critical thinking and creativity complement one another

Please log in to save materials. Log in

• Austin Community College
• Effective Learning Strategies
• Student Success
• https-www-oercommons-org-courseware-module-25864-s
• https://www.oercommons.org/courseware/module/25864/student/206121

Chapter 7: Critical and Creative Thinking

Learning Framework: Effective Strategies for College Success

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Define critical thinking
• Describe the role that logic plays in critical thinking
• Describe how critical thinking skills can be used to evaluate information
• Apply the CRAAP test to evaluate sources of information
• Identify strategies for developing yourself as a critical thinker
• Identify applications in education and one's career where creative thinking is relevant and beneficial
• Explore key elements and stages in the creative process
• Apply specific skills for stimulating creative perspectives and innovative options
• Integrate critical and creative thinking in the process of problem-solving

Critical and Creative Thinking

Critical Thinking

As a college student, you are tasked with engaging and expanding your thinking skills. One of the most important of these skills is critical thinking because it relates to nearly all tasks, situations, topics, careers, environments, challenges, and opportunities. It is a “domain-general” thinking skill, not one that is specific to a particular subject area.

What Is Critical Thinking?

Critical thinking  is clear, reasonable, reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do (Robert Ennis.) It means asking probing questions like “How do we know?” or “Is this true in every case or just in this instance?” It involves being skeptical and challenging assumptions rather than simply memorizing facts or blindly accepting what you hear or read.

Imagine, for example, that you’re reading a history textbook. You wonder who wrote it and why, because you detect certain biases in the writing. You find that the author has a limited scope of research focused only on a particular group within a population. In this case, your critical thinking reveals that there are “other sides to the story.”

Who are critical thinkers, and what characteristics do they have in common? Critical thinkers are usually curious and reflective people. They like to explore and probe new areas and seek knowledge, clarification, and new solutions. They ask pertinent questions, evaluate statements and arguments, and they distinguish between facts and opinion. They are also willing to examine their own beliefs, possessing a manner of humility that allows them to admit lack of knowledge or understanding when needed. They are open to changing their mind. Perhaps most of all, they actively enjoy learning, and seeking new knowledge is a lifelong pursuit. This may well be you!

No matter where you are on the road to being a critical thinker, you can always more fully develop and finely tune your skills. Doing so will help you develop more balanced arguments, express yourself clearly, read critically, and glean important information efficiently. Critical thinking skills will help you in any profession or any circumstance of life, from science to art to business to teaching. With critical thinking, you become a clearer thinker and problem solver.

The following video, from Lawrence Bland, presents the major concepts and benefits of critical thinking.

Critical Thinking and Logic

Critical thinking is fundamentally a process of questioning information and data and then reflecting on and assessing what you discover to arrive at a reasonable conclusion. You may question the information you read in a textbook, or you may question what a politician or a professor or a classmate says.

You can also question a commonly held belief or a new idea. It is equally important (and even more challenging) to question your own thinking and beliefs! With critical thinking, anything and everything is subject to question and examination for the purpose of logically constructing reasoned perspectives.

What Is Logic?

The word  logic  comes from the Ancient Greek  logike , referring to the science or art of reasoning. Using logic, a person evaluates arguments and reasoning and strives to distinguish between good and bad reasoning, or between truth and falsehood. Using logic, you can evaluate the ideas and claims of others, make good decisions, and form sound beliefs about the world.

Questions of Logic in Critical Thinking

Let’s use a simple example of applying logic to a critical-thinking situation. In this hypothetical scenario, a man has a Ph.D. in political science, and he works as a professor at a local college. His wife works at the college, too. They have three young children in the local school system, and their family is well known in the community. The man is now running for political office. Are his credentials and experience sufficient for entering public office? Will he be effective in the political office? Some voters might believe that his personal life and current job, on the surface, suggest he will do well in the position, and they will vote for him. In truth, the characteristics described don’t guarantee that the man will do a good job. The information is somewhat irrelevant. What else might you want to know? How about whether the man had already held a political office and done a good job? In this case, we want to think critically about how much information is adequate in order to make a decision based on  logic  instead of  assumptions.

