes, a non-material/conceptual (drawing) and a material/tangible (real-world model), which are unified to illustrate the developing theory ( transmedia navigation skill ).
The teacher as facilitator of the educational process scaffolds students so that to extend their abilities through the imaginative teaching method of discussion and through the provision of appropriate materials. Additionally, peer support and feedback are indicators of Vygotský s Zone of Proximal Development presence. Social participation and interaction affect collective information processing towards the problem solution, illustrating the implementation of social constructivism ( negotiation skill ).
The employment of inquiry (finding the most accurate solution with “learning by doing” approach) and imagination (conceptualizing the problem with a drawing and realizing its function into real world through a tangible model construction) are indicators of Papert’s constructionism theory ( Kafai and Resnick, 1996 ) ( performance skill ).
The learning perspective followed in this example is multimodal in that the internal representations and meaning construction are externalized through artifacts construction ( Papert and Harel, 1991 ). Media arts implications are encountered through artifacts construction involving meaning making and representation through language and manipulative ( Peppler, 2010 ; Picciano, 2009 ). Learners express themselves and value the aesthetic qualities of their scientific artworks (final products) that represent their understanding ( Kellner and Share, 2007 ) ( collective intelligence, simulation, distributed cognition, visualization skills ).
The proposed model follows a pedagogy-driven approach rather a technology-driven one since we suggest its implementation in low-tech, information-rich learning environments without computers. The added value of this paper is that it proposes a novel pedagogical model that can serve as a pool of pedagogical approaches and as a framework implemented in various disciplines and grades. A CT curriculum framework for K-6 is an area of research that is still in its infancy ( Angeli et al. , 2016 ), so our model is intended to provide a holistic perspective over this area by focusing how to approach the convergence among CT, collaboration and creativity skills in practice rather than what to teach. Based on literature, we explained how multiple moments impact on CT, creativity and collaboration development and presented the linkages among them. Successful implementation of CT requires not only computer science and mathematics, but also imaginative capacities involving innovation and curiosity ( The College Board, 2012 ). It is necessary to understand the CT implications for teaching and learning beyond the traditional applications on computer science and mathematics ( Kotsopoulos et al. , 2017 ) and start paying more attention to CT implications on social sciences and non-cognitive skills. Furthermore, there is room for research on how imaginative capacities can facilitate, foster and even predict the CT acquisition in various disciplines. However, there is some research work reporting that imagination is essential in computing, explicit guidelines and experimental applications that show how it can be achieved in practice are scarce. Drawing upon this scarcity, we based our pedagogical model on imagination and on pedagogical approaches that can empower it in relation to unplugged CT and collaboration. CT in this model is seen as a cognitive variable involving problem-solving process disconnected from computer programming. Though an unplugged approach can introduce young students into CT requiring the least amount of cognitive demand and technical knowledge ( Kotsopoulos et al. , 2017 ), further research is necessary to define the point at which the unplugged approach should grant its position to the plugged-in approach so that to keep on developing CT skills in a more sophisticated manner ( Brackmann et al. , 2017 ).
Brackmann et al. (2016) assert that the application of unplugged CT activities should be evaluated in relation to cognitive development improvement to empirically confirm that the CT incorporation into the basic education curriculum is necessary. Even though the combined approach of creativity, CT and collaboration is proposed, empirical studies are still scarce. What is needed is to infuse these skills into school curricula with evidence-based findings across different disciplines and grades, from preschool to higher education. Additionally, the current literature lacks in assuming connections among CT, collaboration, creativity and new media literacy skills. Characteristics of new media literacy skills are inherent elements of CSU and low-tech prototyping methods such as play, collective intelligence and simulation. Therefore, future research should focus on how new media literacy skills are developed through CSU and low-tech prototyping methods, how they can feed back into CT development and whether new media literacy skills can predict the successful CT, creativity and collaboration acquisition. Another interesting direction for future research is the area of learning styles. Kotsopoulos et al. (2017) state that many different types of projects support the different abilities, interests and learning styles of students. Future research can be oriented on this field by investigating whether learning styles can predict the engagement level, performance or even the success of students in CT and which learning styles model is the most appropriate to accompany this skill.
Though the presented example (case study) seems to exploit the proposed multiple moments model at optimal level, empirical evidence is needed to show the practical applicability of it in a variety of contexts, not only in primary school settings. Future studies can extend, enrich or even alter some of its elements through experimental applications on how all these macro/micromoments work in practice in terms of easiness in implementation, flexibility, social orientation and skills improvement.
3C (CT, creativity and collaboration) multiple moments pedagogical model
Alhumaidan , H. , Lo , K.P.Y. and Selby , A. ( 2015 ), “ Co-design of augmented reality book for collaborative learning experience in primary education ”, SAI Intelligent Systems Conference (IntelliSys), London, 10-11 November .
Angeli , C. , Voogt , J. , Fluck , A. , Webb , M. , Cox , M. , Malyn-Smith , J. and Zagami , J. ( 2016 ), “ A K-6 computational thinking curriculum framework: implications for teacher knowledge ”, Journal of Educational Technology and Society , Vol. 19 No. 3 .
Bers , M.U. , Ponte , I. , Juelich , C. , Viera , A. and Schenker , J. ( 2002 ), “ Teachers as designers: integrating robotics in early childhood education ”, Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual , Vol. 2002 No. 1 , pp. 123 - 145 .
