advantages and disadvantages of critical thinking in the classroom

Advantages and Disadvantages of Critical Thinking In Education

Looking for advantages and disadvantages of Critical Thinking In Education?

We have collected some solid points that will help you understand the pros and cons of Critical Thinking In Education in detail.

But first, let’s understand the topic:

What is Critical Thinking In Education?

Critical thinking in education is when students learn to think clearly and make smart choices by asking questions, looking at all sides of a problem, and using logic before deciding what they believe or what action to take.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of Critical Thinking In Education

The following are the advantages and disadvantages of Critical Thinking In Education:

Advantages of Critical Thinking In Education

Enhances problem-solving skills – Critical thinking helps students tackle complex issues by breaking them down into smaller, more manageable parts. This approach leads to better solutions.
Promotes independent thinking – It allows students to rely on their own reasoning and analysis, making them self-sufficient learners who can explore ideas on their own.
Encourages open-mindedness – Being open to different viewpoints, critical thinking teaches students to consider various perspectives before forming an opinion, which broadens their understanding.
Improves decision-making ability – It sharpens the ability to weigh options and assess the consequences, leading to smarter choices in academic and everyday situations.
Fosters effective communication – Critical thinking equips students with the ability to articulate their thoughts clearly and listen to others, which is key in collaborating and sharing ideas effectively.

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking In Education

Can hinder quick decision-making – Critical thinking sometimes makes it hard to make fast choices because it asks for careful thought and weighing of options.
May lead to overthinking – Thinking too much about all the possible outcomes and angles can make simple decisions feel more complicated than they need to be.
Requires extensive time and resources – Teaching people to always think critically can take a lot of effort and tools, which might not always be easy to find or afford.
Can cause analysis paralysis – When you try to think about every detail, you can get stuck and find it hard to decide on anything at all.
Might discourage creative spontaneity – Focusing too much on critical thinking could take away from the ability to come up with new ideas quickly and act on them without second-guessing.
Advantages and disadvantages of Cardiac Rehabilitation
Advantages and disadvantages of Cardiovascular Endurance
Advantages and disadvantages of Cloves

You can view other “advantages and disadvantages of…” posts by clicking here .

If you have a related query, feel free to let us know in the comments below.

Also, kindly share the information with your friends who you think might be interested in reading it.

The Advantages & Disadvantages of Critical Thinking

Micah mcdunnigan.

Critical thinking is, at heart, questioning what you are told instead of taking it at face value. It is evaluating information in a rational framework where facts and reason line up to support or fail to support assertions. Critical thinking skills are highly sought, and have a number of benefits in life. However, with the upsides comes certain downsides.

Explore this article

Academic Success
Professional Success
Disadvantages

1 Academic Success

Memorizing what your teacher tells you and regurgitating it verbatim will only get you so far in school. Memorizing exactly what the teacher told you gives you access to a number of discrete facts you can call on for exams. This will serve you well on questions that ask for such verbatim recitation of information, but the best grades and future success will go to students who can ask questions about those facts, draw connections between them, formulate their own thoughts on the matter, and articulate them.

2 Professional Success

Critical thinking skills will make you more effective in whatever field you choose to go into. The ability to look at your professional field and make connections to identify opportunities no one else has seen yet will give you an edge. This is the way new and innovative products come about. If you are always just following the crowd, you'll never stand out. In a competitive business world, you're in professional trouble if you can't stand on your own or make valuable contributions to your employer.

Critical thinking skills can help you get along with a wider range of people. This is because if you can step back and evaluate a situation from a perspective other than your own, you can better understand why different people do what they do. This helps you avoid the social conflict that results from two narrow-minded perspectives butting heads with one another. It can expand your social circle, and lead to more harmonious interactions with everyone around you.

4 Disadvantages

The downside of critical thinking skills is that they can lead you into new and frightening territory. You might find yourself questioning the values, even the religion, by which you were raised. There is a certain existential comfort in someone else telling you how the world works, then blindly clinging to those tenets. The price of this simple comfort is forgoing a deeper understanding of how the world works, and all the opportunities this deeper thinking provides. While you can use your thinking skills to find new tenets that make sense, a modified version of those original tenets, or a new understanding of those original tenets, you might feel lost as you move between points A and B.

1 McGraw Hill: Introduction to Critical Thinking

About the Author

Micah McDunnigan has been writing on politics and technology since 2007. He has written technology pieces and political op-eds for a variety of student organizations and blogs. McDunnigan earned a Bachelor of Arts in international relations from the University of California, Davis.

Critical Thinking in the Decision-Making Processes

How Can a College Experience Help With Achieving Future...

How to Improve Adult Reading Comprehension

Seven Key Features of Critical Thinking

Trusting Others After Being Disappointed

What Does It Mean When You Have a High Intuition?

Differences Between Analytical & Critical Thinking

What Are the Differences Between Bias & Fallacy?

How to Move on After a Long Term Relationship Without...

What Are Ethical Ramifications?

The Importance of College After High School Graduation

How to Practice the Serenity Prayer

Signs of Intelligence

Types of Argument Syles

How to Get Over Being Dumped From a Long-Term Relationship

What to Do When a Friend Tells You She's Not Your Friend...

How to Write a Philosophy Thesis

How to Control Anger If Someone Hurls Insults at Me

How to Increase Your Critical Thinking Skills

How to Make People Want to Follow You on Tumblr

Regardless of how old we are, we never stop learning. Classroom is the educational resource for people of all ages. Whether you’re studying times tables or applying to college, Classroom has the answers.

Accessibility
Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Copyright Policy
Manage Preferences

advantages and disadvantages of critical thinking in the classroom

5 Critical Pedagogy: Challenging Bias and Creating Inclusive Classrooms

Introduction.

Regardless of the type of library you work in, your learners will come from varied backgrounds, identities, and life experiences, and will bring different interests and educational needs to the classroom. These experiences shape how learners experience the classroom, the content, and the learning activities, and ultimately impact what they learn and how they use that knowledge. As instructors, we need not only to recognize these differences and how they influence learning but also acknowledge and honor the richness of experience our learners bring. We need to create an inclusive classroom environment where everyone feels welcome and valued, and where our content is relevant to our learners’ diverse identities and interests.

In order to be effective in this role, we must better understand how existing educational, social, and political systems shape our learners’ experiences from their earliest moments and continue to influence what and how they learn inside and outside of the classroom through the rest of their lives. We must recognize how bias has impacted and continues to impact both our learners’ and our own experiences, and develop culturally competent and inclusive practices in order to mitigate bias in the classroom and interact effectively with learners from varied cultural backgrounds.

Critical pedagogy provides a theoretical framework to examine issues of power in the classroom, and to surface and challenge the biases and oppressive structures that can undermine learning and alienate students. Inclusive teaching offers strategies for translating that theoretical knowledge into action. This chapter begins with a brief overview of critical pedagogy, followed by an examination of some of the biases critical pedagogy uncovers and how those biases can impact the work we do as instructors. Next, the chapter presents strategies for mitigating bias, improving our cultural competence, and creating inclusive classrooms where all learners are able to engage with relevant content and effective pedagogies. Chapter 6 extends the discussion of inclusion to address specific issues of accessibility and universal design for learners with disabilities.

Critical Pedagogy

As discussed briefly in Chapter 3, social constructivists in particular recognize that learners’ cultures, including shared values, behaviors, and beliefs, shape their knowledge. However, no society is made up of a single, monolithic culture; rather, different communities reflect different values and beliefs, and encourage and discourage different behaviors. Political, social, and educational systems tend to reflect the dominant culture, and over time the values, behaviors, and beliefs associated with that culture become so ingrained as to be invisible. Those living within the dominant culture do not recognize it as a system but simply see it as “normal,” and anything outside of that system is “other” than normal. Some educational theorists recognized that these differences have a profound impact on education.

Bourdieu (see, e.g., Bourdieu & Passeron, 2000) and Freire (2000), for instance, saw that traditional educational systems tended to reflect and favor the experiences of children from wealthy families. Because these children understood that system and saw themselves reflected in it, they thrived and were successful, while children from poorer families struggled. Since the dominant systems are essentially invisible, those in power tend to attribute the challenges faced by marginalized individuals as inherent to the person. In other words, if a child from a poor family struggles to learn to read, teachers will often assume the issue is with the child’s innate ability to learn, rather than recognize that the child might not have had the same preliteracy experiences and current support systems that other children have. Because they do not recognize the root issue, these educational models tend to replicate rather than challenge the existing systems, so learners from the dominant culture continue to succeed while those from marginalized communities continue to struggle, a phenomenon that Bourdieu refers to as cultural reproduction. While earlier theorists tended to focus mostly on the impact of economic disparities in education, other writers and educators like bell hooks, Henry Giroux, and Ileana Jiménez have applied feminist, queer, and critical race theory to examine how existing classroom power structures marginalize women, people of color, individuals who identify as LGBTQIA+, and other learners as well.

Importantly, critical pedagogy does not end with theory but rather focuses on praxis, or translating knowledge into action. Critical pedagogy sees education as a tool for empowerment, a place where learners develop the knowledge and skills they need to undo oppressive structures and achieve liberation (Freire, 2000; Tewell, 2015). Unlike the traditional “banking” model of education that positions learners as passive recipients of information, in a classroom guided by critical pedagogy, learners engage with problems that are personally meaningful and are active agents in their own education, and through that education gain agency to enact change in the world beyond the classroom (Elmborg, 2006; Freire, 2000; Tewell, 2015).

Critical pedagogy informs the critical approaches to information literacy discussed in Chapter 2, which urge us to move away from a skills-based, teacher-centered approach to information literacy toward one that questions dominant information structures and adopts student-centered teaching methods. Building on the ideas of agency and empowerment, critical information literacy encourages learners to see themselves as part of the “scholarly conversation” and as creators of information, rather than just consumers, and provides them with ways to recognize and challenge dominant powers within the current systems of creating, sharing, and evaluating information. Thus, for instructors, critical pedagogy pushes us to surface power dynamics in the classroom and the larger communities in which our learners live, and to reflect on how our own culture and biases color our approach to the classroom. In doing so, it offers a model for a more inclusive teaching practice.

Bias in the Classroom

We all have bias. These biases might be based on gender, race or ethnicity, class, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, body type, or other elements of people’s personal identity. In some cases, we may be aware that we have a bias, while in other cases, we hold unconscious biases that we have unwittingly picked up over the course of our lifetime. Banaji and Greenwald (2013) show that our unconscious biases are particularly pernicious because we are unaware of the effect they have on our thoughts and actions, resulting in discriminatory judgments and behaviors that are automatic and hard to recognize. For example, research shows that when given résumés with equivalent qualifications from applicants with stereotypically white names and stereotypically Black names, search committees will favor applicants with stereotypically white names (Bertrand & Mullainathan, 2003) and that orchestras have historically favored men over women in auditions (Goldin & Rouse, 2000). Unconscious bias also affects library services. Shachaf and Horowitz (2006) found differences in librarians’ replies to email reference queries based on the patron’s perceived ethnicity and religious affiliation, including the time taken to reply, length and quality of answers, and the use of welcoming, professional greetings and conclusions. These examples demonstrate one of Banaji and Greenwald’s important findings–that hidden biases result in acts of commission, such as favoring men or whites in hiring, as well as acts of omission, such as providing less thorough service to some patrons.

It can be uncomfortable and even challenging to recognize our own bias. As Sue (2010a) notes, most people “see themselves as fair-minded individuals who would never consciously discriminate” and “their self-image of being ‘a good moral human being’ is assailed if they realize and acknowledge that they possess biased thoughts, attitudes and feelings.” As we grapple with our own biases, it can be helpful to remember that our brains evolved to develop heuristics that allow us to function effectively and safely in our environment. These heuristics often operate at an unconscious level; if you have ever seen a snake and instinctively jumped back even before you could assess whether the snake was venomous, you have experienced an unconscious heuristic that told you snakes are dangerous. Unfortunately, unconscious thoughts and biases influence how we react to people as well, particularly when we perceive those people as “different” from ourselves. If we want to be fair-minded, rational people, it is essential that we identify and reflect on our unconscious biases, including recognizing how our society shapes and influences those biases, in order to mitigate the effect they have on our thoughts and actions (Banaji and Greenwald, 2013). Activity 5.1 provides an opportunity to learn more about unconscious biases you may hold.

Activity 5.1: Take an Implicit Bias Test

As part of its research on implicit bias, Project Implicit at Harvard University offers tests that attempt to measure personal biases. While these tests are not perfect measures, they offer a starting point for reflecting on how we might be impacted by unconscious bias. Visit Project Implicit and try one or more of the available tests.

Questions for Reflection and Discussion:

How did you feel about your results? Were you surprised or uncomfortable? Did other feelings emerge?
If your test results revealed a personal bias, how might that bias affect your work in the classroom? What strategies could you use to mitigate this bias and deliver high-quality instruction to all your learners?

Microaggressions

One manifestation of bias is microaggressions, which Sue (2010a) defines as “the everyday verbal, nonverbal, and environmental slights, snubs, or insults, whether intentional or unintentional, which communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative messages to target persons based solely upon their marginalized group membership.” Microaggressions may be aimed at women, people of color, individuals who identify (or are perceived) as LGBTQIA+, and people with disabilities, among others. Microaggressions come in many forms, including verbal (e.g., “Where are you from?” which implies a person of color must be a foreigner; telling a woman to smile), nonverbal (e.g., clutching one’s purse more tightly or crossing the street around a person of color), or environmental (e.g., Native American mascots) (Sue, 2010b). While microaggressions may appear minor, they create hostile classroom environments, perpetuate stereotype threat, lower workplace productivity, and cause mental and physical health problems (Sue et al., 2009, p. 183).

Because microaggressions often reflect our unconscious biases, they can be hard to eliminate. Princing (2019) notes that when we first meet someone new, we tend to notice what makes them different from us. She recommends we reflect on those thoughts and question any beliefs or stereotypes that may accompany them. The Reinert Center for Transformative Teaching and Learning (n.d.) also recommends that instructors reflect on their assumptions and expectations as a first step to avoid committing microaggressions. For example, an instructor who assumes that learners from first-generation or lower socioeconomic backgrounds are less prepared for college might make a comment to that effect in the classroom, making students hesitant to attend office hours lest they confirm the instructor’s negative belief. Additional strategies instructors can use:

Resist the myth of color blindness. Unconscious bias makes it difficult to be truly colorblind. In addition, claims of color blindness obscure structural disadvantages and the very real differences in the experiences of people from marginalized groups (Princing, 2019).
Believe the stories of people from marginalized groups. We can learn more about everyday bias by listening to and learning from the stories of individuals who have firsthand experience with bias. We must take care not to dismiss those stories as exaggerations, misunderstandings, or isolated incidents.
Do not ask students to speak for their entire racial or culture group. As noted elsewhere in this chapter, learners from the same broad cultural group will not necessarily share all of the same values, beliefs, and understandings, and students may not feel capable of speaking for the experience of others (Reinert Center, n.d.). In addition, singling out learners in this way can make it appear that the instructor sees them as a one-dimensional representative of a particular identity, rather than as an individual bringing varied strengths, interests, and experiences to the classroom.
Assume groups you are talking about are represented in the classroom. Treating every classroom interaction as if we were speaking with a member of the group under discussion can remind us to choose our words with care (Reinert Center, n.d.).
Remain open to learning about microaggressions and yourself. While it is natural to feel defensive when others point out that we have said something problematic or offensive, we can approach such instances as learning opportunities.

In addition to recognizing the role that bias might play in our own actions, instructors should be aware that students will bring their own biases to the classroom. These biases will affect how learners understand and interact with instructional content, peers, and instructors, and instructors should be attentive to instances where learners commit microaggressions against one another. Microaggressions can be awkward and even challenging to address, especially if they were framed as a compliment (e.g., “You speak English so well”) or reflect commonly accepted stereotypes. Offenders may be unaware of the offense they have caused and because they did not intend to offend others, may be reluctant to accept responsibility for having done so. However, it is important to address such events clearly and promptly. Sue et al. (2019, p. 134) note that when microaggressions occur, small interventions by allies and bystanders have a “profound positive effect in creating an inclusive and welcoming environment” and discouraging further microaggressions. Strategies for addressing microaggressions in the classroom include:

Make the “invisible” visible. Create awareness by naming the microaggression with statements such as “I think that’s a stereotype I just heard” (Sue et al., 2019, p. 136).
Disarm the microaggression. Statements such as “I don’t agree” or “I don’t see it that way” and actions such as shaking one’s head communicate to the perpetrator and others that the microaggression is not acceptable (Sue et al., 2019, p. 136).
Take an educational, nonpunitive approach. Turn microaggressions into teachable moments by asking learners to reflect on their assumptions (Center for Teaching and Learning, n.d., p. 11). Phrases like “it sounds like you think” or “Could there be another way to look at this?” can prompt speakers to identify and question their unconscious biases (Gonzaga et al., 2019). Ferguson (2015) suggests we approach microaggressions in the spirit of “calling in” rather than “calling out.”
Redirect. When students are asked to speak for all members of their racial or cultural group, we can redirect the conversation with statements such as “Let’s open this question up to others” (Gonzaga et al., 2019).
Use “I” statements. The use of “I” statements such as “I felt uncomfortable when you said . . . ” communicate impact while minimizing blame (Gonzaga et al., 2019).
Discuss intent versus impact. Instructors can use statements like “I know you meant to be funny, but you hurt . . . ” to help learners recognize the impact of something they said. If learners struggle with the idea that they may have offended or harmed someone despite not intending to cause offense, instructors can use metaphors such as bumping someone in the grocery store or causing a car accident to explain the difference between intent and impact (and the need to make amends).
Rewind. Sometimes microaggressions happen so quickly, the conversation moves on before they are addressed. Statements like “I’d like to revisit something that was said earlier” allow us to step back and address these microaggressions ( Gonzaga et al., 2019).

Another manifestation of bias can be “othering,” or treating the history and experiences of white, middle-class, heterosexual, cisgender, able-bodied people as universal or the norm, while presenting the history and experiences of other groups as unusual, exceptional, or only of interest to members of those communities. For example, displaying books by Black authors in February, but not at other times, sends an implicit message that the history of America is the actions and accomplishments of whites and that the accomplishments of others are of limited value or interest. While special displays and programs are an important way to recognize and support events like Black History Month, Women’s History Month, and Pride Month, librarians should also integrate materials by individuals of color, women, and LGBTQIA+ authors into displays year-round.

