cognitive and critical thinking skills

How it works

Transform your enterprise with the scalable mindsets, skills, & behavior change that drive performance.

Explore how BetterUp connects to your core business systems.

We pair AI with the latest in human-centered coaching to drive powerful, lasting learning and behavior change.

Build leaders that accelerate team performance and engagement.

Unlock performance potential at scale with AI-powered curated growth journeys.

Build resilience, well-being and agility to drive performance across your entire enterprise.

Transform your business, starting with your sales leaders.

Unlock business impact from the top with executive coaching.

Foster a culture of inclusion and belonging.

Accelerate the performance and potential of your agencies and employees.

See how innovative organizations use BetterUp to build a thriving workforce.

Discover how BetterUp measurably impacts key business outcomes for organizations like yours.

A demo is the first step to transforming your business. Meet with us to develop a plan for attaining your goals.

• What is coaching?

Learn how 1:1 coaching works, who its for, and if it's right for you.

Accelerate your personal and professional growth with the expert guidance of a BetterUp Coach.

Types of Coaching

Navigate career transitions, accelerate your professional growth, and achieve your career goals with expert coaching.

Enhance your communication skills for better personal and professional relationships, with tailored coaching that focuses on your needs.

Find balance, resilience, and well-being in all areas of your life with holistic coaching designed to empower you.

Discover your perfect match : Take our 5-minute assessment and let us pair you with one of our top Coaches tailored just for you.

Research, expert insights, and resources to develop courageous leaders within your organization.

Best practices, research, and tools to fuel individual and business growth.

View on-demand BetterUp events and learn about upcoming live discussions.

The latest insights and ideas for building a high-performing workplace.

• BetterUp Briefing

The online magazine that helps you understand tomorrow's workforce trends, today.

Innovative research featured in peer-reviewed journals, press, and more.

Founded in 2022 to deepen the understanding of the intersection of well-being, purpose, and performance

We're on a mission to help everyone live with clarity, purpose, and passion.

Join us and create impactful change.

Read the buzz about BetterUp.

Meet the leadership that's passionate about empowering your workforce.

For Business

For Individuals

How to develop critical thinking skills

Jump to section

What are critical thinking skills?

How to develop critical thinking skills: 12 tips, how to practice critical thinking skills at work, become your own best critic.

A client requests a tight deadline on an intense project. Your childcare provider calls in sick on a day full of meetings. Payment from a contract gig is a month behind. 

Your day-to-day will always have challenges, big and small. And no matter the size and urgency, they all ask you to use critical thinking to analyze the situation and arrive at the right solution. 

Critical thinking includes a wide set of soft skills that encourage continuous learning, resilience , and self-reflection. The more you add to your professional toolbelt, the more equipped you’ll be to tackle whatever challenge presents itself. Here’s how to develop critical thinking, with examples explaining how to use it.

Critical thinking skills are the skills you use to analyze information, imagine scenarios holistically, and create rational solutions. It’s a type of emotional intelligence that stimulates effective problem-solving and decision-making . 

When you fine-tune your critical thinking skills, you seek beyond face-value observations and knee-jerk reactions. Instead, you harvest deeper insights and string together ideas and concepts in logical, sometimes out-of-the-box , ways. 

Imagine a team working on a marketing strategy for a new set of services. That team might use critical thinking to balance goals and key performance indicators , like new customer acquisition costs, average monthly sales, and net profit margins. They understand the connections between overlapping factors to build a strategy that stays within budget and attracts new sales. 

Looking for ways to improve critical thinking skills? Start by brushing up on the following soft skills that fall under this umbrella: 

• Analytical thinking: Approaching problems with an analytical eye includes breaking down complex issues into small chunks and examining their significance. An example could be organizing customer feedback to identify trends and improve your product offerings. 
• Open-mindedness: Push past cognitive biases and be receptive to different points of view and constructive feedback . Managers and team members who keep an open mind position themselves to hear new ideas that foster innovation . 
• Creative thinking: With creative thinking , you can develop several ideas to address a single problem, like brainstorming more efficient workflow best practices to boost productivity and employee morale . 
• Self-reflection: Self-reflection lets you examine your thinking and assumptions to stimulate healthier collaboration and thought processes. Maybe a bad first impression created a negative anchoring bias with a new coworker. Reflecting on your own behavior stirs up empathy and improves the relationship. 
• Evaluation: With evaluation skills, you tackle the pros and cons of a situation based on logic rather than emotion. When prioritizing tasks , you might be tempted to do the fun or easy ones first, but evaluating their urgency and importance can help you make better decisions. 

There’s no magic method to change your thinking processes. Improvement happens with small, intentional changes to your everyday habits until a more critical approach to thinking is automatic. 

Here are 12 tips for building stronger self-awareness and learning how to improve critical thinking: 

1. Be cautious

There’s nothing wrong with a little bit of skepticism. One of the core principles of critical thinking is asking questions and dissecting the available information. You might surprise yourself at what you find when you stop to think before taking action. 

Before making a decision, use evidence, logic, and deductive reasoning to support your own opinions or challenge ideas. It helps you and your team avoid falling prey to bad information or resistance to change .

2. Ask open-ended questions

“Yes” or “no” questions invite agreement rather than reflection. Instead, ask open-ended questions that force you to engage in analysis and rumination. Digging deeper can help you identify potential biases, uncover assumptions, and arrive at new hypotheses and possible solutions. 

3. Do your research

No matter your proficiency, you can always learn more. Turning to different points of view and information is a great way to develop a comprehensive understanding of a topic and make informed decisions. You’ll prioritize reliable information rather than fall into emotional or automatic decision-making. 

4. Consider several opinions

You might spend so much time on your work that it’s easy to get stuck in your own perspective, especially if you work independently on a remote team . Make an effort to reach out to colleagues to hear different ideas and thought patterns. Their input might surprise you.

If or when you disagree, remember that you and your team share a common goal. Divergent opinions are constructive, so shift the focus to finding solutions rather than defending disagreements. 

5. Learn to be quiet

Active listening is the intentional practice of concentrating on a conversation partner instead of your own thoughts. It’s about paying attention to detail and letting people know you value their opinions, which can open your mind to new perspectives and thought processes.

If you’re brainstorming with your team or having a 1:1 with a coworker , listen, ask clarifying questions, and work to understand other peoples’ viewpoints. Listening to your team will help you find fallacies in arguments to improve possible solutions.

6. Schedule reflection

Whether waking up at 5 am or using a procrastination hack, scheduling time to think puts you in a growth mindset . Your mind has natural cognitive biases to help you simplify decision-making, but squashing them is key to thinking critically and finding new solutions besides the ones you might gravitate toward. Creating time and calm space in your day gives you the chance to step back and visualize the biases that impact your decision-making. 

7. Cultivate curiosity

With so many demands and job responsibilities, it’s easy to seek solace in routine. But getting out of your comfort zone helps spark critical thinking and find more solutions than you usually might.

If curiosity doesn’t come naturally to you, cultivate a thirst for knowledge by reskilling and upskilling . Not only will you add a new skill to your resume , but expanding the limits of your professional knowledge might motivate you to ask more questions. 

You don’t have to develop critical thinking skills exclusively in the office. Whether on your break or finding a hobby to do after work, playing strategic games or filling out crosswords can prime your brain for problem-solving. 

9. Write it down

Recording your thoughts with pen and paper can lead to stronger brain activity than typing them out on a keyboard. If you’re stuck and want to think more critically about a problem, writing your ideas can help you process information more deeply.

The act of recording ideas on paper can also improve your memory . Ideas are more likely to linger in the background of your mind, leading to deeper thinking that informs your decision-making process. 

10. Speak up

Take opportunities to share your opinion, even if it intimidates you. Whether at a networking event with new people or a meeting with close colleagues, try to engage with people who challenge or help you develop your ideas. Having conversations that force you to support your position encourages you to refine your argument and think critically. 

11. Stay humble

Ideas and concepts aren’t the same as real-life actions. There may be such a thing as negative outcomes, but there’s no such thing as a bad idea. At the brainstorming stage , don’t be afraid to make mistakes.

Sometimes the best solutions come from off-the-wall, unorthodox decisions. Sit in your creativity , let ideas flow, and don’t be afraid to share them with your colleagues. Putting yourself in a creative mindset helps you see situations from new perspectives and arrive at innovative conclusions. 

12. Embrace discomfort

Get comfortable feeling uncomfortable . It isn’t easy when others challenge your ideas, but sometimes, it’s the only way to see new perspectives and think critically.

By willingly stepping into unfamiliar territory, you foster the resilience and flexibility you need to become a better thinker. You’ll learn how to pick yourself up from failure and approach problems from fresh angles. 

Thinking critically is easier said than done. To help you understand its impact (and how to use it), here are two scenarios that require critical thinking skills and provide teachable moments. 

Scenario #1: Unexpected delays and budget

Imagine your team is working on producing an event. Unexpectedly, a vendor explains they’ll be a week behind on delivering materials. Then another vendor sends a quote that’s more than you can afford. Unless you develop a creative solution, the team will have to push back deadlines and go over budget, potentially costing the client’s trust. 

Here’s how you could approach the situation with creative thinking:

• Analyze the situation holistically: Determine how the delayed materials and over-budget quote will impact the rest of your timeline and financial resources . That way, you can identify whether you need to build an entirely new plan with new vendors, or if it’s worth it to readjust time and resources. 
• Identify your alternative options: With careful assessment, your team decides that another vendor can’t provide the same materials in a quicker time frame. You’ll need to rearrange assignment schedules to complete everything on time. 
• Collaborate and adapt: Your team has an emergency meeting to rearrange your project schedule. You write down each deliverable and determine which ones you can and can’t complete by the deadline. To compensate for lost time, you rearrange your task schedule to complete everything that doesn’t need the delayed materials first, then advance as far as you can on the tasks that do. 
• Check different resources: In the meantime, you scour through your contact sheet to find alternative vendors that fit your budget. Accounting helps by providing old invoices to determine which vendors have quoted less for previous jobs. After pulling all your sources, you find a vendor that fits your budget. 
• Maintain open communication: You create a special Slack channel to keep everyone up to date on changes, challenges, and additional delays. Keeping an open line encourages transparency on the team’s progress and boosts everyone’s confidence. 

Scenario #2: Differing opinions 

A conflict arises between two team members on the best approach for a new strategy for a gaming app. One believes that small tweaks to the current content are necessary to maintain user engagement and stay within budget. The other believes a bold revamp is needed to encourage new followers and stronger sales revenue. 

Here’s how critical thinking could help this conflict:

• Listen actively: Give both team members the opportunity to present their ideas free of interruption. Encourage the entire team to ask open-ended questions to more fully understand and develop each argument. 
• Flex your analytical skills: After learning more about both ideas, everyone should objectively assess the benefits and drawbacks of each approach. Analyze each idea's risk, merits, and feasibility based on available data and the app’s goals and objectives. 
• Identify common ground: The team discusses similarities between each approach and brainstorms ways to integrate both idea s, like making small but eye-catching modifications to existing content or using the same visual design in new media formats. 
• Test new strategy: To test out the potential of a bolder strategy, the team decides to A/B test both approaches. You create a set of criteria to evenly distribute users by different demographics to analyze engagement, revenue, and customer turnover. 
• Monitor and adapt: After implementing the A/B test, the team closely monitors the results of each strategy. You regroup and optimize the changes that provide stronger results after the testing. That way, all team members understand why you’re making the changes you decide to make.

You can’t think your problems away. But you can equip yourself with skills that help you move through your biggest challenges and find innovative solutions. Learning how to develop critical thinking is the start of honing an adaptable growth mindset. 

Now that you have resources to increase critical thinking skills in your professional development, you can identify whether you embrace change or routine, are open or resistant to feedback, or turn to research or emotion will build self-awareness. From there, tweak and incorporate techniques to be a critical thinker when life presents you with a problem.

Cultivate your creativity

Foster creativity and continuous learning with guidance from our certified Coaches.

Elizabeth Perry, ACC

Elizabeth Perry is a Coach Community Manager at BetterUp. She uses strategic engagement strategies to cultivate a learning community across a global network of Coaches through in-person and virtual experiences, technology-enabled platforms, and strategic coaching industry partnerships. With over 3 years of coaching experience and a certification in transformative leadership and life coaching from Sofia University, Elizabeth leverages transpersonal psychology expertise to help coaches and clients gain awareness of their behavioral and thought patterns, discover their purpose and passions, and elevate their potential. She is a lifelong student of psychology, personal growth, and human potential as well as an ICF-certified ACC transpersonal life and leadership Coach.

How to improve your creative skills for effective problem-solving

6 ways to leverage ai for hyper-personalized corporate learning, can dreams help you solve problems 6 ways to try, how divergent thinking can drive your creativity, what is lateral thinking 7 techniques to encourage creative ideas, what’s convergent thinking how to be a better problem-solver, 8 creative solutions to your most challenging problems, member story: career development and shaping my future with intention, how to be optimistic, similar articles, what is creative thinking and why does it matter, discover the 7 essential types of life skills you need, 6 big picture thinking strategies that you'll actually use, what are analytical skills examples and how to level up, how intrapersonal skills shape teams, plus 5 ways to build them, critical thinking is the one skillset you can't afford not to master, stay connected with betterup, get our newsletter, event invites, plus product insights and research..

3100 E 5th Street, Suite 350 Austin, TX 78702

• Platform Overview
• Integrations
• Powered by AI
• BetterUp Lead
• BetterUp Manage™
• BetterUp Care™
• Sales Performance
• Diversity & Inclusion
• Case Studies
• Why BetterUp?
• About Coaching
• Find your Coach
• Career Coaching
• Communication Coaching
• Life Coaching
• News and Press
• Leadership Team
• Become a BetterUp Coach
• BetterUp Labs
• Center for Purpose & Performance
• Leadership Training
• Business Coaching
• Contact Support
• Contact Sales
• Privacy Policy
• Acceptable Use Policy
• Trust & Security
• Cookie Preferences

How it works

For Business

Join Mind Tools

Article • 8 min read

Critical Thinking

Developing the right mindset and skills.

By the Mind Tools Content Team

We make hundreds of decisions every day and, whether we realize it or not, we're all critical thinkers.

We use critical thinking each time we weigh up our options, prioritize our responsibilities, or think about the likely effects of our actions. It's a crucial skill that helps us to cut out misinformation and make wise decisions. The trouble is, we're not always very good at it!

In this article, we'll explore the key skills that you need to develop your critical thinking skills, and how to adopt a critical thinking mindset, so that you can make well-informed decisions.

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is the discipline of rigorously and skillfully using information, experience, observation, and reasoning to guide your decisions, actions, and beliefs. You'll need to actively question every step of your thinking process to do it well.

Collecting, analyzing and evaluating information is an important skill in life, and a highly valued asset in the workplace. People who score highly in critical thinking assessments are also rated by their managers as having good problem-solving skills, creativity, strong decision-making skills, and good overall performance. [1]

Key Critical Thinking Skills

Critical thinkers possess a set of key characteristics which help them to question information and their own thinking. Focus on the following areas to develop your critical thinking skills:

Being willing and able to explore alternative approaches and experimental ideas is crucial. Can you think through "what if" scenarios, create plausible options, and test out your theories? If not, you'll tend to write off ideas and options too soon, so you may miss the best answer to your situation.

To nurture your curiosity, stay up to date with facts and trends. You'll overlook important information if you allow yourself to become "blinkered," so always be open to new information.

But don't stop there! Look for opposing views or evidence to challenge your information, and seek clarification when things are unclear. This will help you to reassess your beliefs and make a well-informed decision later. Read our article, Opening Closed Minds , for more ways to stay receptive.

Logical Thinking

You must be skilled at reasoning and extending logic to come up with plausible options or outcomes.

It's also important to emphasize logic over emotion. Emotion can be motivating but it can also lead you to take hasty and unwise action, so control your emotions and be cautious in your judgments. Know when a conclusion is "fact" and when it is not. "Could-be-true" conclusions are based on assumptions and must be tested further. Read our article, Logical Fallacies , for help with this.

Use creative problem solving to balance cold logic. By thinking outside of the box you can identify new possible outcomes by using pieces of information that you already have.

Self-Awareness

Many of the decisions we make in life are subtly informed by our values and beliefs. These influences are called cognitive biases and it can be difficult to identify them in ourselves because they're often subconscious.

Practicing self-awareness will allow you to reflect on the beliefs you have and the choices you make. You'll then be better equipped to challenge your own thinking and make improved, unbiased decisions.

One particularly useful tool for critical thinking is the Ladder of Inference . It allows you to test and validate your thinking process, rather than jumping to poorly supported conclusions.

Developing a Critical Thinking Mindset

Combine the above skills with the right mindset so that you can make better decisions and adopt more effective courses of action. You can develop your critical thinking mindset by following this process:

Gather Information

First, collect data, opinions and facts on the issue that you need to solve. Draw on what you already know, and turn to new sources of information to help inform your understanding. Consider what gaps there are in your knowledge and seek to fill them. And look for information that challenges your assumptions and beliefs.

Be sure to verify the authority and authenticity of your sources. Not everything you read is true! Use this checklist to ensure that your information is valid:

• Are your information sources trustworthy ? (For example, well-respected authors, trusted colleagues or peers, recognized industry publications, websites, blogs, etc.)
• Is the information you have gathered up to date ?
• Has the information received any direct criticism ?
• Does the information have any errors or inaccuracies ?
• Is there any evidence to support or corroborate the information you have gathered?
• Is the information you have gathered subjective or biased in any way? (For example, is it based on opinion, rather than fact? Is any of the information you have gathered designed to promote a particular service or organization?)

If any information appears to be irrelevant or invalid, don't include it in your decision making. But don't omit information just because you disagree with it, or your final decision will be flawed and bias.

Now observe the information you have gathered, and interpret it. What are the key findings and main takeaways? What does the evidence point to? Start to build one or two possible arguments based on what you have found.

You'll need to look for the details within the mass of information, so use your powers of observation to identify any patterns or similarities. You can then analyze and extend these trends to make sensible predictions about the future.

To help you to sift through the multiple ideas and theories, it can be useful to group and order items according to their characteristics. From here, you can compare and contrast the different items. And once you've determined how similar or different things are from one another, Paired Comparison Analysis can help you to analyze them.

The final step involves challenging the information and rationalizing its arguments.

Apply the laws of reason (induction, deduction, analogy) to judge an argument and determine its merits. To do this, it's essential that you can determine the significance and validity of an argument to put it in the correct perspective. Take a look at our article, Rational Thinking , for more information about how to do this.

Once you have considered all of the arguments and options rationally, you can finally make an informed decision.

Afterward, take time to reflect on what you have learned and what you found challenging. Step back from the detail of your decision or problem, and look at the bigger picture. Record what you've learned from your observations and experience.

Critical thinking involves rigorously and skilfully using information, experience, observation, and reasoning to guide your decisions, actions and beliefs. It's a useful skill in the workplace and in life.

You'll need to be curious and creative to explore alternative possibilities, but rational to apply logic, and self-aware to identify when your beliefs could affect your decisions or actions.

You can demonstrate a high level of critical thinking by validating your information, analyzing its meaning, and finally evaluating the argument.

Critical Thinking Infographic

See Critical Thinking represented in our infographic: An Elementary Guide to Critical Thinking .

You've accessed 1 of your 2 free resources.

Get unlimited access

Discover more content

Book Insights

Overcoming Low Self-Esteem

Melanie Fennell

5 Customer Service Parables

Improve Customer Service With Stories

Add comment

Comments (1)

priyanka ghogare

Team Management

Learn the key aspects of managing a team, from building and developing your team, to working with different types of teams, and troubleshooting common problems.

Sign-up to our newsletter

Subscribing to the Mind Tools newsletter will keep you up-to-date with our latest updates and newest resources.

Subscribe now

Business Skills

Personal Development

Leadership and Management

Member Extras

Most Popular

Newest Releases

SWOT Analysis

SMART Goals

Mind Tools Store

About Mind Tools Content

Discover something new today

How to stop procrastinating.

Overcoming the Habit of Delaying Important Tasks

What Is Time Management?

Working Smarter to Enhance Productivity

How Emotionally Intelligent Are You?

Boosting Your People Skills

Self-Assessment

What's Your Leadership Style?

Learn About the Strengths and Weaknesses of the Way You Like to Lead

Recommended for you

Boost your team with positive narratives infographic.

Infographic Transcript

Infographic

Business Operations and Process Management

Strategy Tools

Customer Service

Business Ethics and Values

Handling Information and Data

Project Management

Knowledge Management

Self-Development and Goal Setting

Time Management

Presentation Skills

Learning Skills

Career Skills

Communication Skills

Negotiation, Persuasion and Influence

Working With Others

Difficult Conversations

Creativity Tools

Self-Management

Work-Life Balance

Stress Management and Wellbeing

Coaching and Mentoring

Change Management

Managing Conflict

Delegation and Empowerment

Performance Management

Leadership Skills

Developing Your Team

Talent Management

Problem Solving

Decision Making

Member Podcast

• Skip to primary navigation
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Global Cognition

Critical thinking skills: what are they and how do i get them.

by Winston Sieck updated September 18, 2021

Critical thinking is often touted as a superior way to confront the issues one faces.

But what is critical thinking, really? How is it done?  

Can anyone do it, or are Spock-like mental abilities required?

Critical thinking is sometimes talked about as a near-mystical skill that exercises untapped parts of your brain. The supposed benefits of critical thinking can sound equally fantastic. Unfortunately, the reality is a bit more mundane.

Critical thinking is simply a deliberative thought process. During the process, you use a set of critical thinking skills to consider an issue. At conclusion, you make a judgment about what to believe, or a decision about what to do.

There are a number of critical thinking skills. A core set includes the following:

• Suspending judgment to check the validity of a proposition or action
• Taking into consideration multiple perspectives
• Examining implications and consequences of a belief or action
• Using reason and evidence to resolve disagreements
• Re-evaluating a point of view in light of new information

Critical thinking is neither magical nor foolproof. Beyond these general critical-thinking skills, knowledge of the specific topic at hand plays an important role in the quality of thoughts you produce.

You won’t easily resolve issues about climate change, for example, without knowing the methods and procedures used by climatologists, as well as their wealth of past findings and theories. Critical thinking skills are no substitute for that specialized knowledge. But, they may well help you to develop a stronger understanding of the area.

How can you get critical thinking skills?

Charoula Angeli and Nicos Valanides from the University of Cyprus tested the idea that critical thinking skills are most readily learned when they are embedded in a specific subject. They called this approach the “infusion method,” and compared it to several other methods for teaching critical thinking skills. Their paper, “Instructional effects on critical thinking,” was published in Learning and Instruction .

The researchers used two authentic, ill-defined issues for their study of the infusion method:

• Are American values shaped by the mass media?
• Should drugs be legalized?

Students were given the issues, along with arguments by experts about each. An equal number of arguments were listed that supported or refuted each issue. The students’ primary task was to work in pairs to generate an outline of their own position on the issue.

Students in the “infusion method” training group were explicitly taught critical thinking skills. They also received direct support to think critically through the “American values” issue.

Some questions used to stimulate critical thinking included:

• What is your point of view?
• What are your reasons for supporting this point of view?
• Why do you think that?’
• Are there different perspectives on the issue?

You can ask yourself these questions to help promote your own critical thinking process. There are other questions you might ask, such as questions to help with evaluating sources .

After training, Angeli and Valanides had the students think through the second issue, and scored their performance. The researchers also measured how well the students understood critical thinking skills using a standardized test.

A key finding was that students trained with the infusion method outperformed students in the control group in handling the second issue. In addition, students who received the critical thinking skills training came away understanding the importance of evaluating different perspectives. Students in the control group did not.

The students also relayed several difficulties they experienced in applying their skills to the issues. One was that the found it hard to suspend their judgment. It’s hard to set one’s own beliefs aside to fully consider another side of an issue.

The findings suggest that an effective way to hone your critical thinking skills includes having another person to confront your beliefs and challenge your thought process. Our parents, friends, and teachers are often more than willing to oblige us with this kind of help.

You can also look back at the lists of critical thinking skills and supporting questions above. Reference them when facing your next thorny problem. Can’t say it will guarantee your survival. But it may help you be a bit more deliberate with your thinking.

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2009). Instructional effects on critical thinking: Performance on ill-defined issues Learning and Instruction, 19 (4), 322-334 DOI: 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2008.06.010

Study Smarter

Build your study skills with thinker academy.