Brackmann , C. , Barone , D. , Casali , A. , Boucinha , R. and Muñoz-Hernandez , S. ( 2016 ), “ Computational thinking: panorama of the Americas ”, 2016 international symposium on computers in Education (SIIE) , IEEE , pp. 1 - 6 .
Brackmann , C.P. , Román-González , M. , Robles , G. , Moreno-León , J. , Casali , A. and Barone , D. ( 2017 ), “ Development of computational thinking skills through unplugged activities in primary school ”, Proceedings of the 12th Workshop on Primary and Secondary Computing Education , ACM , pp. 65 - 72 .
Brown , A.L. ( 1992 ), “ Design experiments: theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings ”, Journal of the Learning Sciences , Vol. 2 No. 2 , pp. 141 - 178 .
Campana , K. ( 2018 ), “ the multimodal power of storytime: exploring an information environment for young children ”, PhD Thesis, University of Washington , Washington, DC .
Carroll , M. , Goldman , S. , Britos , L. , Koh , J. , Royalty , A. and Hornstein , M. ( 2010 ), “ Destination, imagination and the fires within: design thinking in a middle school classroom ”, International Journal of Art and Design Education , Vol. 29 No. 1 , pp. 37 - 53 .
Cordes , C. and Miller , E. ( 2000 ), “ Fool's gold: a critical look at computers in childhood ”.
Dede , C. ( 2010 ), “ Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills ”, 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn , Vol. 20 , pp. 51 - 76 .
Dede , C. Mishra , P. and Voogt , J. ( 2013 ), “ Working group 6: advancing computational thinking in 21st century learning ”, International Summit on ICT in Education , pp. 1 - 6 .
Egan , K. and Judson , G. ( 2009 ), “ Values and imagination in teaching: with a special focus on social studies ”, Educational Philosophy and Theory , Vol. 41 No. 2 , pp. 126 - 140 .
Fosnot , C.T. and Perry , R.S. ( 1996 ), “ Constructivism: a psychological theory of learning ”, Constructivism: Theory, Perspectives, and Practice , Vol. 2 , pp. 8 - 33 .
Greene , M. ( 2011 ), “ Releasing the imagination ”, NJ , Vol. 34 No. 1 , pp. 61 - 70 .
Gretter , S. and Yadav , A. ( 2016 ), “ Computational thinking and media and information literacy: an integrated approach to teaching twenty-first century skills ”, TechTrends , Vol. 60 No. 5 , pp. 510 - 516 .
Grover , S. and Pea , R. ( 2013 ), “ Computational thinking in K – 12: a review of the state of the field ”, Educational Researcher , Vol. 42 No. 1 , pp. 38 - 43 .
Helding , L. ( 2009 ), “ Howard gardner's theory of multiple intelligences ”, Journal of Singing , Vol. 66 No. 2 , p. 193 .
Henriksen , D. , Mishra , P. and Fisser , P. ( 2016 ), “ Infusing creativity and technology in 21st century education: a systemic view for change ”, Journal of Educational Technology and Society , Vol. 19 No. 3 , pp. 27 - 37 .
Hübner , E. ( 2015 ), “ Indirect and direct media pedagogy ”, Media Competency and Waldorf Education , Bund der Freien Waldorfschulen , pp. 10 - 13 .
Jacob , S.R. and Warschauer , M. ( 2018 ), “ Computational thinking and literacy ”, Journal of Computer Science Integration , Vol. 1 No. 1 , doi: 10.26716/jcsi.2018.01.1.1 .
Jenkins , H. , Clinton , K. , Purushotma , R. , Robison , A.J. and Weigel , M. ( 2009 ), “ Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: media education for the 21st century ”, The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Reports on Digital Media and Learning , Massachusetts Institute of Technology , Cambridge .
Jennings , P. and Giaccardi , E. ( 2005 ), “ Creativity support tools for and by the new media arts community ”, NSF Workshop Report on Creativity Support Tools , Washington, DC , 12-14 June .
Kafai , Y.B. and Burke , Q. ( 2013 ), “ The social turn in K-12 programming: moving from computational thinking to computational participation ”, Proceeding of the 44th ACM Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education , ACM , pp. 603 - 608 .
Kafai , Y. and Resnick , M. ( 1996 ), Constructionism in Practice: Designing, Thinking, and Learning in a Digital World , Lawrence Erlbaum Associates , Mahwah, NJ .
Kellner , D. and Share , J. ( 2007 ), “ Critical media literacy, democracy, and the reconstruction of education ”, Media Literacy: A Reader , pp. 3 - 23 .
Kosic , M. ( 2018 ), “ Media literacy and social emotional learning for the net generation ”, International Journal of Emotional Education , Vol. 10 No. 1 , pp. 68 - 88 .
Kotsopoulos , D. , Floyd , L. , Khan , S. , Namukasa , I.K. , Somanath , S. , Weber , J. and Yiu , C. ( 2017 ), “ A pedagogical framework for computational thinking ”, Digital Experiences in Mathematics Education , Vol. 3 No. 2 , pp. 154 - 171 .
Letonsaari , M. ( 2018 ), “ Extended cognition hypothesis applied to computational thinking in computer science education ”, International Conference on Computational Science, China, 11-13 June .
McKenzie , P.J. ( 2003 ), “ A model of information practices in accounts of everyday-life information seeking ”, Journal of Documentation , Vol. 59 No. 1 , pp. 19 - 40 .
Mishra , P. and Yadav , A. ( 2013 ), “ Of art and algorithms: rethinking technology and creativity in the 21st century ”, TechTrends , Vol. 57 No. 3 , p. 11 .