In some cases, the systems that are foundational to libraries treat selected groups as the other. For example, the Dewey Decimal System reserves 200-289 for topics related to Christianity and the Bible, leaving only the 290s for all other religions; Schingler (2015) points out that this reflects an underlying assumption that Christianity not only has more to say on theological topics, what it has to say is more valuable. Library of Congress Subject Headings (LCSH) are notoriously problematic in their treatment of women and people of color (Berman, 1969, 1993; Drabinski, 2008; Knowlton, 2005). The presence of subject headings such as “women astronauts” and “African American business enterprises” reveals an assumption that these professions are for white men and that the presence of others is unusual or remarkable, while subject headings that utilize biased terminology, such as “illegal aliens,” send a message about who belongs in America.

These instances of bias and othering can create barriers to information seeking. Howard and Knowlton (2018) point out that Library of Congress Classification distributes materials related to African American and LGBTQIA+ issues throughout the collection, making browsing or even grasping the scope of the topic challenging for researchers. Even when controlled vocabulary uses neutral terminology, the accompanying thesauri can obscure topics for patrons trying to identify the database’s preferred subject heading. For example, a search for “queer” in the ERIC thesaurus returns “the term(s) you entered could not be found” with no suggestions for next steps ( ERIC uses the subject heading “homosexuality”). In comparison, a search for “queer” in the thesaurus for PubMed takes one to the preferred subject heading, “sexual and gender minorities,” along with notes about how the term is applied and related/narrower terms.

As part of creating inclusive classrooms, we must be aware of the ways in which library systems and spaces can “other” marginalized groups, and take steps to improve equity and inclusion in our spaces and collections. For example, when creating lessons, we can plan search examples that reflect the diversity of our community and learners’ interests. As appropriate, we can surface and acknowledge problematic practices, and engage students in a dialogue about the impact of those practices and how they might be changed. Integrating diversity into curricular content is addressed in more detail later in this chapter.

Deficit-Based Thinking

Learners, by their very nature, come to our libraries and classrooms with gaps in their knowledge and skills. Oftentimes, instructors seek out research that will help them identify these gaps in order to develop relevant content. While this research can provide valuable guidance for instructors, it is sometimes framed solely in terms of what learners are lacking and can lead us to focus exclusively on students’ weaknesses, an approach termed deficit-based thinking.

Increasingly, educators are taking an asset-based approach that recognizes and builds on the strengths students bring to the classroom (Heinbach, 2019; Ilett, 2019; Kocevar-Weidinger et al., 2019; Matteson & Gersch, 2019; Tewell, 2020). For example, research on returning adult learners may show that they lack up-to-date research and citation skills, framing this as a problem that will hinder academic success. An asset-based approach recognizes that adult learners, by virtue of having spent time in the workforce, bring valuable life experience that can enrich classroom discussions, along with strong collaborative and interpersonal skills developed in the workplace. In addition, adult learners tend to have clear educational and career goals and are highly motivated to develop the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in higher education. As another example, Kocevar-Weidinger et al. (2019) show that despite the stereotype that first-year college students lack research skills, they actually have extensive everyday research experience that can serve as a starting point for academic information literacy instruction.

Sometimes things characterized as weaknesses or deficits are in fact strengths if we recast our narrative. For instance, research on first-generation students may focus on the challenges they encounter because their families are unable to advise them on how to navigate the academic and social aspects of college. Research also shows that first-generation undergraduate students are less likely to use campus support services (Longwell-Grice et al., 2016; Portnoi & Kwong, 2011). An asset-based approach recognizes that families of first-generation students are often very supportive of their students’ academic endeavors and, if given information about support services on campus, will recommend their students take advantage of such services. Thus, while they lack firsthand knowledge of higher education, family members can be a conduit to connecting first-generation students to campus resources. Activity 5.2 asks you to think more deeply about asset-based approaches.

Activity 5.2: Reflecting on Asset-Based Thinking

Individually or with a group of classmates, select a group of learners you might work with, such as recent immigrants, English-language learners, international students, or older adults.

What gaps in knowledge or skills are typically ascribed to this group? Are these viewed as simple gaps or as deficits?
What strengths will this group of learners bring to the classroom?
How could you use an asset-based approach to build on these strengths in designing instruction?

Cultural Competency

Cultural competency is the ability to work effectively with people from varied cultural backgrounds. Cultural competency is an essential skill for librarians; it prepares us to recognize barriers to information use, to work with colleagues and patrons of diverse backgrounds, and to develop culturally responsive services and programs (Cooke et al., 2017; Kim & Sin, 2006; Morris, 2007; Overall, 2009). Instructors who are culturally competent understand how culture influences teaching and learning, and are able to engage learners from diverse backgrounds in the classroom.

Cultural differences can emerge in our classrooms in numerous ways. For example, contemporary American classrooms tend to be student-centered; students are expected to ask questions during lectures, discuss ideas and even disagree with instructors and peers, and engage in self-directed learning activities. In contrast, some cultures value teacher-centered classrooms where learners are expected to listen respectfully as teachers share their expertise. International students and recent immigrants who are accustomed to teacher-centered instruction may be uncomfortable during discussions and student-led activities and may even feel instructors are abdicating their responsibility to share expertise. They may also be reluctant to “bother” the instructor by asking questions or admitting they did not understand something. Culturally competent instructors can attend to these differences by interspersing discussion and active learning with direct instruction, encouraging questions and participation in discussions, and explaining how the planned activities support learning. In addition, librarians can create more culturally inclusive classrooms by:

Speaking slowly and clearly, especially when working with learners from different cultures and language backgrounds.
Avoiding slang, idioms, and sarcasm, none of which translates well across cultures, and using humor judiciously.
Avoiding library jargon, which is likely to be unfamiliar to international students and recent immigrants, as well as to novice learners in general.
Respecting cross-cultural rules for personal space and touching.
Making expectations for participation explicit.

Cultural differences may surface in surprising ways. Bunner (2017, p. 43) provides an example of a student who got in trouble for answering a question in class, not realizing that the teacher was asking a rhetorical question, something that does not exist in his culture. The student explained, “in my culture when an adult asks you a question, you are supposed to answer.” Osa et al. (2006) highlight the care we must take in using or interpreting body language and facial expressions; they provide the example of raised eyebrows, which can indicate surprise, interest, approval, skepticism, or disapproval, depending on the culture of the speaker. Whether or not to make eye contact as a sign of respect and the appropriate finger with which to point also differ by culture.

These are only a few examples of cultural differences. Cultural differences also influence written and conversational communication styles, preferences for individual or cooperative problem solving and study, tolerance for uncertainty, conventions of politeness, and expectations for how children will interact with adults (Brook et al., 2015; Cifuentes & Ozel, 2006; Gay, 2002; Weinstein et al., 2003). Activity 5.3 asks you to think about cultural differences you have experienced.

Activity 5.3: Reflecting on Cultural Differences

Think of a specific instance of a cultural difference or misunderstanding that you have observed.

What behaviors were central to the situation?
What values, beliefs, or assumptions are reflected in the behaviors of each person involved?
How might these values, beliefs, or assumptions influence a person’s experience in the classroom?
How might your recognition of these values, beliefs, and assumptions impact your understanding of your students and your instruction?

In order to provide culturally competent instruction, librarians must develop their cultural knowledge and translate that knowledge into strategies for action. Villagran (2018) suggests librarians use the Cultural Intelligence (CQ) model as a framework for reflection and professional development. This model, shown in Figure 5.1, has four components: drive, knowledge, strategy, and action (Cultural Intelligence Center, n.d.).

Drive: This component reflects our interest, persistence, and confidence in learning about other cultures and working in culturally diverse environments. For example, librarians might be motivated to learn about other cultures in order to improve their ability to design and deliver inclusive services for members of their community.
Knowledge: This component is our understanding of cultural similarities and differences. Instruction librarians who want to improve their cross-cultural knowledge might seek out readings and professional development opportunities on how culture impacts teaching and learning.
Strategy: This component reflects the metacognitive element of cultural competence; it is our ability to plan for and reflect on multicultural encounters. Culturally competent instruction librarians recognize their learners will come from varied backgrounds, develop strategies to create inclusive instruction, and reflect on their teaching experiences in order to identify areas for improvement.
Action: This component is our ability to use appropriate behaviors during multicultural interactions. Instruction librarians can translate cultural competence into action through their instructional design and delivery and through their interactions with individual learners.

Figure 5.1: The Cultural Intelligence Model

An example may demonstrate how librarians can use the Cultural Intelligence model as a guide to professional development. Early in her career as an academic librarian, one of the authors, Melissa, heard that international students from Asia would answer questions such as “Do you understand?” with “yes” out of politeness, whether or not they understood the material being taught. Concerned that she might not be teaching international students effectively (drive), Melissa sought out articles about library services for international students and talked with a colleague with expertise in the area (knowledge). This research helped her better understand cultural differences in teaching and learning, and confirmed the need to modify the instructional strategies she used in the classroom and at the reference desk (strategy). As a result, Melissa became conscientious about speaking slowly, avoiding slang and library jargon, using open-ended questions that could not be answered with “yes,” providing written handouts, and using a pencil or her entire hand to point, instead of the index finger (action).

Librarians can use a number of strategies to develop their cultural knowledge, including reading books and articles, participating in relevant conferences and webinars, and attending cultural events such as festivals, museum exhibits, and film screenings. Reflection is an important part of cultural competence; a teaching journal, discussed in more detail in Chapter 14, can prompt librarians to reflect on classroom experiences, record teaching success, and identify areas for improvement. Conversations with colleagues are also a way to increase cultural knowledge, reflect on one’s teaching, and develop new strategies for inclusive pedagogy. Activity 5.4 is an exercise to reflect on your own learning and instructional practices using the Cultural Intelligence model.

Activity 5.4: Building Cultural Competency

Using the Cultural Intelligence Model shown in Figure 5.1, reflect on your cultural competence, either in general or with regard to a specific patron group with whom you anticipate working.

How would you rate your cultural competence? Are you stronger in some areas, such as Drive or Knowledge, than others?
What motivates you to improve your cultural competency?
How have you built your cultural knowledge? What resources can you use to continue building your knowledge?
Do you feel confident applying your cultural competence in the classroom? What strategies would you use as you plan and deliver instruction?

While learning about different cultures can empower librarians to provide more culturally relevant instruction, librarians should avoid categorizing or stereotyping specific learners. Cultural groups are not static or homogeneous, meaning learners from the same broad cultural group will not necessarily share all of the same values, beliefs, and understandings, or react in exactly the same way to instructional experiences. In addition, learners are comprised of multiple identities, of which culture is only one aspect. Thus, we should use the knowledge we develop about different cultures as a way to be alert to potential differences that could lead to misunderstandings, but not to pigeonhole or predict the behavior and experience of an individual learner.

Strategies for Inclusive Teaching

Increasing our knowledge and understanding of other cultures is only a first step toward cultural competence and inclusive teaching. We also need to parlay that understanding into instructional practices that acknowledge, appreciate, and attend to the rich diversity of our classrooms. This section presents strategies for inclusive teaching, including fostering a positive classroom climate, integrating diverse content, and using inclusive pedagogies.

Fostering a Positive Classroom Climate

Our sense of belonging in the classroom influences our motivation to learn. The Center for Teaching and Learning (2019) at Columbia University identifies four types of classroom environments:

Explicitly Marginalizing: The instructor or other students say or do things, such as committing microaggressions or repeating stereotypes, that exclude learners and perspectives from marginalized backgrounds.
Implicitly Marginalizing: The instructor excludes some learners through subtle actions such as calling primarily on male students or using examples solely from the predominant culture.
Implicitly Centralizing: The instructor will discuss issues of marginalization and diversity if a student raises the topic, but such conversations are not planned or presented as essential.
Explicitly Centralizing: The instructor intentionally integrates marginalized perspectives into course content, raises issues of diversity and inclusion, and takes action to foster sensitivity, such as establishing norms for discussion and group work.

While the environment in any classroom can fluctuate, the overall classroom climate is often less inclusive and welcoming than instructors realize. In one study, instructors rated their course as falling midway between implicitly and explicitly centralizing, while learners rated the same course as implicitly marginalizing (Center for Teaching and Learning, 2019).

One conclusion we might take away from this research is the need for critical self-reflection on the part of instructors. In addition, the research suggests that instructors must make a concerted effort to create an inclusive classroom environment. Some strategies we can use include:

Express interest in students. Welcoming participants as they enter the room and learning their names help participants feel recognized (if you are worried about remembering names, you can have them create a table tent or name tag). In addition, instructors should come out from behind podiums, which can be perceived as distancing, to engage with participants. Reflective activities such as minute papers also offer opportunities to respond to individuals and demonstrate interest in their learning (Center for Teaching and Learning, n.d.; Bunner, 2017).
Establish ground rules for discussions. Establishing guidelines for civil, constructive interaction is becoming more common in credit courses; oftentimes, instructors engage students in creating these guidelines in order to foster a sense of ownership. The time constraints of library workshops may not allow for lengthy or collaborative agreements; however, librarians can establish simple ground rules, such as respecting the opinions of others and valuing diverse perspectives, at the beginning of sessions (Watts, 2017).
Foster student-to-student relationships. Instructional strategies that foster interaction such as think-pair-share, small group work, and class discussions promote positive classroom relationships.
Make expectations explicit. As mentioned earlier, cultural background can influence classroom behaviors such as participation styles and how, or whether, to ask questions. Instructors should make their expectations explicit with comments such as “I hope you will ask a lot of questions as we go along,” or “Right now we are going to work independently, but later we’ll share our work with others.”
Express high expectations for all students. Instructors should use an encouraging, positive tone, while also setting high expectations for all learners. Gay (2002) and Weinstein et al. (2003) point out that stereotypes based on race and/or gender can cause instructors to lower expectations for certain groups of students. Weinstein et al. (2003) offer the example of a non-native speaker of English who was offended when a teacher told him his English was “good,” rather than suggesting he continue to practice. He felt the former was patronizing and did not help him improve his language skills.
Address microaggressions and other forms of bias. As discussed earlier, instructors should be mindful of stereotypes and take care not to perpetuate them, and to practice intervention strategies that can be used when microaggressions occur in the classroom.
Ask for feedback. Instructors can use course evaluations and classroom observations to gather feedback on how well they foster an inclusive classroom environment.

Integrating Diverse Content

All learners have a right to instructional offerings that address their needs and interests. At the program level, we should offer workshops and other instructional resources on a wide variety of topics that are suitable for patrons of varied ages and ability levels. We should take care to schedule classes and programs at varied times to ensure access for the widest number of people. For example, a traditional storytime program on a weekday morning will serve families with a stay-at-home parent as well as families where parents work the late shift or on weekends, while a pajama storytime held in the evening will serve families where parents and other caregivers work during the day.

In addition, our course content should reflect the diversity of our communities and the larger world. Not only does this allow learners to “see” themselves in the curriculum, it provides opportunities for all learners to learn about diversity and equity and to develop cultural competence. In addition, integrating discussions of diversity and equity throughout the curriculum ensures these issues are not “othered” or treated as an addendum to a curriculum where whiteness and heterosexuality are the norm. Further, we must engage these topics in authentic ways, rather than with benign or superficial celebrations of multiculturalism (Bunner, 2017, p. 42; Kumasi & Hill, 2011, p. 252). Some strategies librarians can use to integrate diversity and inclusion into instructional content:

Use diverse examples. For instance, a librarian teaching a workshop on Overdrive can conduct sample searches featuring authors of diverse identities. An academic librarian or archivist teaching students to locate primary documents from World War II might highlight sites with materials from the Tuskegee Airmen or the all Japanese-American 442nd Regiment. Hinchliffe (2016) notes that librarians can call attention to issues of human rights through the examples used in class.
Choose metaphors and analogies carefully. While metaphors and analogies can help learners build on prior knowledge and make concepts more concrete, they are often embedded in cultural knowledge or experiences that not everyone will share. Similarly, pop culture references may exclude learners based on their age or cultural background, although in some cases librarians can pause to offer a brief explanation.
Discuss how issues of race, class, and gender impact the material being covered. Gorski and Swalwell (2015, p. 36) argue, “at the heart of a curriculum that is meaningfully multicultural lie principles of equity and social justice—purposeful attention to issues like racism, homophobia, sexism, and economic inequality.” Gay (2002) suggests that instructors address topics such as racism, historical atrocities, and structures of power, and contextualize issues within race, class, and gender. While librarians may initially feel uncomfortable discussing challenging topics in the classroom, Bunner (2017, p. 43) found that ignoring issues of race is more problematic for students of color than imperfect conversations.
Model how participants can seek out marginalized voices and perspectives. In addition to incorporating a wide range of perspectives into our own teaching, we can encourage others to adopt a wider perspective and demonstrate resources and search strategies to uncover marginalized voices.

As part of creating a more inclusive curriculum, librarians will need to build collections that incorporate the histories and voices of marginalized groups. After all, it will be difficult to use diverse examples or demonstrate strategies for surfacing marginalized voices if our print and online collections do not contain that material. In addition, we need to be skilled at working within these collections. Curry (2005, p. 70) found that small behaviors like raised eyebrows, biting one’s lip, or a reserved or even neutral affect communicated discomfort while helping a patron research LGBTQIA+ topics, leading the patron to be less likely to ask for help in the future. In the same study, Curry (2005, p. 71) found that even librarians who indicated a willingness to help the patron lacked the necessary knowledge to identify appropriate sources of information. While Curry’s study focused on assisting patrons at the reference desk, her findings are very applicable to the classroom.

Part and parcel with building our knowledge of resources, we must understand the biases and weaknesses built into existing search systems, and develop strategies to find information within (or despite) those systems. Drabinski (2008) shares her experience of teaching with a colleague who incorrectly assumed that if LCSH has a heading for “African American women,” it must also have a heading for “white women” and advised students to use that phrase when searching. Noble (2012, 2018) shows that search engines such as Google are not neutral; rather, they replicate the biases inherent in society, delivering search results that reinforce stereotypical depictions of women and people of color. Ultimately, librarians who are committed to integrating equity and inclusion into the classroom must step back to look at the totality of their library’s spaces, collections, and systems.