About Winston Sieck

Dr. Winston Sieck is a cognitive psychologist working to advance the development of thinking skills. He is founder and president of Global Cognition, and director of Thinker Academy .

Reader Interactions

January 1, 2013 at 3:56 am

Thank you very much. Now I am thinking Critically 😛

January 6, 2013 at 2:39 am

January 6, 2013 at 10:00 pm

“The findings suggest that an effective way to hone your critical thinking skills includes having another person to confront your beliefs and challenge your thought process. Our co-workers, spouses, parents and kids are often more than willing to oblige us with this kind of help.” ROFL!! As if!! If we engage in debate, it might cause them to confront their own irrationally held beliefs! THAT cannot be allowed under ANY circumstances! Plus, there might be hurt feelings if we disagree to vehemently, or something. *sigh* No…I just went through a huge argument about how it’s not cool to go around disagreeing with people, cause it makes you look like you’re going around picking fights just for the fun of it (well…that part may be true! I love debating, but very few people I know do. :P). I so wish people would challenge me, and accept challenges from me.

March 31, 2016 at 10:49 am

Hilarious..I m having the same issue

March 7, 2013 at 8:35 pm

Great Blog! The steps we take towards understanding our brain remind us that our minds can be programmed as in brainwashed. The training of the mind to think critically and positively is crucial to the success of our business and life.

March 14, 2013 at 2:05 am

After the Texas Republicans proposed discouraging the teaching of critical thinking in their platform, we had an interesting discussion on the CogSci StackExchange about “can critical thinking be taught?” . Would be great to have your input there.

March 14, 2013 at 10:27 am

Sounds interesting. I’ll have to take a look. Thanks Artem.

• Save Your Ammo
• Publications

GC Blog Topics

• Culture & Communication
• Thinking & Deciding
• Learning Skills
• Learning Science

Online Courses

• Thinker Academy
• Study Skills Course
• For Parents
• For Teachers

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Working with sources
• What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

Published on May 30, 2022 by Eoghan Ryan . Revised on May 31, 2023.

Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment .

To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources .

Critical thinking skills help you to:

• Identify credible sources
• Evaluate and respond to arguments
• Assess alternative viewpoints
• Test hypotheses against relevant criteria

Table of contents

Why is critical thinking important, critical thinking examples, how to think critically, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about critical thinking.

Critical thinking is important for making judgments about sources of information and forming your own arguments. It emphasizes a rational, objective, and self-aware approach that can help you to identify credible sources and strengthen your conclusions.

Critical thinking is important in all disciplines and throughout all stages of the research process . The types of evidence used in the sciences and in the humanities may differ, but critical thinking skills are relevant to both.

In academic writing , critical thinking can help you to determine whether a source:

• Is free from research bias
• Provides evidence to support its research findings
• Considers alternative viewpoints

Outside of academia, critical thinking goes hand in hand with information literacy to help you form opinions rationally and engage independently and critically with popular media.

Scribbr Citation Checker New

The AI-powered Citation Checker helps you avoid common mistakes such as:

• Missing commas and periods
• Incorrect usage of “et al.”
• Ampersands (&) in narrative citations
• Missing reference entries

Critical thinking can help you to identify reliable sources of information that you can cite in your research paper . It can also guide your own research methods and inform your own arguments.

Outside of academia, critical thinking can help you to be aware of both your own and others’ biases and assumptions.

Academic examples

However, when you compare the findings of the study with other current research, you determine that the results seem improbable. You analyze the paper again, consulting the sources it cites.

You notice that the research was funded by the pharmaceutical company that created the treatment. Because of this, you view its results skeptically and determine that more independent research is necessary to confirm or refute them. Example: Poor critical thinking in an academic context You’re researching a paper on the impact wireless technology has had on developing countries that previously did not have large-scale communications infrastructure. You read an article that seems to confirm your hypothesis: the impact is mainly positive. Rather than evaluating the research methodology, you accept the findings uncritically.

Nonacademic examples

However, you decide to compare this review article with consumer reviews on a different site. You find that these reviews are not as positive. Some customers have had problems installing the alarm, and some have noted that it activates for no apparent reason.

You revisit the original review article. You notice that the words “sponsored content” appear in small print under the article title. Based on this, you conclude that the review is advertising and is therefore not an unbiased source. Example: Poor critical thinking in a nonacademic context You support a candidate in an upcoming election. You visit an online news site affiliated with their political party and read an article that criticizes their opponent. The article claims that the opponent is inexperienced in politics. You accept this without evidence, because it fits your preconceptions about the opponent.

There is no single way to think critically. How you engage with information will depend on the type of source you’re using and the information you need.

However, you can engage with sources in a systematic and critical way by asking certain questions when you encounter information. Like the CRAAP test , these questions focus on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

When encountering information, ask:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert in their field?
• What do they say? Is their argument clear? Can you summarize it?
• When did they say this? Is the source current?
• Where is the information published? Is it an academic article? Is it peer-reviewed ?
• Why did the author publish it? What is their motivation?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence? Does it rely on opinion, speculation, or appeals to emotion ? Do they address alternative arguments?

Critical thinking also involves being aware of your own biases, not only those of others. When you make an argument or draw your own conclusions, you can ask similar questions about your own writing:

• Am I only considering evidence that supports my preconceptions?
• Is my argument expressed clearly and backed up with credible sources?
• Would I be convinced by this argument coming from someone else?

If you want to know more about ChatGPT, AI tools , citation , and plagiarism , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• ChatGPT vs human editor
• ChatGPT citations
• Is ChatGPT trustworthy?
• Using ChatGPT for your studies
• What is ChatGPT?
• Chicago style
• Paraphrasing

 Plagiarism

• Types of plagiarism
• Self-plagiarism
• Avoiding plagiarism
• Academic integrity
• Consequences of plagiarism
• Common knowledge

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Critical thinking refers to the ability to evaluate information and to be aware of biases or assumptions, including your own.

Like information literacy , it involves evaluating arguments, identifying and solving problems in an objective and systematic way, and clearly communicating your ideas.

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

You can assess information and arguments critically by asking certain questions about the source. You can use the CRAAP test , focusing on the currency , relevance , authority , accuracy , and purpose of a source of information.

Ask questions such as:

• Who is the author? Are they an expert?
• How do they make their argument? Is it backed up by evidence?

A credible source should pass the CRAAP test  and follow these guidelines:

• The information should be up to date and current.
• The author and publication should be a trusted authority on the subject you are researching.
• The sources the author cited should be easy to find, clear, and unbiased.
• For a web source, the URL and layout should signify that it is trustworthy.

Information literacy refers to a broad range of skills, including the ability to find, evaluate, and use sources of information effectively.

Being information literate means that you:

• Know how to find credible sources
• Use relevant sources to inform your research
• Understand what constitutes plagiarism
• Know how to cite your sources correctly

Confirmation bias is the tendency to search, interpret, and recall information in a way that aligns with our pre-existing values, opinions, or beliefs. It refers to the ability to recollect information best when it amplifies what we already believe. Relatedly, we tend to forget information that contradicts our opinions.

Although selective recall is a component of confirmation bias, it should not be confused with recall bias.

On the other hand, recall bias refers to the differences in the ability between study participants to recall past events when self-reporting is used. This difference in accuracy or completeness of recollection is not related to beliefs or opinions. Rather, recall bias relates to other factors, such as the length of the recall period, age, and the characteristics of the disease under investigation.

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved April 11, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, student guide: information literacy | meaning & examples, what are credible sources & how to spot them | examples, applying the craap test & evaluating sources, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Cognitive Thinking Skills

Dr jane yeomans.

March 28, 2023

What are cognitive thinking skills, and what is their significance for promoting learning outcomes?

Main, P (2023, March 28). Cognitive Thinking Skills. Retrieved from https://www.structural-learning.com/post/cognitive-thinking-skills

What are Cognitive Thinking Skills?

Cognitive thinking skills are the mental processes that allow us to perceive, understand, and analyze information. These skills are essential for problem-solving, decision-making, and critical thinking. Fortunately, cognitive thinking skills can be learned and developed with practice and training.

In this article, we'll explore what cognitive thinking skills are, why they are important, and how we can promote them in the classroom. We'll also provide some practical tips and exercises to help you enhance your students' cognitive thinking skills to become more effective problem-solvers and decision-makers.

Using the house of cognition model, this article will look at each part of the house and then go on to suggest how this model can help us to understand failure to learn . The article will outline why it is important to focus on cognitive skills and cognitive processes in order to support learning.

Learning is a complex process that involves various cognitive thinking skills such as attention, memory, problem-solving, and decision-making. These skills are essential for acquiring new knowledge, making connections between different concepts, and applying what has been learned in different situations.

By understanding the different components of cognitive thinking skills and how they relate to learning, we can develop strategies to support learners and help them overcome obstacles to learning. It is important to recognize that cognitive skills are not fixed, but can be developed and improved with practice and targeted interventions.

Using the House of Cognition 

The foundations of the house are the underpinning theories about cognition. These theories would need several separate articles to explore them in detail, but the ‘headlines’ of these theories are:

• Social and cultural factors are important. Our culture affects the way we perceive things. Cognition and learning develop in a social context. Lev Vygotsky is probably the most well know proponent of these ideas. Social interactions promote cognitive development, particularly where those interactions are with a ‘more knowledgeable other’ (MKO). This MKO type of interaction assists the learner to perform at a higher level ;
• Cognition and cognitive abilities aren’t fixed. Our thinking, reasoning and problem-solving skills can be affected by many factors. For example, dealing with trauma or the lasting effects of ACEs (adverse childhood experiences). Professor Reuven Feuerstein’s experiences in the 1950s working with young people who were Holocaust survivors led him to suggest that intelligence wasn’t fixed, because the young people he worked with had to put all their energies into coping with their trauma , resulting in a reduction in their capacity for reasoning and problem-solving.

Supporting cognitive thinking skills

How can we support and promote cognitive thinking skills? The idea of the house of cognition is one way of providing a structure for this support. It also helps us to understand some of the factors involved in successful – and unsuccessful – learning.

The bricks that make up the house of cognition are the cognitive thinking skills that all individuals develop and use. Professor Reuven Feuerstein's work, mentioned above, led him to draw up a list of what he called cognitive functions.

These cognitive functions are what we might also call thinking skills, learning-to-learn skills , cognitive processes, cognitive ability or cognitive skills. Feuerstein’s original list was of deficient cognitive functions but later this list was turned round to describe what we should, rather than what we shouldn’t see. He organised his list of cognitive thinking skills into three areas.

• Input: the cognitive thinking skills that the learner needs to gather all the information that they need to complete a task or solve a problem.
• Elaboration: the cognitive thinking skills that the learner needs to complete a task or solve a problem
• Output: the cognitive thinking skills that the learner needs to show what they have learned

One important part of Feuerstein’s work was that he recognised the importance of the affective elements of learning. What do we mean by the affective element? Basically, this involves emotions, feelings and attitudes. It relates to how we deal with things emotionally. Feuerstein called these non intellective factors .

The cognitive thinking skills and non-intellective factors are shown in the table below. Information in this table is drawn from Adey and Shayer, Feuerstein and Lidz.

Organising cognitive thinking skills

Focussed perception, paying attention

Using all the senses to gather information

Systematic search/exploration, planning

Gathering information using a system or plan so that nothing is missed

Conservation

Knowing what stays the same and what changes.

Using labels

Giving the things we gather through our senses and our experience names so that we can remember them more clearly and talk about them

Use of temporal and spatial concepts

Using knowledge about space and time: describing things and events in terms of where and when they occur

Precision and accuracy

Being precise and accurate when it matters; recognising the need to be precise and accurate when gathering information

Considering more than one source of information

Gathering information from several sources; organising the information we gather by considering more than one thing at a time (working memory is used to hold information in our head whilst gathering other information)

ELABORATION

Defining the problem

Knowing what to do with the information gathered: what do we need to do or figure out

Using only the part of the information we have gathered that is relevant, that is, that applies to the problem, and ignoring the rest

Planning and sequencing

Making a plan that will include the steps we need to take to reach our goal, knowing what to do first, second, and so on, knowing what ‘finished’ looks like.

Being able to recognise what is the same and what is different

Categorising

Finding the class or set that new objects or experiences belong to

Projecting relationships

Seeing how things go together; looking for the relationship by which separate objects, events, and experiences can be used together

Hypothetical thinking

If………..then thinking; thinking about different possibilities and figuring out what would happen if you were to choose one or another

Working with several sources of information: memory

Working memory : holding information in your head whilst working with it.

Short term memory: recalling recent learning.

Long term memory : recalling previous learning or approaches to solving problems

Logical justification

Being able to defend your opinion or choice using logical evidence

Interiorisation

Having a good picture in our mind of what we are looking for, or what we must do

Precision and accuracy in communication

Communicating clearly using precise and accurate language so your answer is clear

Communicating outcomes

Having the necessary vocabulary/expressive skills to communicate findings

Reducing egocentric communication

Being able to put yourself in the shoes of the listener

Restraining impulsivity

Thinking before responding; reducing a trial and error approach to learning; count to 10 (at least) so that you do not say or do something you will be sorry for later

Overcoming blocking

Not being able to respond because the learner feels that s/he can’t do it. If you cannot answer a question for some reason even though you ‘know’ the answer, do not fret or panic. Leave the question for a little while and then, when you return to it, use a strategy to help you find the answer

Visual transport

Mentally lifting something up and placing it elsewhere; Carrying an exact picture of an object in your mind to another place for comparison without losing or changing some details

NON INTELLECTIVE FACTORS

Wanting to learn and take part, engagement in the task/activity/lesson. How interested is the learner?

Willingness to find out

Frustration tolerance

Coping when tasks are challenging: what does the learner do when things become tough?

Self regulation , including restraining impulsivity

Taking time to think or act

Response to challenge

Wanting to tackle a more difficult task or step of a task

Response to mediation/intervention of adults

How the learner responds to the adult’s mediation, intervention or support

Persistence

Keeping going, seeing a task through to the end

Flexibility

The learner tries out alternative solutions or self corrects, or the learner perseveres in using a strategy even when it does not work

Promoting Thinking Skills

The mortar that holds together the bricks of the house of cognition represents the process of mediation. Mediation is a specific way of supporting and promoting cognitive thinking skills . We saw that there are five layers to the cognitive map which help us to understand task demands.

Using the house of cognition analogy, if we simply pile up bricks the house won’t be stable. We have to stick the bricks together. So, if we teach cognitive thinking skills without sticking them together, they are not likely to be useful.

Mediation is a way of helping pupils to make links between the curriculum they are following and the cognitive thinking skills they are using. Feuerstein suggested that for an interaction to be called mediation, the following three essential characteristics have to be present:

• Intentionality and reciprocity: all this means is that mediation is an intentional act. It doesn’t happen by accident. Reciprocity means that you will adjust your mediation according to how the pupil responds.
• Meaning: this is where you communicate the importance of the task or activity. With most pupils we can tell them that ‘this is important because’….’we are doing this because….’. Where pupils are very young and still acquiring language , or have some language delay, we might communicate meaning by showing enthusiasm through your body language or tone of voice
• Transcendence: this is also called bridging, because it is about building bridges between the current task, previous learning and future learning.

These essential characteristics are important because interaction can only be called mediation when these three characteristics are used. Kathy Greenberg gives a useful overview of how mediation is more than good teaching. Greenberg suggests what 'Teacher-Mediators' do in contrast to good teachers. Here are some examples:  

• Teacher-mediators collaborate as another learner with students
• Teacher-mediators connect concepts to students' real world experiences
• Teacher-mediators provide opportunities for students to explore ideas 
• Teacher-mediators provide extra time and assistance so every student can reflect on the process of reaching the right answer
• Teacher-mediators clarify and expand students' understanding beyond the immediate needs of the context and content

Cognition in the Curriculum                                                                      

The idea of building a house also illustrates the importance of cognitive thinking skills in relation to the taught curriculum. The roof of a house is the last part to be added to the building. It isn't possible to build the roof and then add the other parts of the building.

In our house of cognition, the roof represents the curriculum or the products of learning. Successful learning is being able to put the roof on the house.....and that won’t work without the foundations, bricks and mortar being in place first. Cognitive skills are important foundations for learning.

We could argue that the current National Curriculum and EYFS Early Learning Goals are the roof of the house. They set out the content of what should be learned; the products of learning. Therefore, schools and early years settings mostly work on the roof of the house. There is little or no emphasis on the other parts of the house of cognition, so there is nothing to hold up the roof.

Promoting Cognition Skills in Special Education

Promoting cognitive skills in children with special educational needs can be a challenging but rewarding task. Here are nine practical strategies that teachers can use:

• Scaffold Learning : Break down complex tasks into smaller, manageable parts. This helps students understand each component before moving on to the next. This approach is particularly useful for children with dyslexia who may struggle with information overload.
• Use Visual Aids : Visual aids can help children with dyspraxia and other cognitive impairments understand abstract concepts. Diagrams, charts, and other visual tools can make learning more engaging and accessible.
• Promote Active Learning : Encourage students to participate actively in their learning process. This could involve hands-on activities, group work, or problem-solving tasks. Active learning promotes critical thinking and reasoning skills .
• Teach Metacognitive Strategies : Metacognition, or thinking about thinking, can help students understand their own learning processes. Teaching strategies like self-questioning and reflection can improve students' ability to monitor their own understanding and adjust their learning strategies as needed.
• Incorporate Technology : Assistive technology can be a powerful tool for supporting students with special educational needs. For example, speech-to-text software can help students with dyslexia improve their writing skills.
• Differentiate Instruction : Tailor your teaching methods to meet the individual needs of each student. Differentiated instruction can involve adjusting the content, process, product, or learning environment to support each student's learning style and ability level.
• Encourage Cooperative Learning : Group activities can promote social skills and cooperative learning . Working in a team can help students develop their communication and interpersonal skills, which are crucial for their cognitive development.
• Use Real-World Examples : Applying learning to real-world situations can make abstract concepts more concrete. This can help students understand the relevance of what they're learning and improve their long-term memory.
• Provide Regular Feedback : Regular, constructive feedback can help students understand their strengths and areas for improvement. This can motivate them to work on their weaknesses and enhance their cognitive skills.

Remember, every child is unique, and what works for one might not work for another. It's important to be patient, flexible, and creative in your approach.

Key Insights:

• Breaking down complex tasks into smaller parts can make learning more manageable for students with cognitive impairments.
• Visual aids, active learning, and real-world examples can make abstract concepts more concrete and understandable.
• Regular, constructive feedback can motivate students to improve their cognitive skills.

According to a study by the American Society for Engineering Education, using real-world examples in teaching can significantly improve students' understanding and retention of information. As the famous educational psychologist Jean Piaget once said, "The goal of education is not to increase the amount of knowledge but to create the possibilities for a child to invent and discover, to create men who are capable of doing new things."

Focusing on the process of learning

So how do we put the roof on the house? This can be a challenge when there is so much emphasis on delivering the products, rather than the processes of learning. However, a few simple adjustments can be made in order to include the bricks and mortar in everyday classroom practice:

• In curriculum planning , think about the cognitive functions or cognitive skills that are needed for particular tasks
• During teacher-led sessions that involve explaining and/or demonstrating tasks, make explicit reference to the cognitive functions that learners will use. Here’s an example that you might use for a written expression task:

‘when you do this piece of writing you will make a plan. A plan means thinking about something before you do it and deciding the steps you need to do to finish the task. You decide what to do first and next and so on. So when we use a plan for writing we have three big chunks, the beginning, the middle and the end. Then for each chunk we will list in order what will happen in our story. When we have this plan we can begin to write in more detail’

• When pupils are completing the task, use open-ended questions or prompts that focus on the learning process or cognitive skill (that is, the thinking skills). For example:

‘what does finished look like?’

‘What will you do first? And next?’

‘Let’s make a plan so you don’t miss anything out’

‘What can you do to help you to remember?’

Focusing on the processes of learning through supporting cognitive thinking skills will help children and young people to be successful and independent learners. If an individual knows how to learn they will develop skills and behaviours that are transferable to all kinds of contexts beyond the classroom and the taught curriculum .

Adey, P. and Shayer, M. (1994). Really Raising Standards: Cognitive intervention and academic achievement. London: Routledge

Greenberg, K.H. (2005). The Cognitive Enrichment Advantage Handbook . Knoxville, USA: KCD Harris and Associate Press

Feuerstein, R (nd). Developed Cognitive Functions. Source: Feuerstein Institute, www.icelp.info

Lidz, C. (2007). Application of Cognitive Functions Behaviour Rating Scale. In: Haywood and Lidz, 2007, Dynamic Assessment in Practice: Clinical and educational applications . Cambridge University Press

Enhance Learner Outcomes Across Your School

Download an Overview of our Support and Resources

We'll send it over now.

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

What type of school are you?

We'll get you the right resource

Is your school involved in any staff development projects?

Are your colleagues running any research projects or courses?

Do you have any immediate school priorities?

Please check the ones that apply.

Download your resource

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

Cognitive Development

3 Core Critical Thinking Skills Every Thinker Should Have

Critically thinking about critical thinking skills..

Posted March 13, 2020 | Reviewed by Ekua Hagan

• Why Education Is Important
• Find a Child Therapist

I recently received an email from an educator friend, asking me to briefly describe the skills necessary for critical thinking. They were happy to fill in the blanks themselves from outside reading but wanted to know what specific skills they should focus on teaching their students. I took this as a good opportunity to dedicate a post here to such discussion, in order to provide my friend and any other interested parties with an overview.

To understand critical thinking skills and how they factor into critical thinking, one first needs a definition of the latter. Critical thinking (CT) is a metacognitive process, consisting of a number of skills and dispositions, that when used through self-regulatory reflective judgment, increases the chances of producing a logical conclusion to an argument or solution to a problem (Dwyer, 2017; Dwyer, Hogan & Stewart, 2014). On the surface, this definition clarifies two issues. First, critical thinking is metacognitive—simply, it requires the individual to think about thinking; second, its main components are reflective judgment, dispositions, and skills.

Below the surface, this description requires clarification; hence the impetus for this entry—what is meant by reflective judgment, disposition towards CT, and CT skills? Reflective judgment (i.e. an individuals' understanding of the nature, limits, and certainty of knowing and how this can affect their judgments [King & Kitchener, 1994]) and disposition towards CT (i.e. an inclination, tendency or willingness to perform a given thinking skill [Dwyer, 2017; Facione, Facione & Giancarlo, 1997; Ku, 2009; Norris, 1992; Siegel, 1999; Valenzuela, Nieto & Saiz, 2011]) have both already been covered in my posts; so, consistent with the aim of this piece, let’s discuss CT skills.

CT skills allow individuals to transcend lower-order, memorization-based learning strategies to gain a more complex understanding of the information or problems they encounter (Halpern, 2014). Though debate is ongoing over the definition of CT, one list stands out as a reasonable consensus conceptualization of CT skills. In 1988, a committee of 46 experts in the field of CT gathered to discuss CT conceptualisations, resulting in the Delphi Report; within which was overwhelmingly agreement (i.e. 95% consensus) that analysis , evaluation and inference were the core skills necessary for CT (Facione, 1990). Indeed, over 30 years later, these three CT skills remain the most commonly cited.

1. Analysis

Analysis is a core CT skill used to identify and examine the structure of an argument, the propositions within an argument and the role they play (e.g. the main conclusion, the premises and reasons provided to support the conclusion, objections to the conclusion and inferential relationships among propositions), as well as the sources of the propositions (e.g. personal experience, common belief, and research).

When it comes to analysing the basis for a standpoint, the structure of the argument can be extracted for subsequent evaluation (e.g. from dialogue and text). This can be accomplished through looking for propositions that either support or refute the central claim or other reasons and objections. Through analysis, the argument’s hierarchical structure begins to appear. Notably, argument mapping can aid the visual representation of this hierarchical structure and is supported by research as having positive effects on critical thinking (Butchart et al., 2009; Dwyer, 2011; Dwyer, Hogan & Stewart, 2012; van Gelder, Bisset & Cumming, 2004).

2. Evaluation

Evaluation is a core CT skill that is used in the assessment of propositions and claims (identified through the previous analysis ) with respect to their credibility; relevance; balance, bias (and potential omissions); as well as the logical strength amongst propositions (i.e. the strength of the inferential relationships). Such assessment allows for informed judgment regarding the overall strength or weakness of an argument (Dwyer, 2017; Facione, 1990). If an argument (or its propositions) is not credible, relevant, logical, and unbiased, you should consider excluding it or discussing its weaknesses as an objection.