National Research Council ( 2003 ), Beyond Productivity: Information Technology, Innovation, and Creativity , National Academies Press .
National Research Council ( 2010 ), “ Committee for the workshops on computational thinking: report of a workshop on the scope and nature of computational thinking ”, National Academies Press , Washington, DC , available at: www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12840
Nielsen , T.W. ( 2006 ), “ towards a pedagogy of imagination: a phenomenological case study of holistic education ”, Ethnography and Education , Vol. 1 No. 2 , pp. 247 - 264 .
Nishida , T. , Idosaka , Y. , Hofuku , Y. , Kanemune , S. and Kuno , Y. ( 2008 ), “ New methodology of information education with computer science unplugged ”, International Conference on Informatics in Secondary Schools-Evolution and Perspectives, Poland, 1-4 July .
Nishida , T. , Kanemune , S. , Idosaka , Y. , Namiki , M. , Bell , T. and Kuno , Y. ( 2009 ), “ A CS unplugged design pattern ”, ACM SIGCSE Bulletin , Vol. 41 No. 1 , pp. 231 - 235 .
Papert , S. ( 1987 ), “ Constructionism: a new opportunity for elementary science education ”, available at: http://nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=8751190 (accessed 1 August 2016 ).
Papert , S. ( 2000 ), “ What's the big idea? Toward a pedagogy of idea power ”, IBM Systems Journal , Vol. 39 No. 3.4 , pp. 720 - 729 .
Papert , S. and Harel , I. ( 1991 ), “ Situating constructionism ”, Constructionism , Vol. 36 No. 2 , pp. 1 - 11 .
Peppler , K. ( 2010 ), “ Media arts: arts education for a digital age ”, Teachers College Record , Vol. 112 No. 8 , pp. 2118 - 2153 .
Peppler , K.A. and Kafai , Y.B. ( 2007a ), “ Collaboration, computation, and creativity: media arts practices in urban youth culture ”, Proceedings of the 8th Iternational Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning , International Society of the Learning Sciences , pp. 590 - 592 .
Peppler , K.A. and Kafai , Y.B. ( 2007b ), “ Collaboration, computation, and creativity: media arts practices in urban youth culture ”, 8th International Conference on Computer Supported Collaborative Learning, NJ, 16-21 July .
Picciano , A.G. ( 2009 ), “ Blending with purpose: the multimodal model ”, Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks , Vol. 13 No. 1 , pp. 7 - 18 .
Pritchard , A. ( 2008 ), Ways of Learning: Learning Theories and Learning Styles in the Classroom , Routledge .
Razzouk , R. and Shute , V. ( 2012 ), “ What is design thinking and why is it important? ”, Review of Educational Research , Vol. 82 No. 3 , pp. 330 - 348 .
Robin , B. ( 2006 ), “ The educational uses of digital storytelling ”, Society for Information Technology and Teacher Education International Conference, Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education , AACE , FL , pp. 709 - 716 .
Sawyer , R.K. ( 2012 ), Explaining Creativity: The Science of Human Innovation , 2nd ed. , Oxford University Press , New York, NY .
Sawyer , R.K. and DeZutter , S. ( 2009 ), “ Distributed creativity: how collective creations emerge from collaboration ”, Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts , Vol. 3 No. 2 , p. 81 .
Scheer , A. , Noweski , C. and Meinel , C. ( 2012 ), “ Transforming constructivist learning into action: design thinking in education ”, Design and Technology Education An International Journal , Vol. 17 No. 3 .
Schunk , D.H. ( 2012 ), Learning Theories an Educational Perspective , Pearson , Boston .
Shute , V.J. , Sun , C. and Asbell-Clarke , J. ( 2017 ), “ Demystifying computational thinking ”, Educational Research Review , Vol. 22 , pp. 142 - 158 .
Steen , M. ( 2013 ), “ Co-design as a process of joint inquiry and imagination ”, Design Issues , Vol. 29 No. 2 , pp. 16 - 28 .
Sun , H. ( 2017 ), “ low-tech education in information education: conflict and fusion ”, International Conference on Education and Cognition, Behavior, Neuroscience , Francis Academic Press , pp. 547 - 561 .
Sysło , M.M. and Kwiatkowska , A.B. ( 2015 ), “ Introducing a new computer science curriculum for all school levels in Poland ”, International Conference on Informatics in Schools: Situation, Evolution, and Perspectives , Springer , Cham , pp. 141 - 154 .
Talja , S. , Tuominen , K. and Savolainen , R. ( 2005 ), “ ‘Isms’ in information science: constructivism, collectivism and constructionism ”, Journal of Documentation , Vol. 61 No. 1 , pp. 79 - 101 .
The College Board ( 2012 ), “ Computational thinking practices and big ideas, key concepts, and supporting concepts ”, available at: www.csprinciples.org/home/about-theproject
Van Alphen , P. ( 2011 ), “ imagination as a transformative tool in primary school education ”, RoSE – Research on Steiner Education , Vol. 2 No. 2 , pp. 16 - 34 .
Voogt , J. , Fisser , P. , Good , J. , Mishra , P. and Yadav , A. ( 2015 ), “ Computational thinking in compulsory education: towards an agenda for research and practice ”, Education and Information Technologies , Vol. 20 No. 4 , pp. 715 - 728 .
Vygotsky , L.S. ( 2004 ), “ imagination and creativity in childhood ”, Journal of Russian and East European Psychology , Vol. 42 No. 1 , pp. 7 - 97 .