The following questions, presented in Figure 1, below, are ones you may apply to formulate a logical, reasoned perspective in the above scenario or any other situation:

• What’s happening?  Gather the basic information and begin to think of questions.
• Why is it important?  Ask yourself why it’s significant and whether or not you agree.
• What don’t I see?  Is there anything important missing?
• How do I know?  Ask yourself where the information came from and how it was constructed.
• Who is saying it?  What’s the position of the speaker and what is influencing them?
• What else?   What if?  What other ideas exist and are there other possibilities?

Problem-Solving with Critical Thinking

For most people, a typical day is filled with critical thinking and problem-solving challenges. In fact, critical thinking and problem-solving go hand-in-hand. They both refer to using knowledge, facts, and data to solve problems effectively. But with problem-solving, you are specifically identifying, selecting, and defending your solution. Below are some examples of using critical thinking to problem-solve:

• Your roommate was upset and said some unkind words to you, which put a crimp in the relationship. You try to see through the angry behaviors to determine how you might best support the roommate and help bring the relationship back to a comfortable spot.
• Your campus club has been languishing due to a lack of participation and funds. The new club president, though, is a marketing major and has identified some strategies to interest students in joining and supporting the club. Implementation is forthcoming.
• Your final art class project challenges you to conceptualize form in new ways. On the last day of class when students present their projects, you describe the techniques you used to fulfill the assignment. You explain why and how you selected that approach.
• Your math teacher sees that the class is not quite grasping a concept. They use clever questioning to dispel anxiety and guide you to a new understanding of the concept.

You have a job interview for a position that you feel you are only partially qualified for, although you really want the job and are excited about the prospects. You analyze how you will explain your skills and experiences in a way to show that you are a good match for the prospective employer.

• You are doing well in college, and most of your college and living expenses are covered. But there are some gaps between what you want and what you feel you can afford. You analyze your income, savings, and budget to better calculate what you will need to stay in college and maintain your desired level of spending.

Evaluating Information with Critical Thinking

Evaluating information can be one of the most complex tasks you will be faced with in college. But if you utilize the following four strategies, you will be well on your way to success:

• Read for understanding
• Examine arguments
• Clarify thinking
• Cultivate “habits of mind”

Read for Understanding

When you read, take notes or mark the text to track your thinking about what you are reading. As you make connections and ask questions in response to what you read,  you monitor your comprehension and enhance your long-term understanding of the material. You will want to mark important arguments and key facts. Indicate where you agree and disagree or have further questions. You don’t necessarily need to read every word, but make sure you understand the concepts or the intentions behind what is written. See the chapter on  Active Reading Strategies   for additional tips.

Examine Arguments

When you examine arguments or claims that an author, speaker, or other source is making, your goal is to identify and examine the hard facts. You can use the spectrum of authority strategy for this purpose. The spectrum of authority strategy assists you in identifying the “hot” end of an argument—feelings, beliefs, cultural influences, and societal influences—and the “cold” end of an argument—scientific influences. The most compelling arguments balance elements from both ends of the spectrum. The following video explains this strategy in further detail:

Clarify Thinking

When you use critical thinking to evaluate information, you need to clarify your thinking to yourself and likely to others. Doing this well is mainly a process of asking and answering probing questions, such as the logic questions discussed earlier. Design your questions to fit your needs, but be sure to cover adequate ground. What is the purpose? What question are we trying to answer? What point of view is being expressed? What assumptions are we or others making? What are the facts and data we know, and how do we know them? What are the concepts we’re working with? What are the conclusions, and do they make sense? What are the implications?

Cultivate “Habits of Mind”

“Habits of mind” are the personal commitments, values, and standards you have about the principle of good thinking. Consider your intellectual commitments, values, and standards. Do you approach problems with an open mind, a respect for truth, and an inquiring attitude? Some good habits to have when thinking critically are being receptive to having your opinions changed, having respect for others, being independent and not accepting something is true until you’ve had the time to examine the available evidence, being fair-minded, having respect for a reason, having an inquiring mind, not making assumptions, and always, especially, questioning your own conclusions—in other words, developing an intellectual work ethic. Try to work these qualities into your daily life.