Evaluating the credibility of claims and arguments involves progressing beyond merely identifying the source of propositions in an argument, to actually examining the "trustworthiness" of those identified sources (e.g. personal experiences, common beliefs/opinions, expert/authority opinion and scientific evidence). This is particularly important because some sources are more credible than others. Evaluation also implies deep consideration of the relevance of claims within an argument, which is accomplished by assessing the contextual relevance of claims and premises—that is, the pertinence or applicability of one proposition to another.

With respect to balance, bias (and potential omissions), it's important to consider the "slant" of an argument—if it seems imbalanced in favour of one line of thinking, then it’s quite possible that the argument has omitted key, opposing points that should also be considered. Imbalance may also imply some level of bias in the argument—another factor that should also be assessed.

However, just because an argument is balanced does not mean that it isn’t biased. It may very well be the case that the "opposing views" presented have been "cherry-picked" because they are easily disputed (akin to building a strawman ); thus, making supporting reasons appear stronger than they may actually be—and this is just one example of how a balanced argument may, in fact, be biased. The take-home message regarding balance, bias, and potential omissions should be that, in any argument, you should construct an understanding of the author or speaker’s motivations and consider how these might influence the structure and contents of the argument.

Finally, evaluating the logical strength of an argument is accomplished through monitoring both the logical relationships amongst propositions and the claims they infer. Assessment of logical strength can actually be aided through subsequent inference, as a means of double-checking the logical strength. For example, this can be checked by asking whether or not a particular proposition can actually be inferred based on the propositions that precede it. A useful means of developing this sub-skill is through practicing syllogistic reasoning .

3. Inference

Similar to other educational concepts like synthesis (e.g., see Bloom et al., 1956; Dwyer, 2011; 2017), the final core CT skill, inference , involves the “gathering” of credible, relevant and logical evidence based on the previous analysis and evaluation, for the purpose of drawing a reasonable conclusion (Dwyer, 2017; Facione, 1990). Drawing a conclusion always implies some act of synthesis (i.e. the ability to put parts of information together to form a new whole; see Dwyer, 2011). However, inference is a unique form of synthesis in that it involves the formulation of a set of conclusions derived from a series of arguments or a body of evidence. This inference may imply accepting a conclusion pointed to by an author in light of the evidence they present, or "conjecturing an alternative," equally logical, conclusion or argument based on the available evidence (Facione, 1990). The ability to infer a conclusion in this manner can be completed through formal logic strategies, informal logic strategies (or both) in order to derive intermediate conclusions, as well as central claims.

Another important aspect of inference involves the querying of available evidence, for example, by recognising the need for additional information, gathering it and judging the plausibility of utilising such information for the purpose of drawing a conclusion. Notably, in the context of querying evidence and conjecturing alternative conclusions, inference overlaps with evaluation to a certain degree in that both skills are used to judge the relevance and acceptability of a claim or argument. Furthermore, after inferring a conclusion, the resulting argument should be re-evaluated to ensure that it is reasonable to draw the conclusion that was derived.

Overall, the application of critical thinking skills is a process—one must analyse, evaluate and then infer; and this process can be repeated to ensure that a reasonable conclusion has been drawn. In an effort to simplify the description of this process, for the past few years, I’ve used the analogy of picking apples for baking . We begin by picking apples from a tree. Consider the tree as an analogy, in its own right, for an argument, which is often hierarchically structured like a tree-diagram. By picking apples, I mean identifying propositions and the role they play (i.e. analysis). Once we pick an apple, we evaluate it—we make sure it isn’t rotten (i.e. lacks credibility, is biased) and is suitable for baking (i.e. relevant and logically strong). Finally, we infer— we gather the apples in a basket and bring them home and group them together based on some rationale for construction— maybe four for a pie, three for a crumble and another four for a tart. By the end of the process, we have baked some apple-based goods, or developed a conclusion, solution or decision through critical thinking.

Of course, there is more to critical thinking than the application of skills—a critical thinker must also have the disposition to think critically and engage reflective judgment. However, without the appropriate skills—analysis, evaluation, and inference, it is not likely that CT will be applied. For example, though one might be willing to use CT skills and engage reflective judgment, they may not know how to do so. Conversely, though one might be aware of which CT skills to use in a given context and may have the capacity to perform well when using these skills, they may not be disposed to use them (Valenzuela, Nieto & Saiz, 2011). Though the core CT skills of analysis, evaluation, and inference are not the only important aspects of CT, they are essential for its application.

Bloom, B.S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay.

Butchart, S., Bigelow, J., Oppy, G., Korb, K., & Gold, I. (2009). Improving critical thinking using web-based argument mapping exercises with automated feedback. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 25, 2, 268-291.

Dwyer, C.P. (2011). The evaluation of argument mapping as a learning tool. Doctoral Thesis. National University of Ireland, Galway.

Dwyer, C.P. (2017). Critical thinking: Conceptual perspectives and practical guidelines.Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Dwyer, C.P., Hogan, M.J., & Stewart, I. (2012). An evaluation of argument mapping as a method of enhancing critical thinking performance in e-learning environments. Metacognition and Learning, 7, 219-244.

Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2014). An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Thinking Skills & Creativity, 12, 43–52.

Facione, P.A. (1990). The Delphi report: Committee on pre-college philosophy. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press.

Facione, P.A., Facione, N.C., & Giancarlo, C.A. (1997). Setting expectations for student learning: New directions for higher education. Millbrae: California Academic Press.

Halpern, D.F. (2014). Thought & knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (5th Ed.). UK: Psychology Press.

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

Ku, K.Y.L. (2009). Assessing students’ critical thinking performance: Urging for measurements using multi-response format. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4, 1, 70- 76.

Norris, S. P. (Ed.). (1992). The generalizability of critical thinking: Multiple perspectives on an educational ideal. New York: Teachers College Press.

Siegel, H. (1999). What (good) are thinking dispositions? Educational Theory, 49, 2, 207-221.

Valenzuela, J., Nieto, A.M., & Saiz, C. (2011). Critical thinking motivational scale: A contribution to the study of relationship between critical thinking and motivation. Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 9, 2, 823-848.

van Gelder, T.J., Bissett, M., & Cumming, G. (2004). Enhancing expertise in informal reasoning. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 58, 142-52.

Christopher Dwyer, Ph.D., is a lecturer at the Technological University of the Shannon in Athlone, Ireland.

• Find a Therapist
• Find a Treatment Center
• Find a Psychiatrist
• Find a Support Group
• Find Teletherapy
• United States
• Brooklyn, NY
• Chicago, IL
• Houston, TX
• Los Angeles, CA
• New York, NY
• Portland, OR
• San Diego, CA
• San Francisco, CA
• Seattle, WA
• Washington, DC
• Asperger's
• Bipolar Disorder
• Chronic Pain
• Eating Disorders
• Passive Aggression
• Personality
• Goal Setting
• Positive Psychology
• Stopping Smoking
• Low Sexual Desire
• Relationships
• Child Development
• Therapy Center NEW
• Diagnosis Dictionary
• Types of Therapy

Understanding what emotional intelligence looks like and the steps needed to improve it could light a path to a more emotionally adept world.

• Coronavirus Disease 2019
• Affective Forecasting
• Neuroscience

• Open access
• Published: 11 September 2019

Inquiry and critical thinking skills for the next generation: from artificial intelligence back to human intelligence

• Jonathan Michael Spector   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-6270-3073 1 &
• Shanshan Ma 1  

Smart Learning Environments volume  6 , Article number:  8 ( 2019 ) Cite this article

30k Accesses

50 Citations

32 Altmetric

Metrics details

Along with the increasing attention to artificial intelligence (AI), renewed emphasis or reflection on human intelligence (HI) is appearing in many places and at multiple levels. One of the foci is critical thinking. Critical thinking is one of four key 21st century skills – communication, collaboration, critical thinking and creativity. Though most people are aware of the value of critical thinking, it lacks emphasis in curricula. In this paper, we present a comprehensive definition of critical thinking that ranges from observation and inquiry to argumentation and reflection. Given a broad conception of critical thinking, a developmental approach beginning with children is suggested as a way to help develop critical thinking habits of mind. The conclusion of this analysis is that more emphasis should be placed on developing human intelligence, especially in young children and with the support of artificial intelligence. While much funding and support goes to the development of artificial intelligence, this should not happen at the expense of human intelligence. Overall, the purpose of this paper is to argue for more attention to the development of human intelligence with an emphasis on critical thinking.

Introduction

In recent decades, advancements in Artificial Intelligence (AI) have developed at an incredible rate. AI has penetrated into people’s daily life on a variety of levels such as smart homes, personalized healthcare, security systems, self-service stores, and online shopping. One notable AI achievement was when AlphaGo, a computer program, defeated the World Go Champion Mr. Lee Sedol in 2016. In the previous year, AlphaGo won in a competition against a professional Go player (Silver et al. 2016 ). As Go is one of the most challenging games, the wins of AI indicated a breakthrough. Public attention has been further drawn to AI since then, and AlphaGo continues to improve. In 2017, a new version of AlphaGo beat Ke Jie, the current world No.1 ranking Go player. Clearly AI can manage high levels of complexity.

Given many changes and multiple lines of development and implement, it is somewhat difficult to define AI to include all of the changes since the 1980s (Luckin et al. 2016 ). Many definitions incorporate two dimensions as a starting point: (a) human-like thinking, and (b) rational action (Russell and Norvig 2009 ). Basically, AI is a term used to label machines (computers) that imitate human cognitive functions such as learning and problem solving, or that manage to deal with complexity as well as human experts.

AlphaGo’s wins against human players were seen as a comparison between artificial and human intelligence. One concern is that AI has already surpassed HI; other concerns are that AI will replace humans in some settings or that AI will become uncontrollable (Epstein 2016 ; Fang et al. 2018 ). Scholars worry that AI technology in the future might trigger the singularity (Good 1966 ), a hypothesized future that the development of technology becomes uncontrollable and irreversible, resulting in unfathomable changes to human civilization (Vinge 1993 ).

The famous theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking warned that AI might end mankind, yet the technology he used to communicate involved a basic form of AI (Cellan-Jones 2014 ). This example highlights one of the basic dilemmas of AI – namely, what are the overall benefits of AI versus its potential drawbacks, and how to move forward given its rapid development? Obviously, basic or controllable AI technologies are not what people are afraid of. Spector et al. 1993 distinguished strong AI and weak AI. Strong AI involves an application that is intended to replace an activity performed previously by a competent human, while weak AI involves an application that aims to enable a less experienced human to perform at a much higher level. Other researchers categorize AI into three levels: (a) artificial narrow intelligence (Narrow AI), (b) artificial general intelligence (General AI), and (c) artificial super intelligence (Super AI) (Siau and Yang 2017 ; Zhang and Xie 2018 ). Narrow AI, sometimes called weak AI, refers to a computer that focus on a narrow task such as AlphaZero or a self-driving car. General AI, sometimes referred to as strong AI, is the simulation of human-level intelligence, which can perform more cognitive tasks as well as most humans do. Super AI is defined by Bostrom ( 1998 ) as “an intellect that is much smarter than the best human brains in practically every field, including scientific creativity, general wisdom and social skills” (p.1).

Although the consequence of singularity and its potential benefits or harm to the human race have been intensely debated, an undeniable fact is that AI is capable of undertaking recursive self-improvement. With the increasing improvement of this capability, more intelligent generations of AI will appear rapidly. On the other hand, HI has its own limits and its development requires continuous efforts and investment from generation to generation. Education is the main approach humans use to develop and improve HI. Given the extraordinary growth gap between AI and HI, eventually AI can surpass HI. However, that is no reason to neglect the development and improvement of HI. In addition, in contrast to the slow development rate of HI, the growth of funding support to AI has been rapidly increasing according to the following comparison of support for artificial and human intelligence.

The funding support for artificial and human intelligence

There are challenges in comparing artificial and human intelligence by identifying funding for both. Both terms are somewhat vague and can include a variety of aspects. Some analyses will include big data and data analytics within the sphere of artificial intelligence and others will treat them separately. Some will include early childhood developmental research within the sphere of support for HI and others treat them separately. Education is a major way of human beings to develop and improve HI. The investments in education reflect the efforts put on the development of HI, and they pale in comparison with investments in AI.

Sources also vary from governmental funding of research and development to business and industry investments in related research and development. Nonetheless, there are strong indications of increased funding support for AI in North America, Europe and Asia, especially in China. The growth in funding for AI around the world is explosive. According to ZDNet, AI funding more than doubled from 2016 to 2017 and more than tripled from 2016 to 2018. The growth in funding for AI in the last 10 years has been exponential. According to Venture Scanner, there are approximately 2500 companies that have raised $60 billion in funding from 3400 investors in 72 different countries (see https://www.slideshare.net/venturescanner/artificial-intelligence-q1-2019-report-highlights ). Areas included in the Venture Scanner analysis included virtual assistants, recommendation engines, video recognition, context-aware computing, speech recognition, natural language processing, machine learning, and more.

The above data on AI funding focuses primarily on companies making products. There is no direct counterpart in the area of HI where the emphasis is on learning and education. What can be seen, however, are trends within each area. The above data suggest exponential growth in support for AI. In contrast, according to the Urban Institute, per-student funding in the USA has been relatively flat for nearly two decades, with a few states showing modest increases and others showing none (see http://apps.urban.org/features/education-funding-trends/ ). Funding for education is complicated due to the various sources. In the USA, there are local, state and federal sources to consider. While that mixture of funding sources is complex, it is clear that federal and state spending for education in the USA experienced an increase after World War II. However, since the 1980s, federal spending for education has steadily declined, and state spending on education in most states has declined since 2010 according to a government report (see https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/education_spending ). This decline in funding reflects the decreasing emphasis on the development of HI, which is a dangerous signal.

Decreased support for education funding in the USA is not typical of what is happening in other countries, according to The Hechinger Report (see https://hechingerreport.org/rest-world-invests-education-u-s-spends-less/ ). For example, in the period of 2010 to 2014, American spending on elementary and high school education declined 3%, whereas in the same period, education spending in the 35 countries in the OECD rose by 5% with some countries experiencing very significant increases (e.g., 76% in Turkey).

Such data can be questioned in terms of how effectively funds are being spent or how poorly a country was doing prior to experiencing a significant increase. However, given the performance of American students on the Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), the relative lack of funding support in the USA is roughly related with the mediocre performance on PISA tests (see https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/pisa/pisa2015/index.asp ). Research by Darling-Hammond ( 2014 ) indicated that in order to improve learning and reduce the achievement gap, systematic government investments in high-need schools would be more effective if the focus was on capacity building, improving the knowledge and skills of educators and the quality of curriculum opportunities.

Though HI could not be simply defined by the performance on PISA test, improving HI requires systematic efforts and funding support in high-need areas as well. So, in the following section, we present a reflection on HI.

Reflection on human intelligence

Though there is a variety of definitions of HI, from the perspective of psychology, according to Sternberg ( 1999 ), intelligence is a form of developing expertise, from a novice or less experienced person to an expert or more experienced person, a student must be through multiple learning (implicit and explicit) and thinking (critical and creative) processes. In this paper, we adopted such a view and reflected on HI in the following section by discussing learning and critical thinking.

What is learning?

We begin with Gagné’s ( 1985 ) definition of learning as characterized by stable and persistent changes in what a person knows or can do. How do humans learn? Do you recall how to prove that the square root of 2 is not a rational number, something you might have learned years ago? The method is intriguing and is called an indirect proof or a reduction to absurdity – assume that the square root of 2 is a rational number and then apply truth preserving rules to arrive at a contradiction to show that the square root of 2 cannot be a rational number. We recommend this as an exercise for those readers who have never encountered that method of learning and proof. (see https://artofproblemsolving.com/wiki/index.php/Proof_by_contradiction ). Yet another interesting method of learning is called the process of elimination, sometimes accredited to Arthur Conan Doyle’s ( 1926 ) in The Adventure of the Blanched Soldier – Sherlock Holmes says to Dr. Watson that the process of elimination “starts upon the supposition that when you have eliminated all which is impossible, that whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth ” (see https://www.dfw-sherlock.org/uploads/3/7/3/8/37380505/1926_november_the_adventure_of_the_blanched_soldier.pdf ).

The reason to mention Sherlock Holmes early in this paper is to emphasize the role that observation plays in learning. The character Sherlock Holmes was famous for his observation skills that led to his so-called method of deductive reasoning (a process of elimination), which is what logicians would classify as inductive reasoning as the conclusions of that reasoning process are primarily probabilistic rather than certain, unlike the proof of the irrationality of the square root of 2 mentioned previously.

In dealing with uncertainty, it seems necessary to make observations and gather evidence that can lead one to a likely conclusion. Is that not what reasonable people and accomplished detectives do? It is certainly what card counters do at gambling houses; they observe high and low value cards that have already been played in order to estimate the likelihood of the next card being a high or low value card. Observation is a critical process in dealing with uncertainty.

Moreover, humans typically encounter many uncertain situations in the course of life. Few people encounter situations which require resolution using a mathematical proof such as the one with which this article began. Jonassen ( 2000 , 2011 ) argued that problem solving is one of the most important and frequent activities in which people engage. Moreover, many of the more challenging problems are ill-structured in the sense that (a) there is incomplete information pertaining to the situation, or (b) the ideal resolution of the problem is unknown, or (c) how to transform a problematic situation into an acceptable situation is unclear. In short, people are confronted with uncertainty nearly every day and in many different ways. The so called key 21st century skills of communication, collaboration, critical thinking and creativity (the 4 Cs; see http://www.battelleforkids.org/networks/p21 ) are important because uncertainty is a natural and inescapable aspect of the human condition. The 4 Cs are interrelated and have been presented by Spector ( 2018 ) as interrelated capabilities involving logic and epistemology in the form of the new 3Rs – namely, re-examining, reasoning, and reflecting. Re-examining is directly linked to observation as a beginning point for inquiry. The method of elimination is one form of reasoning in which a person engages to solve challenging problems. Reflecting on how well one is doing in the life-long enterprise of solving challenging problems is a higher kind of meta-cognitive activity in which accomplished problem-solvers engage (Ericsson et al. 1993 ; Flavell 1979 ).

Based on these initial comments, a comprehensive definition of critical thinking is presented next in the form of a framework.

A framework of critical thinking

Though there is variety of definitions of critical thinking, a concise definition of critical thinking remains elusive. For delivering a direct understanding of critical thinking to readers such as parents and school teachers, in this paper, we present a comprehensive definition of critical thinking through a framework that includes many of the definitions offered by others. Critical thinking, as treated broadly herein, is a multi-dimensioned and multifaceted human capability. Critical thinking has been interpreted from three perspectives: education, psychology, and epistemology, all of which are represented in the framework that follows.

In a developmental approach to critical thinking, Spector ( 2019 ) argues that critical thinking involves a series of cumulative and related abilities, dispositions and other variables (e.g., motivation, criteria, context, knowledge). This approach proceeds from experience (e.g., observing something unusual) and then to various forms of inquiry, investigation, examination of evidence, exploration of alternatives, argumentation, testing conclusions, rethinking assumptions, and reflecting on the entire process.

Experience and engagement are ongoing throughout the process which proceeds from relatively simple experiences (e.g., direct and immediate observation) to more complex interactions (e.g., manipulation of an actual or virtual artifact and observing effects).

The developmental approach involves a variety of mental processes and non-cognitive states, which help a person’s decision making to become purposeful and goal directed. The associated critical thinking skills enable individuals to be likely to achieve a desired outcome in a challenging situation.

In the process of critical thinking, apart from experience, there are two additional cognitive capabilities essential to critical thinking – namely, metacognition and self-regulation . Many researchers (e.g., Schraw et al. 2006 ) believe that metacognition has two components: (a) awareness and understanding of one’s own thoughts, and (b) the ability to regulate one’s own cognitive processes. Some other researchers put more emphasis on the latter component. For example, Davies ( 2015 ) described metacognition as the capacity to monitor the quality of one’s thinking process, and then to make appropriate changes. However, the American Psychology Association (APA) defines metacognition as an awareness and understanding of one’s own thought with the ability to control related cognitive processes (see https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2008-15725-005 ).

Although the definition and elaboration of these two concepts deserve further exploration, they are often used interchangeably (Hofer and Sinatra 2010 ; Schunk 2008 ). Many psychologists see the two related capabilities of metacognition and self-regulation as being closely related - two sides on one coin, so to speak. Metacognition involves or emphasizes awareness, whereas self-regulation involves and emphasizes appropriate control. These two concepts taken together enable a person to create a self-regulatory mechanism, which monitors and regulates the corresponding skills (e.g., observation, inquiry, interpretation, explanation, reasoning, analysis, evaluation, synthesis, reflection, and judgement).

As to the critical thinking skills, it should be noted that there is much discussion about the generalizability and domain specificity of them, just as there is about problem-solving skills in general (Chi et al. 1982 ; Chiesi et al. 1979 ; Ennis 1989 ; Fischer 1980 ). The research supports the notion that to achieve high levels of expertise and performance, one must develop high levels of domain knowledge. As a consequence, becoming a highly effective critical thinker in a particular domain of inquiry requires significant domain knowledge. One may achieve such levels in a domain in which one has significant domain knowledge and experience but not in a different domain in which one has little domain knowledge and experience. The processes involved in developing high levels of critical thinking are somewhat generic. Therefore, it is possible to develop critical thinking in nearly any domain when the two additional capabilities of metacognition and self-regulation are coupled with motivation and engagement and supportive emotional states (Ericsson et al. 1993 ).

Consequently, the framework presented here (see Fig. 1 ) is built around three main perspectives about critical thinking (i.e., educational, psychological and epistemological) and relevant learning theories. This framework provides a visual presentation of critical thinking with four dimensions: abilities (educational perspective), dispositions (psychological perspective), levels (epistemological perspective) and time. Time is added to emphasize the dynamic nature of critical thinking in terms of a specific context and a developmental approach.

Critical thinking often begins with simple experiences such as observing a difference, encountering a puzzling question or problem, questioning someone’s statement, and then leads, in some instances to an inquiry, and then to more complex experiences such as interactions and application of higher order thinking skills (e.g., logical reasoning, questioning assumptions, considering and evaluating alternative explanations).

If the individual is not interested in what was observed, an inquiry typically does not begin. Inquiry and critical thinking require motivation along with an inquisitive disposition. The process of critical thinking requires the support of corresponding internal indispositions such as open-mindedness and truth-seeking. Consequently, a disposition to initiate an inquiry (e.g., curiosity) along with an internal inquisitive disposition (e.g., that links a mental habit to something motivating to the individual) are both required (Hitchcock 2018 ). Initiating dispositions are those that contribute to the start of inquiry and critical thinking. Internal dispositions are those that initiate and support corresponding critical thinking skills during the process. Therefore, critical thinking dispositions consist of initiating dispositions and internal dispositions. Besides these factors, critical thinking also involves motivation. Motivation and dispositions are not mutually exclusive, for example, curiosity is a disposition and also a motivation.

Critical thinking abilities and dispositions are two main components of critical thinking, which involve such interrelated cognitive constructs as interpretation, explanation, reasoning, evaluation, synthesis, reflection, judgement, metacognition and self-regulation (Dwyer et al. 2014 ; Davies 2015 ; Ennis 2018 ; Facione 1990 ; Hitchcock 2018 ; Paul and Elder 2006 ). There are also some other abilities such as communication, collaboration and creativity, which are now essential in current society (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_century_skills ). Those abilities along with critical thinking are called the 4Cs; they are individually monitored and regulated through metacognitive and self-regulation processes.

The abilities involved in critical thinking are categorized in Bloom’s taxonomy into higher order skills (e.g., analyzing and synthesizing) and lower level skills (e.g., remembering and applying) (Anderson and Krathwohl 2001 ; Bloom et al. 1956 ).

The thinking process can be depicted as a spiral through both lower and higher order thinking skills. It encompasses several reasoning loops. Some of them might be iterative until a desired outcome is achieved. Each loop might be a mix of higher order thinking skills and lower level thinking skills. Each loop is subject to the self-regulatory mechanism of metacognition and self-regulation.

But, due to the complexity of human thinking, a specific spiral with reasoning loops is difficult to represent. Therefore, instead of a visualized spiral with an indefinite number of reasoning loops, the developmental stages of critical thinking are presented in the diagram (Fig. 1 ).

