fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy

Browse Econ Literature

• Working papers
• Software components
• Book chapters
• JEL classification

More features

• Subscribe to new research

RePEc Biblio

Author registration.

• Economics Virtual Seminar Calendar NEW!

Fostering Critical Thinking through Effective Pedagogy

• Author & abstract
• 6 Citations
• Related works & more

Corrections

Suggested citation, download full text from publisher.

Follow serials, authors, keywords & more

Public profiles for Economics researchers

Various research rankings in Economics

RePEc Genealogy

Who was a student of whom, using RePEc

Curated articles & papers on economics topics

Upload your paper to be listed on RePEc and IDEAS

New papers by email

Subscribe to new additions to RePEc

EconAcademics

Blog aggregator for economics research

Cases of plagiarism in Economics

About RePEc

Initiative for open bibliographies in Economics

News about RePEc

Questions about IDEAS and RePEc

RePEc volunteers

Participating archives

Publishers indexing in RePEc

Privacy statement

Found an error or omission?

Opportunities to help RePEc

Get papers listed

Have your research listed on RePEc

Open a RePEc archive

Have your institution's/publisher's output listed on RePEc

Get RePEc data

Use data assembled by RePEc

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

A Critical Review of Lisa Tsui's "Fostering Critical Thinking Through Effective Pedagogy"

Related Papers

maiden foolish

fereshte ahangaryan

Johann-Georg FUCHS

Khder Al Shagori

Ahmed A Abdelhady

Abdulmalik Esmail

Dulce Vargas Mora

RELATED PAPERS

EDGAR OSVALDO ROSAS MEZA

David Ilan , Matthew Susnow

Svět literatury: Časopis pro novodobé literatury, 2018, 58, 141-148

Dora Poláková

Heinz Dehnen

Cristiano Rosa

International Journal of Differential Equations

Khalid Hattaf

Environmental Management

William Sonzogni

Ağcakışla Bucağında Eski Şeker Bayramları

Edebiyat Kitap

Experimental and Therapeutic Medicine

Adnan Al Aloul

Journal of Engineering

kamal lateef

Open Journal of Epidemiology

Maria orellana

Patrick Gajewski

Macromolecules

Manoj Chaudhury

China CDC Weekly

muhtar hasan

Journal of Statistical Theory and Applications

Irene L Hudson

Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution

Mark Bidwell

International journal of electronics and electrical engineering

Hiromitsu Shimakawa

Josef Kuňák

Optics Express

Kevin Gaudfrin

The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England

Mustafa Ozhan

Neuroscience Letters

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• [email protected]

Login to MyWabash

"Fostering Critical Thinking Through Effective Pedagogy"

Article Tsui, Lisa 2002 The Journal of Higher Education 73, no. 6 (2002): 740-763 Topics: Teaching Critical Thinking

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

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

Eight Instructional Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking

• Share article

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

The new question-of-the-week is:

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

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

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

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

Current Events

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

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

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

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

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

Here are the two photos and a student response:

F - Focus on both photos and respond for three minutes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Before-Explore-Explain’

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

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

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

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

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

An Issue of Equity

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

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

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

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

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

So, what does that really look like?

Unpack and define critical thinking

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

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

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

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

Designing experiences for critical thinking

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

1.Choose Compelling Topics: Keep it relevant

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

2. Make Local Connections: Keep it real

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

3. Create Authentic Projects: Keep it rigorous

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

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

Critical Thinking & Student Engagement

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

QUESTIONING

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

TALK TIME / CONTROL

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

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

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

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

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

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

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

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

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

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

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

Sign Up & Sign In

Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: evidence from four institutional case studies.

• MLA style: "Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: evidence from four institutional case studies.." The Free Library . 2002 Ohio State University Press 29 May. 2024 https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Fostering+critical+thinking+through+effective+pedagogy%3a+evidence+from...-a094326614
• Chicago style: The Free Library . S.v. Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: evidence from four institutional case studies.." Retrieved May 29 2024 from https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Fostering+critical+thinking+through+effective+pedagogy%3a+evidence+from...-a094326614
• APA style: Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: evidence from four institutional case studies.. (n.d.) >The Free Library. (2014). Retrieved May 29 2024 from https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Fostering+critical+thinking+through+effective+pedagogy%3a+evidence+from...-a094326614

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2024 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |

Advertisement

Effects of Active Learning on Enhancing Student Critical Thinking in an Undergraduate General Science Course