Westerlund , B. , Lindquist , S. and Sundblad , Y. ( 2001 ), “ Cooperative design of communication support for and with families in Stockholm, communication maps, communication probes and low-tech prototypes ”, 1st Equator IRC Workshop on Ubiquitous Computing for the domestic environment, Nottingham, 13-14 September .
Wing , J.M. ( 2006 ), “ Computational thinking ”, Communications of the ACM , Vol. 49 No. 3 , pp. 33 - 35 .
Bell , T. , Alexander , J. , Freeman , I. and Grimley , M. ( 2009 ), “ computer science unplugged: school students doing real computing without computers ”, The New Zealand Journal of Applied Computing and Information Technology , Vol. 13 No. 1 , pp. 20 - 29 .
Cassidy* , S. ( 2004 ), “ Learning styles: an overview of theories, models, and measures ”, Educational Psychology , Vol. 24 No. 4 , pp. 419 - 444 .
Fleming , L. ( 2013 ), “ expanding learning opportunities with transmedia practices: ‘inanimate Alice’ as an exemplar ”, Journal of Media Literacy Education , Vol. 5 No. 2 , pp. 370 - 377 .
Guha , M.L. , Druin , A. and Fails , J.A. ( 2013 ), “ Cooperative inquiry revisited: reflections of the past and guidelines for the future of intergenerational co-design ”, International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction , Vol. 1 No. 1 , pp. 14 - 23 .
Hawk , T.F. and Shah , A.J. ( 2007 ), “ using learning style instruments to enhance student learning ”, Decision Sciences Journal of Innovative Education , Vol. 5 No. 1 , pp. 1 - 19 .
Kim , J.H. and Wiehe-Beck , A. ( 2016 ), “ Understanding ‘the other’ through art: fostering narrative imagination in elementary students ”, International Journal of Education and the Arts , Vol. 17 No. 2 .
Messick , S. ( 1984 ), “ The nature of cognitive styles: problems and promises in educational research ”, Educational Psychologist , Vol. 19 No. 2 , pp. 59 - 74 .
Mills , K.A. and Unsworth , L. ( 2018 ), “ iP ad animations: powerful multimodal practices for adolescent literacy and emotional language ”, Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy , Vol. 61 No. 6 , pp. 609 - 620 .
Pietschmann , D. , Völkel , S. and Ohler , P. ( 2014 ), “ Limitations of transmedia storytelling for children: a cognitive developmental analysis ”, International Journal of Communication , Vol. 8 , pp. 2259 - 2282 .
Rodriguez-Illera , J.L. and Castells , N.M. ( 2014 ), “ Educational uses of transmedia storytelling ”, Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia , Vol. 23 No. 4 , pp. 335 - 357 .
Stehlik , T. ( 2008 ), “ Thinking, feeling, and willing: how waldorf schools provide a creative pedagogy that nurtures and develops imagination ”, Pedagogies of the Imagination , Springer , Dordrecht , pp. 231 - 243 .
This work is part of doctoral dissertation, supported by a doctoral grant from the Open University of Catalonia, Spain.
About the authors.
Xanthippi Tsortanidou is a PhD candidate at Open University of Catalonia. She holds a Master in Curriculum Development from the University of Thessaly in Greece. Her research interests include learning design and pedagogies, ICT and collaborative learning.
Thanasis Daradoumis holds a PhD in Computer Science from the Polytechnic University of Catalonia. He combines his role as an Associate Professor at the University of the Aegean, Department of Cultural Technology and Communication with his collaboration at the Open University of Catalonia within the Department of Computer Science, Multimedia and Telecommunications. He is also researcher at the Internet Interdisciplinary Institute (IN3) as well as at the eLearn Center (eLC). His research interests are emotional intelligence, alternative (Holistic) education, learning analytics, e-learning, collaborative, affective and adaptive systems, CSCL. He has been advisor of over 20 MSc theses and 8 PhDs. He has published over 110 Scopus-indexed papers, from which over 20 are articles in ISI-JCR journals. He is a member of the editorial board of several international conferences and journals; he has also coordinated or participated in various National and European R&D projects.
Elena Barberá holds a PhD in Psychology (1995) and doctorate extraordinary award for the University of Barcelona (Spain). She is currently Director of the Education and Technology PhD program and she is Full Professor at the Department of Psychology and Education Sciences at the Open University of Catalonia. Her research activity is focused on learning regulation and assessment, learning strategies and processes of teaching and learning in virtual contexts.
All feedback is valuable.
Please share your general feedback
Contact Customer Support
Harvard Business School Online's Business Insights Blog provides the career insights you need to achieve your goals and gain confidence in your business skills.
One of the biggest hindrances to innovation is complacency—it can be more comfortable to do what you know than venture into the unknown. Business leaders can overcome this barrier by mobilizing creative team members and providing space to innovate.
There are several tools you can use to encourage creativity in the workplace. Creative problem-solving is one of them, which facilitates the development of innovative solutions to difficult problems.
Here’s an overview of creative problem-solving and why it’s important in business.
Access your free e-book today.
Research is necessary when solving a problem. But there are situations where a problem’s specific cause is difficult to pinpoint. This can occur when there’s not enough time to narrow down the problem’s source or there are differing opinions about its root cause.
In such cases, you can use creative problem-solving , which allows you to explore potential solutions regardless of whether a problem has been defined.