Besides, most of the definitions of critical thinking are based on the imagination about ideal critical thinkers such as the consensus generated from the Delphi report (Facione 1990 ). However, according to Dreyfus and Dreyfus ( 1980 ), in the course of developing an expertise, students would pass through five stages. Those five stages are “absolute beginner”, “advanced beginner”, “competent performer”, “proficient performer,” and “intuitive expert performer”. Dreyfus and Dreyfus ( 1980 ) described the five stages the result of the successive transformations of four mental functions: recollection, recognition, decision making, and awareness.

In the course of developing critical thinking and expertise, individuals will pass through similar stages which are accompanied with the increasing practices and accumulation of experience. Through the intervention and experience of developing critical thinking, as a novice, tasks are decomposed into context-free features which could be recognized by students without the experience of particular situations. For further improving, students need to be able to monitor their awareness, and with a considerable experience. They can note recurrent meaningful component patterns in some contexts. Gradually, increased practices expose students to a variety of whole situations which enable the students to recognize tasks in a more holistic manner as a professional. On the other hand, with the increasing accumulation of experience, individuals are less likely to depend simply on abstract principles. The decision will turn to something intuitive and highly situational as well as analytical. Students might unconsciously apply rules, principles or abilities. A high level of awareness is absorbed. At this stage, critical thinking is turned into habits of mind and in some cases expertise. The description above presents a process of critical thinking development evolving from a novice to an expert, eventually developing critical thinking into habits of mind.

We mention the five-stage model proposed by Dreyfus and Dreyfus ( 1980 ) to categorize levels of critical thinking and emphasize the developmental nature involved in becoming a critical thinker. Correspondingly, critical thinking is categorized into 5 levels: absolute beginner (novice), advanced beginner (beginner), competent performer (competent), proficient performer (proficient), and intuitive expert (expert).

Ability level and critical thinker (critical thinking) level together represent one of the four dimensions represented in Fig. 1 .

In addition, it is noteworthy that the other two elements of critical thinking are the context and knowledge in which the inquiry is based. Contextual and domain knowledge must be taken into account with regard to critical thinking, as previously argued. Besides, as Hitchcock ( 2018 ) argued, effective critical thinking requires knowledge about and experience applying critical thinking concepts and principles as well.

Critical thinking is considered valuable across disciplines. But except few courses such as philosophy, critical thinking is reported lacking in most school education. Most of researchers and educators thus proclaim that integrating critical thinking across the curriculum (Hatcher 2013 ). For example, Ennis ( 2018 ) provided a vision about incorporating critical thinking across the curriculum in higher education. Though people are aware of the value of critical thinking, few of them practice it. Between 2012 and 2015, in Australia, the demand of critical thinking as one of the enterprise skills for early-career job increased 125% (Statista Research Department, 2016). According to a survey across 1000 adults by The Reboot Foundation 2018 , more than 80% of respondents believed that critical thinking skills are lacking in today’s youth. Respondents were deeply concerned that schools do not teach critical thinking. Besides, the investigation also found that respondents were split over when and how to teach critical thinking, clearly.

In the previous analysis of critical thinking, we presented the mechanism of critical thinking instead of a concise definition. This is because, given the various perspectives of interpreting critical thinking, it is not easy to come out with an unitary definition, but it is essential for the public to understand how critical thinking works, the elements it involves and the relationships between them, so they can achieve an explicit understanding.

In the framework, critical thinking starts from simple experience such as observing a difference, then entering the stage of inquiry, inquiry does not necessarily turn the thinking process into critical thinking unless the student enters a higher level of thinking process or reasoning loops such as re-examining, reasoning, reflection (3Rs). Being an ideal critical thinker (or an expert) requires efforts and time.

According to the framework, simple abilities such as observational skills and inquiry are indispensable to lead to critical thinking, which suggests that paying attention to those simple skills at an early stage of children can be an entry point to critical thinking. Considering the child development theory by Piaget ( 1964 ), a developmental approach spanning multiple years can be employed to help children develop critical thinking at each corresponding development stage until critical thinking becomes habits of mind.

Although we emphasized critical thinking in this paper, for the improvement of intelligence, creative thinking and critical thinking are separable, they are both essential abilities that develop expertise, eventually drive the improvement of HI at human race level.

As previously argued, there is a similar pattern among students who think critically in different domains, but students from different domains might perform differently in creativity because of different thinking styles (Haller and Courvoisier 2010 ). Plus, students have different learning styles and preferences. Personalized learning has been the most appropriate approach to address those differences. Though the way of realizing personalized learning varies along with the development of technologies. Generally, personalized learning aims at customizing learning to accommodate diverse students based on their strengths, needs, interests, preferences, and abilities.

Meanwhile, the advancement of technology including AI is revolutionizing education; students’ learning environments are shifting from technology-enhanced learning environments to smart learning environments. Although lots of potentials are unrealized yet (Spector 2016 ), the so-called smart learning environments rely more on the support of AI technology such as neural networks, learning analytics and natural language processing. Personalized learning is better supported and realized in a smart learning environment. In short, in the current era, personalized learning is to use AI to help learners perform at a higher level making adjustments based on differences of learners. This is the notion with which we conclude – the future lies in using AI to improve HI and accommodating individual differences.

The application of AI in education has been a subject for decades. There are efforts heading to such a direction though personalized learning is not technically involved in them. For example, using AI technology to stimulate critical thinking (Zhu 2015 ), applying a virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills (Ketelhut et al. 2010 ). Developing computational thinking through robotics (Angeli and Valanides 2019 ) is another such promising application of AI to support the development of HI.

However, almost all of those efforts are limited to laboratory experiments. For accelerating the development rate of HI, we argue that more emphasis should be given to the development of HI at scale with the support of AI, especially in young children focusing on critical and creative thinking.

In this paper, we argue that more emphasis should be given to HI development. Rather than decreasing the funding of AI, the analysis of progress in artificial and human intelligence indicates that it would be reasonable to see increased emphasis placed on using various AI techniques and technologies to improve HI on a large and sustainable scale. Well, most researchers might agree that AI techniques or the situation might be not mature enough to support such a large-scale development. But it would be dangerous if HI development is overlooked. Based on research and theory drawn from psychology as well as from epistemology, the framework is intended to provide a practical guide to the progressive development of inquiry and critical thinking skills in young children as children represent the future of our fragile planet. And we suggested a sustainable development approach for developing inquiry and critical thinking (See, Spector 2019 ). Such an approach could be realized through AI and infused into HI development. Besides, a project is underway in collaboration with NetDragon to develop gamified applications to develop the relevant skills and habits of mind. A game-based assessment methodology is being developed and tested at East China Normal University that is appropriate for middle school children. The intention of the effort is to refocus some of the attention on the development of HI in young children.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

Artificial Intelligence

Human Intelligence

L.W. Anderson, D.R. Krathwohl, A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Allyn & Bacon, Boston, 2001)

Google Scholar  

Angeli, C., & Valanides, N. (2019). Developing young children’s computational thinking with educational robotics: An interaction effect between gender and scaffolding strategy. Comput. Hum. Behav. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.018

B.S. Bloom, M.D. Engelhart, E.J. Furst, W.H. Hill, D.R. Krathwohl, Taxonomy of educational objectives: The classification of educational goals. Handbook I: Cognitive Domain (David McKay Company, New York, 1956)

Bostrom, N. (1998). How long before superintelligence? Retrieved from https://nickbostrom.com/superintelligence.html

R. Cellan-Jones, Stephen hawking warns artificial intelligence could end mankind. BBC. News. 2 , 2014 (2014)

M.T.H. Chi, R. Glaser, E. Rees, in Advances in the Psychology of Human Intelligence , ed. by R. S. Sternberg. Expertise in problem solving (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, 1982), pp. 7–77

H.L. Chiesi, G.J. Spliich, J.F. Voss, Acquisition of domain-related information in relation to high and low domain knowledge. J. Verbal Learn. Verbal Behav. 18 , 257–273 (1979)

Article   Google Scholar  

L. Darling-Hammond, What can PISA tell US about US education policy? N. Engl. J. Publ. Policy. 26 (1), 4 (2014)

M. Davies, in Higher education: Handbook of theory and research . A Model of Critical Thinking in Higher Education (Springer, Cham, 2015), pp. 41–92

Chapter   Google Scholar  

A.C. Doyle, in The Strand Magazine . The adventure of the blanched soldier (1926) Retrieved from https://www.dfw-sherlock.org/uploads/3/7/3/8/37380505/1926_november_the_adventure_of_the_blanched_soldier.pdf

S.E. Dreyfus, H.L. Dreyfus, A five-stage model of the mental activities involved in directed skill acquisition (no. ORC-80-2) (University of California-Berkeley Operations Research Center, Berkeley, 1980)

Book   Google Scholar  

C.P. Dwyer, M.J. Hogan, I. Stewart, An integrated critical thinking framework for the 21st century. Think. Skills Creat. 12 , 43–52 (2014)

R.H. Ennis, Critical thinking and subject specificity: Clarification and needed research. Educ. Res. 18 , 4–10 (1989)

R.H. Ennis, Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. Topoi. 37 (1), 165–184 (2018)

Epstein, Z. (2016). Has artificial intelligence already surpassed the human brain? Retrieved from https://bgr.com/2016/03/10/alphago-beats-lee-sedol-again/

K.A. Ericsson, R.T. Krampe, C. Tesch-Römer, The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol. Rev. 100 (3), 363–406 (1993)

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction [Report for the American Psychology Association]. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED315423.pdf

J. Fang, H. Su, Y. Xiao, Will Artificial Intelligence Surpass Human Intelligence? (2018). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3173876

K.W. Fischer, A theory of cognitive development: The control and construction of hierarchies of skills. Psychol. Rev. 87 , 477–431 (1980)

J.H. Flavell, Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive development inquiry. Am. Psychol. 34 (10), 906–911 (1979)

R.M. Gagné, The conditions of learning and theory of instruction , 4th edn. (Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, New York, 1985)

I.J. Good, Speculations concerning the first ultraintelligent machine. Adv Comput. 6 , 31-88 (1966)

C.S. Haller, D.S. Courvoisier, Personality and thinking style in different creative domains. Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts. 4 (3), 149 (2010)

D.L. Hatcher, Is critical thinking across the curriculum a plausible goal? OSSA. 69 (2013) Retrieved from https://scholar.uwindsor.ca/ossaarchive/OSSA10/papersandcommentaries/69

Hitchcock, D. (2018). Critical thinking. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/critical-thinking/

B.K. Hofer, G.M. Sinatra, Epistemology, metacognition, and self-regulation: Musings on an emerging field. Metacogn. Learn. 5 (1), 113–120 (2010)

D.H. Jonassen, Toward a design theory of problem solving. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 48 (4), 63–85 (2000)

D.H. Jonassen, Learning to Solve Problems: A Handbook for Designing Problem-Solving Learning Environments (Routledge, New York, 2011)

D.J. Ketelhut, B.C. Nelson, J. Clarke, C. Dede, A multi-user virtual environment for building and assessing higher order inquiry skills in science. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 41 (1), 56–68 (2010)

R. Luckin, W. Holmes, M. Griffiths, L.B. Forcier, Intelligence Unleashed: An Argument for AI in Education (Pearson Education, London, 2016) Retrieved from http://oro.open.ac.uk/50104/1/Luckin%20et%20al.%20-%202016%20-%20Intelligence%20Unleashed.%20An%20argument%20for%20AI%20in%20Educ.pdf

R. Paul, L. Elder, The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools , 4th edn. (2006) Retrieved from https://www.criticalthinking.org/files/Concepts_Tools.pdf

J. Piaget, Part I: Cognitive development in children: Piaget development and learning. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 2 (3), 176–186 (1964)

S.J. Russell, P. Norvig, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach , 3rd edn. (Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2009) ISBN 978-0-136042594

G. Schraw, K.J. Crippen, K. Hartley, Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Res. Sci. Educ. 36 (1–2), 111–139 (2006)

D.H. Schunk, Metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: Research recommendations. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 20 (4), 463–467 (2008)

K. Siau, Y. Yang, in Twelve Annual Midwest Association for Information Systems Conference (MWAIS 2017) . Impact of artificial intelligence, robotics, and machine learning on sales and marketing (2017), pp. 18–19

D. Silver, A. Huang, C.J. Maddison, A. Guez, L. Sifre, G. Van Den Driessche, et al., Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature. 529 (7587), 484 (2016)

J. M. Spector, M. C. Polson, D. J. Muraida (eds.), Automating Instructional Design: Concepts and Issues (Educational Technology Publications, Englewood Cliffs, 1993)

J.M. Spector, Smart Learning Environments: Concepts and Issues . In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2728–2737). (Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Savannah, GA, United States, 2016). Retrieved June 4, 2019 from https://www.learntechlib.org/primary/p/172078/ .

J. M. Spector, Thinking and learning in the anthropocene: The new 3 Rs . Discussion paper presented at the International Big History Association Conference, Philadelphia, PA (2018). Retrieved from http://learndev.org/dl/HLAIBHA2018/Spector%2C%20J.%20M.%20(2018).%20Thinking%20and%20Learning%20in%20the%20Anthropocene.pdf .

J. M. Spector, Complexity, Inquiry Critical Thinking, and Technology: A Holistic and Developmental Approach . In Mind, Brain and Technology (pp. 17–25). (Springer, Cham, 2019).

R.J. Sternberg, Intelligence as developing expertise. Contemp. Educ. Psychol. 24 (4), 359–375 (1999)

The Reboot Foundation. (2018). The State of Critical Thinking: A New Look at Reasoning at Home, School, and Work. Retrieved from https://reboot-foundation.org/wp-content/uploads/_docs/REBOOT_FOUNDATION_WHITE_PAPER.pdf

V. Vinge, The Coming Technological Singularity: How to Survive in the Post-Human Era . Resource document. NASA Technical report server. Retrieved from https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19940022856.pdf . Accessed 20 June 2019.

D. Zhang, M. Xie, Artificial Intelligence’s Digestion and Reconstruction for Humanistic Feelings . In 2018 International Seminar on Education Research and Social Science (ISERSS 2018) (Atlantis Press, Paris, 2018)

X. Zhu, in Twenty-Ninth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence . Machine Teaching: An Inverse Problem to Machine Learning and an Approach toward Optimal Education (2015)

Download references

Acknowledgements

We wish to acknowledge the generous support of NetDragon and the Digital Research Centre at the University of North Texas.

Initial work is being funded through the NetDragon Digital Research Centre at the University of North Texas with Author as the Principal Investigator.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Learning Technologies, University of North Texas Denton, Texas, TX, 76207, USA

Jonathan Michael Spector & Shanshan Ma

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The authors contributed equally to the effort. Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jonathan Michael Spector .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided 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.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Spector, J.M., Ma, S. Inquiry and critical thinking skills for the next generation: from artificial intelligence back to human intelligence. Smart Learn. Environ. 6 , 8 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-019-0088-z

Download citation

Received : 06 June 2019

Accepted : 27 August 2019

Published : 11 September 2019

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-019-0088-z

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

• Artificial intelligence
• Critical thinking
• Developmental model
• Human intelligence
• Inquiry learning

Work Life is Atlassian’s flagship publication dedicated to unleashing the potential of every team through real-life advice, inspiring stories, and thoughtful perspectives from leaders around the world.

Contributing Writer

Work Futurist

Senior Quantitative Researcher, People Insights

Principal Writer

How to build critical thinking skills for better decision-making

It’s simple in theory, but tougher in practice – here are five tips to get you started.

Get stories like this in your inbox

Have you heard the riddle about two coins that equal thirty cents, but one of them is not a nickel? What about the one where a surgeon says they can’t operate on their own son?

Those brain teasers tap into your critical thinking skills. But your ability to think critically isn’t just helpful for solving those random puzzles – it plays a big role in your career. 

An impressive 81% of employers say critical thinking carries a lot of weight when they’re evaluating job candidates. It ranks as the top competency companies consider when hiring recent graduates (even ahead of communication ). Plus, once you’re hired, several studies show that critical thinking skills are highly correlated with better job performance.

So what exactly are critical thinking skills? And even more importantly, how do you build and improve them? 

What is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is the ability to evaluate facts and information, remain objective, and make a sound decision about how to move forward.

Does that sound like how you approach every decision or problem? Not so fast. Critical thinking seems simple in theory but is much tougher in practice, which helps explain why 65% of employers say their organization has a need for more critical thinking. 

In reality, critical thinking doesn’t come naturally to a lot of us. In order to do it well, you need to:

• Remain open-minded and inquisitive, rather than relying on assumptions or jumping to conclusions
• Ask questions and dig deep, rather than accepting information at face value
• Keep your own biases and perceptions in check to stay as objective as possible
• Rely on your emotional intelligence to fill in the blanks and gain a more well-rounded understanding of a situation

So, critical thinking isn’t just being intelligent or analytical. In many ways, it requires you to step outside of yourself, let go of your own preconceived notions, and approach a problem or situation with curiosity and fairness.

It’s a challenge, but it’s well worth it. Critical thinking skills will help you connect ideas, make reasonable decisions, and solve complex problems.

7 critical thinking skills to help you dig deeper

Critical thinking is often labeled as a skill itself (you’ll see it bulleted as a desired trait in a variety of job descriptions). But it’s better to think of critical thinking less as a distinct skill and more as a collection or category of skills. 

To think critically, you’ll need to tap into a bunch of your other soft skills. Here are seven of the most important. 

Open-mindedness

It’s important to kick off the critical thinking process with the idea that anything is possible. The more you’re able to set aside your own suspicions, beliefs, and agenda, the better prepared you are to approach the situation with the level of inquisitiveness you need. 

That means not closing yourself off to any possibilities and allowing yourself the space to pull on every thread – yes, even the ones that seem totally implausible.

As Christopher Dwyer, Ph.D. writes in a piece for Psychology Today , “Even if an idea appears foolish, sometimes its consideration can lead to an intelligent, critically considered conclusion.” He goes on to compare the critical thinking process to brainstorming . Sometimes the “bad” ideas are what lay the foundation for the good ones. 

Open-mindedness is challenging because it requires more effort and mental bandwidth than sticking with your own perceptions. Approaching problems or situations with true impartiality often means:

• Practicing self-regulation : Giving yourself a pause between when you feel something and when you actually react or take action.
• Challenging your own biases: Acknowledging your biases and seeking feedback are two powerful ways to get a broader understanding. 

Critical thinking example

In a team meeting, your boss mentioned that your company newsletter signups have been decreasing and she wants to figure out why.

At first, you feel offended and defensive – it feels like she’s blaming you for the dip in subscribers. You recognize and rationalize that emotion before thinking about potential causes. You have a hunch about what’s happening, but you will explore all possibilities and contributions from your team members.

Observation

Observation is, of course, your ability to notice and process the details all around you (even the subtle or seemingly inconsequential ones). Critical thinking demands that you’re flexible and willing to go beyond surface-level information, and solid observation skills help you do that.

Your observations help you pick up on clues from a variety of sources and experiences, all of which help you draw a final conclusion. After all, sometimes it’s the most minuscule realization that leads you to the strongest conclusion.

Over the next week or so, you keep a close eye on your company’s website and newsletter analytics to see if numbers are in fact declining or if your boss’s concerns were just a fluke. 

Critical thinking hinges on objectivity. And, to be objective, you need to base your judgments on the facts – which you collect through research. You’ll lean on your research skills to gather as much information as possible that’s relevant to your problem or situation. 

Keep in mind that this isn’t just about the quantity of information – quality matters too. You want to find data and details from a variety of trusted sources to drill past the surface and build a deeper understanding of what’s happening. 

You dig into your email and website analytics to identify trends in bounce rates, time on page, conversions, and more. You also review recent newsletters and email promotions to understand what customers have received, look through current customer feedback, and connect with your customer support team to learn what they’re hearing in their conversations with customers.

The critical thinking process is sort of like a treasure hunt – you’ll find some nuggets that are fundamental for your final conclusion and some that might be interesting but aren’t pertinent to the problem at hand.

That’s why you need analytical skills. They’re what help you separate the wheat from the chaff, prioritize information, identify trends or themes, and draw conclusions based on the most relevant and influential facts. 

It’s easy to confuse analytical thinking with critical thinking itself, and it’s true there is a lot of overlap between the two. But analytical thinking is just a piece of critical thinking. It focuses strictly on the facts and data, while critical thinking incorporates other factors like emotions, opinions, and experiences. 

As you analyze your research, you notice that one specific webpage has contributed to a significant decline in newsletter signups. While all of the other sources have stayed fairly steady with regard to conversions, that one has sharply decreased.

You decide to move on from your other hypotheses about newsletter quality and dig deeper into the analytics. 

One of the traps of critical thinking is that it’s easy to feel like you’re never done. There’s always more information you could collect and more rabbit holes you could fall down.

But at some point, you need to accept that you’ve done your due diligence and make a decision about how to move forward. That’s where inference comes in. It’s your ability to look at the evidence and facts available to you and draw an informed conclusion based on those. 

When you’re so focused on staying objective and pursuing all possibilities, inference can feel like the antithesis of critical thinking. But ultimately, it’s your inference skills that allow you to move out of the thinking process and onto the action steps. 

You dig deeper into the analytics for the page that hasn’t been converting and notice that the sharp drop-off happened around the same time you switched email providers.

After looking more into the backend, you realize that the signup form on that page isn’t correctly connected to your newsletter platform. It seems like anybody who has signed up on that page hasn’t been fed to your email list. 

Communication

3 ways to improve your communication skills at work

If and when you identify a solution or answer, you can’t keep it close to the vest. You’ll need to use your communication skills to share your findings with the relevant stakeholders – like your boss, team members, or anybody who needs to be involved in the next steps.

Your analysis skills will come in handy here too, as they’ll help you determine what information other people need to know so you can avoid bogging them down with unnecessary details. 

In your next team meeting, you pull up the analytics and show your team the sharp drop-off as well as the missing connection between that page and your email platform. You ask the web team to reinstall and double-check that connection and you also ask a member of the marketing team to draft an apology email to the subscribers who were missed. 

Problem-solving

Critical thinking and problem-solving are two more terms that are frequently confused. After all, when you think critically, you’re often doing so with the objective of solving a problem.

The best way to understand how problem-solving and critical thinking differ is to think of problem-solving as much more narrow. You’re focused on finding a solution.

In contrast, you can use critical thinking for a variety of use cases beyond solving a problem – like answering questions or identifying opportunities for improvement. Even so, within the critical thinking process, you’ll flex your problem-solving skills when it comes time to take action. 

Once the fix is implemented, you monitor the analytics to see if subscribers continue to increase. If not (or if they increase at a slower rate than you anticipated), you’ll roll out some other tests like changing the CTA language or the placement of the subscribe form on the page.

5 ways to improve your critical thinking skills

Beyond the buzzwords: Why interpersonal skills matter at work

Think critically about critical thinking and you’ll quickly realize that it’s not as instinctive as you’d like it to be. Fortunately, your critical thinking skills are learned competencies and not inherent gifts – and that means you can improve them. Here’s how:

• Practice active listening: Active listening helps you process and understand what other people share. That’s crucial as you aim to be open-minded and inquisitive.
• Ask open-ended questions: If your critical thinking process involves collecting feedback and opinions from others, ask open-ended questions (meaning, questions that can’t be answered with “yes” or “no”). Doing so will give you more valuable information and also prevent your own biases from influencing people’s input.
• Scrutinize your sources: Figuring out what to trust and prioritize is crucial for critical thinking. Boosting your media literacy and asking more questions will help you be more discerning about what to factor in. It’s hard to strike a balance between skepticism and open-mindedness, but approaching information with questions (rather than unquestioning trust) will help you draw better conclusions. 
• Play a game: Remember those riddles we mentioned at the beginning? As trivial as they might seem, games and exercises like those can help you boost your critical thinking skills. There are plenty of critical thinking exercises you can do individually or as a team . 
• Give yourself time: Research shows that rushed decisions are often regrettable ones. That’s likely because critical thinking takes time – you can’t do it under the wire. So, for big decisions or hairy problems, give yourself enough time and breathing room to work through the process. It’s hard enough to think critically without a countdown ticking in your brain. 

Critical thinking really is critical

The ability to think critically is important, but it doesn’t come naturally to most of us. It’s just easier to stick with biases, assumptions, and surface-level information. 

But that route often leads you to rash judgments, shaky conclusions, and disappointing decisions. So here’s a conclusion we can draw without any more noodling: Even if it is more demanding on your mental resources, critical thinking is well worth the effort.