In 2010, a textbook being used in fourth-grade classrooms in Virginia became big news for all the wrong reasons. The book,  Our Virginia  by Joy Masoff, had caught the attention of a parent who was helping her child do her homework, according to  an article in  The Washington Post . Carol Sheriff was a historian for the College of William and Mary and as she worked with her daughter, she began to notice some glaring historical errors, not the least of which was a passage that described how thousands of African Americans fought for the South during the Civil War.

Further investigation into the book revealed that, although the author had written textbooks on a variety of subjects, she was not a trained historian. The research she had done to write  Our Virginia,  and in particular the information she included about Black Confederate soldiers, was done through the Internet and included sources created by groups like the Sons of Confederate Veterans, an organization that promotes views of history that de-emphasize the role of slavery in the Civil War.

How did a book with errors like these come to be used as part of the curriculum and who was at fault? Was it Masoff for using untrustworthy sources for her research? Was it the editors who allowed the book to be published with these errors intact? Was it the school board for approving the book without more closely reviewing its accuracy?

There are a number of issues at play in the case of  Our Virginia , but there’s no question that evaluating sources is an important part of the research process and doesn’t just apply to Internet sources. Using inaccurate, irrelevant, or poorly researched sources can affect the quality of your own work. Being able to understand and apply the concepts that follow is crucial to becoming a more savvy user and creator of information.

When you begin evaluating sources, what should you consider? The  CRAAP test  is a series of common evaluative elements you can use to evaluate the  C urrency,  R elevance,  A uthority,  A ccuracy, and  P urpose of your sources. The CRAAP test was developed by librarians at California State University at Chico and it gives you a good, overall set of elements to look for when evaluating a resource. Let’s consider what each of these evaluative elements means. 

One of the most important and interesting steps to take as you begin researching a subject is selecting the resources that will help you build your thesis and support your assertions. Certain topics require you to pay special attention to how current your resource is—because they are time sensitive, because they have evolved so much over the years, or because new research comes out on the topic so frequently. When evaluating the currency of an article, consider the following:

• When was the item written, and how frequently does the publication come out?
• Is there evidence of newly added or updated information in the item?
• If the information is dated, is it still suitable for your topic?
• How frequently does information change about your topic?

Understanding what resources are most applicable to your subject and why they are applicable can help you focus and refine your thesis. Many topics are broad and searching for information on them produces a wide range of resources. Narrowing your topic and focusing on resources specific to your needs can help reduce the piles of information and help you focus in on what is truly important to read and reference. When determining relevance consider the following:

• Does the item contain information relevant to your argument or thesis?
• Read the article’s introduction, thesis, and conclusion.
• Scan main headings and identify article keywords.
• For book resources, start with the index or table of contents—how wide a scope does the item have? Will you use part or all of this resource?
• Does the information presented support or refute your ideas?
• If the information refutes your ideas, how will this change your argument?
• Does the material provide you with current information?
• What is the material’s intended audience?

Understanding more about your information’s source helps you determine when, how, and where to use that information. Is your author an expert on the subject? Do they have some personal stake in the argument they are making? What is the author or information producer’s background? When determining the authority of your source, consider the following:

• What are the author’s credentials?
• What is the author’s level of education, experience, and/or occupation?
• What qualifies the author to write about this topic?
• What affiliations does the author have? Could these affiliations affect their position?
• What organization or body published the information? Is it authoritative? Does it have an explicit position or bias?

Determining where information comes from, if the evidence supports the information, and if the information has been reviewed or refereed can help you decide how and whether to use a source. When determining the accuracy of a source, consider the following:

• Is the source well-documented? Does it include footnotes, citations, or a bibliography?
• Is information in the source presented as fact, opinion, or propaganda? Are biases clear?
• Can you verify information from the references cited in the source?
• Is the information written clearly and free of typographical and grammatical mistakes? Does the source look to be edited before publication? A clean, well-presented paper does not always indicate accuracy, but usually at least means more eyes have been on the information.