Creative problem-solving is less structured than other innovation processes and encourages exploring open-ended solutions. It also focuses on developing new perspectives and fostering creativity in the workplace . Its benefits include:
Creative problem-solving is traditionally based on the following key principles :
Creative problem-solving uses two primary tools to find solutions: divergence and convergence. Divergence generates ideas in response to a problem, while convergence narrows them down to a shortlist. It balances these two practices and turns ideas into concrete solutions.
By framing problems as questions, you shift from focusing on obstacles to solutions. This provides the freedom to brainstorm potential ideas.
When brainstorming, it can be natural to reject or accept ideas right away. Yet, immediate judgments interfere with the idea generation process. Even ideas that seem implausible can turn into outstanding innovations upon further exploration and development.
Using negative words like "no" discourages creative thinking. Instead, use positive language to build and maintain an environment that fosters the development of creative and innovative ideas.
Whereas creative problem-solving facilitates developing innovative ideas through a less structured workflow, design thinking takes a far more organized approach.
Design thinking is a human-centered, solutions-based process that fosters the ideation and development of solutions. In the online course Design Thinking and Innovation , Harvard Business School Dean Srikant Datar leverages a four-phase framework to explain design thinking.
The four stages are:
Creative problem-solving primarily operates in the ideate phase of design thinking but can be applied to others. This is because design thinking is an iterative process that moves between the stages as ideas are generated and pursued. This is normal and encouraged, as innovation requires exploring multiple ideas.
While there are many useful tools in the creative problem-solving process, here are three you should know:
One way to innovate is by creating a story about a problem to understand how it affects users and what solutions best fit their needs. Here are the steps you need to take to use this tool properly.
Create a problem story to identify the undesired phenomena (UDP). For example, consider a company that produces printers that overheat. In this case, the UDP is "our printers overheat."
To move forward in time, ask: “Why is this a problem?” For example, minor damage could be one result of the machines overheating. In more extreme cases, printers may catch fire. Don't be afraid to create multiple problem stories if you think of more than one UDP.
To move backward in time, ask: “What caused this UDP?” If you can't identify the root problem, think about what typically causes the UDP to occur. For the overheating printers, overuse could be a cause.
Following the three-step framework above helps illustrate a clear problem story:
You can extend the problem story in either direction if you think of additional cause-and-effect relationships.
By this point, you’ll have multiple UDP storylines. Take two that are similar and focus on breaking the chains connecting them. This can be accomplished through inversion or neutralization.
Even if creating a problem story doesn't provide a solution, it can offer useful context to users’ problems and additional ideas to be explored. Given that divergence is one of the fundamental practices of creative problem-solving, it’s a good idea to incorporate it into each tool you use.
Brainstorming is a tool that can be highly effective when guided by the iterative qualities of the design thinking process. It involves openly discussing and debating ideas and topics in a group setting. This facilitates idea generation and exploration as different team members consider the same concept from multiple perspectives.
Hosting brainstorming sessions can result in problems, such as groupthink or social loafing. To combat this, leverage a three-step brainstorming method involving divergence and convergence :
The alternate worlds tool is an empathetic approach to creative problem-solving. It encourages you to consider how someone in another world would approach your situation.
For example, if you’re concerned that the printers you produce overheat and catch fire, consider how a different industry would approach the problem. How would an automotive expert solve it? How would a firefighter?
Be creative as you consider and research alternate worlds. The purpose is not to nail down a solution right away but to continue the ideation process through diverging and exploring ideas.
Whether you’re an entrepreneur, marketer, or business leader, learning the ropes of design thinking can be an effective way to build your skills and foster creativity and innovation in any setting.
If you're ready to develop your design thinking and creative problem-solving skills, explore Design Thinking and Innovation , one of our online entrepreneurship and innovation courses. If you aren't sure which course is the right fit, download our free course flowchart to determine which best aligns with your goals.
Birth To 5 Matters
Guidance by the sector, for the sector
Having their own ideas (creative thinking) • Thinking of ideas that are new and meaningful to the child • Playing with possibilities (what if? what else?) • Visualising and imagining options • Finding new ways to do things
Making links (building theories) • Making links and noticing patterns in their experience • Making predictions • Testing their ideas • Developing ideas of grouping, sequences, cause and effect
Working with ideas (critical thinking) • Planning, making decisions about how to approach a task, solve a problem and reach a goal • Checking how well their activities are going • Flexibly changing strategy as needed • Reviewing how well the approach worked
• Use the language of thinking and learning: think, know, remember, forget, idea, makes sense, plan, learn, find out, confused, figure out, trying to do. • Model being a thinker, showing that you don’t always know, are curious and sometimes puzzled, and can think and find out. I wonder? • Give children time to talk and think. Make time to actively listen to children’s ideas. • Encourage open-ended thinking, generating more alternative ideas or solutions, by not settling on the first suggestions: What else is possible?. • Always respect children’s efforts and ideas, so they feel safe to take a risk with a new idea and feel comfortable with mistakes. • Encourage children to question and challenge assumptions. • Help children to make links to what they already know. • Support children’s interests over time, reminding them of previous approaches and encouraging them to make connections between their experiences. • Help children to become aware of their own goals, make plans, and to review their own progress and successes. Describe what you see them trying to do, and encourage children to talk about what they are doing, how they plan to do it, what worked well and what they would change next time. • Talking aloud helps children to think and control what they do. Model self-talk, describing your actions in play. • Value questions, talk, and many possible responses, without rushing toward answers too quickly. • Sustained shared thinking helps children to explore ideas and make links. Follow children’s lead in conversation, and think about things together. • Encourage children to choose personally meaningful ways to represent and clarify their thinking through graphics. • Take an interest in what the children say about their marks and signs, talk to them about their meanings and value what they do and say. • Encourage children to describe problems they encounter, and to suggest ways to solve the problem. • Show and talk about strategies – how to do things – including problem-solving, thinking and learning. • Encourage children to reflect and evaluate their work and review their own progress and learning. • Model the plan-do-review process yourself.