Advice, stories, and expertise about work life today.

Distance Learning

Using technology to develop students’ critical thinking skills.

by Jessica Mansbach

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking is a higher-order cognitive skill that is indispensable to students, readying them to respond to a variety of complex problems that are sure to arise in their personal and professional lives. The  cognitive skills at the foundation of critical thinking are  analysis, interpretation, evaluation, explanation, inference, and self-regulation.  

When students think critically, they actively engage in these processes:

• Communication
• Problem-solving

To create environments that engage students in these processes, instructors need to ask questions, encourage the expression of diverse opinions, and involve students in a variety of hands-on activities that force them to be involved in their learning.

Types of Critical Thinking Skills

Instructors should select activities based on the level of thinking they want students to do and the learning objectives for the course or assignment. The chart below describes questions to ask in order to show that students can demonstrate different levels of critical thinking.

*Adapted from Brown University’s Harriet W Sheridan Center for Teaching and Learning

Using Online Tools to Teach Critical Thinking Skills

Online instructors can use technology tools to create activities that help students develop both lower-level and higher-level critical thinking skills.

• Example: Use Google Doc, a collaboration feature in Canvas, and tell students to keep a journal in which they reflect on what they are learning, describe the progress they are making in the class, and cite course materials that have been most relevant to their progress. Students can share the Google Doc with you, and instructors can comment on their work.
• Example: Use the peer review assignment feature in Canvas and manually or automatically form peer review groups. These groups can be anonymous or display students’ names. Tell students to give feedback to two of their peers on the first draft of a research paper. Use the rubric feature in Canvas to create a rubric for students to use. Show students the rubric along with the assignment instructions so that students know what they will be evaluated on and how to evaluate their peers.
• Example: Use the discussions feature in Canvas and tell students to have a debate about a video they watched. Pose the debate questions in the discussion forum, and give students instructions to take a side of the debate and cite course readings to support their arguments.  
• Example: Us e goreact , a tool for creating and commenting on online presentations, and tell students to design a presentation that summarizes and raises questions about a reading. Tell students to comment on the strengths and weaknesses of the author’s argument. Students can post the links to their goreact presentations in a discussion forum or an assignment using the insert link feature in Canvas.
• Example:  Use goreact, a narrated Powerpoint, or a Google Doc and instruct students to tell a story that informs readers and listeners about how the course content they are learning is useful in their professional lives. In the story, tell students to offer specific examples of readings and class activities that they are finding most relevant to their professional work. Links to the goreact presentation and Google doc can be submitted via a discussion forum or an assignment in Canvas. The Powerpoint file can be submitted via a discussion or submitted in an assignment.

Pulling it All Together

Critical thinking is an invaluable skill that students need to be successful in their professional and personal lives. Instructors can be thoughtful and purposeful about creating learning objectives that promote lower and higher-level critical thinking skills, and about using technology to implement activities that support these learning objectives. Below are some additional resources about critical thinking.

Additional Resources

Carmichael, E., & Farrell, H. (2012). Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Online Resources in Developing Student Critical Thinking: Review of Literature and Case Study of a Critical Thinking Online Site.  Journal of University Teaching and Learning Practice ,  9 (1), 4.

Lai, E. R. (2011). Critical thinking: A literature review.  Pearson’s Research Reports ,  6 , 40-41.

Landers, H (n.d.). Using Peer Teaching In The Classroom. Retrieved electronically from https://tilt.colostate.edu/TipsAndGuides/Tip/180

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

Mandernach, B. J. (2006). Thinking critically about critical thinking: Integrating online tools to Promote Critical Thinking. Insight: A collection of faculty scholarship , 1 , 41-50.

Yang, Y. T. C., & Wu, W. C. I. (2012). Digital storytelling for enhancing student academic achievement, critical thinking, and learning motivation: A year-long experimental study. Computers & Education , 59 (2), 339-352.

Insight Assessment: Measuring Thinking Worldwide

http://www.insightassessment.com/

Michigan State University’s Office of Faculty  & Organizational Development, Critical Thinking: http://fod.msu.edu/oir/critical-thinking

The Critical Thinking Community

http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

Related Posts

All You Need is an Oven and a Knife

USB Mic Comparison

Choosing a Web Conferencing Solution

Online Learning Resource Round-Up!

9 responses to “ Using Technology To Develop Students’ Critical Thinking Skills ”

This is a great site for my students to learn how to develop critical thinking skills, especially in the STEM fields.

Great tools to help all learners at all levels… not everyone learns at the same rate.

Thanks for sharing the article. Is there any way to find tools which help in developing critical thinking skills to students?

Technology needs to be advance to develop the below factors:

Understand the links between ideas. Determine the importance and relevance of arguments and ideas. Recognize, build and appraise arguments.

Excellent share! Can I know few tools which help in developing critical thinking skills to students? Any help will be appreciated. Thanks!

• Pingback: EDTC 6431 – Module 4 – Designing Lessons That Use Critical Thinking | Mr.Reed Teaches Math
• Pingback: Homepage
• Pingback: Magacus | Pearltrees

Brilliant post. Will be sharing this on our Twitter (@refthinking). I would love to chat to you about our tool, the Thinking Kit. It has been specifically designed to help students develop critical thinking skills whilst they also learn about the topics they ‘need’ to.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

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

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it's official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you're on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

National Research Council (US) Committee on the Assessment of 21st Century Skills. Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011.

Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop.

• Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press

2 Assessing Cognitive Skills

As described in Chapter 1 , the steering committee grouped the five skills identified by previous efforts ( National Research Council, 2008 , 2010 ) into the broad clusters of cognitive skills, interpersonal skills, and intrapersonal skills. Based on this grouping, two of the identified skills fell within the cognitive cluster: nonroutine problem solving and systems thinking. The definition of each, as provided in the previous report ( National Research Council, 2010 , p. 3), appears below:

• Nonroutine problem solving: A skilled problem solver uses expert thinking to examine a broad span of information, recognize patterns, and narrow the information to reach a diagnosis of the problem. Moving beyond diagnosis to a solution requires knowledge of how the information is linked conceptually and involves metacognition—the ability to reflect on whether a problem-solving strategy is working and to switch to another strategy if it is not working ( Levy and Murnane, 2004 ). It includes creativity to generate new and innovative solutions, integrating seemingly unrelated information, and entertaining possibilities that others may miss ( Houston, 2007 ).
• Systems thinking: The ability to understand how an entire system works; how an action, change, or malfunction in one part of the system affects the rest of the system; adopting a “big picture” perspective on work ( Houston, 2007 ). It includes judgment and decision making, systems analysis, and systems evaluation as well as abstract reasoning about how the different elements of a work process interact ( Peterson et al., 1999 ).

After considering these definitions, the committee decided a third cognitive skill, critical thinking, was not fully represented. The committee added critical thinking to the list of cognitive skills, since competence in critical thinking is usually judged to be an important component of both skills ( Mayer, 1990 ). Thus, this chapter focuses on assessments of three cognitive skills: problem solving, critical thinking, and systems thinking.

• DEFINING THE CONSTRUCT

One of the first steps in developing an assessment is to define the construct and operationalize it in a way that supports the development of assessment tasks. Defining some of the constructs included within the scope of 21st century skills is significantly more challenging than defining more traditional constructs, such as reading comprehension or mathematics computational skills. One of the challenges is that the definitions tend to be both broad and general. To be useful for test development, the definition needs to be specific so that there can be a shared conception of the construct for use by those writing the assessment questions or preparing the assessment tasks.

This set of skills also generates debate about whether they are domain general or domain specific. A predominant view in the past has been that critical thinking and problem-solving skills are domain general: that is, that they can be learned without reference to any specific domain and, further, once they are learned, can be applied in any domain. More recently, psychologists and learning theorists have argued for a domain-specific conception of these skills, maintaining that when students think critically or solve problems, they do not do it in the absence of subject matter: instead, they think about or solve a problem in relation to some topic. Under a domain-specific conception, the learner may acquire these skills in one domain as he or she acquires expertise in that domain, but acquiring them in one domain does not necessarily mean the learner can apply them in another.

At the workshop, Nathan Kuncel, professor of psychology with University of Minnesota, and Eric Anderman, professor of educational psychology with Ohio State University, discussed these issues. The sections below summarize their presentations and include excerpts from their papers, 1 dealing first with the domain-general and domain-specific conceptions of critical thinking and problem solving and then with the issue of transferring skills from one domain to another.

Critical Thinking: Domain-Specific or Domain-General

It is well established, Kuncel stated, that foundational cognitive skills in math, reading, and writing are of central importance and that students need to be as proficient as possible in these areas. Foundational cognitive abilities, such as verbal comprehension and reasoning, mathematical knowledge and skill, and writing skills, are clearly important for success in learning in college as well as in many aspects of life. A recent study documents this. Kuncel and Hezlett (2007) examined the body of research on the relationships between traditional measures of verbal and quantitative skills and a variety of outcomes. The measures of verbal and quantitative skills included scores on six standardized tests—the GRE, MCAT, LSAT, GMAT, MAT, and PCAT. 2 The outcomes included performance in graduate school settings ranging from Ph.D. programs to law school, medical school, business school, and pharmacy programs. Figure 2-1 shows the correlations between scores on the standardized tests and the various outcome measures, including (from bottom to top) first-year graduate GPA (1st GGPA), cumulative graduate GPA (GGPA), qualifying or comprehensive examination scores, completion of the degree, estimate of research productivity, research citation counts, faculty ratings, and performance on the licensing exam for the profession. For instance, the top bar shows a correlation between performance on the MCAT and performance on the licensing exam for physicians of roughly .65, the highest of the correlations reported in this figure. The next bar indicates the correlation between performance on the LSAT and performance on the licensing exam for lawyers is roughly .35. Of the 34 correlations shown in the figure, all but 11 are over .30. Kuncel characterized this information as demonstrating that verbal and quantitative skills are important predictors of success based on a variety of outcome measures, including performance on standardized tests, whether or not people finish their degree program, how their performance is evaluated by faculty, and their contribution to the field.

Correlations between scores on standardized tests and academic and job outcome measures. SOURCE: Kuncel and Hezlett (2007). Reprinted with permission of American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Kuncel has also studied the role that broader abilities have in predicting future outcomes. A more recent review ( Kuncel and Hezlett, 2010 ) examined the body of research on the relationships between measures of general cognitive ability (historically referred to as IQ) and job outcomes, including performance in high, medium, and low complexity jobs; training success in civilian and military settings; how well leaders perform on objective measures; and evaluations of the creativity of people’s work. Figure 2-2 shows the correlations between performance on a measure of general cognitive ability and these outcomes. All of the correlations are above .30, which Kuncel characterized as demonstrating a strong relationship between general cognitive ability and job performance across a variety of performance measures. Together, Kuncel said, these two reviews present a body of evidence documenting that verbal and quantitative skills along with general cognitive ability are predictive of college and career performance.

Correlations between measures of cognitive ability and job performance. SOURCE: Kuncel and Hezlett (2011). Copyright 2010 by Sage Publications. Reprinted with permission of Sage Publications.

Kuncel noted that other broader skills, such as critical thinking or analytical reasoning, may also be important predictors of performance, but he characterizes this evidence as inconclusive. In his view, the problems lie both with the conceptualization of the constructs as domain-general (as opposed to domain-specific) as well as with the specific definition of the construct. He finds the constructs are not well defined and have not been properly validated. For instance, a domain-general concept of the construct of “critical thinking” is often indistinguishable from general cognitive ability or general reasoning and learning skills. To demonstrate, Kuncel presented three definitions of critical thinking that commonly appear in the literature:

• “[Critical thinking involves] cognitive skills or strategies that increase the probability of a desirable outcome—in the long run, critical thinkers will have more desirable outcomes than ‘noncritical’ thinkers. . . . Critical thinking is purposeful, reasoned, and goal-directed. It is the kind of thinking involved in solving problems, formulating inferences, calculating likelihoods, and making decisions” ( Halpern, 1998 , pp. 450–451).
• “Critical thinking is reflective and reasonable thinking that is focused on deciding what to believe or do” ( Ennis, 1985 , p. 45).
• “Critical thinking [is] the ability and willingness to test the validity of propositions” ( Bangert-Drowns and Bankert, 1990 , p. 3).

He characterizied these definitions both very general and very broad. For instance, Halpern’s definition essentially encompasses all of problem solving, judgment, and cognition, he said. Others are more specific and focus on a particular class of tasks (e.g., Bangert-Drowns and Bankert, 1990 ). He questioned the extent to which critical thinking so conceived is distinct from general cognitive ability (or general intelligence).

Kuncel conducted a review of the literature for empirical evidence of the validity of the construct of critical thinking. The studies in the review examined the relationships between various measures of critical thinking and measures of general intelligence and expert performance. He looked for two types of evidence—convergent validity evidence 3 and discriminant validity 4 evidence.

Kuncel found several analyses of the relationships among different measures of critical thinking (see Bondy et al., 2001 ; Facione, 1990 ; and Watson and Glaser, 1994 ). The assessments that were studied included the Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal (WGCTA), the Cornell Critical Thinking Test (CCTT), the California Critical Thinking Skills Test (CCTST), and the California Critical Thinking Disposition Inventory (CCTDI). The average correlation among the measures was .41. Considering that all of these tests purport to be measures of the same construct, Kuncel judged this correlation to be low. For comparison, he noted a correlation of .71 between two subtests of the SAT intended to measure critical thinking (the SAT-critical reading test and the SAT-writing test).

With regard to discriminant validity, Kuncel conducted a literature search that yielded 19 correlations between critical-thinking skills and traditional measures of cognitive abilities, such as the Miller Analogies Test and the SAT ( Adams et al., 1999 ; Bauer and Liang, 2003 ; Bondy et al., 2001 ; Cano and Martinez, 1991 ; Edwards, 1950 ; Facione et al., 1995 , 1998 ; Spector et al., 2000 ; Watson and Glaser, 1994 ). He separated the studies into those that measured critical-thinking skills and those that measured critical-thinking dispositions (i.e., interest and willingness to use one’s critical-thinking skills). The average correlation between general cognitive ability measures and critical-thinking skills was .48, and the average correlation between general cognitive ability measures and critical-thinking dispositions was .21.

Kuncel summarized these results as demonstrating that different measures of critical thinking show lower correlations with each other (i.e., average of .41) than they do with traditional measures of general cognitive ability (i.e., average of .48). Kuncel judges that these findings provide little support for critical thinking as a domain-general construct distinct from general cognitive ability. Given this relatively weak evidence of convergent and discriminant validity, Kuncel argued, it is important to determine if critical thinking is correlated differently than cognitive ability with important outcome variables like grades or job performance. That is, do measures of critical-thinking skills show incremental validity beyond the information provided by measures of general cognitive ability?

Kuncel looked at two outcome measures: grades in higher education and job performance. With regard to higher education, he examined data from 12 independent samples with 2,876 subjects ( Behrens, 1996 ; Gadzella et al., 2002 , 2004 ; Kowalski and Taylor, 2004 ; Taube, 1997 ; Williams, 2003 ). Across these studies, the average correlation between critical-thinking skills and grades was .27 and between critical-thinking dispositions and grades was .24. To put these correlations in context, the SAT has an average correlation with 1st year college GPA between .26 to .33 for the individual scales and .35 when the SAT scales are combined ( Kobrin et al., 2008 ). 5

There are very limited data that quantify the relationship between critical-thinking measures and subsequent job performance. Kuncel located three studies with the Watson-Glaser Appraisal ( Facione and Facione, 1996 , 1997 ; Giancarlo, 1996 ). They yielded an average correlation of .32 with supervisory ratings of job performance (N = 293).

Kuncel described these results as “mixed” but not supporting a conclusion that assessments of critical thinking are better predictors of college and job performance than other available measures. Taken together with the convergent and discriminant validity results, the evidence to support critical thinking as an independent construct distinct from general cognitive ability is weak.

Kuncel believes these correlational results do not tell the whole story, however. First, he noted, a number of artifactual issues may have contributed to the relatively low correlation among different assessments of critical thinking, such as low reliability of the measures themselves, restriction in range, different underlying definitions of critical thinking, overly broad definitions that are operationalized in different ways, different kinds of assessment tasks, and different levels of motivation in test takers.

Second, he pointed out, even though two tests correlate highly with each other, they may not measure the same thing. That is, although the critical-thinking tests correlate .48, on average, with cognitive ability measures, it does not mean that they measure the same thing. For example, a recent study ( Kuncel and Grossbach, 2007 ) showed that ACT and SAT scores are highly predictive of nursing knowledge. But, obviously, individuals who score highly on a college admissions test do not have all the knowledge needed to be a nurse. The constructs may be related but not overlap entirely.

Kuncel explained that one issue with these studies is they all conceived of critical thinking in its broadest sense and as a domain-general construct. He said this conception is not useful, and he summarized his meta-analysis findings as demonstrating little evidence that critical thinking exists as a domain-general construct distinct from general cognitive ability. He highlighted the fact that some may view critical thinking as a specific skill that, once learned, can be applied in many situations. For instance, many in his field of psychology mention the following as specific critical-thinking skills that students should acquire: understanding the law of large numbers, understanding what it means to affirm the consequent, being able to make judgments about sample bias, understanding control groups, and understanding Type I versus Type II errors. However, Kuncel said many tasks that require critical thinking would not make use of any of these skills.

In his view, the stronger argument is for critical thinking as a domain-specific construct that evolves as the person acquires domain-specific knowledge. For example, imagine teaching general critical-thinking skills that can be applied across all reasoning situations to students. Is it reasonable, he asked, to think a person can think critically about arguments for different national economic policies without understanding macro-economics or even the current economic state of the country? At one extreme, he argued, it seems clear that people cannot think critically about topics for which they have no knowledge, and their reasoning skills are intimately tied to the knowledge domain. For instance, most people have no basis for making judgments about how to conduct or even prioritize different experiments for CERN’s Large Hadron Collider. Few people understand the topic of particle physics sufficiently to make more than trivial arguments or decisions. On the other hand, perhaps most people could try to make a good decision about which among a few medical treatments would best meet their needs.

Kuncel also talked about the kinds of statistical and methodological reasoning skills learned in different disciplines. For instance, chemists, engineers, and physical scientists learn to use these types of skills in thinking about the laws of thermodynamics that deal with equilibrium, temperature, work, energy, and entropy. On the other hand, psychologists learn to use these skills in thinking about topics such as sample bias and self-selection in evaluating research findings. Psychologists who are adept at thinking critically in their own discipline would have difficulty thinking critically about problems in the hard sciences, unless they have specific subject matter knowledge in the discipline. Likewise, it is difficult to imagine that a scientist highly trained in chemistry could solve a complex problem in psychology without knowing some subject matter in psychology.

Kuncel said it is possible to train specific skills that aid in making good judgments in some situations, but the literature does not demonstrate that it is possible to train universally effective critical thinking skills. He noted, “I think you can give people a nice toolbox with all sorts of tools they can apply to a variety of tasks, problems, issues, decisions, citizenship questions, and learning those things will be very valuable, but I dissent on them being global and trainable as a global skill.”

Transfer from One Context to Another

There is a commonplace assumption, Eric Anderman noted in his presentation, that learners readily transfer the skills they have learned in one course or context to situations and problems that arise in another. Anderman argued research on human learning does not support this assumption. Research suggests such transfer seldom occurs naturally, particularly when learners need to transfer complex cognitive strategies from one domain to another ( Salomon and Perkins, 1989 ). Transfer is only likely to occur when care is taken to facilitate that transfer: that is, when students are specifically taught strategies that facilitate the transfer of skills learned in one domain to another domain ( Gick and Holyoak, 1983 ).

For example, Anderman explained, students in a mathematics class might be taught how to solve a problem involving the multiplication of percentages (e.g., 4.79% × 0.25%). The students then might encounter a problem in their social studies courses that involves calculating compounded interest (such as to solve a problem related to economics or banking). Although the same basic process of multiplying percentages might be necessary to solve both problems, it is unlikely that students will naturally, on their own, transfer the skills learned in the math class to the problem encountered in the social studies class.

In the past, Anderman said, there had been some notion that critical-thinking and problem-solving skills could be taught independent of context. For example, teaching students a complex language such as Latin, a computer programming language such as LOGO, or other topics that require complex thinking might result in an overall increase in their ability to think critically and problem solve.

Both Kuncel and Anderman maintained that the research does not support this idea. Instead, the literature better supports a narrower definition in which critical thinking is considered a finite set of specific skills. These skills are useful for effective decision making for many, but by no means all, tasks or situations. Their utility is further curtailed by task-specific knowledge demands. That is, a decision maker often has to have specific knowledge to make more than trivial progress with a problem or decision.

Anderman highlighted four important messages emerging from recent research. First, research documents that it is critical that students learn basic skills (such as basic arithmetic skills like times tables) so the skills become automatic. Mastery of these skills is required for the successful learning of more complex cognitive skills. Second, the use of general practices intended to improve students’ thinking are not usually successful as a means of improving their overall cognitive abilities. The research suggests students may become more adept in the specific skill taught, but this does not transfer to an overall increase in cognitive ability. Third, when general problem-solving strategies are taught, they should be taught within meaningful contexts and not as simply rote algorithms to be memorized. Finally, educators need to actively teach students to transfer skills from one context to another by helping students to recognize that the solution to one type of problem may be useful in solving a problem with similar structural features ( Mayer and Wittrock, 1996 ).

He noted that instructing students in general problem-solving skills can be useful but more elaborate scaffolding and domain-specific applications of these skills are often necessary. Whereas general problem-solving and critical-thinking strategies can be taught, research indicates these skills will not automatically or naturally transfer to other domains. Anderman stressed that educators and trainers must recognize that 21st century skills should be taught within specific domains; if they are taught as general skills, he cautioned, then extreme care must be taken to facilitate the transfer of these skills from one domain to another.

• ASSESSMENT EXAMPLES

The workshop included examples of four different types of assessments of critical-thinking and problem-solving skills—one that will be used to make international comparisons of achievement, one used to license lawyers, and two used for formative purposes (i.e., intended to support instructional decision making). The first example was the computerized problem-solving component of the Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). This assessment is still under development but is scheduled for operational administration in 2012. 6 Joachim Funke, professor of cognitive, experimental, and theoretical psychology with the Heidelberg University in Germany, discussed this assessment.

The second example was the Multistate Bar Exam, a paper-and-pencil test that consists of both multiple-choice and extended-response components. This test is used to qualify law students for practice in the legal profession. Susan Case, director of testing with the National Conference of Bar Exams, made this presentation.

The two formative assessments both make use of intelligent tutors, with assessments embedded into instruction modules. The “Auto Tutor” described by Art Graesser, professor of psychology with the University of Memphis, is used in instructing high school and higher education students in critical thinking skills in science. The Auto Tutor is part of a system Graesser has developed called Operation ARIES! (Acquiring Research Investigative and Evaluative Skills). The “Packet Tracer,” described by John Beherns, director of networking academy learning systems development with Cisco, is intended for individuals learning computer networking skills.

Problem Solving on PISA

For the workshop, Joachim Funke supplied the committee with the draft framework for PISA (see Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010 7 ) and summarized this information in his presentation. 8 The summary below is based on both documents.

PISA, Funke explained, defines problem solving as an individual’s capacity to engage in cognitive processing to understand and resolve problem situations where a solution is not immediately obvious. The definition includes the willingness to engage with such situations in order to achieve one’s potential as a constructive and reflective citizen ( Organisation for Co-operation and Development, 2010 , p. 12). Further, the PISA 2012 assessment of problem-solving competency will not test simple reproduction of domain-based knowledge, but will focus on the cognitive skills required to solve unfamiliar problems encountered in life and lying outside traditional curricular domains. While prior knowledge is important in solving problems, problem-solving competency involves the ability to acquire and use new knowledge or to use old knowledge in a new way to solve novel problems. The assessment is concerned with nonroutine problems, rather than routine ones (i.e., problems for which a previously learned solution procedure is clearly applicable). The problem solver must actively explore and understand the problem and either devise a new strategy or apply a strategy learned in a different context to work toward a solution. Assessment tasks center on everyday situations, with a wide range of contexts employed as a means of controlling for prior knowledge in general.