Inclusive Pedagogy

Pedagogy is our approach to teaching. It reflects our understanding of the learning process, our goals for the classroom environment and student learning, and, subsequently, the activities one plans for the classroom. Instructors who practice inclusive pedagogy recognize that students have varied preferences for and comfort levels with different learning activities such as lecture, whole-class discussion, and small group work, and offer varied ways for learners to engage in the classroom.

Instructors can select from a wide variety of activities when planning instructional sessions. In fact, novice instructors are sometimes overwhelmed by the seemingly endless array of options. Chávez and Longerbeam (2016, pp. 8-9) suggest cultural approaches to teaching and learning range from “individuated,” which tend to compartmentalize content and treat learning as an individual experience, to “integrated,” which are more interconnected and focus on shared learning experiences. Instructors might seek to balance activities that reflect an individuated approach such as lecture, independent practice, and reflective writing, with activities that reflect an integrated approach such as discussion, case studies, and collaborative work.

Another approach we can take is balancing instructor-centered and learner-centered activities. Instructor-centered activities are those in which the instructor has a strong role in directing course content and the process of student learning, such as lecture and demonstration. In student-centered activities, students direct and shape their own learning; examples of student-centered activities include small group work, case-based and problem-based learning, and practice exercises that allow students to explore their own interests.

In addition to varying classroom activities, instructors can offer learners choices. For example, during an online searching activity, we might give learners the option of trying a task on their own or collaborating with their neighbor. Instructors can also adapt activities to create a more inclusive environment. For example, workshop participants might be reluctant to engage in a discussion with others they do not know well, especially if the topic is sensitive. A think-pair-share, which offers time for individual reflection and ordering one’s thoughts, or a small group discussion, where one shares ideas with just a few others, may feel safer for participants and can be used as a lead-in to a whole-class discussion or activity.

Emancipatory Education

While inclusive pedagogy outlines the strategies we can take as instructors to honor our learners’ experiences and make our classrooms and instruction welcoming and accessible to all learners, critical pedagogy also recognizes learners as agents in the classroom and in the world. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed , Freire (2000) discusses the emancipatory aspects of education, or how education can be structured so as to empower marginalized and oppressed communities to liberate themselves from systems of oppression. Crucial to Freire’s approach is that the learners are the agents of their own liberation. Instructors can facilitate this process by recognizing and mitigating bias and through the inclusive strategies outlined in this chapter, but ultimately, learners should be empowered to act on their own behalf.

We can foster emancipatory education within the library classroom by surfacing oppressive practices not only within education but within library systems and structures, facilitating dialogues about these practices, and encouraging students to imagine and adopt roles for themselves in challenging those systems. Chapter 2 outlines steps we could take in the context of critical information literacy, such as helping students recognize how prevailing publishing practices and notions of authority favor some voices and marginalize others, and encouraging them to seek out those voices that have been marginalized to include their perspectives. We can also work with learners to take action in the wider world, as librarians at Dartmouth College did when they collaborated with students to petition the Library of Congress to eliminate the term “illegal aliens” from its official subject headings (Albright, 2019).

Our learners bring varied backgrounds, identities, and educational needs to the classroom. Using critical pedagogy as a guide, librarians can adopt inclusive teaching practices that create classrooms, libraries, and, ultimately, communities that are more just and equitable for all members.

Key takeaways from this chapter include:

Instructors should understand the role unconscious bias plays in discrimination and inequity, and develop strategies to prevent and address microaggressions, othering, and deficit thinking.
Cultural competence is a set of knowledge, skills, and dispositions that enable librarians to interact effectively with patrons from diverse backgrounds. Instruction librarians need to understand how culture affects teaching and learning, and develop strategies for inclusive pedagogy.
Elements of inclusive teaching include fostering a positive classroom climate, integrating diverse perspectives and issues of diversity and equity into course content, and using inclusive pedagogies.

Activity 5.5 asks you to reflect on inclusive teaching.

Activity 5.5: Reflecting on Inclusive Teaching

Find (or draw) an image, photo, gif, etc., that captures your thoughts on inclusive teaching. Share your image and a brief explanation with your classmates.

Share This Book

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

View all journals
My Account Login
Explore content
About the journal
Publish with us
Sign up for alerts
Review Article
Open access
Published: 11 January 2023

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature

Enwei Xu ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6424-8169 1 ,
Wei Wang 1 &
Qingxia Wang 1

Humanities and Social Sciences Communications volume 10 , Article number: 16 ( 2023 ) Cite this article

15k Accesses

15 Citations

3 Altmetric

Metrics details

Science, technology and society

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education as well as a key competence for learners in the 21st century. However, the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking remains uncertain. This current research presents the major findings of a meta-analysis of 36 pieces of the literature revealed in worldwide educational periodicals during the 21st century to identify the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and to determine, based on evidence, whether and to what extent collaborative problem solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. The findings show that (1) collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster students’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]); (2) in respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem solving can significantly and successfully enhance students’ attitudinal tendencies (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI[0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI[0.58, 0.82]); and (3) the teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01) all have an impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. On the basis of these results, recommendations are made for further study and instruction to better support students’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Fostering twenty-first century skills among primary school students through math project-based learning

A meta-analysis to gauge the impact of pedagogies employed in mixed-ability high school biology classrooms

A guide to critical thinking: implications for dental education

Introduction.

Although critical thinking has a long history in research, the concept of critical thinking, which is regarded as an essential competence for learners in the 21st century, has recently attracted more attention from researchers and teaching practitioners (National Research Council, 2012 ). Critical thinking should be the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field of education (Peng and Deng, 2017 ) because students with critical thinking can not only understand the meaning of knowledge but also effectively solve practical problems in real life even after knowledge is forgotten (Kek and Huijser, 2011 ). The definition of critical thinking is not universal (Ennis, 1989 ; Castle, 2009 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). In general, the definition of critical thinking is a self-aware and self-regulated thought process (Facione, 1990 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). It refers to the cognitive skills needed to interpret, analyze, synthesize, reason, and evaluate information as well as the attitudinal tendency to apply these abilities (Halpern, 2001 ). The view that critical thinking can be taught and learned through curriculum teaching has been widely supported by many researchers (e.g., Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), leading to educators’ efforts to foster it among students. In the field of teaching practice, there are three types of courses for teaching critical thinking (Ennis, 1989 ). The first is an independent curriculum in which critical thinking is taught and cultivated without involving the knowledge of specific disciplines; the second is an integrated curriculum in which critical thinking is integrated into the teaching of other disciplines as a clear teaching goal; and the third is a mixed curriculum in which critical thinking is taught in parallel to the teaching of other disciplines for mixed teaching training. Furthermore, numerous measuring tools have been developed by researchers and educators to measure critical thinking in the context of teaching practice. These include standardized measurement tools, such as WGCTA, CCTST, CCTT, and CCTDI, which have been verified by repeated experiments and are considered effective and reliable by international scholars (Facione and Facione, 1992 ). In short, descriptions of critical thinking, including its two dimensions of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, different types of teaching courses, and standardized measurement tools provide a complex normative framework for understanding, teaching, and evaluating critical thinking.

Cultivating critical thinking in curriculum teaching can start with a problem, and one of the most popular critical thinking instructional approaches is problem-based learning (Liu et al., 2020 ). Duch et al. ( 2001 ) noted that problem-based learning in group collaboration is progressive active learning, which can improve students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills. Collaborative problem-solving is the organic integration of collaborative learning and problem-based learning, which takes learners as the center of the learning process and uses problems with poor structure in real-world situations as the starting point for the learning process (Liang et al., 2017 ). Students learn the knowledge needed to solve problems in a collaborative group, reach a consensus on problems in the field, and form solutions through social cooperation methods, such as dialogue, interpretation, questioning, debate, negotiation, and reflection, thus promoting the development of learners’ domain knowledge and critical thinking (Cindy, 2004 ; Liang et al., 2017 ).

Collaborative problem-solving has been widely used in the teaching practice of critical thinking, and several studies have attempted to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of the empirical literature on critical thinking from various perspectives. However, little attention has been paid to the impact of collaborative problem-solving on critical thinking. Therefore, the best approach for developing and enhancing critical thinking throughout collaborative problem-solving is to examine how to implement critical thinking instruction; however, this issue is still unexplored, which means that many teachers are incapable of better instructing critical thinking (Leng and Lu, 2020 ; Niu et al., 2013 ). For example, Huber ( 2016 ) provided the meta-analysis findings of 71 publications on gaining critical thinking over various time frames in college with the aim of determining whether critical thinking was truly teachable. These authors found that learners significantly improve their critical thinking while in college and that critical thinking differs with factors such as teaching strategies, intervention duration, subject area, and teaching type. The usefulness of collaborative problem-solving in fostering students’ critical thinking, however, was not determined by this study, nor did it reveal whether there existed significant variations among the different elements. A meta-analysis of 31 pieces of educational literature was conducted by Liu et al. ( 2020 ) to assess the impact of problem-solving on college students’ critical thinking. These authors found that problem-solving could promote the development of critical thinking among college students and proposed establishing a reasonable group structure for problem-solving in a follow-up study to improve students’ critical thinking. Additionally, previous empirical studies have reached inconclusive and even contradictory conclusions about whether and to what extent collaborative problem-solving increases or decreases critical thinking levels. As an illustration, Yang et al. ( 2008 ) carried out an experiment on the integrated curriculum teaching of college students based on a web bulletin board with the goal of fostering participants’ critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These authors’ research revealed that through sharing, debating, examining, and reflecting on various experiences and ideas, collaborative problem-solving can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking in real-life problem situations. In contrast, collaborative problem-solving had a positive impact on learners’ interaction and could improve learning interest and motivation but could not significantly improve students’ critical thinking when compared to traditional classroom teaching, according to research by Naber and Wyatt ( 2014 ) and Sendag and Odabasi ( 2009 ) on undergraduate and high school students, respectively.

The above studies show that there is inconsistency regarding the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking. Therefore, it is essential to conduct a thorough and trustworthy review to detect and decide whether and to what degree collaborative problem-solving can result in a rise or decrease in critical thinking. Meta-analysis is a quantitative analysis approach that is utilized to examine quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. This approach characterizes the effectiveness of its impact by averaging the effect sizes of numerous qualitative studies in an effort to reduce the uncertainty brought on by independent research and produce more conclusive findings (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ).

This paper used a meta-analytic approach and carried out a meta-analysis to examine the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking in order to make a contribution to both research and practice. The following research questions were addressed by this meta-analysis:

What is the overall effect size of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills)?

How are the disparities between the study conclusions impacted by various moderating variables if the impacts of various experimental designs in the included studies are heterogeneous?

This research followed the strict procedures (e.g., database searching, identification, screening, eligibility, merging, duplicate removal, and analysis of included studies) of Cooper’s ( 2010 ) proposed meta-analysis approach for examining quantitative data from various separate studies that are all focused on the same research topic. The relevant empirical research that appeared in worldwide educational periodicals within the 21st century was subjected to this meta-analysis using Rev-Man 5.4. The consistency of the data extracted separately by two researchers was tested using Cohen’s kappa coefficient, and a publication bias test and a heterogeneity test were run on the sample data to ascertain the quality of this meta-analysis.

Data sources and search strategies

There were three stages to the data collection process for this meta-analysis, as shown in Fig. 1 , which shows the number of articles included and eliminated during the selection process based on the statement and study eligibility criteria.

This flowchart shows the number of records identified, included and excluded in the article.

First, the databases used to systematically search for relevant articles were the journal papers of the Web of Science Core Collection and the Chinese Core source journal, as well as the Chinese Social Science Citation Index (CSSCI) source journal papers included in CNKI. These databases were selected because they are credible platforms that are sources of scholarly and peer-reviewed information with advanced search tools and contain literature relevant to the subject of our topic from reliable researchers and experts. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the Web of Science was “TS = (((“critical thinking” or “ct” and “pretest” or “posttest”) or (“critical thinking” or “ct” and “control group” or “quasi experiment” or “experiment”)) and (“collaboration” or “collaborative learning” or “CSCL”) and (“problem solving” or “problem-based learning” or “PBL”))”. The research area was “Education Educational Research”, and the search period was “January 1, 2000, to December 30, 2021”. A total of 412 papers were obtained. The search string with the Boolean operator used in the CNKI was “SU = (‘critical thinking’*‘collaboration’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘collaborative learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘CSCL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem solving’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem-based learning’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘PBL’ + ‘critical thinking’*‘problem oriented’) AND FT = (‘experiment’ + ‘quasi experiment’ + ‘pretest’ + ‘posttest’ + ‘empirical study’)” (translated into Chinese when searching). A total of 56 studies were found throughout the search period of “January 2000 to December 2021”. From the databases, all duplicates and retractions were eliminated before exporting the references into Endnote, a program for managing bibliographic references. In all, 466 studies were found.

Second, the studies that matched the inclusion and exclusion criteria for the meta-analysis were chosen by two researchers after they had reviewed the abstracts and titles of the gathered articles, yielding a total of 126 studies.

Third, two researchers thoroughly reviewed each included article’s whole text in accordance with the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Meanwhile, a snowball search was performed using the references and citations of the included articles to ensure complete coverage of the articles. Ultimately, 36 articles were kept.

Two researchers worked together to carry out this entire process, and a consensus rate of almost 94.7% was reached after discussion and negotiation to clarify any emerging differences.

Eligibility criteria

Since not all the retrieved studies matched the criteria for this meta-analysis, eligibility criteria for both inclusion and exclusion were developed as follows:

The publication language of the included studies was limited to English and Chinese, and the full text could be obtained. Articles that did not meet the publication language and articles not published between 2000 and 2021 were excluded.

The research design of the included studies must be empirical and quantitative studies that can assess the effect of collaborative problem-solving on the development of critical thinking. Articles that could not identify the causal mechanisms by which collaborative problem-solving affects critical thinking, such as review articles and theoretical articles, were excluded.

The research method of the included studies must feature a randomized control experiment or a quasi-experiment, or a natural experiment, which have a higher degree of internal validity with strong experimental designs and can all plausibly provide evidence that critical thinking and collaborative problem-solving are causally related. Articles with non-experimental research methods, such as purely correlational or observational studies, were excluded.

The participants of the included studies were only students in school, including K-12 students and college students. Articles in which the participants were non-school students, such as social workers or adult learners, were excluded.

The research results of the included studies must mention definite signs that may be utilized to gauge critical thinking’s impact (e.g., sample size, mean value, or standard deviation). Articles that lacked specific measurement indicators for critical thinking and could not calculate the effect size were excluded.

Data coding design

In order to perform a meta-analysis, it is necessary to collect the most important information from the articles, codify that information’s properties, and convert descriptive data into quantitative data. Therefore, this study designed a data coding template (see Table 1 ). Ultimately, 16 coding fields were retained.

The designed data-coding template consisted of three pieces of information. Basic information about the papers was included in the descriptive information: the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper.

The variable information for the experimental design had three variables: the independent variable (instruction method), the dependent variable (critical thinking), and the moderating variable (learning stage, teaching type, intervention duration, learning scaffold, group size, measuring tool, and subject area). Depending on the topic of this study, the intervention strategy, as the independent variable, was coded into collaborative and non-collaborative problem-solving. The dependent variable, critical thinking, was coded as a cognitive skill and an attitudinal tendency. And seven moderating variables were created by grouping and combining the experimental design variables discovered within the 36 studies (see Table 1 ), where learning stages were encoded as higher education, high school, middle school, and primary school or lower; teaching types were encoded as mixed courses, integrated courses, and independent courses; intervention durations were encoded as 0–1 weeks, 1–4 weeks, 4–12 weeks, and more than 12 weeks; group sizes were encoded as 2–3 persons, 4–6 persons, 7–10 persons, and more than 10 persons; learning scaffolds were encoded as teacher-supported learning scaffold, technique-supported learning scaffold, and resource-supported learning scaffold; measuring tools were encoded as standardized measurement tools (e.g., WGCTA, CCTT, CCTST, and CCTDI) and self-adapting measurement tools (e.g., modified or made by researchers); and subject areas were encoded according to the specific subjects used in the 36 included studies.

The data information contained three metrics for measuring critical thinking: sample size, average value, and standard deviation. It is vital to remember that studies with various experimental designs frequently adopt various formulas to determine the effect size. And this paper used Morris’ proposed standardized mean difference (SMD) calculation formula ( 2008 , p. 369; see Supplementary Table S3 ).

Procedure for extracting and coding data

According to the data coding template (see Table 1 ), the 36 papers’ information was retrieved by two researchers, who then entered them into Excel (see Supplementary Table S1 ). The results of each study were extracted separately in the data extraction procedure if an article contained numerous studies on critical thinking, or if a study assessed different critical thinking dimensions. For instance, Tiwari et al. ( 2010 ) used four time points, which were viewed as numerous different studies, to examine the outcomes of critical thinking, and Chen ( 2013 ) included the two outcome variables of attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills, which were regarded as two studies. After discussion and negotiation during data extraction, the two researchers’ consistency test coefficients were roughly 93.27%. Supplementary Table S2 details the key characteristics of the 36 included articles with 79 effect quantities, including descriptive information (e.g., the publishing year, author, serial number, and title of the paper), variable information (e.g., independent variables, dependent variables, and moderating variables), and data information (e.g., mean values, standard deviations, and sample size). Following that, testing for publication bias and heterogeneity was done on the sample data using the Rev-Man 5.4 software, and then the test results were used to conduct a meta-analysis.

Publication bias test

When the sample of studies included in a meta-analysis does not accurately reflect the general status of research on the relevant subject, publication bias is said to be exhibited in this research. The reliability and accuracy of the meta-analysis may be impacted by publication bias. Due to this, the meta-analysis needs to check the sample data for publication bias (Stewart et al., 2006 ). A popular method to check for publication bias is the funnel plot; and it is unlikely that there will be publishing bias when the data are equally dispersed on either side of the average effect size and targeted within the higher region. The data are equally dispersed within the higher portion of the efficient zone, consistent with the funnel plot connected with this analysis (see Fig. 2 ), indicating that publication bias is unlikely in this situation.

This funnel plot shows the result of publication bias of 79 effect quantities across 36 studies.