• In planning activities, ask yourself: Is this an opportunity for children to find their own ways to represent and develop their own ideas? Avoid children just reproducing someone else’s ideas. • Build in opportunities for children to play with materials before using them in planned tasks. • Play is a key opportunity for children to think creatively and flexibly, solve problems and link ideas. Establish the enabling conditions for rich play: space, time, flexible resources, choice, control, warm and supportive relationships. • Recognisable and predictable routines help children to predict and make connections in their experiences. • Routines can be flexible, while still basically orderly. • Provide extended periods of uninterrupted time so that children can develop their activities. • Keep significant activities out instead of routinely tidying them away, so that there are opportunities to revisit what they have been doing to explore possible further lines of enquiry. • Plan linked experiences that follow the ideas children are really thinking about. • Represent thinking visually, such as mind-maps to represent thinking together, finding out what children know and want to know. • Develop a learning community which focuses on how and not just what we are learning. • Setting leaders should give staff time to think about children’s needs, to make links between their knowledge and practice.
Previous page: Active Learning | Next page: Learning and Development
Despite acknowledging the importance of teaching or promoting critical thinking as part of education, practicing critical thinking in the real world and life has its own challenges to be resolved. Some of them are presented in the studies included in this chapter. The first article is on the gap between the perceptions on cognitive active learning of teachers and learners. The focus of the study is on exploring learners’ perceptions on deep learning particularly in Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). Instructors facing organizational difficulties, lack of experience in synchronous learning for the students, unable to have peer interaction while learning in VLE, inadequate training for the instructors and students to teach and learning virtually, students’ not experiencing the benefits of deep learning are among the major gaps or problems identified in this study. The second article is about techniques that enhance higher order thinking skills in EFL learners by using post-reading strategies resulting in better speech production and reasoning power. The output of the research states that concept mapping and argumentation enhance EFL learners’ reasoning power when private speech is used to understand the process of thinking. The third article in this chapter is on cross-cultural psychology where the cultural influence on making inferences and participating in debates by Asian students who are studying in western institutions. Though there are intercultural differences in the inferences made because of cultural backgrounds and first language variations, they are insignificant. Then the reasons for obvious differences could be learning environment, literacy and higher education. The statement that Asian students are unable to perform well in western logic might be true not because the Asian students are less capable of thinking critically but because they are not trained in or used to western logical problems. The last article of this chapter is on assessment of critical thinking in first year dental curriculum that establishes the importance of critical thinking in dental education. The assessment is on the importance of critical thinking and the need to change the curriculum incorporating critical thinking.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Institutional subscriptions
Smith, T. W., & Colby, S. A. (2007). Teaching for deep learning. The Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 80 (5), 205–210.
Article Google Scholar
Platow, M. J., Mavor, K. I., & Grace, D. M. (2013). On the role of discipline-related self-concept in deep and surface approaches to learning among university students. Instructional Science, 41 (2), 271–285.
Reinhardt, M. M. (2010). The use of deep learning strategies in online business courses to impact student retention. American Journal of Business Education, 3 (12), 49.
Google Scholar
Mimirinis, M., & Bhattacharya, M. (2007). Design of virtual learning environments for deep learning. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 18 (1), 55–64.
Smart, K., & Cappel, J. (2006). Students’ perceptions of online learning: A comparative study. Journal of Information Technology Education: Research, 5 (1), 201–219.
Jain, P. (2015). Virtual learning environment. International Journal in IT & Engineering, 3 (5), 75–84.
Molnár, G. (2013). Challenges and opportunities in virtual and electronic learning environments. In IEEE 11th international symposium on intelligent systems and informatics .
Riley, S. K. L. (2008). Teaching in virtual worlds: Opportunities and challenges. Setting Knowledge Free: The Journal of Issues in Informing Science and Information Technology, 5 (5), 127–135.
Warden, C. A., Stanworth, J. O., Ren, J. B., & Warden, A. R. (2013). Synchronous learning best practices: An action research study. Computers & Education, 63 , 197–207.
Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2014). Blending online asynchronous and synchronous learning. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 15 (2), 189–212.
Cole, M. (2009). Using wiki technology to support student engagement: Lessons from the trenches. Computers & Education, 52 (1), 141–146.
Tyler, J., & Zurick, A. (2014). Synchronous versus asynchronous learning-is there a measurable difference? In Proceedings of the 2014 Institute for Behavioral and Applied Management Conference, IBAM22 . October 9–11, 2014, 52.
Asikainen, H., & Gijbels, D. (2017). Do students develop towards more deep approaches to learning during studies? A systematic review on the development of students’ deep and surface approaches to learning in higher education. Educational Psychology Review, 29 (2), 205–234.
Biggs, J. B. (1993). From theory to practice: A cognitive systems approach. Higher Education Research and Development, 12 (1), 73–86.
Garrison, D. R., & Cleveland-Innes, M. (2005). Facilitating cognitive presence in online learning: Interaction is not enough. The American Journal of Distance Education, 19 (3), 133–148.
Van Raaij, E. M., & Schepers, J. J. (2008). The acceptance and use of a virtual learning environment in China. Computers & Education, 50 (3), 838–852.