• Published: 12 September 2012
• Volume 38 , pages 223–235, ( 2013 )

Cite this article

• Kyoungna Kim 1 ,
• Priya Sharma 2 ,
• Susan M. Land 2 &
• Kevin P. Furlong 3  

90 Citations

2 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

To enhance students’ critical thinking in an undergraduate general science course, we designed and implemented active learning modules by incorporating group-based learning with authentic tasks, scaffolding, and individual reports. This study examined the levels of critical thinking students exhibited in individual reports and the students’ critical thinking level change over time. Findings indicated that students’ average critical thinking level fell in the category of “developing”, but students’ scores on individual reports revealed a statistically significant increase. The study suggested that the active learning strategies employed in the study were useful to promote student critical thinking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Cultivating and Leveraging Continuous Accountability Through Mundane Infrastructures for Critical Thinking

Active Learning Methods and Strategies to Improve Student Conceptual Understanding: Some Considerations from Physics Education Research

Strategies for Active Learning and Assessment of the Learning Processes

Andriessen, J. (2006). Arguing to Learn. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of learning sciences (pp. 443–459). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Google Scholar  

Blumenfeld, P. C., Kempler, T. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2006). Motivation and cognitive engagement in learning environments. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 475–488). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (2000). How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore alternative ways of thinking and acting . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Bunce, D., & VandenPlas, J. R. (2006). Student recognition and construction of quality chemistry essay responses. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 7 (3), 160–169.

Article   Google Scholar  

Chapman, B. S. (2001, Nov). Emphasizing concepts and reasoning skills in introductory college molecular cell biology. International Journal of Science Education, 23 (11), 1157–1176.

Edelson, D. C., & Reiser, B. J. (2006). Making authentic practices accessible to learners: Designing challenges and strategies. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 335–354). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

Ennis, R. (1991). Critical thinking: A streamlined conception. Teaching Philosophy, 14 (1), 5–25.

Ge, X., & Land, S. (2003). Scaffolding students’ problem-solving processes in an ill-structured task using question prompts and peer interactions. Educational Technology Research and Development, 51 (1), 21–38.

Gellin, A. (2003). The effect of undergraduate student involvement on critical thinking: A meta-analysis of the literature 1991–2000. Journal of College Student Development, 44 (6), 746–762.

Gupta, G. (2005). Improving students' critical-thinking, logic, and problem-solving skills. Journal of College Science Teaching, 34 (4), 48.

Hager, P., Sleet, R., Logan, P., & Hooper, M. (2003). Teaching critical thinking in undergraduate science courses. Science Education, 12 , 303–313.

Halpern, D. F. (1999, Winter). Teaching for critical thinking: Helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker. New Directions for Teaching & Learning, 80 , 69–74.

Hannafin, M., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 115–140). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Jonassen, D. H. (1997). Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. Educational Technology Research and Development, 45 (1), 65–94.

Kim, K. (2009). Exploring undergraduate students' active learning for enhancing their critical thinking and learning in a large class. Dissertation Abstracts International, 70 (11), 3380934.

King, A. (1995). Inquiring minds really do want to know: Using questioning to teach critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology, 22 (1), 13–17.

King, P. M., & Kitchener, K. S. (1994). Developing reflective judgment: Understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Kronberg, J. R., & Griffin, M. S. (2000). Analysis problems-A means to developing students' critical-thinking skills: Pushing the boundaries of higher-order thinking. Journal of College Science Teaching, 29 (5), 348–352.

Lajoie, S. P., Lavigne, N. C., Guerrera, C., & Munsie, S. (2001). Constructing knowledge in the context of BioWorld. Instructional Science, 29 , 155–186.

Land, S. M. (2000). Cognitive requirements for learning with open-ended learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 48 (3), 61–78.

Lynch, C. L., & Wolcott, S. K. (2001). Helping your students develop critical thinking skills. IDEA Paper #37 . Manhattan, KS: The IDEA Center.

MacKnight, C. B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions: Faculty can play a key role in fostering critical thinking among students using web communication tools. Educational Quarterly, 4 , 38–41.

Mayer, R. H. (1999). Designing instruction for constructivist learning. In C. M. Reigeluth, (Eds.), In C. M. Reigeluth, (Ed), Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory, Volume II. pp,141–160. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

McConnell, D. A. (2005). How students think: Implications for learning in introductory Geoscience Courses. Journal of Geoscience Education, 53 , 462–470.