Heterogeneity test

To select the appropriate effect models for the meta-analysis, one might use the results of a heterogeneity test on the data effect sizes. In a meta-analysis, it is common practice to gauge the degree of data heterogeneity using the I 2 value, and I 2 ≥ 50% is typically understood to denote medium-high heterogeneity, which calls for the adoption of a random effect model; if not, a fixed effect model ought to be applied (Lipsey and Wilson, 2001 ). The findings of the heterogeneity test in this paper (see Table 2 ) revealed that I 2 was 86% and displayed significant heterogeneity ( P < 0.01). To ensure accuracy and reliability, the overall effect size ought to be calculated utilizing the random effect model.

The analysis of the overall effect size

This meta-analysis utilized a random effect model to examine 79 effect quantities from 36 studies after eliminating heterogeneity. In accordance with Cohen’s criterion (Cohen, 1992 ), it is abundantly clear from the analysis results, which are shown in the forest plot of the overall effect (see Fig. 3 ), that the cumulative impact size of cooperative problem-solving is 0.82, which is statistically significant ( z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]), and can encourage learners to practice critical thinking.

This forest plot shows the analysis result of the overall effect size across 36 studies.

In addition, this study examined two distinct dimensions of critical thinking to better understand the precise contributions that collaborative problem-solving makes to the growth of critical thinking. The findings (see Table 3 ) indicate that collaborative problem-solving improves cognitive skills (ES = 0.70) and attitudinal tendency (ES = 1.17), with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 7.95, P < 0.01). Although collaborative problem-solving improves both dimensions of critical thinking, it is essential to point out that the improvements in students’ attitudinal tendency are much more pronounced and have a significant comprehensive effect (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]), whereas gains in learners’ cognitive skill are slightly improved and are just above average. (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

The analysis of moderator effect size

The whole forest plot’s 79 effect quantities underwent a two-tailed test, which revealed significant heterogeneity ( I 2 = 86%, z = 12.78, P < 0.01), indicating differences between various effect sizes that may have been influenced by moderating factors other than sampling error. Therefore, exploring possible moderating factors that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis, such as the learning stage, learning scaffold, teaching type, group size, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, in order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking. The findings (see Table 4 ) indicate that various moderating factors have advantageous effects on critical thinking. In this situation, the subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01), and teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05) are all significant moderators that can be applied to support the cultivation of critical thinking. However, since the learning stage and the measuring tools did not significantly differ among intergroup (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05, and chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05), we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving. These are the precise outcomes, as follows:

Various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively, without significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05). High school was first on the list of effect sizes (ES = 1.36, P < 0.01), then higher education (ES = 0.78, P < 0.01), and middle school (ES = 0.73, P < 0.01). These results show that, despite the learning stage’s beneficial influence on cultivating learners’ critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is essential for cultivating critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Different teaching types had varying degrees of positive impact on critical thinking, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05). The effect size was ranked as follows: mixed courses (ES = 1.34, P < 0.01), integrated courses (ES = 0.81, P < 0.01), and independent courses (ES = 0.27, P < 0.01). These results indicate that the most effective approach to cultivate critical thinking utilizing collaborative problem solving is through the teaching type of mixed courses.

Various intervention durations significantly improved critical thinking, and there were significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01). The effect sizes related to this variable showed a tendency to increase with longer intervention durations. The improvement in critical thinking reached a significant level (ES = 0.85, P < 0.01) after more than 12 weeks of training. These findings indicate that the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated, with a longer intervention duration having a greater effect.

Different learning scaffolds influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01). The resource-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.69, P < 0.01) acquired a medium-to-higher level of impact, the technique-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.63, P < 0.01) also attained a medium-to-higher level of impact, and the teacher-supported learning scaffold (ES = 0.92, P < 0.01) displayed a high level of significant impact. These results show that the learning scaffold with teacher support has the greatest impact on cultivating critical thinking.

Various group sizes influenced critical thinking positively, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05). Critical thinking showed a general declining trend with increasing group size. The overall effect size of 2–3 people in this situation was the biggest (ES = 0.99, P < 0.01), and when the group size was greater than 7 people, the improvement in critical thinking was at the lower-middle level (ES < 0.5, P < 0.01). These results show that the impact on critical thinking is positively connected with group size, and as group size grows, so does the overall impact.

Various measuring tools influenced critical thinking positively, with significant intergroup differences (chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05). In this situation, the self-adapting measurement tools obtained an upper-medium level of effect (ES = 0.78), whereas the complete effect size of the standardized measurement tools was the largest, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 0.84, P < 0.01). These results show that, despite the beneficial influence of the measuring tool on cultivating critical thinking, we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Different subject areas had a greater impact on critical thinking, and the intergroup differences were statistically significant (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05). Mathematics had the greatest overall impact, achieving a significant level of effect (ES = 1.68, P < 0.01), followed by science (ES = 1.25, P < 0.01) and medical science (ES = 0.87, P < 0.01), both of which also achieved a significant level of effect. Programming technology was the least effective (ES = 0.39, P < 0.01), only having a medium-low degree of effect compared to education (ES = 0.72, P < 0.01) and other fields (such as language, art, and social sciences) (ES = 0.58, P < 0.01). These results suggest that scientific fields (e.g., mathematics, science) may be the most effective subject areas for cultivating critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

According to this meta-analysis, using collaborative problem-solving as an intervention strategy in critical thinking teaching has a considerable amount of impact on cultivating learners’ critical thinking as a whole and has a favorable promotional effect on the two dimensions of critical thinking. According to certain studies, collaborative problem solving, the most frequently used critical thinking teaching strategy in curriculum instruction can considerably enhance students’ critical thinking (e.g., Liang et al., 2017 ; Liu et al., 2020 ; Cindy, 2004 ). This meta-analysis provides convergent data support for the above research views. Thus, the findings of this meta-analysis not only effectively address the first research query regarding the overall effect of cultivating critical thinking and its impact on the two dimensions of critical thinking (i.e., attitudinal tendency and cognitive skills) utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving, but also enhance our confidence in cultivating critical thinking by using collaborative problem-solving intervention approach in the context of classroom teaching.

Furthermore, the associated improvements in attitudinal tendency are much stronger, but the corresponding improvements in cognitive skill are only marginally better. According to certain studies, cognitive skill differs from the attitudinal tendency in classroom instruction; the cultivation and development of the former as a key ability is a process of gradual accumulation, while the latter as an attitude is affected by the context of the teaching situation (e.g., a novel and exciting teaching approach, challenging and rewarding tasks) (Halpern, 2001 ; Wei and Hong, 2022 ). Collaborative problem-solving as a teaching approach is exciting and interesting, as well as rewarding and challenging; because it takes the learners as the focus and examines problems with poor structure in real situations, and it can inspire students to fully realize their potential for problem-solving, which will significantly improve their attitudinal tendency toward solving problems (Liu et al., 2020 ). Similar to how collaborative problem-solving influences attitudinal tendency, attitudinal tendency impacts cognitive skill when attempting to solve a problem (Liu et al., 2020 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ), and stronger attitudinal tendencies are associated with improved learning achievement and cognitive ability in students (Sison, 2008 ; Zhang et al., 2022 ). It can be seen that the two specific dimensions of critical thinking as well as critical thinking as a whole are affected by collaborative problem-solving, and this study illuminates the nuanced links between cognitive skills and attitudinal tendencies with regard to these two dimensions of critical thinking. To fully develop students’ capacity for critical thinking, future empirical research should pay closer attention to cognitive skills.

The moderating effects of collaborative problem solving with regard to teaching critical thinking

In order to further explore the key factors that influence critical thinking, exploring possible moderating effects that might produce considerable heterogeneity was done using subgroup analysis. The findings show that the moderating factors, such as the teaching type, learning stage, group size, learning scaffold, duration of the intervention, measuring tool, and the subject area included in the 36 experimental designs, could all support the cultivation of collaborative problem-solving in critical thinking. Among them, the effect size differences between the learning stage and measuring tool are not significant, which does not explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

In terms of the learning stage, various learning stages influenced critical thinking positively without significant intergroup differences, indicating that we are unable to explain why it is crucial in fostering the growth of critical thinking.

Although high education accounts for 70.89% of all empirical studies performed by researchers, high school may be the appropriate learning stage to foster students’ critical thinking by utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving since it has the largest overall effect size. This phenomenon may be related to student’s cognitive development, which needs to be further studied in follow-up research.

With regard to teaching type, mixed course teaching may be the best teaching method to cultivate students’ critical thinking. Relevant studies have shown that in the actual teaching process if students are trained in thinking methods alone, the methods they learn are isolated and divorced from subject knowledge, which is not conducive to their transfer of thinking methods; therefore, if students’ thinking is trained only in subject teaching without systematic method training, it is challenging to apply to real-world circumstances (Ruggiero, 2012 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Teaching critical thinking as mixed course teaching in parallel to other subject teachings can achieve the best effect on learners’ critical thinking, and explicit critical thinking instruction is more effective than less explicit critical thinking instruction (Bensley and Spero, 2014 ).

In terms of the intervention duration, with longer intervention times, the overall effect size shows an upward tendency. Thus, the intervention duration and critical thinking’s impact are positively correlated. Critical thinking, as a key competency for students in the 21st century, is difficult to get a meaningful improvement in a brief intervention duration. Instead, it could be developed over a lengthy period of time through consistent teaching and the progressive accumulation of knowledge (Halpern, 2001 ; Hu and Liu, 2015 ). Therefore, future empirical studies ought to take these restrictions into account throughout a longer period of critical thinking instruction.

With regard to group size, a group size of 2–3 persons has the highest effect size, and the comprehensive effect size decreases with increasing group size in general. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a group composed of two to four members is most appropriate for collaborative learning (Schellens and Valcke, 2006 ). However, the meta-analysis results also indicate that once the group size exceeds 7 people, small groups cannot produce better interaction and performance than large groups. This may be because the learning scaffolds of technique support, resource support, and teacher support improve the frequency and effectiveness of interaction among group members, and a collaborative group with more members may increase the diversity of views, which is helpful to cultivate critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

With regard to the learning scaffold, the three different kinds of learning scaffolds can all enhance critical thinking. Among them, the teacher-supported learning scaffold has the largest overall effect size, demonstrating the interdependence of effective learning scaffolds and collaborative problem-solving. This outcome is in line with some research findings; as an example, a successful strategy is to encourage learners to collaborate, come up with solutions, and develop critical thinking skills by using learning scaffolds (Reiser, 2004 ; Xu et al., 2022 ); learning scaffolds can lower task complexity and unpleasant feelings while also enticing students to engage in learning activities (Wood et al., 2006 ); learning scaffolds are designed to assist students in using learning approaches more successfully to adapt the collaborative problem-solving process, and the teacher-supported learning scaffolds have the greatest influence on critical thinking in this process because they are more targeted, informative, and timely (Xu et al., 2022 ).

With respect to the measuring tool, despite the fact that standardized measurement tools (such as the WGCTA, CCTT, and CCTST) have been acknowledged as trustworthy and effective by worldwide experts, only 54.43% of the research included in this meta-analysis adopted them for assessment, and the results indicated no intergroup differences. These results suggest that not all teaching circumstances are appropriate for measuring critical thinking using standardized measurement tools. “The measuring tools for measuring thinking ability have limits in assessing learners in educational situations and should be adapted appropriately to accurately assess the changes in learners’ critical thinking.”, according to Simpson and Courtney ( 2002 , p. 91). As a result, in order to more fully and precisely gauge how learners’ critical thinking has evolved, we must properly modify standardized measuring tools based on collaborative problem-solving learning contexts.

With regard to the subject area, the comprehensive effect size of science departments (e.g., mathematics, science, medical science) is larger than that of language arts and social sciences. Some recent international education reforms have noted that critical thinking is a basic part of scientific literacy. Students with scientific literacy can prove the rationality of their judgment according to accurate evidence and reasonable standards when they face challenges or poorly structured problems (Kyndt et al., 2013 ), which makes critical thinking crucial for developing scientific understanding and applying this understanding to practical problem solving for problems related to science, technology, and society (Yore et al., 2007 ).

Suggestions for critical thinking teaching

Other than those stated in the discussion above, the following suggestions are offered for critical thinking instruction utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

First, teachers should put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, to design real problems based on collaborative situations. This meta-analysis provides evidence to support the view that collaborative problem-solving has a strong synergistic effect on promoting students’ critical thinking. Asking questions about real situations and allowing learners to take part in critical discussions on real problems during class instruction are key ways to teach critical thinking rather than simply reading speculative articles without practice (Mulnix, 2012 ). Furthermore, the improvement of students’ critical thinking is realized through cognitive conflict with other learners in the problem situation (Yang et al., 2008 ). Consequently, it is essential for teachers to put a special emphasis on the two core elements, which are collaboration and problem-solving, and design real problems and encourage students to discuss, negotiate, and argue based on collaborative problem-solving situations.

Second, teachers should design and implement mixed courses to cultivate learners’ critical thinking, utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving. Critical thinking can be taught through curriculum instruction (Kuncel, 2011 ; Leng and Lu, 2020 ), with the goal of cultivating learners’ critical thinking for flexible transfer and application in real problem-solving situations. This meta-analysis shows that mixed course teaching has a highly substantial impact on the cultivation and promotion of learners’ critical thinking. Therefore, teachers should design and implement mixed course teaching with real collaborative problem-solving situations in combination with the knowledge content of specific disciplines in conventional teaching, teach methods and strategies of critical thinking based on poorly structured problems to help students master critical thinking, and provide practical activities in which students can interact with each other to develop knowledge construction and critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem-solving.

Third, teachers should be more trained in critical thinking, particularly preservice teachers, and they also should be conscious of the ways in which teachers’ support for learning scaffolds can promote critical thinking. The learning scaffold supported by teachers had the greatest impact on learners’ critical thinking, in addition to being more directive, targeted, and timely (Wood et al., 2006 ). Critical thinking can only be effectively taught when teachers recognize the significance of critical thinking for students’ growth and use the proper approaches while designing instructional activities (Forawi, 2016 ). Therefore, with the intention of enabling teachers to create learning scaffolds to cultivate learners’ critical thinking utilizing the approach of collaborative problem solving, it is essential to concentrate on the teacher-supported learning scaffolds and enhance the instruction for teaching critical thinking to teachers, especially preservice teachers.

Implications and limitations

There are certain limitations in this meta-analysis, but future research can correct them. First, the search languages were restricted to English and Chinese, so it is possible that pertinent studies that were written in other languages were overlooked, resulting in an inadequate number of articles for review. Second, these data provided by the included studies are partially missing, such as whether teachers were trained in the theory and practice of critical thinking, the average age and gender of learners, and the differences in critical thinking among learners of various ages and genders. Third, as is typical for review articles, more studies were released while this meta-analysis was being done; therefore, it had a time limit. With the development of relevant research, future studies focusing on these issues are highly relevant and needed.

Conclusions

The subject of the magnitude of collaborative problem-solving’s impact on fostering students’ critical thinking, which received scant attention from other studies, was successfully addressed by this study. The question of the effectiveness of collaborative problem-solving in promoting students’ critical thinking was addressed in this study, which addressed a topic that had gotten little attention in earlier research. The following conclusions can be made:

Regarding the results obtained, collaborative problem solving is an effective teaching approach to foster learners’ critical thinking, with a significant overall effect size (ES = 0.82, z = 12.78, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.69, 0.95]). With respect to the dimensions of critical thinking, collaborative problem-solving can significantly and effectively improve students’ attitudinal tendency, and the comprehensive effect is significant (ES = 1.17, z = 7.62, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.87, 1.47]); nevertheless, it falls short in terms of improving students’ cognitive skills, having only an upper-middle impact (ES = 0.70, z = 11.55, P < 0.01, 95% CI [0.58, 0.82]).

As demonstrated by both the results and the discussion, there are varying degrees of beneficial effects on students’ critical thinking from all seven moderating factors, which were found across 36 studies. In this context, the teaching type (chi 2 = 7.20, P < 0.05), intervention duration (chi 2 = 12.18, P < 0.01), subject area (chi 2 = 13.36, P < 0.05), group size (chi 2 = 8.77, P < 0.05), and learning scaffold (chi 2 = 9.03, P < 0.01) all have a positive impact on critical thinking, and they can be viewed as important moderating factors that affect how critical thinking develops. Since the learning stage (chi 2 = 3.15, P = 0.21 > 0.05) and measuring tools (chi 2 = 0.08, P = 0.78 > 0.05) did not demonstrate any significant intergroup differences, we are unable to explain why these two factors are crucial in supporting the cultivation of critical thinking in the context of collaborative problem-solving.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included within the article and its supplementary information files, and the supplementary information files are available in the Dataverse repository: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/IPFJO6 .