Knowing why the information was created is a key to evaluation. Understanding the reason or purpose of the information, if the information has clear intentions, or if the information is fact, opinion, or propaganda will help you decide how and why to use information:

• Is the author’s purpose to inform, sell, persuade, or entertain?
• Does the source have an obvious bias or prejudice?
• Is the article presented from multiple points of view?
• Does the author omit important facts or data that might disprove their argument?
• Is the author’s language informal, joking, emotional, or impassioned?
• Is the information clearly supported by evidence?

When you feel overwhelmed by the information you are finding, the CRAAP test can help you determine which information is the most useful to your research topic. How you respond to what you find out using the CRAAP test will depend on your topic. Maybe you want to use two overtly biased resources to inform an overview of typical arguments in a particular field. Perhaps your topic is historical and currency means the past hundred years rather than the past one or two years. Use the CRAAP test, be knowledgeable about your topic, and you will be on your way to evaluating information efficiently and well!

Next, visit the  ACC Library’s Website  for a tutorial and quiz on using the CRAAP test to evaluate sources.

Developing Yourself As a Critical Thinker

Critical thinking is a fundamental skill for college students, but it should also be a lifelong pursuit. Below are additional strategies to develop yourself as a critical thinker in college and in everyday life:

• Reflect and practice : Always reflect on what you’ve learned. Is it true all the time? How did you arrive at your conclusions?
• Use wasted time : It’s certainly important to make time for relaxing, but if you find you are indulging in too much of a good thing, think about using your time more constructively. Determine when you do your best thinking and try to learn something new during that part of the day.
• Redefine the way you see things : It can be very uninteresting to always think the same way. Challenge yourself to see familiar things in new ways. Put yourself in someone else’s shoes and consider things from a different angle or perspective.  If you’re trying to solve a problem, list all your concerns: what you need in order to solve it, who can help, what some possible barriers might be, etc. It’s often possible to reframe a problem as an opportunity. Try to find a solution where there seems to be none.
• Analyze the influences on your thinking and in your life : Why do you think or feel the way you do? Analyze your influences. Think about who in your life influences you. Do you feel or react a certain way because of social convention, or because you believe it is what is expected of you? Try to break out of any molds that may be constricting you.
• Express yourself : Critical thinking also involves being able to express yourself clearly. Most important in expressing yourself clearly is stating one point at a time. You might be inclined to argue every thought, but you might have greater impact if you focus just on your main arguments. This will help others to follow your thinking clearly. For more abstract ideas, assume that your audience may not understand. Provide examples, analogies, or metaphors where you can.
• Enhance your wellness : It’s easier to think critically when you take care of your mental and physical health. Try taking activity breaks throughout the day to reach 30 to 60 minutes of physical activity each day. Scheduling physical activity into your day can help lower stress and increase mental alertness. Also,  do your most difficult work when you have the most energy . Think about the time of day you are most effective and have the most energy. Plan to do your most difficult work during these times. And be sure to  reach out for help i f you feel you need assistance with your mental or physical health (see  Maintaining Your Mental (and Physical) Health  for more information).

Complete ACTIVITY 1:  REFLECT ON CRITICAL THINKING at the end of the chapter to deepen your understanding of critical thinking in action. 

Creative thinking.

Creative thinking  is an invaluable skill for college students because it helps you look at problems and situations from a fresh perspective. Creative thinking is a way to develop novel or unorthodox solutions that do not depend wholly on past or current solutions. It’s a way of employing strategies to clear your mind so that your thoughts and ideas can transcend what appears to be the limitations of a problem. Creative thinking is a way of moving beyond barriers and it can be understood as a  skill —as opposed to an inborn talent or natural “gift”—that can be taught as well as learned.

However, the ability to think and act in creative ways is a natural ability that we all exhibited as children. The curiosity, wonder, imagination, playfulness, and persistence in obtaining new skills are what transformed us into the powerful learners that we became well before we entered school. As a creative thinker now, you are curious, optimistic, and imaginative. You see problems as interesting opportunities, and you challenge assumptions and suspend judgment. You don’t give up easily. You work hard. Is this you? Even if you don’t yet see yourself as a competent creative thinker or problem-solver yet, you can learn solid skills and techniques to help you become one.