The key domain elements for PISA 2012 are as follows:

• The problem context: whether it involves a technological device or not, and whether the focus of the problem is personal or social
• The nature of the problem situation: whether it is interactive or static (defined below)
• The problem-solving processes: the cognitive processes involved in solving the problem

The PISA 2012 framework (pp. 18–19) defines four processes that are components of problem solving. The first involves information retrieval. This process requires the test taker to quickly explore a given system to find out how the relevant variables are related to each other. The test taker must explore the situation, interact with it, consider the limitations or obstacles, and demonstrate an understanding of the given information. The objective is for the test taker to develop a mental representation of each piece of information presented in the problem. In the PISA framework, this process is referred to as exploring and understanding.

The second process is model building, which requires the test taker to make connections between the given variables. To accomplish this, the examinee must sift through the information, select the information that is relevant, mentally organize it, and integrate it with relevant prior knowledge. This requires the test taker to represent the problem in some way and formulate hypotheses about the relevant factors and their interrelationships. In the PISA framework, this dimension is called representing and formulating.

The third process is called forecasting and requires the active control of a given system. The framework defines this process as setting goals, devising a strategy to carry them out, and executing the plan. In the PISA framework, this dimension is called planning and executing.

The fourth process is monitoring and reflecting. The framework defines this process as checking the goal at each stage, detecting unexpected events, taking remedial action if necessary, and reflecting on solutions from different perspectives by critically evaluating assumptions and alternative solutions.

Each of these processes requires the use of reasoning skills, which the framework describes as follows ( Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010 , p. 19):

In understanding a problem situation, the problem solver may need to distinguish between facts and opinion, in formulating a solution, the problem solver may need to identify relationship between variables, in selecting a strategy, the problem solver may need to consider cause and effect, and in communicating the results, the problem solver may need to organize information in a logical manner. The reasoning skills associated with these processes are embedded within problem solving. They are important in the PISA context since they can be taught and modeled in classroom instruction (e.g., Adey et al., 2007 ; Klauer and Phye, 2008 ).

For any given test taker, the test lasts for 40 minutes. PISA is a survey-based assessment that uses a balanced rotation design. A total of 80 minutes of material is organized into four 20-minute clusters, with each student taking two clusters.

The items are grouped into units around a common stimulus that describes the problem. Reading and numeracy demands are kept to a minimum. The tasks all consist of authentic stimulus items, such as refueling a moped, playing on a handball team, mixing a perfume, feeding cats, mixing elements in a chemistry lab, taking care of a pet, and so on. Funke noted that the different contexts for the stimuli are important because test takers might be motivated differentially and might be differentially interested depending on the context. The difficulty of the items is manipulated by increasing the number of variables or the number of relations that the test taker has to deal with.

PISA 2012 is a computer-based test in which items are presented by computer and test takers respond on the computer. Approximately three-quarters of the items are in a format that the computer can score (simple or complex multiple-choice items). The remaining items are constructed-response, and test takers enter their responses into text boxes.

Scoring of the items is based on the processes that the test taker uses to solve the problem and involves awarding points for the use of certain processes. For information retrieval, the focus is on identifying the need to collect baseline data (referred to in PISA terminology as identifying the “zero round”) and the method of manipulating one variable at a time (referred to in PISA terminology as “varying one thing at a time” or VOTAT). Full credit is awarded if the subject uses VOTAT strategy and makes use of zero rounds. Partial credit is given if the subject uses VOTAT but does not make use of zero rounds.

For model building, full credit is awarded if the generated model is correct. If one or two errors are present in the model, partial credit is given. If more than two errors are present, then no credit is awarded.

For forecasting, full credit is given if the target goals are reached. Partial credit is given if some progress toward the target goals can be registered, and no credit is given if there is no progress toward target goals at all.

PISA items are classified as static versus interactive. In static problems, all the information the test taker needs to solve the problem is presented at the outset. In contrast, interactive problems require the test taker to explore the problem to uncover important relevant information ( Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2010 , p. 15). Two sample PISA items appear in Box 2-1 .

Sample Problem-Solving Items for PISA 2012. Digital Watch–interactive: A simulation of a digital watch is presented. The watch is controlled by four buttons, the functions of which are unknown to the student at the outset of the problems. The (more...)

Funke and his colleagues have conducted analyses to evaluate the construct validity of the assessment. They have examined the internal structure of the assessment using structural equation modeling, which evaluates the extent to which the items measure the dimensions they are intended to measure. The results indicate the three dimensions are correlated with each other. Model Building and Forecasting correlate at .77; Forecasting and Information Retrieval correlate at .71; and Information Retrieval and Model Building correlate at .75. Funke said that the results also document that the items “load on” the three dimensions in the way the test developers hypothesized. He indicated some misfit related to the items that measure Forecasting, and he attributes this to the fact that the Forecasting items have a skewed distribution. However, the fit of the model does not change when these items are removed.

Funke reported results from studies of the relationship between test performance and other variables, including school achievement and two measures of problem solving on the PISA German National Extension on Complex Problem Solving. The latter assessment, called HEIFI, measures knowledge about a system and the control of the system separately. Scores on the PISA Model Building dimension are statistically significant (p < .05) related to school achievement (r = .64) and to scores on the HEIFI knowledge component (r = .48). Forecasting is statistically significant (p < .05) related to both of the HEIFI scores (r = .48 for HEIFI knowledge and r = .36 for HEIFI control). Information Retrieval is statistically significant (p < .05) related to HEIFI control (r = .38). The studies also show that HEIFI scores are not related to school achievement.

Funke closed by discussing the costs associated with the assessment. He noted it is not easy to specify the costs because in a German university setting, many costs are absorbed by the department and its equipment. Funke estimates that development costs run about $13 per unit, 9 plus $6.5 for the Cognitive Labs used to pilot test and refine the items. 10 The license for the Computer Based Assessment (CBA) Item-builder and the execution environment is given for free for scientific use from DIPF 11 Frankfurt.

The Bar Examination for Lawyers 12

The Bar examination is administered by each jurisdiction in the United States as one step in the process to license lawyers. The National Council of Bar Examiners (NCBE) develops a series of three exams for use by the jurisdictions. Jurisdictions may use any or all of these three exams or may administer locally developed exam components if they wish. The three major components developed by the NCBE include the Multi-state Bar Exam (MBE), the Multi-state Essay Exam (MEE), and the Multi-state Performance Test (MPT). All are paper-and-pencil tests. Examinees pay to take the test, and the costs are $54 for the MBE, $20 for the MEE, and $20 for the MPT.

Susan Case, who has spent her career working on licensing exams—first the medical licensing exam for physicians and then the bar exam for lawyers—noted the Bar examination is like other tests used to award professional licensure. The focus of the test is on the extent to which the test taker has the knowledge and skills necessary to be licensed in the profession on the day of the test. The test is intended to ensure the newly licensed professional knows what he/she needs to know to practice law. The test is not designed to measure the curriculum taught in law schools, but what licensed professionals need to know. When they receive the credential, lawyers are licensed to practice in all fields of law. This is analogous to medical licensing in which the licensed professional is eligible to practice any kind of medicine.

The Bar exam includes both multiple-choice and constructed-response components. Both require examinees to be able to gather and synthesize information and apply their knowledge to the given situation. The questions generally follow a vignette that describes a case or problem and asks the examinee to determine the issues to resolve before advising the client or to determine other information needed in order to proceed. For instance, what questions should be asked next? What is the best strategy to implement? What is the best defense? What is the biggest obstacle to relief? The questions may require the examinee to synthesize the law and the facts to predict outcomes. For instance, is the ordinance constitutional? Should a conviction be overturned?

The purpose of the MBE is to assess the extent to which an examinee can apply fundamental legal principles and legal reasoning to analyze a given pattern of facts. The questions focus on the understanding of legal principles rather than memorization of local case or statutory law. The MBE consists of 60 multiple-choice questions and lasts a full day.

A sample question follows:

A woman was told by her neighbor that he planned to build a new fence on his land near the property line between their properties. The woman said that, although she had little money, she would contribute something toward the cost. The neighbor spent $2,000 in materials and a day of his time to construct the fence. The neighbor now wants her to pay half the cost of the materials. Is she liable for this amount?

The purpose of the MEE is to assess the examinee’s ability to (1) identify legal issues raised by a hypothetical factual situation; (2) separate material that is relevant from that which is not; (3) present a reasoned analysis of the relevant issues in a clear, concise, and well-organized composition; and (4) demonstrate an understanding of the fundamental legal principles relevant to the probable resolution of the issues raised by the factual situation.

The MEE lasts for 6 hours and consists of nine 30-minute questions. An excerpt from a sample question follows:

The CEO/chairman of the 12-member board of directors (the Board) of a company plus three other members of the Board are senior officers of the company. The remaining eight members of the Board are wholly independent directors. Recently, the Board decided to hire a consulting firm to market a new product . . . The CEO disclosed to the Board that he had a 25% partnership interest in the consulting firm. The CEO stated that he would not be involved in any work to be performed by the consulting firm. He knew but did not disclose to the Board that the consulting firm’s proposed fee for this consulting assignment was substantially higher than it normally charged for comparable work . . . The Board discussed the relative merits of the two proposals for 10 minutes. The Board then voted unanimously (CEO abstaining) to hire the consulting firm . . . Did the CEO violate his duty of loyalty to his company? Explain. Assuming the CEO breached his duty of loyalty to his company, does he have any defense to liability? Explain. Did the other directors violate their duty of care? Explain.

The purpose of the MPT is to assess fundamental lawyering skills in realistic situations by asking the candidate to complete a task that a beginning lawyer should be able to accomplish. The MPT requires applicants to sort detailed factual materials; separate relevant from irrelevant facts; analyze statutory, case, and administrative materials for relevant principles of law; apply relevant law to the facts in a manner likely to resolve a client’s problem; identify and resolve ethical dilemmas; communicate effectively in writing; and complete a lawyering task within time constraints.

Each task is completely self-contained and includes a file, a library, and a task to complete. The task might deal with a car accident, for example, and therefore might include a file with pictures of the accident scene and depositions from the various witnesses, as well as a library with relevant case law. Examinees are given 90 minutes to complete each task.

For example, in a case involving a slip and fall in a store, the task might be to prepare an initial draft of an early dispute resolution for a judge. The draft should candidly discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the client’s case. The file would contain the instructional memo from the supervising attorney, the local rule, the complaint, an investigator’s report, and excerpts of the depositions of the plaintiff and a store employee. The library would include a jury instruction concerning the premises liability with commentary on contributory negligence.

The MBE is a multiple-choice test and thus scored by machine. However, the other two components require human scoring. The NCBE produces the questions and the grading guidelines for the MEE and MPT, but the essays and performance tests are scored by the jurisdictions themselves. The scorers are typically lawyers who are trained during grading seminars held at the NCBE offices, after the exam is administered. At this time, they review sample papers and receive training on how to apply the scoring guidelines in a consistent fashion.

Each component of the Bar examination (MBE, MEE, MPT) is intended to assess different skills. The MBE focuses on breadth of knowledge, the MEE focuses on depth of knowledge, and the MPT focuses on the ability to demonstrate practical skills. Together, the three formats cover the different types of tasks that a new lawyer needs to do.

Determinations about weighting the three components are left to the jurisdictions; however, the NCBE urges them to weight the MBE score by 50 percent and the MEE and MPT by 25 percent each. The recommendation is an attempt to balance a number of concerns, including authenticity, psychometric considerations, logistical issues, and economic concerns. The recommendation is to award the highest weight to the MBE because it is the most psychometrically sound. The reliability of scores on the MBE is generally over .90, much higher than scores on the other portions, and the MBE is scaled and equated across time. The recommended weighting helps to ensure high decision consistency and comparability of pass/fail decisions across administrations.

Currently the MBE is used by all but three jurisdictions (Louisiana, Washington, and Puerto Rico). The essay exam is used by 27 jurisdictions, and the performance test is used by 34 jurisdictions.

Test Development

Standing test development committees that include practicing lawyers, judges, and lawyers on staff with law schools write the test questions. The questions are reviewed by outside experts, pretested on appropriate populations, analyzed and revised, and professionally edited before operational use. Case said the test development procedures for the Bar exam are analogous to those used for the medical licensure exams.

Operation ARIES! (Acquiring Research Investigative and Evaluative Skills)

The summary below is based on materials provided by Art Graesser, including his presentation 13 and two background papers he supplied to the committee ( Graesser et al., 2010 ; Millis et al., in press ).

Operation ARIES! is a tutorial system with a formative assessment component intended for high school and higher education students, Graesser explained. It is designed to teach and assess critical thinking about science. The program operates in a game environment intended to be engaging to students. The system includes an “Auto Tutor,” which makes use of animated characters that converse with students. The Auto Tutor is able to hold conversations with students in natural language, interpret the student’s response, and respond in a way that is adaptive to the student’s response. The designers have created a science fiction setting in which the game and exercises operate. In the game, alien creatures called “Fuaths” are disguised as humans. The Fuaths disseminate bad science through various media outlets in an attempt to confuse humans about the appropriate use of the scientific method. The goal for the student is to become a “special agent of the Federal Bureau of Science (FBS), an agency with a mission to identify the Fuaths and save the planet” ( Graesser et al., 2010 , p. 328).

The system addresses scientific inquiry skills, developing research ideas, independent and dependent variables, experimental control, the sample, experimenter bias, and relation of data to theory. The focus is on use of these skills in the domains of biology, chemistry, and psychology. The system helps students to learn to evaluate evidence intended to support claims. Some examples of the kinds of research questions/claims that are evaluated include the following:

From Biology

• Do chemical and organic pesticides have different effects on food quality?
• Does milk consumption increase bone density?

From Chemistry

• Does a new product for winter roads prevent water from freezing?
• Does eating fish increase blood mercury levels?

From Psychology

• Does using cell phones hurt driving?
• Is a new cure for autism effective?

The system includes items in real-life formats, such as articles, advertisements, blogs, and letters to the editor, and makes use of different types of media where it is common to see faulty claims.

Through the system, the student encounters a story told by video, combined with communications received by e-mail, text message, and updates. The student is engaged through the Auto Tutor, which involves a “tutor agent” that serves as a narrator, and a “student agent” that serves in different roles, depending on the skill level of the student.

The system makes use of three kinds of modules—interactive training, case studies, and interrogations. The interactive training exchanges begin with the student reading an e-book, which provides the requisite information used in later modules. After each chapter, the student responds to a set of multiple-choice questions intended to assess the targeted skills. The text is interactive in that it involves “trialogs” (three-way conversations) between the primary agent, the student agent, and the actual (human) student. It is adaptive in that the strategy used is geared to the student’s performance. If the student is doing poorly, the two auto-tutor agents carry on a conversation that promotes vicarious learning: that is, the tutor agent and the student agent interact with each other, and the human student observes. If the student is performing at an intermediate level, normal tutoring occurs in which the student carries on a conversational exchange with the tutor agent. If the student is doing very well, he or she may be asked to teach the student agent, under the notion that the act of teaching can help to perfect one’s skills.

In the case study modules, the student is expected to apply what he or she has learned. The case study modules involve some type of flawed science, and the student is to identify the flaws by applying information learned from the interactive text in the first module. The student responds by verbally articulating the flaws, and the system makes use of advances in computational linguistics to analyze the meaning of the response. The researchers adopted the case study approach because it “allows learners to encode and discover the rich source of constraints and interdependencies underlying the target elements (flaws) within the cases. [Prior] cases provide a knowledge base for assessing new cases and help guide reasoning, problem solving, interpretation and other cognitive processes” ( Millis et al., in press , p. 17).

In the interrogation modules, insufficient information is provided, so students must ask questions. Research is presented in an abbreviated fashion, such as through headlines, advertisements, or abstracts. The student is expected to identify the relevant questions to ask and to learn to discriminate good research from flawed research. The storyline is advanced by e-mails, dialogues, and videos that are interspersed among the learning activities.

Through the three kinds of modules, the system interweaves a variety of key principles of learning that Graesser said have been shown to increase learning. These include

• Self-explanation (where the learner explains the material to another student, such as the automated student)
• Immediate feedback (through the tutoring system)
• Multimedia effects (which tend to engage the student)
• Active learning (in which students actually participate in solving a problem)
• Dialog interactivity (in which students learn by engaging in conversations and tutorial dialogs)
• Multiple, real-life examples (intended to help students transfer what they learn in one context to another context and to real world situations)

Graesser closed by saying that he and his colleagues are beginning to collect data from evaluation studies to examine the effects of the Auto Tutor. Research has focused on estimating changes in achievement before and after use of the system, and, to date, the results are promising.

Packet Tracer

The summary below is based on materials provided by John Behrens, including his presentation 14 and a background paper he forwarded in preparation for the workshop ( Behrens et al., in press ).

To help countries around the world train their populations in networking skills, Cisco created the Networking Academy. The academy is a public/private partnership through which Cisco provides free online curricula and assessments. Behrens pointed out that in order to become adept with networking, students need both a conceptual understanding of networking and the skills to apply this knowledge to real situations. Thus, hands-on practice and assessment on real equipment are important components of the academy’s instructional program. Cisco also wants to provide students with time for out-of-class practice and opportunities to explore on their own using online equipment that is not typically available in the average classroom setting. In the Networking Academy, students work with an online instructor, and they proceed through an established curriculum that incorporates numerous interactive activities.

Behrens talked specifically about a new program Cisco has developed called “Packet Tracer,” a computer package that uses simulations to provide instruction and includes an interactive and adaptable assessment component. Cisco has incorporated Packet Tracer activities into the curricula for training networking professionals. Through this program, instructors and students can construct their own activities, and students can explore problems on their own. In Cisco’s Networking Academy, assessments can be student-initiated or instructor-initiated. Student-initiated assessments are primarily embedded in the curriculum and include quizzes, interactive activities, and “challenge labs,” which are a feature of Packet Tracer. The student-initiated assessments are designed to provide feedback to the student to help his or her learning. They use a variety of technologies ranging from multiple-choice questions (in the quizzes) to complex simulations (in the challenge labs). Before the development of Packet Tracer, the instructor-initiated assessments consisted either of hands-on exams with real networking equipment or multiple-choice exams in the online assessment system. Packet Tracer provides more simulation-based options, and also includes detailed reporting and grade-book integration features.

Each assessment consists of one extensive network configuration or troubleshooting activity that may require up to 90 minutes to complete. Access to the assessment is associated with a particular curricular unit, and it may be re-accessed repeatedly based on instructor authorization. The system provides simulations of a broad range of networking devices and networking protocols, including features set around the Cisco IOS (Internet Operating System). Instructions for tasks can be presented through HTML-formatted text boxes that can be preauthored, stored, and made accessible by the instructor at the appropriate time.

Behrens presented an example of a simulated networking problem in which the student needs to obtain the appropriate cable. To complete this task, the student must determine what kind of cable is needed, where on the computer to plug it in, and how to connect it. The student’s performance is scored, and his or her interactions with the problem are tracked in a log. The goal is not to simply assign a score to the student’s performance but to provide detailed feedback to enhance learning and to correct any misinterpretations. The instructors can receive and view the log in order to evaluate how well the student understands the tasks and what needs to be done.

Packet Tracer can simulate a broad range of devices and networking protocols, including a wide range of PC facilities covering communication cards, power functionality, web browsers, and operating system configurations. The particular devices, configurations, and problem states are determined by the author of the task (e.g., the instructor) in order to address whatever proficiencies the chapter, course, or instruction targets. When icons of the devices are touched in the simulator, more detailed pictures are presented with which the student can interact. The task author can program scoring rules into the system. Students can be observed trying and discarding potential solutions based on feedback from the game resulting in new understandings. The game encourages students to engage in problem-solving steps (such as problem identification, solution generation, and solution testing). Common incorrect strategies can be seen across recordings.

For Kuncel’s presentation, see http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Kuncel.pdf . For Kuncel’s paper, see http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Kuncel_Paper.pdf . For Anderman’s presentation, see http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Anderman.pdf . For Anderman’s paper, see http: ​//nrc51/xpedio/groups ​/dbasse/documents ​/webpage/060387~1.pdf [August 2011].

Respectively, the Graduate Record Exam, Medical College Admission Test, Law School Admission Test, Graduate Management Admission Test, Miller Analogies Test, and Pharmacy College Admission Test.

Convergent validilty indicates the degree to which an operationalized construct is similar to other operationalized constructs that it theoretically should also be similar to. For instance, to show the convergent validity of a test of critical thinking, the scores on the test can be correlated with scores on other tests that are also designed to measure critical thinking. High correlations between the test scores would be evidence of convergent validity.

Discriminant validity evaluates the extent to which a measure of an operationalized construct differs from measures of other operationalized constructs that it should differ from. In the present context, the interest is in verifying that critical thinking is a construct distinct from general intelligence and expert performance. Thus, discriminant validity would be examined by evaluating the patterns of correlations between and among scores on tests of critical thinking and scores on tests of the other two constructs (general intelligence and expert performance).

It is important to note that when corrected for restriction in range, these coefficients increase to .47 to .51 for individual scores and .51 for the combined score.

For a full description of the PISA program, see http://www ​.oecd.org/pages ​/0,3417,en_32252351 ​_32235731_1_1_1_1_1,00.html [August 2011].

Available at http://www ​.oecd.org/dataoecd ​/8/42/46962005.pdf [August 2011].

Available at http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Funke.pdf [August 2011].

A unit consists of stimulus materials, instructions, and the associated questions.

Costs are in American dollars.

DIPF stands for the Deutsches Institut für Internationale Pädagogische Forschung, which translates to the German Institute for Educational Research and Educational Information.

The summary is based on a presentation by Susan Case, see http://www7 ​.nationalacademies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Case.pdf [August 2011].

For Graesser’s presentation, see http: ​//nrc51/xpedio/groups ​/dbasse/documents ​/webpage/060267~1.pdf [August 2011].

For Behrens’ presentation, see http://www7 ​.national-academies ​.org/bota/21st ​_Century_Workshop_Behrens.pdf [August 2011].

• Cite this Page National Research Council (US) Committee on the Assessment of 21st Century Skills. Assessing 21st Century Skills: Summary of a Workshop. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2011. 2, Assessing Cognitive Skills.
• PDF version of this title (1003K)

In this Page

Other titles in this collection.

• The National Academies Collection: Reports funded by National Institutes of Health

Recent Activity

• Assessing Cognitive Skills - Assessing 21st Century Skills Assessing Cognitive Skills - Assessing 21st Century Skills

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

More From Forbes

13 Easy Steps To Improve Your Critical Thinking Skills

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

With the sheer volume of information that we’re bombarded with on a daily basis – and with the pervasiveness of fake news and social media bubbles – the ability to look at evidence, evaluate the trustworthiness of a source, and think critically is becoming more important than ever. This is why, for me, critical thinking is one of the most vital skills to cultivate for future success.

Critical thinking isn’t about being constantly negative or critical of everything. It’s about objectivity and having an open, inquisitive mind. To think critically is to analyze issues based on hard evidence (as opposed to personal opinions, biases, etc.) in order to build a thorough understanding of what’s really going on. And from this place of thorough understanding, you can make better decisions and solve problems more effectively.

To put it another way, critical thinking means arriving at your own carefully considered conclusions instead of taking information at face value. Here are 13 ways you can cultivate this precious skill:

1. Always vet new information with a cautious eye. Whether it’s an article someone has shared online or data that’s related to your job, always vet the information you're presented with. Good questions to ask here include, "Is this information complete and up to date?” “What evidence is being presented to support the argument?” and “Whose voice is missing here?”

2. Look at where the information has come from. Is the source trustworthy? What is their motivation for presenting this information? For example, are they trying to sell you something or get you to take a certain action (like vote for them)?

Best High-Yield Savings Accounts Of 2024

Best 5% interest savings accounts of 2024.

3. Consider more than one point of view. Everyone has their own opinions and motivations – even highly intelligent people making reasonable-sounding arguments have personal opinions and biases that shape their thinking. So, when someone presents you with information, consider whether there are other sides to the story.

4. Practice active listening. Listen carefully to what others are telling you, and try to build a clear picture of their perspective. Empathy is a really useful skill here since putting yourself in another person's shoes can help you understand where they're coming from and what they might want. Try to listen without judgment – remember, critical thinking is about keeping an open mind.

5. Gather additional information where needed. Whenever you identify gaps in the information or data, do your own research to fill those gaps. The next few steps will help you do this objectively…

6. Ask lots of open-ended questions. Curiosity is a key trait of critical thinkers, so channel your inner child and ask lots of "who," "what," and "why" questions.

7. Find your own reputable sources of information, such as established news sites, nonprofit organizations, and education institutes. Try to avoid anonymous sources or sources with an ax to grind or a product to sell. Also, be sure to check when the information was published. An older source may be unintentionally offering up wrong information just because events have moved on since it was published; corroborate the info with a more recent source.