Bensley DA, Spero RA (2014) Improving critical thinking skills and meta-cognitive monitoring through direct infusion. Think Skills Creat 12:55–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2014.02.001

Article Google Scholar

Castle A (2009) Defining and assessing critical thinking skills for student radiographers. Radiography 15(1):70–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2007.10.007

Chen XD (2013) An empirical study on the influence of PBL teaching model on critical thinking ability of non-English majors. J PLA Foreign Lang College 36 (04):68–72

Google Scholar

Cohen A (1992) Antecedents of organizational commitment across occupational groups: a meta-analysis. J Organ Behav. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.4030130602

Cooper H (2010) Research synthesis and meta-analysis: a step-by-step approach, 4th edn. Sage, London, England

Cindy HS (2004) Problem-based learning: what and how do students learn? Educ Psychol Rev 51(1):31–39

Duch BJ, Gron SD, Allen DE (2001) The power of problem-based learning: a practical “how to” for teaching undergraduate courses in any discipline. Stylus Educ Sci 2:190–198

Ennis RH (1989) Critical thinking and subject specificity: clarification and needed research. Educ Res 18(3):4–10. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x018003004

Facione PA (1990) Critical thinking: a statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations. Eric document reproduction service. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ed315423

Facione PA, Facione NC (1992) The California Critical Thinking Dispositions Inventory (CCTDI) and the CCTDI test manual. California Academic Press, Millbrae, CA

Forawi SA (2016) Standard-based science education and critical thinking. Think Skills Creat 20:52–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2016.02.005

Halpern DF (2001) Assessing the effectiveness of critical thinking instruction. J Gen Educ 50(4):270–286. https://doi.org/10.2307/27797889

Hu WP, Liu J (2015) Cultivation of pupils’ thinking ability: a five-year follow-up study. Psychol Behav Res 13(05):648–654. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1672-0628.2015.05.010

Huber K (2016) Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis. Rev Educ Res 86(2):431–468. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315605917

Kek MYCA, Huijser H (2011) The power of problem-based learning in developing critical thinking skills: preparing students for tomorrow’s digital futures in today’s classrooms. High Educ Res Dev 30(3):329–341. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2010.501074

Kuncel NR (2011) Measurement and meaning of critical thinking (Research report for the NRC 21st Century Skills Workshop). National Research Council, Washington, DC

Kyndt E, Raes E, Lismont B, Timmers F, Cascallar E, Dochy F (2013) A meta-analysis of the effects of face-to-face cooperative learning. Do recent studies falsify or verify earlier findings? Educ Res Rev 10(2):133–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2013.02.002

Leng J, Lu XX (2020) Is critical thinking really teachable?—A meta-analysis based on 79 experimental or quasi experimental studies. Open Educ Res 26(06):110–118. https://doi.org/10.13966/j.cnki.kfjyyj.2020.06.011

Liang YZ, Zhu K, Zhao CL (2017) An empirical study on the depth of interaction promoted by collaborative problem solving learning activities. J E-educ Res 38(10):87–92. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2017.10.014

Lipsey M, Wilson D (2001) Practical meta-analysis. International Educational and Professional, London, pp. 92–160

Liu Z, Wu W, Jiang Q (2020) A study on the influence of problem based learning on college students’ critical thinking-based on a meta-analysis of 31 studies. Explor High Educ 03:43–49

Morris SB (2008) Estimating effect sizes from pretest-posttest-control group designs. Organ Res Methods 11(2):364–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428106291059

Article ADS Google Scholar

Mulnix JW (2012) Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educ Philos Theory 44(5):464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x

Naber J, Wyatt TH (2014) The effect of reflective writing interventions on the critical thinking skills and dispositions of baccalaureate nursing students. Nurse Educ Today 34(1):67–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2013.04.002

National Research Council (2012) Education for life and work: developing transferable knowledge and skills in the 21st century. The National Academies Press, Washington, DC

Niu L, Behar HLS, Garvan CW (2013) Do instructional interventions influence college students’ critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis. Educ Res Rev 9(12):114–128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002

Peng ZM, Deng L (2017) Towards the core of education reform: cultivating critical thinking skills as the core of skills in the 21st century. Res Educ Dev 24:57–63. https://doi.org/10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2017.24.011

Reiser BJ (2004) Scaffolding complex learning: the mechanisms of structuring and problematizing student work. J Learn Sci 13(3):273–304. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327809jls1303_2

Ruggiero VR (2012) The art of thinking: a guide to critical and creative thought, 4th edn. Harper Collins College Publishers, New York

Schellens T, Valcke M (2006) Fostering knowledge construction in university students through asynchronous discussion groups. Comput Educ 46(4):349–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2004.07.010

Sendag S, Odabasi HF (2009) Effects of an online problem based learning course on content knowledge acquisition and critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 53(1):132–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.01.008

Sison R (2008) Investigating Pair Programming in a Software Engineering Course in an Asian Setting. 2008 15th Asia-Pacific Software Engineering Conference, pp. 325–331. https://doi.org/10.1109/APSEC.2008.61

Simpson E, Courtney M (2002) Critical thinking in nursing education: literature review. Mary Courtney 8(2):89–98

Stewart L, Tierney J, Burdett S (2006) Do systematic reviews based on individual patient data offer a means of circumventing biases associated with trial publications? Publication bias in meta-analysis. John Wiley and Sons Inc, New York, pp. 261–286

Tiwari A, Lai P, So M, Yuen K (2010) A comparison of the effects of problem-based learning and lecturing on the development of students’ critical thinking. Med Educ 40(6):547–554. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02481.x

Wood D, Bruner JS, Ross G (2006) The role of tutoring in problem solving. J Child Psychol Psychiatry 17(2):89–100. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1976.tb00381.x

Wei T, Hong S (2022) The meaning and realization of teachable critical thinking. Educ Theory Practice 10:51–57

Xu EW, Wang W, Wang QX (2022) A meta-analysis of the effectiveness of programming teaching in promoting K-12 students’ computational thinking. Educ Inf Technol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11445-2

Yang YC, Newby T, Bill R (2008) Facilitating interactions through structured web-based bulletin boards: a quasi-experimental study on promoting learners’ critical thinking skills. Comput Educ 50(4):1572–1585. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2007.04.006

Yore LD, Pimm D, Tuan HL (2007) The literacy component of mathematical and scientific literacy. Int J Sci Math Educ 5(4):559–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-007-9089-4

Zhang T, Zhang S, Gao QQ, Wang JH (2022) Research on the development of learners’ critical thinking in online peer review. Audio Visual Educ Res 6:53–60. https://doi.org/10.13811/j.cnki.eer.2022.06.08

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by the graduate scientific research and innovation project of Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region named “Research on in-depth learning of high school information technology courses for the cultivation of computing thinking” (No. XJ2022G190) and the independent innovation fund project for doctoral students of the College of Educational Science of Xinjiang Normal University named “Research on project-based teaching of high school information technology courses from the perspective of discipline core literacy” (No. XJNUJKYA2003).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

College of Educational Science, Xinjiang Normal University, 830017, Urumqi, Xinjiang, China

Enwei Xu, Wei Wang & Qingxia Wang

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Enwei Xu or Wei Wang .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Additional information.

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary tables, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Xu, E., Wang, W. & Wang, Q. The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting students’ critical thinking: A meta-analysis based on empirical literature. Humanit Soc Sci Commun 10 , 16 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Download citation

Received : 07 August 2022

Accepted : 04 January 2023

Published : 11 January 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-023-01508-1

Share this article

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

This article is cited by

Impacts of online collaborative learning on students’ intercultural communication apprehension and intercultural communicative competence.

Hoa Thi Hoang Chau
Hung Phu Bui
Quynh Thi Huong Dinh

Education and Information Technologies (2024)

Exploring the effects of digital technology on deep learning: a meta-analysis

Sustainable electricity generation and farm-grid utilization from photovoltaic aquaculture: a bibliometric analysis.

A. A. Amusa
M. Alhassan

International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology (2024)

Quick links

Explore articles by subject
Guide to authors
Editorial policies

Intentional College Teaching

Online Professional Development Courses for College Educators

Bloom’s Taxonomy: Benefits and Limitations

Many college educators are familiar with Bloom’s Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain . This well-known categorization of learning, developed by a team of scholars but often attributed to the first author, Benjamin Bloom, has been used by countless educators to design, structure, and assess learning. The six categories in Bloom’s Taxonomy for the Cognitive Domain – remember, understand, apply, analyze, evaluate, and create – have been the go-to resource for writing learning objectives for over 50 years, assisting countless educators.

Bloom’s Revised Taxonomy

In 2001, a group of cognitive psychologists, curriculum, and assessment scholars published a revised version under the title A Taxonomy for Teaching, Learning, and Assessment (Anderson and Krathwohl, 2001). The most recognized change was shifting the category titles from nouns to verbs and flipping the top two levels.

However, there was substantial thinking behind this revision that goes largely unnoticed. In this revision, it is acknowledged that most learning objectives have both a verb and a noun – – an action or cognitive process that is also associated with the intended knowledge outcome.

The cognitive process dimensions remains mainly the same, although replaced by action verbs. And the new knowledge dimension categorizes four types of knowledge that learners may be expected to acquire or construct ranging from concrete to abstract; factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive.

The revised version, while taking into account many subtle components, is arguably more complicated are difficult to use. Losing some of the simplicity might explain the ongoing popularity of the original version.

Benefits of Bloom’s Taxonomy

Nothing sticks around this long unless it’s useful. And Bloom’s Taxonomy has allowed faculty to reach for higher-order thinking, to align their outcome with assessments and activities, and to better assess the type of learning students are engaging in.

Having a classification of learning allows us to think more strategically about the type of learning we want and what students are actually doing in our courses. We can see what higher-order learning is possible and aim towards more complex outcomes. Many college faculty have used the many helpful lists of accompanying verbs to craft measurable learning objectives that are abundantly found online.

Some faculty prefer to show Bloom’s in hierarchical form as it implies that we have to put in the work to acquire, remember, and understand knowledge and information in order to be able to do higher-order types of thinking and application. Students might assume that they can go straight to evaluating or analyzing and skip some of the necessary foundational work. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) argue that there is empirical evidence for at least the bottom four levels of the pyramid.

Using a common taxonomy also allows us to assess learning and compare results. Are we reaching the levels we want? Can we see at a glance what kind of learning is happening in a course? Can we compare learning results from different types of instructional interventions? If many of us are using this popular categorization, comparisons and the ability to recognize effective practice becomes much more possible.

Limitations of Bloom’s Taxonomy

However, as we adopt and use this framework, it’s also valuable to explore its limitations.

Is it a true hierarchy?

Bloom’s pyramid representation shows the need for foundational knowledge in supporting higher-order thinking. However, the pyramid also implies that these types of learning are distinct and separate from one another, which may not always be the case. Often our rich learning experiences involve many different types of learning happening at the same time.

In addition, the levels imply a lock-step approach toward “creating” as the highest level we can achieve. It is certainly debatable in different disciplines if “creating” and “evaluating” are better or higher than “analyzing,” or are rather just different versions of higher-order thinking used in different contexts .

The hierarchical view also brings forth some assumptions. Some faculty may be led to think that they need to go as high as possible as often as possible. Or that every course, or even class period, should be reaching all levels. Yet we may need to focus on different learning outcomes at different times. For example, sometimes we simply need to work within and spend time developing foundational knowledge.

Many scholars argue that Bloom’s should not be viewed as levels or a hierarchy, but rather broken into lower-level and higher-level learning. Some find an inverse pyramid to be a better representation. With creating, evaluating, and analyzing at the top.

Other scholars see additional nuances. In Anton Tolman’s representation , the foundational knowledge of Understanding and Remembering are considered basic skills, while analyzing, creating, and evaluating are considered critical thinking skills. Tolman sees Application as the transition or bridge that connects this necessary knowledge and more advanced thinking skills.

Does Blooms capture all learning?

The writing of learning objectives, considered to be an essential aspect of creating effective and engaging learning experiences, has also too often been viewed as an uninspiring task. Shouldn’t this be where our passion as teachers comes through? Could it be we are focusing on a limited aspect of learning?

When we talk about “Blooms” nearly everyone is talking about Bloom’s Taxonomy of the Cognitive Domain. We often overlook that this was created as one of three domains, including the Psychomotor Domain and the Affective Domain . Rarely do we see college educators using these other domains in course learning outcomes.

Our hopes for student learning often go well beyond cognitive concepts. We also want students to appreciate literature, to recognize their own biases, to work well with others, to learn how to learn, or to have empathy and demonstrate ethical behavior. More recent learning categorizations such as Fink’s Taxonomy of Significant Learning and Wiggins and McTighe’s Facets of Understanding can empower instructors to articulate and use these valuable goals and are also worth exploring.

Is it worth using?

The goal of using Bloom’s Taxonomy is to articulate and diversify our learning goals, and it can be very helpful in doing so. Bloom’s has been used for so long because it makes sense and is useful. Most people likely only scratch the surface of its use and complexity, but nearly everyone can find some value in this categorization.

Overall, as long as we are using this framework for constructive purposes, and are mindful of the concerns and limitations, any focus on different types of learning is beneficial for both faculty and students. And when you are ready to go deeper, there is always more to to explore!

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives . New York: Longman.
Bloom, B., Englehart, M. Furst, E., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive domain . New York, Toronto: Longmans, Green.
Fink, L. D. (2013). Creating significant learning experiences: An integrated approach to designing college courses . John Wiley & Sons.
Tolman, A.O. (2021). Graphic of Bloom’s Taxonomy . https://sites.google.com/site/ttmcollaboration/home/files?authuser=0
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design . ASCD.

The Benefits of Critical Thinking & How to develop it

April 02, 2024

Before we proceed to understand the importance and benefits of critical thinking for students, it is important to understand what critical thinking is.

Critical thinking is the mode of thinking about any subject, problem, or content. It skillfully thinks. Later, it implements and inherent those intellectual thoughts upon them. The best part of critical thinking is, it improves the quality of thinking.

It has intellectual values like clarity, sound evidence, precision, good reasons, relevance, consistency, depth, breadth, and fairness.

Critical thinking requires a proper process, it involves skillfully conceptualizing, analyzing different aspects, synthesizing, most importantly evaluating whatever information is gathered, keenly observing all factors, and experiencing the overall view.

Now let us understand the benefits of critical thinking.

1] it helps to improve decision-making.

Critical thinking will let you make decisions by yourself. It will help you improve decision-making.

For students, while making career decisions or making a new career move, it is crucial to make quick decisions, and hence critical thinking plays a vital role here.

2] Enhances problem-solving ability

Problem-solving is the key skill required for adapting to changes and facing challenges.

This skill of critical thinking should be developed by students to avoid making any situation complex and help find a solution to it.

For instance, two people in the same situation have been given a task and asked to find a solution. One person might take 5 minutes yet can’t give a relevant solution, whereas another person with problem-solving ability will dedicate enough time to research and provide a relevant solution.

Read Here: The Importance of Problem-Solving Skills & How to Develop Them

3] refine your research skills.

Critical Thinking will refine your research skills, moreover will help you research accurately by observing, analyzing, synthesizing, and experimenting with every aspect in detail for a better result.

4] Polishes your creativity

It will help you polish your creative side. Creativity unquestionably defines itself as a requisite skill in the collaborative modern workforce. As critical thinking will surely polish your creativity.

5] Stimulates Curiosity

It stimulates curiosity in you to find the right solution for the problem or the subject you are working on. Curiosity will let you dig and delve deeper to get a better result. This factor will let you stay a lifelong learner.

All these aspects of critical thinking play a vital role in Banking and financial sector. If you are seeking to develop these crucial skills, then you must certainly opt for ‘ Thadomal Shahani Centre for Management ’ institute based in Mulund, Mumbai.

It is one of the Best institutes, aids in developing critical thinking with its innovative teaching methodology, and focuses on comprehensive development, providing students with a globally relevant curriculum, and international faculty members who have hands-on business leadership.

Additionally, If you want to enroll in Certificate in Banking and Financial Services (CBFS) or top global MBA courses, you can contact us for detailed information where you will find the program, curriculum, specializations, certifications, eligibility criteria, and everything related to it.

Consult a Career Advisor

Now lets us learn how to develop critical thinking skills, – ask questions.

For developing critical skills, it is important to ask more questions. The more you ask questions, the more the curiosity and quest to learn increase. The questions will clarify your thinking, and conceptualizing and analyzing will become more accessible through it.

– Scrutinize the consequences

By asking questions, you have the availability of various options. However, you must not make a hasty decision. You have to scrutinize the consequences of each option and accordingly take a decision. Therefore, it will lead to solving your problems.

– Become Active Listener

To be a critical thinker, you need to first be an active listener. You will ask numerous questions to satisfy your quest, but to know the answers, you need to be a good listener too. Listen to different people’s thoughts, views, and opinions; these will help you form your own decisions.

Know what are the advantages of developing Critical Thinking Skills

Now that you know the importance and advantages of critical thinking.

Important Links:

Certificate in Banking and Financial Services (CBFS): https://tscfm.org/courses/certificate-in-banking-and-financial-services/
4-IN-1 Professional Diploma in Banking, Financial Services & Insurance (PDBFSI): https://tscfm.org/courses/4-in-1-professional-diploma-in-banking-financial-services-insurance-pdbfsi/

5 Time Management Tips for Students to Study Effectively and Crack Exams Better

How to crack the campus placement interview, want a successful career.

Fill up this form for a free career psychometric test & a 30 min career guidance session with our advisor.

Business Management Program

Banking and finance, digital marketing, mba for working professionals, business english, career advice, certificate in banking and financial services (cbfs), master of business administration (mba), 4-in-1 professional diploma in banking, financial services & insurance (pdbfsi), mba from uk university, professional diploma in investment banking, professional diploma in digital marketing, certificate in business english, most popular posts, mba program highlights, eligibility, fees, admission process- tscfm, how to pursue mba if scored low marks in the entrance exam, how to get into an mba college without appearing for entrance exams.

MBA Program Highlights, Eligibility, Fees, Admission Process- TSCFM

May 13, 2024

How to Pursue MBA if scored low marks in the Entrance Exam?

May 10, 2024

How to Get into an MBA College Without Appearing for Entrance Exams?

May 06, 2024

About TSCFM

TSCFM, is a part of The Shahani Group of Institutions. We are the only B-school in Mumbai to bring the best of international management education to India. We are ranked at No 3 among colleges offering Global Business Courses in India by Outlook.

Awards & Affiliation
Career Advices
Industry News
Testimonials
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
Refund and Cancellation Policy

+91 9930978000

[email protected]

Kindly Fill up the details to receive a call from our Career expert

Obsidian Iceberg

🌲The Difficulties of Teaching Critical Thinking

Teaching critical thinking in an optimal way is pretty hard when a course has a strict content or assessment focused pacing guide..

Note: This blog post was originally written for my Master Degree’s in Leadership in Teaching via Notre Dame of Maryland University. For readability, I’ve removed some of the inline citations, added some clarification, and omitted some of the academic formatting. If anybody wants my full references list or a copy of the original paper, I’m happy to send it along, but I’m sharing it here because some folks have demonstrated an interested in the sorts of teaching meta I’ve described in The Difficultues of Teaching Notetaking.

The educational priorities of a society are an ever-shifting goalpost that are inherently impacted by labor needs, technology, and values. From apprenticeship systems in Medieval Europe to bureaucratic tests in Imperial China to the famous universities of Timbuktu , the nature of what is taught to adolescents of various social classes, why it is taught, and how it is taught has shifted drastically over time. As the global community moves into the Information Age, lecture and memorization-based methods of education have become increasingly outmoded.

Note: By “outmoded,” I mean I not only don’t use them in my teaching, neither did my teachers 15 years ago. I still cringe every time I read a modern article criticizing “traditional teaching,” as though it’s at all normal to see lecture-based memorization in a normal American classroom.