Moon, J. (2008). Critical thinking: An exploration of theory and practice. London and New York: Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

National Education Goals Panel (1991). The national education goals report: Building a nation of learners . Washington, DC: U.S. Printing Office.

National Research Council (1996). From analysis to action: Undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology . Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas . Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Paul, R. (1995). Critical thinking: How to prepare students for a rapidly changing world . Santa Rosa, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Perkins, D. (1998). What is understanding? In M. S. Wiske (Ed.), Teaching for understanding: Linking research with practice (pp. 39–57). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Ruiz-Primo, M. A., Briggs, D., Iverson, H., Talbot, R., & Shepard, L. A. (2011). Impact of undergraduate science course innovations on learning. Science, 331 (6022), 1269–70.

Russell, A. A. (2004). Calibrated peer review: A writing and critical-thinking instructional tool. In Y. S. George (Ed.), Invention and impact: Building excellence in undergraduate science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) education . American Association for the Advancement of Science: Washington, DC.

Scardamalia, M., and Bereiter, C. (1996). Adaptation and understanding: A case for new cultures of schooling. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International perspectives on the design of technology-supported learning environments (pp. 149–163). Mahwah, NJ.: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (1987). Defining critical thinking: A draft statement for the National Council for Excellence in Critical Thinking. Retrieved December 8, 2009 from the Foundation for Critical Thinking. http://www.criticalthinking.org/University/defining.html

Takeo, A., Prothero, W. A., & Kelly, G. J. (2002). Applying analysis to assess the quality of university oceanography students’ scientific writing. Journal of Geoscience Education, 50 (1), 40–48.

Tsui, L. (1999). Courses and instruction affecting critical thinking. Research in HigherEducation, 40 (2), 185–200.

Tsui, L. (2002). Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence from four institutional case studies. Journal of Higher Education, 73 (6), 749–763.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Yuretich, R. F. (2004). Encouraging critical thinking. Journal of College Science Teaching, 33 (3), 40–45.

Download references

Acknowledgement

This material is based in part upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant Number 0607995 . Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Diplomatic Language Services, Arlington, VA, USA

Kyoungna Kim

Department of Education, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

Priya Sharma & Susan M. Land

Department of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA, USA

Kevin P. Furlong

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kyoungna Kim .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Kim, K., Sharma, P., Land, S.M. et al. Effects of Active Learning on Enhancing Student Critical Thinking in an Undergraduate General Science Course. Innov High Educ 38 , 223–235 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-012-9236-x

Download citation

Published : 12 September 2012

Issue Date : June 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-012-9236-x

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

• Active learning
• Undergraduate education
• Scaffolding
• Critical thinking
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Utility Menu

GA4 Tracking Code

bok_logo_2-02_-_harvard_left.png

• Stimulating Students to Think

Stimulating students to think can happen in one of two ways.  On the first level, educators can take steps to help students ‘pick up’ the mindset of the course or discipline when they step into class.  The second level involves prompting students to think beyond the surface and adopt a critical mindset. 

One aspect of stimulating students to think involves prompting students to drop the concerns they walked into class with, get into the mindset of the discipline, and be receptive to learning new material.  Activities such as Do Now ( http://ablconnect.harvard.edu/do-now-research ), Quick Write ( http://ablconnect.harvard.edu/quick-write ) and Games ( http://ablconnect.harvard.edu/game-research ), when used to open a class period, can be very effective warm-ups that help students transition from whatever they were doing before class to the goals and learning objectives of the class before them.  Other types of activities also apply—the idea is to prime students to think within the appropriate context for the class, which helps them transition and prepares them for learning (Nilson, 2010).

A second aspect of stimulating students to think involves prompting students to think deeply and critically about material.  A large literature on the importance of critical thinking within higher education exists (e.g., Abrami et al., 2008; Gibbs, 1985; McMillan, 1987; Powell, 1987; Tsui, 1998; Pithers & Sodden, 2000).  Although we, as instructors, want students to develop critical thinking skills, we often think of critical thinking as an abstract goal, and we lack specific, concrete steps for turning students into critical thinkers (Kuhn, 1999). We can overcome this by thinking more deeply ourselves about what it means to think critically. Pergiovanni (2014) distills the definitions of critical thinking found in the literature into four components: 1) questioning and reasoning; 2) recognizing assumptions; 3) presenting and evaluating data; and 4) drawing conclusions (Pergiovanni, p. 86).  Students often need to be explicitly taught what critical thinking looks like either in their discipline (the “infusion approach”) or in higher education generally (the “general approach”; Ennis, 1989, p. 4).  In the infusion approach, exercises designed to promote critical thinking are used to teach particular subject matter in a discipline-specific way.  In contrast to this, the general approach refers to efforts to train students in how to think critically that are not tied to a specific discipline or subject matter.  For example, a course that is focused on improving students’ general writing abilities is taking the general approach, as students practice deepening and expressing their thoughts through writing in a manner that is not tied to any specific discipline. Writing exercises are useful in prompting students to integrate research, synthesize arguments, and think deeply about material—which are all skills that transcend specific disciplines (Bean, 2011). 