Postareff, L., Parpala, A., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2015). Factors contributing to changes in a deep approach to learning in different learning environments. Learning Environments Research, 18 , 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10984-015-9186-1
Dolmans, D., Loyens, S., Marcq, H., & Gijbels, D. (2016). Deep and surface learning in problem-based learning: A review of the literature. Advances in Health Science Education, 21 (5), 1087–1112. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-015-9645-6
Wildemuth, B. M. (Ed.). (2016). Applications of social research methods to questions in information and library science . ABC-CLIO.
Silverman, D. (Ed.). (2016). Qualitative research . Sage.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25 (1), 54–67.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language . MIT Press.
McCafferty, S. G. (1994). The use of private speech by adult ESL learners at different levels of proficiency. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 135–156). Ablex.
Centeno-Cortes, B., & Jimenez Jimenez, A. F. (2004). Problem-solving tasks in a foreign language: The importance of the L1 in private verbal thinking. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 14 (1), 7–35. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2004.00052.x
Ghanizadeh, A., & Mirzaee, S. (2012). Critical thinking: How to enhance it in language classes . Lambert Academic Publishing.
Choi, I., Nisbett, R., & Smith, E. E. (1997a). Culture, categorization and inductive reasoning. Cognition, 65 (1), 15–32.
Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: Holistic versus analytic cognition. Psychological Review, 108 (2), 291–310.
Peng, K. (1997). Naive dialecticism and its effects on reasoning and judgement about contradiction . University of Michigan.
Peng, K., & Nisbett, R. (1996). Cross-cultural similarities and differences in the understanding of physical causality. In Paper presented at the science and culture: Proceedings of the seventh interdisciplinary conference on science and culture .
Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline . Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Nisbett, R. E. (2003). The geography of thought: How Asians and westerners think differently … and why . Free Press.
Ji, L.-J., Zhang, Z., & Nisbett, R. E. (2004). Is it culture or is it language? Examination of language effects in cross-cultural research on categorisation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87 (1), 57–65.
Norenzayan, A. (2001). Rule-based and experience-based thinking: The cognitive consequences of intellectual traditions. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences & Engineering, 62 (6-B), 2992.
Norenzayan, A., Smith, E. E., Kim, B. J., & Nisbett, R. E. (2002). Cultural preferences for formal versus intuitive reasoning. Cognitive Science, 26 (5), 653–684.
Peng, K., Ames, D. R., & Knowles, E. D. (2000). Culture and human inference: Perspectives from three traditions. In D. Matsumoto (Ed.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (pp. 1–2). Oxford University Press.
Whorf, B. L. (1962b). The relation of habitual thought to language, and an American Indian model of the universe from language. In J. B. Carroll (Ed.), Language, thought and reality: Selected writings of Benjamin . MIT Press.
Davidson, D. (1984). On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. In inquiries into truth and interpretation . Oxford University Press.
Devitt, M., & Sterelny, K. (1997). Language and reality . MIT Press.
Gellatly, A. (1995). Colourful whorfian ideas: Linguistic and cultural influences on the perception and cognition of colour and on the investigation of time. Mind and Language, 10 (3).
Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct . Penguin Books.
Book Google Scholar
Davies, W. M. (2006b). Intensive teaching formats: A review. Issues in Educational Research, 16 (1), 1–20.
Felix, U., & Lawson, M. (1994). Evaluation of an integrated bridging program course on academic writing for overseas postgraduate students. Higher Education Research and Development, 13 (1), 59–70.
Felix, U., & Martin, C. (1991). A report on the program of instruction in essay writing techniques for overseas post-graduate students . School of Education, Flinders University.
Brand, D. (1987). The new whizz kids: Why Asian Americans are doing well and what it costs them. Time, August (42–50) .
Murphy, D. (1987). Offshore education: A Hong Kong perspective. Australian Universities Review, 30 (2), 43–44.
Wong, N.-Y. (2002). Conceptions of doing and learning mathematics among Chinese. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 23 (2), 211–229.
Accreditation standards for dental education programs. Commission on dental accreditation. Commission on dental Education 2019.
Elangovan, S., Venugopalan, S. R., Srinivasan, S., Karimbux, N. Y., Weistroffer, P., & Allareddy, V. (2016). Integration of basic-clinical sciences, PBL, CBL, and IPE in U.S. dental schools’ curricula and a proposed integrated curriculum model for the future. Journal of Dental Education, 80 , 281–290.
Duong, M. T., Cothron, A. E., Lawson, N. C., & Doherty, E. H. (2018). U.S. Dental schools’ preparation for the integrated national board dental examination. Journal of Dental Education, 82 , 252–259.
Annansingh, F. (2019). Mind the gap: Cognitive active learning in virtual learning environment perception of instructors and students. Education and Information Technologies . https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-019-09949-5
Mirzaee, S., & Maftoon, P. (2016). An examination of Vygotsky’s socio-cultural theory in second language acquisition: The role of higher order thinking enhancing techniques and the EFL learners’ use of private speech in the construction of reasoning. Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education . https://doi.org/10.1186/s40862-016-0022-7
Martin Davies, W. (2006). Cognitive contours: Recent work on cross-cultural psychology and its relevance for education. Studies in Philosophy and Education . https://doi.org/10.1007/s11217-006-9012-4
van der Hoeven, D., Truong, T. T. L. A., Holland, J. N., & Quock, R. L. (2020). Assessment of critical thinking in a first-year dental curriculum. Medical. Science Educator . https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-00914-3
Download references
Authors and affiliations.