My 8th grade Social Studies teacher made this point to me as far back as the 1990s. I visited his classroom at the end of the school year and asked why I hadn’t learned more about a particular topic of interest that I no longer recall – but I remember his response vividly. Although search engines & personal computers were still relatively new in the popular consciousness of the time, he explained that knowledge of dates and names was less important in a world where that information was easier to access than at any time previous, and so skills, not facts, were what he wanted to impart.

He was hardly alone in that opinion. A common criticism of modern education systems that they do not do enough to teach the critical thinking skills that modern students need to be successful in the workforce.

Development of the Common Core State Standards began in 2009 in part to address this precise problem. The trend is continuing. In the last 3 years of my teaching career, my district moved away from multiple-choice tests in grades 6 thru 12 Social Studies to assessing using Document Based Questions (DBQs). These test the student’s ability to analyze sources, make connections, and craft compelling arguments instead of relying primarily on knowledge.

What is the best way to assess critical thinking?

Critical thinking skills are a key component of being “ college and career ready ,” but precise definitions of critical thinking vary depending on the source and many components have been identified. For example, although there are many assessments of critical thinking, the Critical Thinking Assessment Test is unique in that it was “designed for use by college faculty to help them improve their development of students’ critical thinking skills.”

The Critical-thinking Assessment Test (CAT) looks for the skills relating to

evaluating information

creative thinking

learning and problem solving

communication

Of these, creativity and problem solving are the two components of critical thinking that are often most difficult to assess in an objective, standardized, numerical manner. They are therefore of interest in terms of identifying potential best practices for teaching them.

In addition to tests like the CAT, there are organizations specifically geared toward teaching creative problem-solving. In the 1970s, Dr. C. Samuel Micklus, challenged his Industrial Design students to use their creativity to solve unique problems, and found the experience valuable enough that he created a course called Creative Problem Solving .

Other students – and their teachers – asked to be included in the challenges, and from there were born organizations like Olympics of the Mind; Creative Competitions, Inc; and Destination Imagination .

From a personal standpoint, having been a member of both Odyssey of the Mind (“OM”) in elementary school and Destination Imagination (“DI”) in high school, I found them to be valuable experiences. Winning the state-level competition two years out of four was one of the highlights of my high school experience, but the question of whether I was selected because I was “natively good” at creative problem solving, whether I learned creative problem-solving skills during the program, or some combination of both, still lingers.

Critical thinking really IS in decline.

Despite the well-meaning efforts of the National Governors Association, assessment writers, teachers, and organizations like Destination Imagination, creative thinking skills appear to be declining across America. Since testing using the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking began in the 1960s, creative thinking scores have declined despite a generalized increase in Intelligence Quotient (IQ) scores.

Note: standardized tests/measures like BMI and IQ and PARCC scores are, in my opinion, a fairly terrible way to evaluate individuals , but are still useful for measuring generalities in a population.

Sources disagree on whether it is possible to teach creative problem-solving skills in the “traditional” school environment. In the United States, however, the Common Core State Standards make it clear that educators in most jurisdictions must do so. The Common Core State Standards leave curriculum-writing in the hands of individual districts, however, so individual districts and teachers often have some measure of discretion in how they teach these skills.

Many teachers think that critical thinking skills are inherent to the nature of their classes, but there is a gap in studying how to teach specific components – like creativity and problem solving – to teenagers. Although there are some hints that targeted instruction is effective in teaching critical thinking, creativity, and problem solving, details on how best to integrate targeted instruction are lacking in the literature.

Let’s define our terms.

The Glossary of Education Reform defines critical thinking as “an umbrella term that may be applied to many different forms of learning acquisition or to a wide variety of thought processes. In its most basic expression, critical thinking occurs when students are analyzing, evaluating, interpreting, or synthesizing information and applying creative thought to form an argument, solve a problem, or reach a conclusion.” I’m focused on applying creative thought to solve a problem aspect of creative thinking, synthesized into the term creative problem solving.

Creative in the educational context is often used but rarely defined. Brookhart defines creative to mean ‘original and of high quality.’ The characteristic that best indicates that a student is creative is their ability “put things together in new ways.” My favorite definition is that creative is “the interaction among aptitude, process, and environment by which an individual or group produces a perceptible product that is both novel and useful as defined within a social context.” Really, though, it’s one of those things where “you know it when you see it.”

Instructional factors, as opposed to learner factors, refer to teacher-controlled aspects of education, instructional factors such as quality of instructor, learning activities, and learning supports

How do pre-existing factors impact critical thinking skills?

Before researchers and educators can begin evaluating the value of targeted instruction in creative problem-solving skills, it is useful to investigate the relevant advantages and disadvantages students bring with them into the classroom. From an equity perspective, inherent and pre-existing factors may provide perspective and inform instruction choices in the same way that an awareness of other systemic biases in education can inform instructional choices.

Cultural and demographic factors beyond the control of educators nonetheless play a role in students’ creative problem-solving skills. Demographic class does not always correlate to a significant difference in critical thinking skills, for example in the case of gender. Parent education level and job type does correlates to student ability to think creatively, though. Students’ nationality also significantly impacts critical thinking development , although it is unclear precisely why. Demographic differences or instructional policies (or both, or neither) may be contributors. Although broad-spectrum analysis of the impact of external factors such as cultural norms, GDP, social supports, etc., on creative problem solving skills have not been addressed by any studies I was able to find, they may play a role given their impacts on other aspects of child development.

Grade level also correlates to critical thinking ability. When surveying high school students in Bosnia and Turkey, Becirovic, Hodžic, & Brdarevic-Celjo (2019) found that students’ grade level significantly impacts critical thinking development. It is unclear whether this is a function of cognitive development related to biological development associated with aging or instructional growth. With regards to creativity specifically, Kim (2011) found that children’s ability to come up with creative new ideas went up steadily until third grade, stayed static between 4th and 5th grade, then decreased, potentially indicating that children “become alert to issues like accuracy and appropriateness of their responses when they generate ideas.” However, Shavelson (2010) found that seniors at many higher education institutions demonstrated stronger critical thinking skills than similarly situated freshmen. Although “granular analysis of their results” indicates that instructional factors were a significant factor, that does not rule out the possibility of that an adolescent’s precise age may play a role in creative problem solving, given that “abstract thinking ability and ability for synthesis and organization thinking processes” increase with age.

There are barriers to teaching creative problem-solving skills.

One of the difficulties of teaching creative problem solving and other critical thinking skills in the traditional classroom is that the traditional classroom wasn’t designed for it. Revolutionary change is hard, especially for something as important as a public school system… and we’ve been burned before. For example, open floorplan class designs with mixed-age project-based learning with high levels of materials choice look great on paper (see also: Montessori schools), but they’re all but impossible to implement on a wide scale , and school districts that try usually wind up with a horrible mishmash of traditional classrooms that just happen to not have walls. Implementing Montessori educational philosophies is all but impossible for an individual teacher in a traditional schoolhouse because of the financial investment required alone.

Students’ critical thinking skills benefit when instructors focus on teaching those skills in an explicit, purposeful manner. Many educators, especially those at the college level, consider critical thinking to be a major focus of their class “by virtue of the course content.” But unfortunately, implicit inclusion of creative problem solving skills can be less effective than intentional pedagogical focus on teaching relevant critical thinking skills, for example practical context problem solving. Teaching methods that rely on the fundamentals of the course structure or the nature of the academic discipline to teach critical thinking as a natural consequence of the class are less effective than when teachers focused on teaching explicit strategies promoting cognitive flexibility.

It can be really hard to find time to do that when a course has a strict pacing guide that is content instead of skills focused.

Choice, relevancy, and independence all matter.

The skills and focus of individual teachers have an impact on student improvement in creative problem-solving metrics. The amount of student choice offered by an individual teacher is positively correlated with the ability of students to overcome challenges and engage in the creative process, although this is actually less effective at improving creativity than active, targeted training.

Still, inquiry based instruction is an effective means of promoting cognitive flexibility and providing students opportunities to learn problem-solving skills . Requiring students to solve practical problems is more effective than learning by traditional means like rote memorization or lecture and is a small-scale shift that is often within an individual instructor’s discretion to make. Offering choice-based projects on relevant, high-interest topics are therefore likely to be an effective way for individual teachers to teach creative problem-solving skills to teenagers.

What about the people with more power than individual teachers?

When instructing students in a manner intended to enhance creative problem-solving skills, one potential method is to deviate from the traditional model of the classroom. Although Mawtus, Rodriguez-Cuadrado, Ludke, & Nicolson (2019) state that creative thinking is “not a separate subject,” their conclusion that it “can be embedded in a mainstream secondary school without affecting subject learning” (p. 94) speaks from a broader perspective than most teachers are able to individually implement, particularly given the requirements of standardized testing. The decision to implement a play-based pedagogical planning methodology is, like truly flexible seating, one that requires administrative support or an alternative method of teaching.

Globally, many teenagers learn outside of the “traditional” schoolhouse environment. A little over 3% of the school-age population in the USA was homeschooled in 2019 and this is a growing population. Nontraditional schooling environments have more freedom to experiment with sweeping changes to instructional styles. In Sweden, the Kunskapsskolan at Kista is known for informality, an open plan layout, and an emphasis on individualized learning and internet-based research .

Researchers have developed and studied a variety of comprehensive methodologies and models intended at least in part to enhance student creative problem-solving abilities. Play-based learning has been confirmed to increase creativity scores even over the student-centered choice-based models. Similarly, choice-based models alone were insufficient to improve student ability to think critically, although active training on the part of a teacher already possessing high creativity was very effective. The 3CM model of learning , which focuses on the “principle of bringing cool, critical, creative, and meaningful activities to the classroom,” was found to increase student creativity in solving mathematical problems because the learning situation pushed students into thinking systemically.

Major takeaways about teaching critical thinking:

The ability to creatively solve problems is on the decline, although educators and employers have a vested interest in fostering them. Creative problem-solving skills are key across contexts, from mathematics, to employment scenarios, to projects in the humanities. Although creativity itself declines as students progress throughout the secondary grades, other skills associated with critical thinking and problem-solving increase. Decisions made at the instructional level have the largest impact on the development of critical thinking skills, although demographic factors play a part, particularly with regards to non-biological factors like parental income and education level.

Lecture-based rote learning oriented toward standardized testing models is ill-suited to developing creative problem-solving skills. In searching for better teaching methods, researchers have focused primarily on the impacts of inquiry-based learning, choice-based learning, and play-based learning. Regardless of the particular manner lessons are established, active intervention on the part of instructors to deliberately train students in creative problem solving is most effective at improving creative thinking skills. Explicit, not implicit, instruction in creative problem-solving skills and their importance is an important factor in the successful development of creative problem-solving skills in teenagers.

Based on my read of the literature, it’s likely that creative problem-solving skills in teenagers will be improved by requiring students to engage in fun, inquiry-based, interest-based project pedagogy implemented over the long term if the methodology is implemented with flexible curriculum, very infrequent standardized testing, and teachers trained to actively intervene on an individual basis to encourage creativity and model systemic thinking.

Ready for more?

The Pros and Cons of Popular Instructional Strategies

Instructional strategies Edmentum article

Often, students find a benefit in mixing things up a bit with content presentation or assessment, and teachers may find moving out of their traditional practice, stretching, and trying something new is super gratifying as well. I love a design sprint workshop or an impromptu planning experience; however, during the school week, educators do not always have the time to step back and take part. In the past few years, planning periods may have been devoured up by attending meetings, covering a class, or simply trying to catch up. Professional learning has unfortunately taken a backseat to survival. While there are many different types of students and classes, people learn best when they are stimulated and engaged. For teachers to accomplish this, there are different teaching methods and plans they can employ. These are collectively called instructional strategies . Exploring some different instructional strategies and discovering how to incorporate them into the classroom process can rekindle a love affair with teaching. Finding the right instructional strategy to fit your classroom can make a world of difference to your students by allowing them to make meaningful connections with what they are learning. Take a look at a few different strategies, and see which one might suit your students this academic year.

Constructivism and Questioning

Asking questions and listening for learning in the answers is both fun and engaging for students of all ages. Educators naturally do this, but by simply becoming a bit more intentional and process driven with the questions, educators can create an environment that supports a unique experience of learning.

The Socratic Method

Named after the Greek philosopher Socrates, the Socratic method is often used to promote critical thinking. Students come to class prepared for discussion. Educators need to guide student preparation with a pre-class assignment. It is the discussion that leads the way through material. Inquiry is promoted through open-ended questions, and students have the option to explore different perspectives. Each question leads to discussion and can produce more than one answer. The meat of the learning is found in the process, teaching students to think about the material. In this method, educators ask questions of students, listen to the answers, and continue until any contradictions are exposed. Socrates also used this method of questioning to encourage people to question the things they were told and to look beyond the obvious. This process helps students develop critical-thinking skills, gets them to think quickly, and requires them to be prepared and attentive. Examples of questions to pose include: “What exactly do you mean?” and “Why is it vital?” and “What else can we assume?” Questions can focus on viewpoint, such as “Why is it better than the alternative (What is the alternative?)?” and “What would be the effect of that?” and “What made you feel that way?”

Project-Based Learning

Project-based learning or problem-based learning (PBL) is designed to engage students in solving a real-world problem or answering a complex question. Project-based learning unleashes a contagious, creative energy among students and teachers. It is NOT a moment in the curriculum when students build a diorama. PBL begins with teachers assigning an open-ended problem with more than one solution. With the problem presented, students then investigate potential solutions, often within small groups. The role of educators is to facilitate and support. Ultimately, students demonstrate their knowledge and skills by creating a public product or presentation for a real audience. As a result, students develop deep content knowledge, as well as critical-thinking, collaboration, creativity, and communication skills. PBL can vary in length from one class to an entire semester depending on the complexity of the problem. The project should contain and frame curriculum and instruction. Projects tend to be more open-ended than problem-based learning, giving students more choice when it comes to demonstrating what they know. Different from projects that are the culmination of a learning unit, PBL projects ARE the learning unit, meaning that fundamental concepts and skills are learned throughout the project. PBL is an evidence-based practice under the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), and it meets the evidence requirements for tiers 1 and 2 under ESSA, which is exciting on so many levels. There are a few steps for learning to be considered PBL versus just another classroom project. While the core problems will vary among disciplines, some characteristics of good PBL problems transcend school subjects.

Inquiry-Based Learning

Inquiry-based learning is based on constructivist theories of learning, where knowledge is “constructed” from experience and process. Constructivists believe that learning happens through actively “mulling over” information. This encompasses an array of approaches, including fieldwork, case studies, investigations, individual and group projects, and research ventures. This is in contrast to theories like behaviorism , which proposes that students should be told information from a teacher rather than learning it themselves through experiences. It may sound similar to PBL, but there are subtle differences. Inquiry-based learning places an emphasis on finding answers to questions through discovery. In 1961, psychologist Jerome Bruner introduced the discovery learning model as a technique of inquiring-based learning. In discovery learning, teachers guide the process and investigations, whereas in true PBL, the student discovers everything themselves, even the questions. Both are considered constructivist approaches, where the process of learning is achieved actively through experiences such as investigation and observation in a student-centered environment rather than through passive learning, which is a teacher-centered environment, a contrasting educational approach that favors repetition and memorization. An inquiry-based approach asks students to investigate concepts using research and analysis. When executed correctly, this approach focuses on the use of higher-order-thinking skills like problem-solving to reach conclusions. Students are expected to use logic and reason to come to conclusions about topics. Specific learning processes that students engage in during inquiry include refining questions, seeking evidence to answer questions, explaining evidence, and justifying or laying out an argument for the evidence. Progress and outcomes are assessed through observing students’ learning development over time through conversations, notebook entries, student questions, procedural skills, the use of evidence, and other techniques. In this method, the process is more important than the solution. Effective questioning plays a role in focusing students on unit learning goals or overarching themes.

Bloom’s Approach

This approach and its iterations have been the framework for categorizing educational goals since 1956. It is a hierarchical model that categorized learning objectives into varying levels of complexity. Its theory advocated individualized learning over a universal curriculum. In 2001, Bloom’s was revised to call out the process of learning as active rather than passive.

Mastery-Based Learning

Mastery-based learning was introduced by psychologist Benjamin Bloom (perhaps best known for his taxonomy framework). It applies the principles of individualized instruction and tutoring to whole-class learning. In this model students are assessed multiple times throughout the learning process rather than at the end of a unit or semester. It is an instructional approach where students need to demonstrate a deep understanding before progressing to another topic or subject area. Educators provide individual feedback, diagnose learning needs/difficulties, prescribe specific remediation or enrichment strategies, and reassess with a parallel assessment. Mastery learning is basic to many textbook programs and has promoted formative assessments as a routine of classrooms. It honors the idea that students learn at different levels or paces and follows the philosophy that learning is unique to every student and that by instruction being closely monitored, educators learn and understand what students truly know.

Scaffolded Instruction

Scaffolded instruction focuses on delivering content gradually to support high-quality and unforced learning. It is a teaching technique used to build connections for learners by establishing details surrounding content prior to instruction. With scaffolded instruction, students do not learn new concepts in isolation, but as part of the big picture. Teachers may model a task and slowly transfer the knowledge to learners. Instruction could look like chunking the material into small steps to reach the desired content outcome. Strategies that work with scaffolded instruction include simple steps like pre-teaching vocabulary words before reading a text or using a timeline to teach historical content to allow students to see both when and how events impacted each other.

Teacher-Led, Directed, or Reciprocal/Cooperative Teaching

Teacher led instruction, using experience to share knowledge with students has slowly been moving away from “sage on the stage” to “guide on the side.” However, there are some instructional practices that leverage the techniques that made teacher led instruction popular for so many years.

Reciprocal Teaching

Reciprocal teaching is an instructional approach in which students become the teachers in small-group reading (or other content) sessions. Teachers model and then help students learn to guide group discussions using strategies such as summarizing, question generating, clarifying, and predicting. Once students understand and can apply the strategies, they take turns assuming the role of the teacher in a dialogue. In another version, students take the roles of predictor, summarizer, questioner, and clarifier.