Creative Thinking in Education

College is a great ground for enhancing creative thinking skills. The following are some examples of college activities that can stimulate creative thinking. Are any familiar to you? What are some aspects of your own college experience that require you to think creatively?

• Design sample exam questions to test your knowledge as you study for a final.
• Devise a social media strategy for a club on campus.
• Propose an education plan for a major you are designing for yourself.
• Prepare a speech that you will give in a debate in your course.
• Arrange audience seats in your classroom to maximize attention during your presentation.
• Participate in a brainstorming session with your classmates on how you will collaborate on a group project.
• Draft a script for a video production that will be shown to several college administrators.
• Compose a set of requests and recommendations for a campus office to improve its services for students.
• Develop a marketing pitch for a mock business you are developing.
• Develop a plan to reduce energy consumption in your home, apartment, or dorm.

How to Stimulate Creative Thinking

The following video,  How to Stimulate the Creative Process , identifies six strategies to stimulate your creative thinking.

• Sleep on it . Over the years, researchers have found that the REM sleep cycle boosts our creativity and problem-solving abilities, providing us with innovative ideas or answers to vexing dilemmas when we awaken. Keep a pen and paper by the bed so you can write down your nocturnal insights if they wake you up.
• Go for a run or hit the gym . Studies indicate that exercise stimulates creative thinking, and the brainpower boost lasts for a few hours.
• Allow your mind to wander  a few times every day. Far from being a waste of time, daydreaming has been found to be an essential part of generating new ideas. If you’re stuck on a problem or creatively blocked, think about something else for a while.
• Keep learning . Studying something far removed from your area of expertise is especially effective in helping you think in new ways.
• Put yourself in nerve-racking situations  once in a while to fire up your brain. Fear and frustration can trigger innovative thinking.
• Keep a notebook  with you, or create a file for ideas on your smartphone or laptop, so you always have a place to record fleeting thoughts. They’re sometimes the best ideas of all.

The following video, Where Good Ideas Come From by Steven Johnson, reinforces the idea that time allows creativity to flourish.

Watch this supplemental video by PBS Digital Studies: How To Be Creative | Off Book | PBS Digital Studio for a more in-depth look on how to become a “powerful creative person.”

Below is an article by Professor Tobin Quereau, called In Search of Creativity . Perhaps the article can help you think about some simple principles that can enhance your own creative thinking.