Department of Training and Development, The English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
K. Venkat Reddy
Department of English Language Teaching, The English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
G. Suvarna Lakshmi
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Editors and affiliations.
Department of English Language Teaching, English and Foreign Languages University, Hyderabad, Telangana, India
Reprints and permissions
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
Reddy, K.V., Lakshmi, G.S. (2024). Practicing Critical Thinking: Issues and Challenges. In: Reddy, K.V., Lakshmi, G.S. (eds) Critical Thinking for Professional and Language Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37951-2_5
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-37951-2_5
Published : 04 September 2024
Publisher Name : Springer, Cham
Print ISBN : 978-3-031-37950-5
Online ISBN : 978-3-031-37951-2
eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Policies and ethics
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
These characteristics contribute to the development of collaboration, communication and critical thinking during a Design Jam, all 21 st century learning skills. ... The variety of participants stimulated new conversations and new ways of thinking around the same issue or problem. ... reveal that greater attention could be given to the creative ...
In addition to suggesting the portmanteau of "crea-critical thinking" as a new term to describe the overlap of much of the creative and critical thinking processes, the title of this model, "Crea-Critical-Collab-ication", is a verbal representation of the fluid four-way interrelationship between the 4Cs visually represented in Figure 2 ...
Critical thinking permeates every aspect of creative practice and creative development. Creative practice is catalytic in the acquisition and growth of the skills, dispositions, habits, values and virtues central to growth in complexity of critical thinking. The combination of the concepts of creativity and critical thinking in educational ...
Brookfield (Citation 2012) maintains that the discussion taking place in collaborative learning is one way of identifying the critical thinking skills that the students use.He has introduced various forms of focused discussion groups (critical conversation, scenario analysis, circle of voices, circular response, and chalk-talk), in which students experience critical thinking, primarily as a ...
Fostering students' critical thinking and creative thinking is an important aim in education. For example, art courses not only focus on artwork creation, but also on theoretical knowledge for identifying artworks. In the conventional lecture-based instruction mode for theoretical knowledge delivery, students' learning outcomes could be affected owing to the lack of student-teacher ...
In recent decades, approaches to critical thinking have generally taken a practical turn, pivoting away from more abstract accounts - such as emphasizing the logical relations that hold between statements (Ennis, 1964) - and moving toward an emphasis on belief and action.According to the definition that Robert Ennis (2018) has been advocating for the last few decades, critical thinking is ...
The article ends by calling for further research into the benefits of interdisciplinary metacognition across a range of learning contexts and a consideration of the need to go beyond often fixed adversarial critical thinking approaches and to develop an epistemic position based on inclusive collaboration and emergent creativity.
Creativity and critical thinking are key skills for complex, globalised and increasingly digitalised economies and societies. While teachers and education policy makers consider creativity and critical thinking as important learning goals, it is still unclear to many what it means to develop these skills in a school setting. To make it more visible and tangible to practitioners, the OECD ...
Smaller classes might be easier to stimulate students' active learning and integrate it with complex evaluation, where this will enhance students' critical thinking skills (Farmer et al., 2013). Moreover, it is a challenge to expect high quality of effectiveness in terms of equipping such complex skills if there isn't a standardized ...
Critical thinking mainly aims at assessing the strength and appropriateness of a statement, theory, or idea, through a questioning and perspective-taking process, which may (or not) result in a possibly novel statement or theory. Critical thinking need not lead to an original position to a problem. The most conventional one may be the most ...
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 ...
critical thinking, communication and collaborative engagement. This paper contributes to theory and pra ctice in the facilitation to a dvance thinking skills and creativity.
3.2.1 Creativity and Critical Thinking. Creativity and critical thinking are two distinct but related higher-order cognitive skills. As such, both require significant mental effort and energy; both are cognitively challenging. Creativity aims to create novel, appropriate ideas and products.
Abstract thinking. Storytelling. Reflection. Note that this list is not exhaustive, and there are many more ways of thinking creatively - try to see these creative skills as a jumping-off point for seeing things differently and exploring creative thinking at work.
The capacity to successfully, positively engage with the cognitive capacities of critical thinking has become the benchmark of employability for many diverse industries across the globe and is considered critical for the development of informed, decisive global citizenship. Despite this, education systems in several countries have developed policies and practices that limit the opportunities ...
Imaginative and thinking abilities are stimulated during the problem-solving process (Nishida et al., 2009; Nishida et al., 2008) when students have to imagine the model and conceptualize its function by drawing it like a designer (conceptual artifact) and when they have to simulate its function by constructing it like an engineer (tanglible ...
Early childhood is the most significant time in human development. It is during the early years that the brain's basic architecture is formed, commencing soon after conception and continuing from birth. In fact, by the time a child reaches the age of three, more than 90% of the brain has formed, and by five years, it is nearly fully developed ...
Creative problem-solving primarily operates in the ideate phase of design thinking but can be applied to others. This is because design thinking is an iterative process that moves between the stages as ideas are generated and pursued. This is normal and encouraged, as innovation requires exploring multiple ideas.
Working with ideas (critical thinking) • Planning, making decisions about how to approach a task, solve a problem and reach a goal. • Checking how well their activities are going. • Flexibly changing strategy as needed. • Reviewing how well the approach worked. Positive Relationships: what adults might do.
The extensive research on teaching critical thinking at all levels in education and incorporating critical thinking in the curriculum of various courses help us conclude that most of the initial challenges and barriers to teach critical thinking are resolved now as various techniques to enhance critical thinking are proposed by researchers/studies.