Collaborative Learning

Collaborative learning, another research-based strategy for teaching, follows closely in the vein of peer learning, with students working in pairs or small groups and employing reciprocal teaching methods.

Structured Academic Controversy (SAC)

Structured academic controversy (SAC) is a cooperative learning strategy developed by David and Roger Johnson in order to structure and focus classroom discussions. One practice involves students working in pairs and then coming together in four-person teams, where students explore a question by reading about (or viewing) content and then presenting contrasting positions. Afterward, they engage in discussion to reach consensus. A discussion using SAC moves students beyond “either/or” thinking, examining controversial issues from multiple perspectives.

The Jigsaw Classroom

The jigsaw classroom is a research-based cooperative learning technique invented and developed in 1971 by Elliot Aronson and his students at the University of Texas and later at the University of California. It focuses on fostering student cooperation rather than competition. It strives to create a social environment where student learning is dependent on positive relationships.

In this process, a large amount of educators’ time is devoted to building student relationships through a culture of mutual respect, modeling, and teaching. In a jigsaw classroom, students are placed in groups where they must work together toward a common goal. Each member of a small group is assigned to learn one part of a lesson and then expected to teach that information back to the group. Students learn to listen to and respect each other and the lessons being taught.

The primary focus is developing the groups intentionally, building collaboration between students who may not get along or who struggle to understand each other. The content is secondary; it is a means to the collaboration.

Realia refers to real-life objects used in classroom instruction in order to improve students' understanding. It typically refers to instruction of other cultures and real-life situations.

Teachers of English language learners and global languages employ realia to strengthen associations between words and the objects themselves. Teachers of young students also use this process to provide a tangible resource that connects to their developmental stage.

Realia is used to link learners with the tactile and multidimensional connections between learned material and the object of the lesson. Primary objectives of this strategy include increasing comprehensible input, using language in context, and promoting verbal interaction and active involvement.

As a former kindergarten and special education teacher, I do not know how we can teach without understanding all aspects of the child. This is an approach to learning that embraces the concept that education should consider all influences on a child's development. It prioritizes all the developmental and personal needs of students in addition to their academic achievements. Hungry children do not learn; anxious children do not learn either. Sometimes, the baseball coach can get more from students than the classroom teacher. It is important, and in many ways, a no-brainer, to meet and understand the needs of students. However, this requires a team and support from the school and district, many of which are stretched thin already.

Get the latest education insights sent directly to your inbox

Subscribe to our knowledge articles.

Explained: Importance of critical thinking, problem-solving skills in curriculum

F uture careers are no longer about domain expertise or technical skills. Rather, critical thinking and problem-solving skills in employees are on the wish list of every big organization today. Even curriculums and pedagogies across the globe and within India are now requiring skilled workers who are able to think critically and are analytical.

The reason for this shift in perspective is very simple.

These skills provide a staunch foundation for comprehensive learning that extends beyond books or the four walls of the classroom. In a nutshell, critical thinking and problem-solving skills are a part of '21st Century Skills' that can help unlock valuable learning for life.

Over the years, the education system has been moving away from the system of rote and other conventional teaching and learning parameters.

They are aligning their curriculums to the changing scenario which is becoming more tech-driven and demands a fusion of critical skills, life skills, values, and domain expertise. There's no set formula for success.

Rather, there's a defined need for humans to be more creative, innovative, adaptive, agile, risk-taking, and have a problem-solving mindset.

In today's scenario, critical thinking and problem-solving skills have become more important because they open the human mind to multiple possibilities, solutions, and a mindset that is interdisciplinary in nature.

Therefore, many schools and educational institutions are deploying AI and immersive learning experiences via gaming, and AR-VR technologies to give a more realistic and hands-on learning experience to their students that hone these abilities and help them overcome any doubt or fear.

ADVANTAGES OF CRITICAL THINKING AND PROBLEM-SOLVING IN CURRICULUM

Ability to relate to the real world: Instead of theoretical knowledge, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills encourage students to look at their immediate and extended environment through a spirit of questioning, curiosity, and learning. When the curriculum presents students with real-world problems, the learning is immense.

Confidence, agility & collaboration : Critical thinking and problem-solving skills boost self-belief and confidence as students examine, re-examine, and sometimes fail or succeed while attempting to do something.

They are able to understand where they may have gone wrong, attempt new approaches, ask their peers for feedback and even seek their opinion, work together as a team, and learn to face any challenge by responding to it.

Willingness to try new things: When problem-solving skills and critical thinking are encouraged by teachers, they set a robust foundation for young learners to experiment, think out of the box, and be more innovative and creative besides looking for new ways to upskill.

It's important to understand that merely introducing these skills into the curriculum is not enough. Schools and educational institutions must have upskilling workshops and conduct special training for teachers so as to ensure that they are skilled and familiarized with new teaching and learning techniques and new-age concepts that can be used in the classrooms via assignments and projects.

Critical thinking and problem-solving skills are two of the most sought-after skills. Hence, schools should emphasise the upskilling of students as a part of the academic curriculum.

The article is authored by Dr Tassos Anastasiades, Principal- IB, Genesis Global School, Noida.

Watch Live TV in English

Watch Live TV in Hindi

Explained: Importance of critical thinking, problem-solving skills in curriculum

The Disadvantages of Critical Thinking: Don’t Overthink It

Sometimes, critical thinking can lead us to spend too much time and energy on analyzing every detail and possibility of a situation, which can cause stress. Overthinking can also prevent us from taking action or trusting our intuition when it is appropriate. And also make us focus on the flaws, risks, and weaknesses of an idea or a solution, rather than on its strengths, benefits, and opportunities. This can lead to a pessimistic or cynical attitude that can affect our motivation and creativity. Emphasizing the negative can also make us overlook or dismiss positive feedback. It's our duty to identify them and take actions.

Sanju Pradeepa

We’ve all had moments when we spent more time thinking than acting. And that’s usually because we got caught up in the process of critical thinking. It’s not necessarily a bad thing to indulge in. After all, it makes us analyze our decisions, weigh the pros and cons, and come out with a conclusion that is backed by facts and data.

But what if there’s a downside to critical thinking? To be clear, this isn’t an attempt to convince you to just go with your gut feeling all the time. Instead, this article is intended to provide perspective on how excessive overthinking can hinder your progress instead of helping you make an informed decision.

We’ll cover why using critical thinking too much can lead to poor decision-making, how it affects your stress levels, and when it matters most. So don’t overthink it. Let’s dive in and explore the disadvantages of critical thinking together.

What is critical thinking.

Critical thinking is a term you’ve probably heard bandied about, but what does it actually mean? In short, it’s a way of examining information and forming opinions or judgments based on the evidence at hand.

It’s the ability to take an analytical approach to a problem. This means that critical thinking involves analyzing information in order to form an opinion and then continuing to assess the data in order to challenge and modify that opinion.

At its best, critical thinking can lead to more informed decisions and more effective problem-solving. But there are also some disadvantages to this method of thinking. Read on for more information.

Let’s know more about Critical Thinking – 7 Types of Critical Thinking: A Guide to Analyzing Problems

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking, When You Have Too Much

We all value the power of critical thinking; it’s an invaluable skill to have in any field. But like anything, too much of a good thing can be a problem.

When we overthink things and become overly critical, the consequences can be significant. Often, it can prevent us from making decisions in a timely manner, if at all. It can also lead to missed opportunities, as we become paralyzed by our analysis and fail to seize the moment.

Furthermore, analysis paralysis can lead to high levels of stress and anxiety as we struggle to make up our minds on a given subject or action. We might even fail to recognize the real risks at hand when focusing too much on minor details and missing out on what matters most for successful outcomes.

The takeaway here is that being critical is valuable but remember to balance it with intuition and trust your instincts before you get too deep into overthinking things.

1. Difficulty in Decision-Making

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking-Difficulty in Decision-Making

One of the biggest disadvantages of critical thinking is that it can be difficult to make decisions. Because critical thinkers are constantly analyzing and evaluating data to draw conclusions, this can be a time-consuming process.

Even after all the facts and evidence have been gathered, it can take a long time to weigh the pros and cons of each option before making the best decision possible. This means that in some cases, a critical thinker will not be able to make a decision quickly or easily.

On top of that, if there is not enough data or information available about a particular decision, it can be even harder for a critical thinker to come up with a solid solution in an efficient manner. This can cause even more delays in decision-making and may lead to frustration as well as inadequate solutions.

2. You might be overthinking every situation.

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking- You might be overthinking every situation

When you engage in critical thinking, you may find yourself overthinking every situation and making an issue out of things that don’t need your attention. Going back to our earlier example, if you were to critically analyze the situation of your friend sleeping at your house, you might start to worry about the extra resources it may consume or about how it may affect your relationship. While this could be true, it might also be a bit excessive. In certain situations, it’s better to accept certain things and not overthink them.

This is one of the most common disadvantages of critical thinking: overthinking can lead to analysis paralysis, where one is so focused on analyzing a situation that one becomes unable to make any decisions at all. This can lead to frustration and decreased productivity as no progress is made. Additionally, engaging in too much critical thinking can lead to stress and burnout , which are both counterproductive in any situation.

Therefore, while it’s important to engage in critical thinking when necessary and appropriate, it’s also important not to overdo it. Otherwise, the outcomes you’re hoping for will never be achieved.

3. Unavoidable biases and prejudices

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking-Unavoidable biases and prejudices

You may think that critical thinking is the answer to everything, but it has its disadvantages too. Most notably, it’s impossible to completely remove our biases and prejudices when looking at the facts. We all have a unique way of looking at things , and these biases may affect how we interpret evidence.

Confirmation Bias – One of the most common biases is called “ confirmation bias,” where people seek out evidence that supports what they already believe or look for fault in evidence that contradicts it. This often leads to people discrediting any evidence they don’t agree with.

Overconfidence – Another common bias is overconfidence, which can lead us to make more decisions than necessary or, worse yet, poor decisions based on what we think we know.

These biases can affect how people interpret evidence and make decisions, regardless of how logical and reasoned those decisions might seem. That’s why we need to be aware of our own prior beliefs , values, and experiences to prevent our biases from affecting our judgment when using critical thinking skills.

4. Disruption of Imagination and Creativity

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking-Disruption of Imagination and Creativity

As great as it may sound, critical thinking can have its downsides, particularly in the area of imagination and creativity. The process of critical thinking often encourages a strict focus on facts and evidence, which can lead to tunnel vision and the inability to think outside the box.

When we focus too much on analysis and facts, we can become stifled in our creative pursuits. This means that instead of creating something new or being able to think of novel solutions to problems, we are confined by existing thought patterns that don’t allow for exploration or experimentation outside of what is already known.

Limiting Ourselves – Critical thinking is great when it comes to evaluating or assessing existing information or situations, but when it comes to innovating, critical thinking can be limiting. After all, if we are stuck looking at the same evidence from different perspectives, how much further can we go? We need to be open to new ideas and experiences if we want to move forward in our creative pursuits.

Training our brain for critical thinking – An over-reliance on critical thinking skills means that our brains get trained over time to do less imaginative things because our brains become accustomed to relying on a certain pattern of thinking. This means that our brains become so accustomed to certain types of analysis that there is little room left for coming up with unique solutions or uncovering innovative ideas.

It’s true; critical thinking has its advantages. But relying too heavily on this form of thinking could mean that you’re missing out on opportunities for growth and creativity.

5. Lack of Emotional Engagement

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking-Lack of Emotional Engagement

Another possible disadvantage of critical thinking is a lack of emotional engagement. The process of critical thinking involves looking at a problem objectively, dispassionately analyzing the facts, and logically concluding. This can be helpful, but it can also lead to a disconnect with the emotional aspect of the problem or issue at hand.

At times, emotional engagement is essential for tackling certain problems. For example, certain social issues might require individuals to tap into their emotions and empathy to come up with solutions that can bring about positive change without harming anyone or anything.

Moreover, emotional understanding is important for developing solutions that take into account different perspectives and experiences. This can help create solutions that are more inclusive and equitable for everyone involved.

Ultimately, critical thinking should not be used as an exclusive method for problem solving or decision-making; it should be used in conjunction with emotional understanding and empathy. This balance between intellectual analysis and emotional engagement can help to ensure solutions that are highly effective and satisfying for everyone involved.

6. Potential for stress and anxiety

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking-Potential for stress and anxiety

As discussed previously, critical thinking can be a great skill to have. However, it does come with disadvantages. For instance, people who engage in critical thinking can experience significant stress and anxiety as a result of constantly evaluating complex ideas and situations.

This is especially true for those who are very good at it, as they may feel pressure to always think critically and make the “right” decision. Additionally, when you’re constantly taking a hard look at problems from all angles, it can be easier to become overwhelmed. It can be difficult to decide which way to go when you have so many options available.

The constant search for evidence – People who think critically often spend a lot of time searching for evidence or trying to find the correct interpretation of facts. While this might lead to effective problem-solving and decision-making, it can also be exhausting psychologically. When you’re constantly sifting through evidence looking for the right answer, it can be hard not to become overwhelmed or discouraged if you don’t find what you’re looking for right away.

The struggle between intuition and logic – It’s also common for critical thinkers to struggle with integrating intuition into their thought processes since they tend to rely heavily on logic and evidence-based reasoning. While this type of thinking is valuable in certain scenarios, relying solely on logic can lead to overlooking potential solutions that may be based more on emotion or instinct than on facts. This can make it difficult for critical thinkers to make decisions without feeling like they’ve overlooked something important.

7. Critical thinking can be time-consuming.

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking-Critical thinking can be time-consuming

You know that critical thinking is important, but have you ever considered the time it takes to think critically? Well, thinking critically can be a time-consuming endeavor .

You might not think twice about making a quick decision based on intuition or reverting to old habits, but truly making a thoughtful, well-informed decision requires more effort. It’s easy to underestimate the amount of time it can take to dig into the facts and look at an issue from all angles, but that’s what critical thinking is all about.

To ensure that you get the best possible outcome, there are several steps in critical thinking:

Identify and analyze the problem.
Research and gather data from reliable sources.
Generate alternative solutions and evaluate them logically.
Choose the most suitable option.
Implement your chosen option, then evaluate its effectiveness and impact.
Adjust your plan as needed.

This type of process uses up more of our precious time, but it is worth it when you come out with an informed, well-reasoned solution that you can confidently stand behind. That’s why so many organizations prioritize this way of thinking when faced with tough decisions.

8. Critical thinking can lead to uncertainty.

Disadvantages of Critical Thinking-Critical thinking can lead to uncertainty

One of the major disadvantages of critical thinking is that it often leads to uncertainty. When you’re looking at a problem or issue from all angles and considering all the available evidence, it can be difficult to come to a definitive solution. It can be hard to know exactly what steps to take as there may be multiple potential solutions.

This can lead to indecision and doubt, which can slow down progress on any project you’re working on. Furthermore, if there are many possible solutions available, it can take time and effort to evaluate each one fully before coming to a decision.

Another downside of critical thinking is that it requires a lot of mental energy and effort. Balancing this with other aspects of work or life can be tricky, as focusing too much on one area at the expense of others is not desirable. It’s important to remember that there are limits to how much critical thinking you should do in any given situation.

While there are certain disadvantages to critical thinking, it is certainly a skill worth having. It can enable you to see past false claims and identify logical fallacies, form your own well-reasoned opinions, and spot when others might be attempting to manipulate or deceive you.

That said, it’s important to remember that critical thinking doesn’t necessarily lead to the “right” answer. It’s important to keep an open mind and be willing to have your beliefs challenged. When used responsibly, critical thinking can be an invaluable asset to anyone.

The Advantages & Disadvantages of Critical Thinking by MICAH MCDUNNIGAN published in CLASSROOM (https://classroom.synonym.com/)
Is Critical Thinking Overrated? Disadvantages Of Critical Thinking published in EGGCELLENT Work (https://eggcellentwork.com/)

Call to Action

If you want to learn more about this types of topic and discover some tips and tricks to boost your brain power, click the link below and subscribe to our newsletter. You will also get access to exclusive content and offers that will help you achieve your goals and become smarter every day.

Let’s boost your self-growth with Believe in Mind.

Interested in self-reflection tips, learning hacks, and knowing ways to calm down your mind? We offer you the best content which you have been looking for.

Follow Me on

What Students Are Saying About Tech in the Classroom

Does technology help students be more organized, efficient and prepared for the future? Or is it just a distraction?

By The Learning Network

Is there a problem with screens in schools?

We invited students to weigh in on that question in our Picture Prompt Tech in the Classroom , which was based on an Opinion essay arguing that we should “get tech out of the classroom before it’s too late.”

Is there too much tech in your school day? — we asked students. Would you prefer more screen-free time while you are learning, or even during lunch or free periods?

Below, they share the good, the bad and the ugly about technology use in school.

Thank you to everyone who participated in the conversation on our writing prompts this week!

Please note: Student comments have been lightly edited for length.

Some students saw the value of technology in schools, including its ability to prepare students for the future.

I believe that technology in the classroom is a good thing when it is properly moderated. I think completely taking away screens from a student will not help them develop computer skills which they will most likely need in a world like ours, where most of everything is online. Sometimes phones cannot get the job done, and computers will be needed. If schools completely remove devices from the curriculum, then students will be completely clueless when they take classes involving a computer. Too much screen time can be bad for the student, but if it is well moderated, then screen time won’t be an issue.

— Saheed, GMS

I personally do not mind the amount of technology in the classroom. I personally find typing to be a lot easier instead of writing. On top of that, this amount of technology is used in adults’ day to day lives, too. Writing has become less and less relevant for everyone, because most jobs require a computer nowadays. So I think it’s actually better to have the amount of technology we do in the classroom.

— Timothy, Greenbelt Middle

They said, even though there might be down sides, the good outweighs the bad.

Screens in the classroom allows students to complete work in a more organized manner and use online resources to help them learn. It helps teachers to be able to make sure students turn work in before a certain time. However, having screens in the classroom raises students overall screen time which is bad for their eye health and sleep.

— Emily, Greenbelt Middle

I believe that computers should definitely be used at school because it has more pros than cons. They help with everything. The only problem with them is the people using them. The people using them are often misusing them and not charging them.

— Deegan, California

And they argued that tech is so entrenched in the student experience that taking it away would cause a lot of disruption.