In Search of Creativity Tobin Quereau As I was searching through my files the other day for materials on creativity, I ran across some crumpled, yellowed notes which had no clear identification as to their source. Though I cannot remember exactly where they came from, I pass them along to you as an example of the absurd lengths to which some authors will go to get people’s attention. The notes contained five principles or practices with accompanying commentary which supposedly enhance creativity. I reprint them here as I found them and leave you to make your own judgment on the matter.... 1. Do It Poorly! One has to start somewhere and hardly anyone I know starts perfectly at anything. As a result, hardly anyone seems to start very much at all. Often times the quest for excellence quashes any attempt at writing, thinking, doing, saying, etc., since we all start rather poorly in the beginning. Therefore, I advocate more mediocrity as a means to success. Whatever you want, need, or have to do, start doing it! (Apologies to Nike, but this was written long before they stole the concept....) Do it poorly at first with pleasure, take a look or listen to what you’ve done, and then do it again. If you can turn out four good, honest, poor quality examples, the fifth time you should have enough information and experience to turn out something others will admire. And if you do the first four tries in private, only you need to know how you got there. 2. Waste Time! Don’t spend it all doing things. Give yourself time and permission to daydream, mull over, muse about your task or goal without leaping into unending action. “But what,” you say, “if I find myself musing more about the grocery shopping than the gross receipts?” Fine, just see what relationships you can come up with between groceries and gross receipts. (How about increasing the volume and lowering mark-ups? Or providing comfortable seating in the local superstore so that people can relax while shopping and thus have more energy with which to spend their money??) Whatever you do, just pay attention to what comes and get it down in writing somewhere somehow before it goes again. No need to waste ideas.... 3. Be Messy! (Not hard for some of us.) Don’t go for clarity before confusion has had time to teach you something new. In fact, I advocate starting with a large sheet of blank paper–anything up to 2 feet by 4 feet in size–and then filling it up as quickly and randomly as possible with everything that is, might be, or ought to be related to the task at hand. Then start drawing arrows, underlining, scratching through, highlighting, etc., to make a real mess that no one but you can decipher. (If you can’t figure it out either, that’s O.K., too–it doesn’t have to make sense in the beginning.) Then go back to Principle #1 and start doing something. 4. Make Mistakes! Search out your stumbling blocks. Celebrate your errors. Rejoice in your “wrongs” for in them lie riches. Consider your faux pas as feedback not failure and you’ll learn (and possibly even earn!) a lot more. Be like a research scientist and get something publishable out of whatever the data indicates. As one creative consultant, Sidney X. Shore, suggests, always ask, “What’s Good About It?” Some of our most precious inventions have resulted from clumsy hands and creative insight. 5. Forget Everything You Have Learned! (Except, perhaps, these principles!) Give yourself a chance to be a neophyte, return to innocence, start with “beginner’s mind”. In the Zen tradition of Japan, there is a saying in support of this approach because in the beginner’s mind all things are possible, in the expert’s mind only one or two. What would a five-year-old do with your task, goal, project, or problem? Take a risk and be naive again. Many major advances in math and science have come from young, wet-behind-the-ears upstarts who don’t know enough to get stuck like everyone else. Even Picasso worked hard at forgetting how to draw.... But I must stop! There was more to this unusual manuscript, but it would be a poor idea to prolong this further. As a responsible author, I don’t want to waste any more of your time on such ramblings. You know as well as I that such ideas would quickly make a mess of things. I am sure that the original author, whoever that was, has by now repudiated these mistaken notions which could be quite dangerous in the hands of untrained beginners. I even recall a reference to these principles being advocated for groups and teams as well as for individual practice—if you can imagine such a thing! It is a pity that the author or authors did not have more to offer, however, “In Search of Creativity” could have made a catchy title for a book....

Problem Solving with Creative Thinking

Creative problem-solving is a type of problem-solving that involves searching for new and novel solutions to problems. It’s a way to think “outside of the box.” Unlike critical thinking, which scrutinizes assumptions and uses reasoning, creative thinking is about generating alternative ideas— practices and solutions that are unique and effective. It’s about facing sometimes muddy and unclear problems and seeing how things can be done differently.

Complete ACTIVITY 2:  ASSESS YOUR CREATIVE-PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS  at the end of the chapter to see what skills you currently have and which new ones you can develop further. 

As you continue to develop your creative thinking skills, be alert to perceptions about creative thinking that could slow down progress. Remember that creative thinking and problem-solving are ways to transcend the limitations of a problem and see past barriers.

Critical and creative thinking complement each other when it comes to problem-solving. The process of alternatively focusing and expanding your thinking can generate more creative, innovative, and effective outcomes. The following words, by Dr. Andrew Robert Baker, are excerpted from his “Thinking Critically and Creatively ” essay. Dr. Baker illuminates some of the many ways that college students will be exposed to critical and creative thinking and how it can enrich their learning experiences.