8. Try not to get your news from social media. And if you do see something on social media that grabs your interest, check the accuracy of the story (via reputable sources of information, as above) before you share it.

9. Learn to spot fake news. It's not always easy to spot false or misleading content, but a good rule of thumb is to look at the language, emotion, and tone of the piece. Is it using emotionally charged language, for instance, and trying to get you to feel a certain way? Also, look at the sources of facts, figures, images, and quotes. A legit news story will clearly state its sources.

10. Learn to spot biased information. Like fake news, biased information may seek to appeal more to your emotions than logic and/or present a limited view of the topic. So ask yourself, “Is there more to this topic than what’s being presented here?” Do your own reading around the topic to establish the full picture.

11. Question your own biases, too. Everyone has biases, and there’s no point pretending otherwise. The trick is to think objectively about your likes and dislikes, preferences, and beliefs, and consider how these might affect your thinking.

12. Form your own opinions. Remember, critical thinking is about thinking independently. So once you’ve assessed all the information, form your own conclusions about it.

13. Continue to work on your critical thinking skills. I recommend looking at online learning platforms such as Udemy and Coursera for courses on general critical thinking skills, as well as courses on specific subjects like cognitive biases.

Read more about critical thinking and other essential skills in my new book, Future Skills: The 20 Skills & Competencies Everyone Needs To Succeed In A Digital World . Written for anyone who wants to surf the wave of digital transformation – rather than be drowned by it – the book explores why these vital future skills matter and how to develop them.

• Editorial Standards
• Reprints & Permissions

BRIEF RESEARCH REPORT article

Relation between metacognitive strategies, motivation to think, and critical thinking skills.

• 1 Educations Science Department, University of the Bío Bío, Concepción, Chile
• 2 Psychology Faculty, University of Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain

Critical thinking is a complex reasoning skill, and even though it is hard to reach a consensus on its definition, there is agreement on it being an eminently cognitive skill. It is strongly related with reflective and metacognitive skills, as well as attitudinal or motivational aspects, although no model has yet been able to integrate these three elements. We present herein the preliminary results of a study seeking to establish these relations, in a sample of Chilean university students. 435 students from three universities participated, of which 88 were men, 333 were women, and 14 did not indicate their gender. Their ages ranges between 18 and 51 years old ( M  = 21, SD = 3.09). Three instruments were applied, one to measure metacognitive strategies, one to measure motivation to critical thinking, and a third to measure critical thinking skills. The relation was analyzed via structural equations. The results show a positive, strong, and significant relation between metacognition and motivation to think. However, only a weak significant relation was observed between motivation to think and critical thinking, and no direct relation was found between metacognition and critical thinking. We hypothesize a significant but moderate relation between the variables, where metacognition influences motivation to think, which in turn influences critical thinking skills. Factors are discussed which could negatively affect the studied relations, as well as the importance of generating integrated models between the three variables, as they would show a theoretical and empirical link.

Introduction

Critical thinking is a relevant topic for the 21st century, highlighted by Unesco as one of the skills to develop among students to properly face the challenges of this century ( Scott, 2015 ). Despite its importance for human development, its implementation in educational curricula has been difficult to carry out, both at the level of school systems and in higher education systems ( Ossa et al., 2018 ; Silva Pacheco, 2019 ).

This difficulty of incorporating critical thinking into the educational process may be related with the complexity of the task. On one side, there is discussion as to whether the process can be taught as a skill, or whether it is more of a facet of thinking which can only be stimulated in a concrete way ( Saiz, 2017 ). Building on this factor, the complexity of the matter is also expressed in the attempts at defining the process, since there are various definitions of critical thinking. These definitions present different natures, ranging from only cognitive reasoning processes; cognitive and metacognitive processes; cognitive, metacognitive and attitudinal processes; and finally, cognitive, metacognitive, attitudinal, and social agency processes ( Montero, 2010 ; Rivas and Saiz, 2012 ; Ossa and Díaz, 2017 ; Saiz, 2017 ).

As society and socio-cultural challenges have become more complex, it is necessary to adopt more complex perspectives on human processes. Critical thinking perspectives which help integrate diverse processes could be more pertinent for the effective development of this skill among people ( Paul and Elder, 2003 ).

Critical thinking has been linked to different skills, both cognitive and non-cognitive, for example, problem solving, scientific reasoning, motivation, metacognition, and now ultimately creativity ( Saiz and Rivas, 2008 ; Tamayo-Alzate et al., 2019 ; Halpern and Dunn, 2021 ; Muñoz and Ruiz, 2022 ; Santana et al., 2022 ). Of these skills, problem solving has been incorporated as a constituent element of critical thinking in some models; Likewise, motivation and metacognition are closely related factors and it has been proposed that they are satellite skills for critical thinking processes ( Valenzuela and Nieto, 2008 ; Rivas and Saiz, 2011 ; García, 2022 ), although no empirical information has been shown to clearly demonstrate this. The objective of this paper is precisely to show the relationship between motivation to think and metacognition with critical thinking, in order to contribute to what is proposed.

Critical thinking, motivation, and metacognition

Even when critical thinking is a broadly used concept in the academic and educational world, with a wide range of studies in the last decade, it continues to be a difficult phenomenon to conceptualize and to create little consensus ( Ossa et al., 2016 ; Saiz, 2017 ; Díaz et al., 2019 ).

It is conceptualized as a cognitive mechanism which filters information about the ideological intentions accompanying said information, via continual questioning of knowledge production practices, and the recognition of its different perspectives ( Yang and Chung, 2009 ; Montero, 2010 ).

It is a type of thinking oriented toward data and action, in a context of solving problems and interacting with other people ( Daniel and Auriac, 2012 ; López, 2012 ). Critical thinking is self-directed, self-disciplined, self-regulated and self-corrected. It involves undergoing rigorous standards of excellence and a conscious dominion of its use. It also implies effective communication and the development of problem solving skills ( Saiz and Rivas, 2008 , 2012 , 2016 ).

Critical thinking is characterized by generating higher-level cognitive processing in people, centered on the skills of reflecting, comprehension, evaluation and creation. It therefore requires high intellectual development. However, it is also a skill which can be developed, since there are no important differences between people with average and high intellectual levels with regards to developing critical thinking ( Sierra et al., 2010 ).

Since critical thinking is a high-level cognitive process, and the ability to generate an elaborated thought, a close relation has been proposed with elements which are not considered merely cognitive, including metacognition ( Rivas et al., 2022 ). Metacognition is a reflective process which helps deepen thought, regulate, and generate consciousness about thought ( Tamayo-Alzate et al., 2019 ; Drigas and Mitsea, 2020 ). It has been worked on as both a reflective process of self-knowledge, and as a skill which helps develop other cognitive processes including memory, learning, or even intelligence, since different levels of application can be established in its use ( Drigas and Mitsea, 2021 ).

There is evidence that metacognitive strategies can influence critical thinking and its components. For one, it improves the use of metacognitive strategies due to intervention in critical thinking. It also improves the use of critical thinking with metacognitive strategies in interventions done with psychology students at universities ( Ossa et al., 2016 ; Rivas et al., 2022 ). Significant and positive relations have also been found between critical thinking and metacognitive consciousness among medical students, although not for regulation and knowledge tasks ( de la Portilla Maya et al., 2022 ).

In this way, we can observe a relative influence on the way that people think about thinking, since metacognition supports decision making and final evaluation about strategies to resolve problems ( Rivas et al., 2022 ).

Some authors also indicate the presence of another non-cognitive component in critical thinking, which is disposition or motivation ( Facione et al., 2000 ; Saiz and Rivas, 2008 ; Marin and Halpern, 2011 ; Valenzuela et al., 2014 ; Halpern and Dunn, 2023 ). This component is fundamental to achieve this skill, since even when the indicated cognitive functions are available, if people either lack the desire to apply critical thinking or deem it inconvenient to do so, critical thinking will not be adequately manifested ( Valenzuela and Nieto, 2008 ; Valenzuela et al., 2014 ).

This non-cognitive element is based on human attitudes or motivations which complement the use of critical thinking, allowing it to be better developed, since they drive personal improvement ( Boonsathirakul and Kerdsomboon, 2021 ). The factors presented as facets of a disposition toward critical thinking include seeking truth, open-mindedness, being analytical, systematicity, curiosity, self-confidence and maturity (Facione, in Boonsathirakul and Kerdsomboon, 2021 ).

However, considering these non-cognitive elements as dispositions of a being also involves assuming certain personality traits or dimensions of values which cannot always be adequately measured. They should thus be considered more as motivational aspects, since they could be better defined and with a greater possibility of modification, given that they are more related with behavioral and perceptual elements ( Valenzuela et al., 2014 , 2023 ). From this perspective, we understand that non-cognitive components are based on the expectations and value given to the task. In this way, we establish a direct and causal relation between motivation and critical thinking, where the former explains critical thinking development by between 8 and 17%, according to the instrument used to measure it ( Valenzuela et al., 2023 ).

In this way, promoting motivational aspects is a relevant factor for developing cognitive and metacognitive processes, since complex processes are exhausting and require a high and constant investment of cognitive and emotional factors ( Valenzuela and Nieto, 2008 ; Valenzuela and Saiz, 2010 ; Gaviria, 2019 ; Nieto-Márquez et al., 2021 ).

Finally, a relative relation has been noted between motivational processes and metacognitive strategies. Correa et al. (2019) performed an evaluation among Chilean high school students about the use of metacognitive strategies and motivation to critical thinking in bias recognition. They found a positive, significant, and medium-intensity correlation ( r  = 0.50, p  < 0.001) between both variables, which indicates that cognitive and non-cognitive factors have a relevant link for human thought.

With the aforementioned background, we can hypothesize the existence of a significant and positive relation between critical thinking, metacognitive strategies, and motivation to think critically; that motivation to think directly affects critical thinking; and those metacognitive strategies are related with both variables.

In this article it will be showed preliminary results from this relation, presenting a relational model based on structural equations which would allow for establishing direct and mediated relations between said variables.

A correlational study was done via structural equations.

Participants

435 students from pedagogy majors at three Chilean universities participated in the study. Of these, 88 were male (20.2%), 333 were female (76.6%), 7 were students of unidentified gender (1.6%), and 7 did not respond (1.6%). Students’ ages fell between 18 and 51 years ( M  = 21, SD = 3.09). The careers to which the students belong are in the area of pedagogy, in specialties of mathematics (22%), history (8%), science (15%), special education (15%), and early childhood education (40%).

Instruments

For this study, a battery with three instruments was applied:

1. Metacognitive strategy questionnaire from O’Neil and Abedi, adapted into Spanish by Martínez (2007) . This measure metacognitive strategies applied to different academic tasks. There are 20 items organized into three dimensions: self-knowledge (referring to metacognitive consciousness), self-regulation (referring to metacognitive control), and evaluation (referring to global task evaluation). Results are recorded with a Likert-type scale of 5 choices (0 to 4 points). This instrument has been applied to Chilean university students and shown adequate reliability indicators. The global Cronbach’s α was 0.87, and for the dimensions it was between 0.62 and 0.65 ( Correa et al., 2019 ).

2. Critical thinking motivation questionnaire from Valenzuela, measuring the intention of applying thinking to knowledge tasks, based on personal expectations and the value of the task. It contains 19 items organized into 5 dimensions: Expectation ( α  = 0.774), Importance ( α  = 0.770), Cost ( α  = 0.775), Utility ( α  = 0.790) and Interest ( α  = 0.724). Its results are recorded based on a Likert-type scale with 5 alternatives (0–4 points). It has been applied to Chilean university students with strong reliability indicators. The global Cronbach’s α was 0.92, and the values for its dimensions ranged from 0.69 to 0.83 ( Valenzuela and Nieto, 2008 ; Correa et al., 2019 ).

3. Critical thinking task test from Miranda, adapted by Palma Luengo et al. (2021) . This measured the capacity to apply cognitive critical thinking processes to socio-scientific topics. It contains 15 items organized into three dimensions: inquiry (referring to identifying useful information), analysis (referring to the decision to use pertinent and reliable data), and arguing (referring to providing arguments with useful and reliable data). Its results are recorded with a sequence of scores ranging from 0 to 3 points, based on a performance rubric. It has been applied to a sample of Chilean university students with moderately adequate reliability indicators. The overall Cronbach’s α was 0.67, with moderately low values in its dimensions ranging from 0.47 to 0.60 ( Palma Luengo et al., 2021 ).

Three metacognition questions were incorporated into this instrument to reflect on the tasks being done, one for each dimension (e.g., How are you so confident about knowing how to do the activity? ). Two questions about motivation to thinking were also included, in the middle and at the end of the test, seeking to analyze whether there was a disposition to answer a question in a more voluntary form (e.g., Do you want to finish the test here or do you want to continue to delve deeper into the topic? ). The overall Cronbach’s α was 0.78 (five dimensions), and the values were moderately adequate within these dimensions (0.54 for metacognition and 0.73 for motivation).

We made contact with the directors of the pedagogy majors at three different universities, coordinating the process and determining the courses to consider. After this, a talk was carried out in each course, inviting students to participate in the study. Written informed consent was incorporated into the survey, indicating the study objectives and describing the anonymous and voluntary nature of participation. Open consultations were made about participation in applying the surveys, applying the battery of instruments only to those who wished to participate.

After answering the instruments, the data was emptied into a digital database and analyzed with SPSS v.27 and RStudio software. For data analysis, we used inferential and multivariate statistics. For all inference effects, a 5% significance threshold has been considered. In the structural models, we applied formats from Partial Least Squares (SEM-PLS).

We present an application of structural equations based on partial least squares (PLS), designed to model behavioral situations and social sciences. According to Wold (1980) it is fairly flexible, since it is useful for small sample sizes and also does not require distributional assumptions for the variables, along with being useful for predictive analysis as well as theoretical confirmation. With the PLS format, there are three methodological considerations which are relevant for application: (i) choosing variable with items that effectively belong, (ii) valuing items’ reliability and validity, and (iii) properly interpreting the coefficients.

As indicated in this type of modeling, there are two sections. The first is the measurement model, where each dimension is formatively related with its items: i.e., the item contributes to the variable with a certain coefficient called weight ( w ). This factorial weight represents the weighting of the dimension regarding the latent variable which it intends to measure, so that we can expect it to have sufficient magnitude to be statistically significant.

To begin, for the Metacognition variable, the scores for Self-Knowledge ( w  = 0.67, p  < 0.001, 95% IC: 0.41; 0.97) and Evaluation ( w  = 0.34, p  < 0.01, 95% IC: 0.12; 0.56) are relevant for generating the latent indicator. For the Motivation variable, the scores for Expectations ( w  = 0.21, p  < 0.05, 95% IC: 0.25; 0.62), Importance ( w  = 0.43, p  < 0.001, 95% IC: 0.14; 0.60), and Usefulness ( w  = 0.39, p  < 0.001, 95% IC: 0.19; 0.25) are representative when generating this indicator. For Critical Thinking, only the Metacognition indicator ( w  = 0.71, p  < 0.05, 95% IC: 0.56; 0.86) turned out to be appropriate.

The second section of this type of models is called the structural model. It shows the causality relations between the latent variables. Schematically, we consider that a variable X is the cause of another variable Y, and an arrow will go from X to Y. For this study, the relational schematic between variables is given by the following hypothesis set:

H1 : There is a positive effect of the Metacognition Strategy (ME) on Critical Thinking Motivation (MO). H2 : There is a positive effect of Metacognition Strategy (ME) on Critical Thinking (PC). H3 : There is a positive effect of Critical Thinking Motivation (MO) on Critical Thinking (PC).

Figure 1 shows the hypotheses combined with their respective variables, indicating the measurement and structural models.

Figure 1 . Schematic of hypothesis and effects expected. Structural equation model. Source: authors.

The empirical results from the model appear in Table 1 with their significance level.

Table 1 . Structural equation model results.

Finally, in the structural model ( Figure 2 ), we can see the fulfillment of hypothesis H1 ( B  = 0.56, p  < 0.001, 95% IC: 0.49; 0.63) where a greater perception of Metacognition leads to a greater level of Critical Thinking Motivation. There is also fulfillment for hypothesis H3 ( B  = 0.21, p  < 0.01, 95% IC: 0.06; 0.34) indicating that greater levels of Critical Thinking Motivation lead to a greater level of Critical Thinking.

Figure 2 . Results schematic. Structural equations model. Source: authors.

Our preliminary study results show ties between the three variables, as indicated both in theory ( Facione et al., 2000 ; Valenzuela and Nieto, 2008 ; Tamayo-Alzate et al., 2019 ) and in other studies ( Correa et al., 2019 ; Rivas et al., 2022 ; Valenzuela et al., 2023 ). However, we found some disparate data with regards to the latter points.

For the structural models, hypotheses H1 and H3 have been fulfilled, reporting statistically significant evidence that greater perceived Metacognition explains a greater level of Critical Thinking Motivation, a greater level of Critical Thinking Motivation implies a higher level of Critical Thinking.

One important aspect here is that a significant relation was found between motivation and critical thinking skills, which is supported by Valenzuela et al. (2023) . While the value of the relation is moderate, it can be related, as presented in the aforementioned study, and may be due to the type of instrument used to measure critical thinking. One notable aspect is that the motivation question incorporated into the critical thinking task instrument had little weight within this instrument. However, this could be explained because the questions sought to consider effort for the task. Reviewing the components of the critical thinking motivation survey, the dimensions with the strongest ties were those oriented towards expectations, usefulness and importance, not effort or energy costs.

It is possible that the relationship between metacognition and motivation to think is established because, from the theoretical model used ( Valenzuela and Nieto, 2008 ; Valenzuela et al., 2014 ), the expectation of the task, and its assessment of usefulness (aspects motivation), require an evaluation process (metacognitive aspect); However, this idea must be deepened and reviewed in more detail.

Considering metacognition, no direct relation was observed between the instrument used in this study to measure the metacognitive strategies of self-knowledge, self-regulation and evaluation on one hand, and critical thinking on the other. This situation goes against other studies’ findings ( de la Portilla Maya et al., 2022 ; Rivas et al., 2022 ), and may be explained by the type of instrument used, which may not be sensitive to the critical thinking tasks measured by the test from Palma Luengo et al. (2021) .

The relation discovered about metacognition supporting critical thinking motivation, in order to thus achieve better critical thinking, is one of the key relevant findings in this study. It implies that reflecting on oneself and tasks can generate greater expectations and evaluation for the task, which can drive better performance. These results still need more breadth and depth from further research.

This study is only a preliminary report of results, to account for the relationship between the aforementioned variables and propose that critical thinking benefits from metacognitive and motivational work. Its limitations are the fact that its objective was only empirical, in order to account for the relationship raised in studies ( Valenzuela and Nieto, 2008 ), so the theoretical depth was less. On the other hand, there was a limited number of participating students, and only from some university majors. Likewise, it is considered that the critical thinking test that was used presents adequate reliability values overall, but with less powerful values in some of its dimensions (specifically, inquiry and motivation). It is considered necessary to replicate the study with another instrument and a larger sample to more fully support the results found.

Data availability statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.

Ethics statement

The studies involving humans were approved by Pedro Labraña Research Unit of Bio-Bio University. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements. The participants provided their written informed consent to participate in this study.

Author contributions

CO: Conceptualization, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft. SR: Investigation, Supervision, Writing – review & editing. CS: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – review & editing.

The author(s) declare financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This article was developed in part with funding from FONDECYT Project 11220056, from the Chilean National Research and Development Agency (ANID).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher’s note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Boonsathirakul, J., and Kerdsomboon, C. (2021). The investigation of critical thinking disposition among Kasetsart University students. High. Educ. Stud. 11, 224–232. doi: 10.5539/hes.v11n2p224

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Correa, J., Ossa, C., and Sanhueza, P. (2019). Sesgo en razonamiento, metacognicion y motivación al pensamiento crítico en estudiantes de primer año medio de un establecimiento de Chillán. Rev. Estud. Exp. Educ. 18, 61–77. doi: 10.21703/rexe.20191837correa8

Daniel, M., and Auriac, E. (2012). Philosophy, critical thinking and philosophy for children. Educ. Philos. Theory 43, 415–435. doi: 10.1111/j.14695812.2008.00483.x

de la Portilla Maya, S. R., Duque Dussán, A. M., Landínez Martínez, D. A., Montoya Londoño, D. M., and Gutiérrez De Blume, A. P. (2022). Pensamiento crítico y conciencia metacognitiva en una muestra de estudiantes de Medicina. Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos 18, 145–168. doi: 10.17151/rlee.2022.18.1.8

Díaz, C., Ossa, C., Palma, M., Lagos, N., and Boudon, J. (2019). El concepto de pensamiento crítico según estudiantes chilenos de pedagogía. Sophia 26, 267–288.

Google Scholar

Drigas, A., and Mitsea, E. (2020). The 8 pillars of metacognition. Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn. 15, 162–178. doi: 10.3991/ijet.v15i21.14907

Drigas, A., and Mitsea, E. (2021). 8 pillars X 8 layers model of metacognition: educational strategies, exercises and trainings. Int. J. Online Biomed. Eng. 17, 115–134. doi: 10.3991/ijoe.v17i08.23563

Facione, P. A., Facione, N. C., and Giancarlo, C. A. (2000). The disposition toward critical thinking: its character, measurement, and relationship to critical thinking. Informal Logic 20, 61–84. doi: 10.22329/il.v20i1.2254

García, E. J. A. (2022). Motivación, pensamiento crítico y metacognición:¿ esenciales para aprender? Reflexiones sobre calidad educativa. Rev. Dialog. 7, 79–88. doi: 10.37594/dialogus.v1i7.527

Gaviria, C. (2019). Pensar la Historia con el Deseo: Metacognición, Motivación y Comprensión Histórica. Rev. Colomb. Psicol. 28, 147–164. doi: 10.15446/rcp.v28n1.70763

Halpern, D. F., and Dunn, D. (2021). Critical thinking: a model of intelligence for solving real-world problems. J. Intelligence 9:22. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9020022

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Halpern, D. F., and Dunn, D. (2023). Thought and knowledge. An introduction to critical thinking . 6ª Edn. New york: Taylor and Francis.

López, G. (2012). Pensamiento crítico en el aula. Docencia e Investigación XXXVII, 41–60.

Marin, L., and Halpern, D. (2011). Pedagogy for developing critical thinking in adolescents: explicit instruction produces greatest gains. Think. Skills Creat. 6, 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2010.08.002

Martínez, J. (2007). Concepción de aprendizaje y estrategias metacognitivas en estudiantes universitarios de psicología. Anal. Psicol. 23, 7–16.

Montero, M. (2010). Crítica, autocrítica y construcción de teoría en la psicología social latinoamericana. Rev. Colomb. Psicol. 19, 177–191.

Muñoz, C., and Ruiz, A. (2022). Programa estratégico lector para desarrollar el pensamiento crítico-creativo en estudiantes de secundaria. Revista Innova Educación 4, 159–175. doi: 10.35622/j.rie.2022.02.010.es

Nieto-Márquez, N., García-Sinausía, S., and Pérez Nieto, M. (2021). Relaciones de la motivación con la metacognición y el desempeño en el rendimiento cognitivo en estudiantes de educación primaria. Anales de psicología 37, 51–60. doi: 10.6018/analesps.383941

Ossa, C., and Díaz, A. (2017). Enfoques intraindividual e interindividual en programas de pensamiento crítico. Psicol. Esc. Educ. 21, 593–600. doi: 10.1590/2175-353920170213111121

Ossa, C., Lepe, N., Díaz, A., Merino, J., and Larraín, A. (2018). Programas de pensamiento crítico en la formación de docentes Iberoamericanos. Profesorado 22, 443–462. doi: 10.30827/profesorado.v22i4.8432

Ossa, C., Rivas, S.F., and Saiz, C. (2016). Estrategias metacognitivas en el desarrollo del análisis argumentativo. En:J. Casanova and C. Bisinoto Y L. Almeida. IV Seminário Internacional Cognição, aprendizagem e desempenho. Livro de atas Braga: Livro de atas (pp. 30–47).