There are no problems with screens in school. I believe without screens, school would be much less productive, produce so much waste of paper, and assignments would be lost a lot. Also when I have paper homework, which is almost never, almost every time I get it I forget because everything is on the iPad. This is important because if there is any change in the iPads we use, it’ll affect everyone drastically. Also it would just be really annoying to get used to a whole new thing.

— August, GBW

But another contingent of students said, “There is definitely a problem with screens in school.” They called them a distraction.

There is definitely a problem with screens in school. While regular technology use in school is highly efficient and much more convenient than using textbooks and paper, I still feel like using technology as the main method for learning is detrimental. There are plenty of students in my classes who are hiding behind their iPads to play games or go on their phones rather than utilizing their technology to enhance their learning experience. So in turn, I think we need to minimize (but not completely take away) the prominence of tech in our classrooms. This matters because it’s so important for students to learn how to completely pay attention and focus in on one task so that they are prepared for the moments in life where they don’t get the opportunity to look at their phone if they’re bored or to text their friends. Trust me, this may seem like I’m one hundred percent anti-phones but the truth is I love my phone and am somewhat addicted to it, so I realize that it’s a major distraction for myself in the classroom. Moreover, staring at an iPad screen for 7 hours a day puts significant strain on our eyes, so for the sake of our health and our attention spans, we need to minimize tech use in school.

— Mary, Glenbard West High School

Tech inside classrooms has had many positive effects and many negative effects. Without technology, it would take forever to find sources/information and it would also take ages to do complex things. With technology, people can easily find information and they can easily do many things but the big downside is that they can easily just search up games and get distracted. On one side, it has provided many different changes to students so they can learn in a fun and entertaining way but in another, people are mostly on their phones scrolling through YouTube or Instagram. Many people don’t have control over their body and have a big urge to go on their cellphones.

— Srikanth, Greenbelt Middle School

In my opinion, yes there is a problem with screens in schools. It distracts kids from focusing on their work. Many students are always on their phone during class, and it is disrespectful as well as sad for them. They will not be able to learn the material that is being taught. Personally, I think that screens should be reduced in class, but I do not think that is possible. Whenever a teacher takes away someone’s phone, they get very mad and say that it is their right to have their phone. In these cases it is very confusing on how to act for the teacher!

— Kadambari, gms

Some reported that their peers use technology to cheat.

It might be a problem depending on what people are doing. If it is used for school, like typing an essay, working on homework, or checking your grades it’s okay, but I know people who abuse this privilege. They go onto YouTube and watch things, listen to music when they aren’t supposed to, and play games. Many people cheat to the point where it takes forever to start a test because people don’t close out their tabs. It helps to be able to do these ‘Quick Writes’ as we call them in my ELA class because I can write faster (I know it’s called typing). It’s harder to access things because of the restriction because people mess around so they block so many useful websites and words from our computer. I like to type on the computer, but I feel people abuse this privilege too much.

— Nina, California

When the teachers assign tests on computers, sometimes teachers have to lock students’ screens to make sure they’re not cheating. Sometimes they do it on paper and they try to cheat while hiding their phones in their laps. And then if another student sees them doing that, they will tell and the student who would have the phone out could start a big argument.

— Taylor, Huntington Beach

Several lamented the sheer number of hours teenagers spend in front of screens.

I feel that we have become too comfortable with using screens for nearly every lesson in school, because it has gotten to the point where we are spending upwards of 4 hours on our laptops in school alone. I understand that it would be hard to switch back to using journals and worksheets, but it would be very beneficial for kids if we did.

— Chase, school

I think we should reduce the tech a little just because most students are going straight to screens when they get home, after a full day of screens … Although I know this would be very difficult to do because everything in the world now seems to go online.

— Jaydin, California

And they even worried about their handwriting in a world full of typing.

I think technology in a class is very helpful, but I think that we should incorporate more writing. Since the pandemic, most of the work has been online and it never gave students the opportunity to write as much. When we came back from lockdown, I almost forgot how to write with a pencil. My handwriting was very different. And now we don’t get much time to write with our hands so I think we should have fewer screens.

— Eric, Greenbelt

Some students said that less time spent on screens in school would give them a break from the always-on digital culture they live in.

Although typing is useful and using the internet is very useful, I think we should go back to how it was about 20-40 years ago when all people used the computer for was to type an essay. Drama didn’t get spread in a millisecond, we didn’t have to worry as much about stereotypes. Now all kids want to do is text each other and watch videos. I’m well aware that I have fallen into this trap and I want out, but our lives revolve around technology. You can’t get away from it. I know this is about schools not using technology, which the world without it would be impossible now, but life would be so much simpler again.

— Ivy, Huntington Beach, CA

I will say that my phone is usually always with me during school hours, but I don’t use it all the time. I may check the time or play a short game as a brain break. But I do see some people absolutely glued to their phones during class time, and it’s honestly embarrassing. You really can’t go without your phone for an hour?? It’s almost like an addiction at this point. I understand using your phone to quickly distract yourself; I do it too. And I also think it’s okay to have your phone/electronic during lunch time or free periods. But using it to the point that you can’t properly pay attention in class is just embarrassing. So, in summary, I do think that schools are having a problem with screens.

— Allison, Greenbelt Middle School

And they named classes in which they think screens do and do not have a place.

I feel like for classes for younger kids, technology is definitely not good. Kids should be playing, using their hands, and actually experiencing things instead of being on tablets in kindergarten. I think using computers in school is good though. It’s a lot more efficient, and we live in a society where fast and efficient things are the trend.

— sarah, maryland

I think screens have their place, and will always have their place, in schools and education. The capabilities of computers will always surpass anything else, and they should not be banned from school environments. Still, I have one exception: English class. Other than final drafts of essays, everything in English should be on paper. You can formulate ideas better and minimize outside influence on your thinking.

— Addie, The Potomac School

Learn more about Current Events Conversation here and find all of our posts in this column .

Choose Your Country

United Kingdom/Ireland
Canada (French)

The technology shaking up higher education in 2024

Written by: Alexandrea Purvis

In the wake of the pandemic, university and college campuses have transformed to redefine the modern campus experience. Central to this transformation is the adoption of new technological innovations aimed at empowering universities, students, and educators to shape a stronger future in higher education.

However, while students have quickly adopted new technology into their educational careers, such as genAi (Generative AI), many universities and colleges are finding it difficult to fully understand and integrate these technologies into their current systems and processes. Below, we explore the technology driving modern learning environments, its benefits and drawbacks, and strategies for higher education institutions to navigate and embrace the technological revolution in 2024.

Artificial intelligence shaking up higher education

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has had a profound impact on the world, particularly with the rise of generative AI (genAI) tools such as ChatGPT. In fact, a recent Best Colleges survey of 1,000 undergraduate and graduate students revealed that 56% of college students admit to completing assignments using AI— an impressive and somewhat startling statistic when we look at how recently AI was introduced.

The excitement surrounding AI and its potential to transform higher education demonstrates new possibilities that could revolutionize various aspects of teaching and consequently reshape how students learn, enabling them to enhance their academic work. This year, we foresee higher education institutions moving into a pivotal juncture, with open questions necessitating a deeper understanding of how AI will integrate within the higher education landscape for professors, students, and faculty alike. Below, we explore the advantages and disadvantages of AI in an academic setting.

The positive side of AI in higher education

AI has a positive impact on higher education institutions by allowing them to create personalized learning experiences that cater to individual student’s needs and learning styles. This could include adaptive learning systems using AI algorithms to analyze students’ performance data, identify areas of strengths and weaknesses, and deliver customized learning materials and interventions. This approach not only enhances student engagement and comprehension but also promotes retention and academic success.

Beyond the classroom, we foresee AI facilitating improved operational efficiency, utilizing AI-powered predictive analytics tools to analyze data that can help forecast enrollment trends, identify at-risk students, and optimize resource allocation. Additionally, we expect AI-driven systems to aid in the facilitation of administrative processes such as admissions, course scheduling, and financial aid distribution, reducing administrative burden and enabling staff to focus on strategic initiatives this year and beyond.

The challenges posed by AI

Because higher education institutions have typically been slow to evolve along with emerging technologies, we expect AI to bring forth several challenges this year. The first challenge will encompass student inequalities in learning. Although AI holds the potential for delivering highly personalized learning experiences, it also runs the risk of exacerbating disparities among students by widening knowledge gaps, particularly if access to AI tools is limited to specific groups or institutions. Moreover, AI implementations have the potential to deepen existing gaps or introduce new ones, underscoring the importance of integrating AI in a manner that is both inclusive and equitable.

The second challenge focuses on the potential decline of critical thinking and creativity, which are fundamental aspects of higher education. By prioritizing efficiency over profound understanding, AI tools raise apprehensions about the impact on students’ learning experiences. There is a fear that graduates may become overly dependent on technology for their work and comprehension rather than developing a genuine understanding of the material.

The final pressing challenge lies in data privacy and security, an area that also affects industries outside of higher education. The proliferation of AI systems’ collection and analysis of vast amounts of sensitive student information raises ethical dilemmas and regulatory concerns that must be considered – both for this year and beyond.

Gen Z students hold new technology expectations

Growing up in the digital era, technology has become integral to the lives of Gen Z students, serving as the cornerstone of their daily existence. Consequently, they expect the same level of technological advancement in their academic endeavors as well as in their personal lives.

Gen Z students aspire to an educational experience that transcends conventional boundaries, providing opportunities for hands-on experiential learning, interdisciplinary collaboration, and the practical application of knowledge in real-world scenarios. According to findings from Hanover Research , 91% of Gen Z students assert that the ability to engage with cutting-edge technology would heavily influence their job selection among similar employment offers. Therefore, it is imperative that their academic journey not only enrich their minds but also equip them with the skills to apply their knowledge effectively in real-world contexts, making it an important area of investment and understanding for higher education institutions this year.

The future of higher education

The swift development of technology has seeped into our daily lives, resulting in increased expectations among students and faculty regarding its incorporation into academia. As tech-savvy, Gen Z students seek institutions with a forward-thinking mindset and a grasp of modern technologies, they aspire to use these tools not only in their education but also in their future careers.

In response to these changing demands, 2024 is poised to be a year of significant technological innovation on college campuses. Higher education institutions are proactively seeking to understand and integrate these advancements on campus, setting the stage for an exciting year in higher education.

Download our white paper to learn more about our predictions for higher education in 2024.

Ready to learn more? Lock in your solution today.

IMAGES

The benefits of critical thinking for students and how to develop it
Infographic Design The 6 Keys to Critical Thinking Teacher Classroom
The benefits of critical thinking for students and how to develop it
Critical Thinking in the Classroom
Critical Thinking in Education
Advantages Of Critical Thinking In The Classroom

VIDEO

How We Grade in a Thinking Classroom
7th Alg 2 Thinking Classroom-
Academic Debates and Critical Thinking
Critical Thinking
DETV’s Good Morning Wilmington for September 25, 2023
What is critical thinking?

COMMENTS

20 Pros and Cons of Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is a valuable skill that has its advantages and disadvantages. One of the benefits of critical thinking is improved decision-making skills, which enables individuals to make informed choices based on facts rather than emotions or biases.
PDF Critical Thinking in the Classroom…and Beyond
Critical thinking in the classroom is a common term used by educators. Critical thinking has been called "the art of thinking about thinking" (Ruggiero, V.R., 2012) with the intent to improve one's thinking. The challenge, of course, is to create learning environments that promote critical thinking both in the classroom and beyond.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Critical Thinking In Education
The following are the advantages and disadvantages of Critical Thinking In Education: Advantages. Disadvantages. Enhances problem-solving skills. Can hinder quick decision-making. Promotes independent thinking. May lead to overthinking. Encourages open-mindedness. Requires extensive time and resources.
The Advantages & Disadvantages of Critical Thinking
Critical thinking is, at heart, questioning what you are told instead of taking it at face value. It is evaluating information in a rational framework where facts and reason line up to support or fail to support assertions. Critical thinking skills are highly sought, and have a number of benefits in life. However, ...
Critical Thinking in the Classroom: A Guide for Teachers
Critical thinking is a key skill that goes far beyond the four walls of a classroom. It equips students to better understand and interact with the world around them. Here are some reasons why fostering critical thinking is important: Making Informed Decisions: Critical thinking enables students to evaluate the pros and cons of a situation ...
Critical Pedagogy: Challenging Bias and Creating Inclusive Classrooms
5 Critical Pedagogy: Challenging Bias and Creating Inclusive Classrooms Introduction. Regardless of the type of library you work in, your learners will come from varied backgrounds, identities, and life experiences, and will bring different interests and educational needs to the classroom.
6 Benefits of Critical Thinking and Why They Matter
Critical thinking capacity does all that and more. 4. It's a multi-faceted practice. Critical thinking is known for encompassing a wide array of disciplines, and cultivating a broad range of cognitive talents. One could indeed say that it's a cross-curricular activity for the mind, and the mind must be exercised just like a muscle to stay ...
How To Teach Critical Thinking
Asking questions, reading books, being aware of surroundings, focusing the mind, active listening, and understanding different perspectives are some ways to enhance critical thinking skills. In ...
PDF Enhancing Critical Thinking through Class Discussion:
To activate the concept of critical pedagogy (and a participatory democracy), the pedagogical strategies offered in this guide support the development of critical thought processes. While loosely related, there are differences between the concepts of critical thinking and critical pedagogy (Burbules & Burk, 1999).
The effectiveness of collaborative problem solving in promoting
Collaborative problem-solving has been widely embraced in the classroom instruction of critical thinking, which is regarded as the core of curriculum reform based on key competencies in the field ...
Bloom's Taxonomy: Benefits and Limitations
Benefits of Bloom's Taxonomy. Nothing sticks around this long unless it's useful. And Bloom's Taxonomy has allowed faculty to reach for higher-order thinking, to align their outcome with assessments and activities, and to better assess the type of learning students are engaging in. Having a classification of learning allows us to think ...
Strategies for Promoting Critical and Creative Thinking in Students
2. Stimulation of debate and discussion. Encouraging debate and discussion in the classroom is a powerful strategy for promoting critical. thinking and the development of argumentation skills ...
(PDF) The Benefits of Critical Thinking Skills and Techniques for
Many employers seek employees with good critical thinking skills because they can benefit their companies. Dorine Neba, a Ph.D. in Philosophy and a member of the University of Beau's Department of ...
The Benefits of Critical Thinking & How to develop it
5] Stimulates Curiosity. It stimulates curiosity in you to find the right solution for the problem or the subject you are working on. Curiosity will let you dig and delve deeper to get a better result. This factor will let you stay a lifelong learner. All these aspects of critical thinking play a vital role in Banking and financial sector.
Practical work: The benefits, challenges and solutions
Practical work can in fact facilitate learning in the classroom. Using a practical activity can help structure a lesson and improve engagement and knowledge retention: Many students learn more easily by actually "doing" activities. This is particularly relevant in practical science activities. When studying a particular topic, we often ...
The Difficulties of Teaching Critical Thinking
There are barriers to teaching creative problem-solving skills. One of the difficulties of teaching creative problem solving and other critical thinking skills in the traditional classroom is that the traditional classroom wasn't designed for it. Revolutionary change is hard, especially for something as important as a public school system ...
Concept Mapping: Benefits and Challenges in Higher Education
Undergraduates need to develop critical thinking, problem-solving skills, and deep understanding of concepts. Concept maps are considered an educational tool that promotes meaningful learning and that has demonstrated potential effects in the learning process. Based on studies carried out in adult/higher education, the aim of this review is to ...
The Pros and Cons of Popular Instructional Strategies
Named after the Greek philosopher Socrates, the Socratic method is often used to promote critical thinking. Students come to class prepared for discussion. Educators need to guide student preparation with a pre-class assignment. It is the discussion that leads the way through material.
(PDF) Discovery Learning in the Classroom
show-me - tell- me, transmission methods. Discovery Learning makes teaching fun, and if the kids are learning and. having fun doing it, then teachers are also enjoying their work more. Without ...
The flipped classroom: A review of its advantages and challenges
This new review of the advantages and challenges reported in research studies associated on this approach can more comprehensively indicate best practices, and areas for future research and development. In the present study, 71 research studies examining flipped classroom, published to the end of 2016, were identified and systematically analyzed.
AI In The Classroom: Benefits, Challenges, And Best Practices
3. Foster Ethical And Critical Thinking. Incorporating AI into the classroom provides an opportunity for students to develop a critical perspective on this technology and its impact on society. Teachers should encourage students to think critically about the ethical implications of AI and to consider the potential consequences of its widespread ...
Understanding the role of digital technologies in education: A review
Traditional classroom instructions fall short of providing an immediate learning environment, faster evaluations, and more engagement. ... Digital learning tools and technology engage students and improve critical thinking skills, the foundation for developing analytic reasoning. ... advantages and disadvantages of its adoption in higher education.
Explained: Importance of critical thinking, problem-solving skills in
In a nutshell, critical thinking and problem-solving skills are a part of '21st Century Skills' that can help unlock valuable learning for life. Over the years, the education system has been ...
The Disadvantages of Critical Thinking: Don't Overthink It
1. Difficulty in Decision-Making. Difficulty in Decision-Making. One of the biggest disadvantages of critical thinking is that it can be difficult to make decisions. Because critical thinkers are constantly analyzing and evaluating data to draw conclusions, this can be a time-consuming process.
(PDF) Benefits and Challenges of Applying Computational Thinking in
Based on the literature review, there are. many benefits of computational thinking in education, including increasing critical and analytical thinking among. students, cultivating CT skills in ...
E-Communications Lesson Plan Grade 12 (pdf)
Having learners engage in the lesson by taking active participation, note- taking, discussions, and application, promotes cognitive engagement as Critical Thinking: By initiating a class discussion about the advantages and disadvantages of E- communication the teacher encourages critical thinking as learners are prompted to analyze and evaluate ...
What Students Are Saying About Tech in the Classroom
Moreover, staring at an iPad screen for 7 hours a day puts significant strain on our eyes, so for the sake of our health and our attention spans, we need to minimize tech use in school. — Mary ...
The technology shaking up higher education in 2024
As tech-savvy, Gen Z students seek institutions with a forward-thinking mindset and a grasp of modern technologies, they aspire to use these tools not only in their education but also in their future careers. In response to these changing demands, 2024 is poised to be a year of significant technological innovation on college campuses. Higher ...