 Perhaps the biggest challenge for educators, in stimulating students to think, is in getting clear themselves about what constitutes good thinking.  As Kuhn (1999) put it, “What does it mean to be accomplished in thinking, and how does this accomplishment manifest itself?” (p. 16). Instructors should be as clear as possible about what kind of thinking they want students to do during a particular exercise or assignment (for example, is the goal to get students to uncover and then question their assumptions?  Is it to weigh various pieces of evidence and decide which kind is strongest? etc.).  Research has demonstrated that students experience more learning gains when faculty share their teaching goals and the reasons behind their objectives (Winkelmes, 2013).  Moreover, students may be more open to unfamiliar activities if they understand why the instructor is asking them to engage in them and what they stand to gain (Bok Center 2002/2010). Having clarified the learning objectives associated with each activity or assignment for themselves, instructors should then make their goals transparent to students. 

Written by Julia Hayden Galindo, Ed.D., Harvard Graduate School of Education  

References:  

Abrami, P. C., Bernard, R. M., Borokhovski, E., Wade, A., Surkes, M. A., Tamin, R., & Zhang, D. (2008).  Instructional interventions affecting critical thinking skills and dispositions: A stage 1 meta-analysis.  Review of Educational Research, 78 (4), 1102-1134.

Bok Center (2002/2010).  Twenty ways to make lectures more participatory.  Retrieved September 12, 2014 from: http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/html/icb.topic58474/TFTlectures.html

• Bean, J. C. (2011).  Engaging Ideas (2 nd ed.).  San Francisco, CA:  Jossey-Bass.

Ennis, R. H. (1989).  Critical thinking and subject specificity: Calrification and needed research.  Educational Researcher, 18 (3), 4-10.

Gibbs, E. M. (1985).  Teaching critical thinking at the university level: A review of some empirical evidence.  Informal Logic, 7 (2 & 3), 137-149.

Kuhn, D.  (1999).  A developmental model of critical thinking.  Educational Research, 28 (2), 16-25.

McMillan, J. H. (1987). Enhancing college students’ critical thinking: A review of studies.  Research in Higher Education, 26, 3-29.

Nilson, L. B. (2010). Teaching at its best: A research-based resource for college instructors . San Francisco, CA:  Jossey-Bass.

Piergiovanni, P. R.  (2014).  Creating a critical thinker.  College Teaching, 62 (3), 86-93. DOI: 10.1080/87567555.2014.896775

Pithers, R. T. & Soden, R. (2000).  Critical thinking in education: A review.  Educational Research, 42 (3), 237-249.

Powell, S. (1987).  Improving critical thinking: A review.  Educational Psychology, 7 (3), 169-185.

Tsui, L. (2002).  Fostering critical thinking through effective pedagogy: Evidence from four institutional case studies.  Journal of Higher Education, 73 (6), 740-763.

Winkelmes, M.A.  (2013).  Transparency in teaching: Faculty share data and improve students’ learning.  Liberal Education, 99 (2), 48-55.

Further Resources:  

• Condon, W. & Kelly-Riley, D. (2004).  Assessing and teaching what we value: The relationship between college-level writing and critical thinking abilities.  Assessing Writing, 9 (1), 56-75.
• Glaser, E. M. (1942).  An experiment in the development of critical thinking.  Teachers College Record, 43 (5), 409-410.  
• Sternberg, R. J. (1990).  Thinking styles: Keys to understanding student performance.  Phi Delta Kappan, 71 (5), 366-371.
• Authentic Learning (Simulations, Lab, Field)
• Classroom Assessment, Reflection, & Feedback
• Expanding Depth and Breadth
• Fostering Motivation
• Group & Cooperative Learning; Students as Classroom Leaders
• Revealing & Dealing with Misconceptions
• Research on Activity Types
• Additional Research