Palma Luengo, M., Ossa Cornejo, C., Ahumada Gutiérrez, H., Moreno Osorio, L., and Miranda Jaña, C. (2021). Adaptación y validación del test Tareas de Pensamiento Crítico en estudiantes universitarios. Rev. Estud. Exp. Educ. 20, 199–212. doi: 10.21703/rexe.20212042palma12

Paul, R., and Elder, L. (2003). La mini-guía para el Pensamiento crítico . Conceptos y herramientas. Ed. Fundación para el Pensamiento Crítico. Available at: http://www.criticalthinking.org

Rivas, S. F., and Saiz, C. (2012). Validación y propiedades psicométricas de la prueba de pensamiento crítico PENCRISAL. Rev. Electrón. Metodol. Aplic. 17, 18–34.

Rivas, S. F., Saiz, C., and Ossa, C. (2022). Metacognitive strategies and development of critical thinking in higher education. Front. Psychol. 13:913219. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.913219

Saiz, C. (2017). Pensamiento Crítico y Cambio . Madrid: Pirámide.

Saiz, C., and Rivas, S. F. (2008). Evaluación en pensamiento crítico: una propuesta para diferenciar formas de pensar. Ergo. Nueva Época 22-23, 25–66.

Saiz, C., and Rivas, S. F. (2011). Evaluation of the ARDESOS programs: an initiative to improve critical thinking skills. J. Scholarsh. Teach. Learn. 11, 34–51.

Saiz, C., and Rivas, S. F. (2012). Pensamiento crítico y aprendizaje basado en problemas cotidianos. Rev. Docen. Universit. 10, 325–346. doi: 10.4995/redu.2012.6026

Saiz, C., and Rivas, S. F. (2016). New teaching techniques to improve critical thinking. DIAPROVE. Methodol. 40, 3–36.

Santana, L. M. Q., Cedeño, B. J. B., Atoche, C. B., Torres, C. V. G., Preciado, M. P. U., and Quito, C. R. M. (2022). Estrategias metacognitivas y pensamiento crítico en docentes. Ciencia Latina Revista Científica Multidisciplinar 6, 649–675. doi: 10.37811/cl_rcm.v6i1.1529

Scott, C. L. (2015). El futuro del aprendizaje 2 ¿Qué tipo de aprendizaje se necesita en el siglo XXI? Investigación y Prospectiva en Educación UNESCO, París. [Documentos de Trabajo ERF, No. 14]. Available at: https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000242996_spa

Sierra, J., Carpintero, E., and Pérez, L. (2010). Pensamiento crítico y capacidad intelectual. Faísca 15, 98–110.

Silva Pacheco, C. (2019). El desarrollo del pensamiento crítico en la propuesta curricular de la educación del arte en Chile. Estud. Pedagóg. 45, 79–92. doi: 10.4067/S0718-07052019000300079

Tamayo-Alzate, O., Cadavid-Alzate, V., and Montoya-Londoño, D. (2019). Análisis metacognitivo en estudiantes de básica, durante la resolución de dos situaciones experimentales en la clase de ciencias Naturales. Rev. Colomb. Educ. 1, 117–141. doi: 10.17227/rce.num76-4188

Valenzuela, J., and Nieto, A.M. (2008). Motivación y Pensamiento Crítico: Aportes para el estudio de esta relación. Available at: http://reme.uji.es/articulos/numero28/article3/article3.pdf

Valenzuela, J., Nieto, A. M., and Muñoz, C. (2014). Motivación y disposiciones: enfoques alternativos para explicar el desempeño de habilidades de pensamiento crítico. Rev Electrón. Investig. Educat. 16, 16–32.

Valenzuela, J., Nieto, A., Ossa, C., Sepúlveda, S., and Muñoz, C. (2023). Relaciones entre factores motivacionales y pensamiento crítico. Eur. J. Educat. Psychol. 16, 1–18. doi: 10.32457/ejep.v16i1.2077

Valenzuela, J., and Saiz, C. (2010). Percepción sobre el coste de pensar críticamente en universitarios chilenos y españoles. Electron. J. Res. Educ. Psychol. 8, 689–706.

Wold, H. (1980). “Model construction and evaluation when theoretical knowledge is scarce,” in Evaluation of econometric models . eds. J. Kmnta and J. Ramsey (Cambridge: Academic press).

Yang, S. C., and Chung, T. Y. (2009). Experimental study of teaching critical thinking in civic education in Taiwanese junior high school. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 79, 29–55. doi: 10.1348/000709907X238771

Keywords: critical thinking, structural models, cognition, motivation, pedagogy

Citation: Ossa CJ, Rivas SF and Saiz C (2023) Relation between metacognitive strategies, motivation to think, and critical thinking skills. Front. Psychol . 14:1272958. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1272958

Received: 04 August 2023; Accepted: 13 November 2023; Published: 04 December 2023.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2023 Ossa, Rivas and Saiz. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Carlos J. Ossa, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• USC Libraries
• Research Guides

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper

• Applying Critical Thinking
• Purpose of Guide
• Design Flaws to Avoid
• Independent and Dependent Variables
• Glossary of Research Terms
• Reading Research Effectively
• Narrowing a Topic Idea
• Broadening a Topic Idea
• Extending the Timeliness of a Topic Idea
• Academic Writing Style
• Choosing a Title
• Making an Outline
• Paragraph Development
• Research Process Video Series
• Executive Summary
• The C.A.R.S. Model
• Background Information
• The Research Problem/Question
• Theoretical Framework
• Citation Tracking
• Content Alert Services
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary Sources
• Secondary Sources
• Tiertiary Sources
• Scholarly vs. Popular Publications
• Qualitative Methods
• Quantitative Methods
• Insiderness
• Using Non-Textual Elements
• Limitations of the Study
• Common Grammar Mistakes
• Writing Concisely
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Footnotes or Endnotes?
• Further Readings
• Generative AI and Writing
• USC Libraries Tutorials and Other Guides
• Bibliography

Critical thinking refers to deliberately scrutinizing and evaluating theories, concepts, or ideas using reasoned reflection and analysis. The act of thinking critically implies moving beyond simply understanding information, but questioning its source, its production, and its presentation in order to expose potential bias or researcher subjectivity [i.e., being influenced by personal opinions and feelings rather than by external determinants ] . Applying critical thinking to investigating a research problem involves actively challenging assumptions and questioning the choices and potential motives underpinning how the author designed the study, conducted the research, and arrived at particular conclusions or recommended courses of action.

Mintz, Steven. "How the Word "Critical" Came to Signify the Leading Edge of Cultural Analysis." Higher Ed Gamma Blog , Inside Higher Ed, February 13, 2024; Van Merriënboer, Jeroen JG and Paul A. Kirschner. Ten Steps to Complex Learning: A Systematic Approach to Four-component Instructional Design . New York: Routledge, 2017.

Thinking Critically

Applying Critical Thinking to Research and Writing

Professors like to use the term critical thinking; in fact, the idea of being critical permeates much of higher education writ large. In the classroom, the idea of thinking critically is often mentioned by professors when students ask how they should approach a research and writing assignment [other approaches your professor might mention include interdisciplinarity, comparative, gendered, global, etc.]. However, critical thinking is more than just an approach to research and writing. It is an acquired skill used in becoming a complex learner capable of discerning important relationships among the elements of, as well as integrating multiple ways of understanding applied to, the research problem. Critical thinking is a lens through which you holistically interrogate a topic.

Given this, thinking critically encompasses a variety of inter-related connotations applied to college-level research and writing * :

• Integrated and Multi-Dimensional . Critical thinking is not focused on any one element of research, but rather, is applied holistically throughout the process of identifying the research problem, reviewing of literature, applying methods of analysis, describing the results, discussing their implications, and, if appropriate, offering recommendations for further research. The act of thinking critically is also non-linear [i.e., applies to going back and changing prior thoughts when new evidence emerges]; it permeates the entire research endeavor from contemplating what to write to proofreading the final product.
• Humanize Research . Thinking critically can help humanize the research problem by extending the scope of your analysis beyond the boundaries of traditional approaches to studying the topic. Traditional approaches can include, for example, sampling homogeneous populations, considering only certain factors related to investigating a phenomenon, or limiting the way you frame or represent the context of your study. Critical thinking can help reveal opportunities to incorporate the experiences of others into the research, creating a more representative examination of the research problem.
• Normative . This refers to the idea that critical thinking can be used to challenge prior assumptions in ways that advocate for social justice, equity, and inclusion and which can lead to research having a more transformative and expansive impact. In this respect, critical thinking can be a method for breaking away from dominant culture norms so as to produce research outcomes that illuminate previously hidden aspects of exploitation and injustice.
• Power Dynamics . Research in the social and behavioral sciences often includes examining aspects of power and influence that shape social relations, organizations, institutions, and the production and maintenance of knowledge. This approach encompasses studying how power operates, how it can be acquired, and how power and influence can be maintained. Critical thinking can reveal how societal structures perpetuate power and influence in ways that marginalizes and oppresses certain groups or communities within the contexts of history , politics, economics, culture, and other factors.
• Reflection . A key aspect of critical thinking is practicing reflexivity; the act of turning ideas and concepts back onto yourself in order to reveal and clarify your own beliefs, assumptions, and perspectives. Being critically reflexive is important because it can reveal hidden biases you may have that could unintentionally influence how you interpret and validate information. The more reflexive you are, the better able and more comfortable you are about opening yourself up to new modes of understanding.
• Rigorous Questioning . Thinking critically is guided by asking questions that lead to addressing complex concepts, principles, theories, or problems more effectively and to help distinguish what is known from from what is not known [or that may be hidden]. In this way, critical thinking involves deliberately framing inquiries not just as research questions, but as a way to focus on systematic, disciplined,  in-depth questioning concerning the research problem and your positionality as a researcher.
• Social Change . An overarching goal of critical thinking applied to research and writing is to seek to identify and challenge sources of inequality, exploitation, oppression, and marinalization that contributes to maintaining the status quo within institutions of society. This can include entities, such as, schools, courts, businesses, government agencies, religious centers, that have been created and maintained through certain ways of thinking within the dominant culture.

In writing a research paper, the act of critical thinking applies most directly to the literature review and discussion sections of your paper . In reviewing the literature, it is important to reflect upon specific aspects of a study, such as, determining if the research design effectively establishes cause and effect relationships or provides insight into explaining why certain phenomena do or do not occur, assessing whether the method of gathering data or information supports the objectives of the study, and evaluating if the assumptions used t o arrive at a specific conclusion are evidence-based and relevant to addressing the research problem. An assessment of whether a source is helpful to investigating the research problem also involves critically analyzing how the research challenges conventional approaches to investigations that perpetuate inequalities or hides the voices of others.

Critical thinking also applies to the discussion section of your paper because this is where you interpret the findings of your study and explain its significance. This involves more than summarizing findings and describing outcomes. It includes reflecting on their importance and providing reasoned explanations why the research study is important in filling a gap in the literature or expanding knowledge and understanding about the topic in ways that inform practice. Critical reflection helps you think introspectively about your own beliefs concerning the significance of the findings but in ways that avoid biased judgment and decision making.

* Mintz, Steven. "How the Word "Critical" Came to Signify the Leading Edge of Cultural Analysis." Higher Ed Gamma Blog , Inside Higher Ed, February 13, 2024; Suter, W. Newton. Introduction to Educational Research: A Critical Thinking Approach. 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, 2012

Behar-Horenstein, Linda S., and Lian Niu. “Teaching Critical Thinking Skills in Higher Education: A Review of the Literature.” Journal of College Teaching and Learning 8 (February 2011): 25-41; Bayou, Yemeserach and Tamene Kitila. "Exploring Instructors’ Beliefs about and Practices in Promoting Students’ Critical Thinking Skills in Writing Classes." GIST–Education and Learning Research Journal 26 (2023): 123-154; Butcher, Charity. "Using In-class Writing to Promote Critical Thinking and Application of Course Concepts." Journal of Political Science Education 18 (2022): 3-21; Loseke, Donileen R. Methodological Thinking: Basic Principles of Social Research Design. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2012; Hart, Claire et al. “Exploring Higher Education Students’ Critical Thinking Skills through Content Analysis.” Thinking Skills and Creativity 41 (September 2021): 100877; Sabrina, R., Emilda Sulasmi, and Mandra Saragih. "Student Critical Thinking Skills and Student Writing Ability: The Role of Teachers' Intellectual Skills and Student Learning." Cypriot Journal of Educational Sciences 17 (2022): 2493-2510.Van Merriënboer, Jeroen JG and Paul A. Kirschner. Ten Steps to Complex Learning: A Systematic Approach to Four-component Instructional Design. New York: Routledge, 2017; Yeh, Hui-Chin, Shih-hsien Yang, Jo Shan Fu, and Yen-Chen Shih. "Developing College Students’ Critical Thinking through Reflective Writing." Higher Education Research & Development 42 (2023): 244-259.

• << Previous: Academic Writing Style
• Next: Choosing a Title >>
• Last Updated: Apr 11, 2024 1:27 PM
• URL: https://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide

• Resume Writing
• Resume Examples
• Cover Letter
• Remote Work
• Famous Resumes
• Try Kickresume

7 Problem Solving Skills That Aren’t Just Buzzwords (+ Resume Example)

• Julia Mlcuchova , 
• Updated April 8, 2024 9 min read

Problem-solving skills are something everybody should include on their resume, yet only a few seem to understand what these skills actually are. If you've always felt that the term "problem-solving skills" is rather vague and wanted to know more, you've come to the right place.

In this article, we're going to explain what problem-solving skills really mean. We'll talk about what makes up good problem-solving skills and give you tips on how to get better at them. You'll also find out how to make your problem-solving abilities look more impressive to those who might want to hire you.

Sounds good, right? Curious to learn more? 

In this article we’ll show you:

• What are problem solving skills;
• Why are they important; 
• Specific problem solving skills examples;
• How to develop your problem solving skills;
• And, how to showcase them on your resume.

Table of Contents

Click on a section to skip

What are problem solving skills?

Why are problem solving skills important, the best 7 problem solving skills examples, how to develop problem solving skills, problem solving skills resume example, key takeaways: problem solving skills.

First of all, they're more than just a buzzword!

Problem-solving skills are a set of specific abilities that allow you to deal with unexpected situations in the workplace, whether it be job related or team related. 

It's a complex process that involves several “sub skills” or “sub steps,” namely:

• Recognizing and identifying the issue at hand.
• Breaking the problem down into smaller parts and analyzing how they relate to one another. 
• Creating potential solutions to the problem, evaluating them and picking the best one.  
• Applying the chosen solution and assessing its outcome. 
• Learning from the whole process to deal with future problems more effectively. 

As you can see, it's not just about solving problems that are right in front of us, but also about predicting potential issues and being prepared to deal with them before they arise.  

Despite what you may believe, problem-solving skills aren't just for managers . 

Think about it this way: Why do employers hire employees in the first place? To solve problems for them!

And, as we all know, problems don't discriminate. In other words, it doesn't matter whether you're just an intern, an entry-level professional, or a seasoned veteran, you'll constantly face some kind of challenges. And the only difference is in how complex they will get.

This is also reflected in the way employers assess suitability of potential job candidates. 

In fact, research shows that the ability to deal with unexpected complications is prioritized by an overwhelming 60% of employers across all industries, making it one of the most compelling skills on your resume.

So, regardless of your job description or your career level, you're always expected to find solutions for problems, either independently or as a part of a team. 

And that's precisely what makes problem-solving skills so invaluable and universal ! 

Wondering how good is your resume?

Find out with our AI Resume Checker! Just upload your resume and see what can be improved.

As we've said before, problem-solving isn't really just one single skill. 

Instead, your ability to handle workplace issues with composure depends on several different “sub-skills”. 

So, which specific skills make an employee desirable even for the most demanding of recruiters? 

In no particular order, you should focus on these 7 skills : 

• Analytical skills
• Research skills
• Critical thinking 
• Decision-making
• Collaboration
• Having a growth mindset

Let's have a look at each of them in greater detail!

#1 Analytical skills

Firstly, to truly understand complex problems, you need to break them down into more manageable parts . Then, you observe them closely and ask yourself: “ Which parts work and which don't,” How do these parts contribute to the problem as a whole,” and "What exactly needs to be fixed?” In other words, you gather data , you study it, and compare it - all to pinpoint the cause of the issue as closely as possible.

#2 Research skills

Another priceless tool is your research skills (sometimes relying on just one source of information isn't enough). Besides, to make a truly informed decision , you'll have to dig a little deeper. Being a good researcher means looking for potential solutions to a problem in a wider context. For example: going through team reports, customer feedback, quarterly sales or current market trends.  

#3 Critical thinking

Every employer wants to hire people who can think critically. Yet, the ability to evaluate situations objectively and from different perspectives , is actually pretty hard to come by. But as long as you stay open-minded, inquisitive, and with a healthy dose of skepticism, you'll be able to assess situations based on facts and evidence more successfully. Plus, critical thinking comes in especially handy when you need to examine your own actions and processes. 

 #4 Creativity

Instead of following the old established processes that don't work anymore, you should feel comfortable thinking outside the box. The thing is, problems have a nasty habit of popping up unexpectedly and rapidly. And sometimes, you have to get creative in order to solve them fast. Especially those that have no precedence. But this requires a blend of intuition, industry knowledge, and quick thinking - a truly rare combination. 

#5 Decision-making

The analysis, research, and brainstorming are done. Now, you need to look at the possible solutions, and make the final decision (informed, of course). And not only that, you also have to stand by it ! Because once the train gets moving, there's no room for second guessing. Also, keep in mind that you need to be prepared to take responsibility for all decisions you make. That's no small feat! 

#6 Collaboration

Not every problem you encounter can be solved by yourself alone. And this is especially true when it comes to complex projects. So, being able to actively listen to your colleagues, take their ideas into account, and being respectful of their opinions enables you to solve problems together. Because every individual can offer a unique perspective and skill set. Yes, democracy is hard, but at the end of the day, it's teamwork that makes the corporate world go round. 

#7 Having a growth mindset

Let's be honest, no one wants their work to be riddled with problems. But facing constant challenges and changes is inevitable. And that can be scary! However, when you're able to see these situations as opportunities to grow instead of issues that hold you back, your problem solving skills reach new heights. And the employers know that too!

Now that we've shown you the value problem-solving skills can add to your resume, let's ask the all-important question: “How can I learn them?”

Well…you can't. At least not in the traditional sense of the word. 

Let us explain: Since problem-solving skills fall under the umbrella of soft skills , they can't be taught through formal education, unlike computer skills for example. There's no university course that you can take and graduate as a professional problem solver. 

But, just like other interpersonal skills, they can be nurtured and refined over time through practice and experience. 

Unfortunately, there's no one-size-fits-all approach, but the following tips can offer you inspiration on how to improve your problem solving skills:

• Cultivate a growth mindset. Remember what we've said before? Your attitude towards obstacles is the first step to unlocking your problem-solving potential. 
• Gain further knowledge in your specialized field. Secondly, it's a good idea to delve a little deeper into your chosen profession. Because the more you read on a subject, the easier it becomes to spot certain patterns and relations.  
• Start with small steps. Don't attack the big questions straight away — you'll only set yourself up for failure. Instead, start with more straightforward tasks and work your way up to more complex problems. 
• Break problems down into more digestible pieces. Complex issues are made up of smaller problems. And those can be further divided into even smaller problems, and so on. Until you're left with only the basics. 
• Don't settle for a single solution. Instead, keep on exploring other possible answers.
• Accept failure as a part of the learning process. Finally, don't let your failures discourage you. After all, you're bound to misstep a couple of times before you find your footing. Just keep on practicing. 

How to improve problem solving skills with online courses

While it’s true that formal education won’t turn you into a master problem solver, you can still hone your skills with courses and certifications offered by online learning platforms :

• Analytical skills. You can sharpen your analytical skills with Data Analytics Basics for Everyone from IBM provided by edX (Free); or Decision Making and Analytical Thinking: Fortune 500 provided by Udemy (＄21,74).
• Creativity. And, to unlock your inner creative mind, you can try Creative Thinking: Techniques and Tools for Success from the Imperial College London provided by Coursera (Free).
• Critical thinking. Try Introduction to Logic and Critical Thinking Specialization from Duke University provided by Coursera (Free); or Logical and Critical Thinking offered by The University of Auckland via FutureLearn.  
• Decision-making. Or, you can learn how to become more confident when it's time to make a decision with Decision-Making Strategies and Executive Decision-Making both offered by LinkedIn Learning (1 month free trial).
• Communication skills . Lastly, to improve your collaborative skills, check out Communicating for Influence and Impact online at University of Cambridge. 

The fact that everybody and their grandmothers put “ problem-solving skills ” on their CVs has turned the phrase into a cliche. 

But there's a way to incorporate these skills into your resume without sounding pretentious and empty. Below, we've prepared a mock-up resume that manages to do just that.

FYI, if you like this design, you can use the template to create your very own resume. Just click the red button and fill in your information (or let the AI do it for you).

Problem solving skills on resume example

This resume was written by our experienced resume writers specifically for this profession.

Why this example works?

• Firstly, the job description itself is neatly organized into bullet points .  
• Instead of simply listing soft skills in a skills section , you can incorporate them into the description of your work experience entry.  
• Also, the language here isn't vague . This resume puts each problem-solving skill into a real-life context by detailing specific situations and obstacles. 
• And, to highlight the impact of each skill on your previous job position, we recommend quantifying your results whenever possible. 
• Finally, starting each bullet point with an action verb (in bold) makes you look more dynamic and proactive.

To sum it all up, problem-solving skills continue gaining popularity among employers and employees alike. And for a good reason!

Because of them, you can overcome any obstacles that stand in the way of your professional life more efficiently and systematically. 

In essence, problem-solving skills refer to the ability to recognize a challenge, identify its root cause, think of possible solutions , and then implement the most effective one. 

Believing that these skills are all the same would be a serious misconception. In reality, this term encompasses a variety of different abilities , including:

In short, understanding, developing, and showcasing these skills, can greatly boost your chances at getting noticed by the hiring managers. So, don't hesitate and start working on your problem-solving skills right now!

Julia has recently joined Kickresume as a career writer. From helping people with their English to get admitted to the uni of their dreams to advising them on how to succeed in the job market. It would seem that her career is on a steadfast trajectory. Julia holds a degree in Anglophone studies from Metropolitan University in Prague, where she also resides. Apart from creative writing and languages, she takes a keen interest in literature and theatre.

Related Posts

10 buzzwords you should stop using on your resume, how to tailor your executive-level resume for a job board, share this article, join our newsletter.

Every month, we’ll send you resume advice, job search tips, career hacks and more in pithy, bite-sized chunks. Sounds good?

Analysis of students’ critical thinking ability in linear program material viewed from their cognitive style

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

• Split-Screen
• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data
• Peer Review
• Open the PDF for in another window
• Reprints and Permissions
• Cite Icon Cite
• Search Site

Hosma Refwatul Hasana , Ronal Rifandi , Maulani Meutia Rani , Sri Novia Martin; Analysis of students’ critical thinking ability in linear program material viewed from their cognitive style. AIP Conf. Proc. 10 April 2024; 3024 (1): 050034. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0204460

Download citation file:

• Ris (Zotero)
• Reference Manager

Critical thinking skills are beneficial and must be considered when learning where these skills are needed to prepare students for academic careers. However, students critical thinking skills are still relatively low. This study aims to determine students’ critical thinking skills in class XI IPS 4 SMA Pertiwi 1 Padang linear programming material for students with Field Independent (FI) and Field Dependent (FD) cognitive styles. This research is classified as qualitative research. The selection of samples or research subjects was selected using a purposive sampling technique. This study’s research subjects were taken in class XI IPS 4 SMA Pertiwi 1 Padang, totaling 26 students. Which then selected six students of class XI IPS 4 at SMA Pertiwi 1 Padang. These six students consist of three with FI cognitive style and three with FD cognitive style. The data were collected using observation methods, written tests, and interviews. Validation of the data used is the triangulation method, and data analysis is done by data reduction, data presentation, and conclusion. The results showed 1. Students with FI cognitive style tends to be able to understand problems in linear programming, so students with FI cognitive style tend to be able to meet the indicators of critical thinking skills, namely interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and judgment. 2. Students with FD cognitive style have difficulty understanding the problems in the questions, so students with FD cognitive style are less able to meet the indicators of critical thinking skills.

Citing articles via

Publish with us - request a quote.

Sign up for alerts

• Online ISSN 1551-7616
• Print ISSN 0094-243X
• For Researchers
• For Librarians
• For Advertisers
• Our Publishing Partners  
• Physics Today
• Conference Proceedings
• Special Topics

pubs.aip.org

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

Connect with AIP Publishing

This feature is available to subscribers only.

Sign In or Create an Account