THINKING CRITICALLY AND CREATIVELY Critical thinking skills are perhaps the most fundamental skills involved in making judgments and solving problems. You use them every day, and you can continue improving them. The ability to think critically about a matter—to analyze a question, situation, or problem down to its most basic parts—is what helps us evaluate the accuracy and truthfulness of statements, claims, and information we read and hear. It is the sharp knife that, when honed, separates fact from fiction, honesty from lies, and the accurate from the misleading. We all use this skill to one degree or another almost every day. For example, we use critical thinking every day as we consider the latest consumer products and why one particular product is the best among its peers. Is it a quality product because a celebrity endorses it? Because a lot of other people may have used it? Because it is made by one company versus another? Or perhaps because it is made in one country or another? These are questions representative of critical thinking. The academic setting demands more of us in terms of critical thinking than everyday life. It demands that we evaluate information and analyze myriad issues. It is the environment where our critical thinking skills can be the difference between success and failure. In this environment we must consider information in an analytical, critical manner. We must ask questions—What is the source of this information? Is this source an expert one and what makes it so? Are there multiple perspectives to consider on an issue? Do multiple sources agree or disagree on an issue? Does quality research substantiate information or opinion? Do I have any personal biases that may affect my consideration of this information? It is only through purposeful, frequent, intentional questioning such as this that we can sharpen our critical thinking skills and improve as students, learners and researchers. While critical thinking analyzes information and roots out the true nature and facets of problems, it is creative thinking that drives progress forward when it comes to solving these problems. Exceptional creative thinkers are people that invent new solutions to existing problems that do not rely on past or current solutions. They are the ones who invent solution C when everyone else is still arguing between A and B. Creative thinking skills involve using strategies to clear the mind so that our thoughts and ideas can transcend the current limitations of a problem and allow us to see beyond barriers that prevent new solutions from being found. Brainstorming is the simplest example of intentional creative thinking that most people have tried at least once. With the quick generation of many ideas at once, we can block-out our brain’s natural tendency to limit our solution-generating abilities so we can access and combine many possible solutions/thoughts and invent new ones. It is sort of like sprinting through a race’s finish line only to find there is new track on the other side and we can keep going, if we choose. As with critical thinking, higher education both demands creative thinking from us and is the perfect place to practice and develop the skill. Everything from word problems in a math class, to opinion or persuasive speeches and papers, call upon our creative thinking skills to generate new solutions and perspectives in response to our professor’s demands. Creative thinking skills ask questions such as—What if? Why not? What else is out there? Can I combine perspectives/solutions? What is something no one else has brought-up? What is being forgotten/ignored? What about ______? It is the opening of doors and options that follows problem-identification. Consider an assignment that required you to compare two different authors on the topic of education and select and defend one as better. Now add to this scenario that your professor clearly prefers one author over the other. While critical thinking can get you as far as identifying the similarities and differences between these authors and evaluating their merits, it is creative thinking that you must use if you wish to challenge your professor’s opinion and invent new perspectives on the authors that have not previously been considered. So, what can we do to develop our critical and creative thinking skills? Although many students may dislike it, group work is an excellent way to develop our thinking skills. Many times I have heard from students their disdain for working in groups based on scheduling, varied levels of commitment to the group or project, and personality conflicts too, of course. True—it’s not always easy, but that is why it is so effective. When we work collaboratively on a project or problem we bring many brains to bear on a subject. These different brains will naturally develop varied ways of solving or explaining problems and examining information. To the observant individual we see that this places us in a constant state of back and forth critical/creative thinking modes. For example, in group work we are simultaneously analyzing information and generating solutions on our own, while challenging other’s analyses/ideas and responding to challenges to our own analyses/ideas. This is part of why students tend to avoid group work—it challenges us as thinkers and forces us to analyze others while defending ourselves, which is not something we are used to or comfortable with as most of our educational experiences involve solo work. Your professors know this—that’s why we assign it—to help you grow as students, learners, and thinkers! —Dr. Andrew Robert Baker,  Foundations of Academic Success: Words of Wisdom

Problem-Solving Action Checklist

Problem-solving can be an efficient and rewarding process, especially if you are organized and mindful of critical steps and strategies. Remember to assume the attributes of a good critical thinker: if you are curious, reflective, knowledge-seeking, open to change, probing, organized, and ethical, your challenge or problem will be less of a hurdle, and you’ll be in a good position to find intelligent solutions. The steps outlined in this checklist will help you adhere to these qualities in your approach to any problem:

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Critical thinking is logical and reflective thinking focused on deciding what to believe or do.
• Critical thinking involves questioning and evaluating information.
• Evaluating information is a complex, but essential, process. You can use the CRAAP test to help determine if sources and information are reliable.
• Creative thinking is both a natural aspect of childhood and a re-learnable skill as an adult.
• Creative thinking is as essential a skill as critical thinking and integrating them can contribute to  innovative and rewarding experiences in life.
• Critical and creative thinking both contribute to our ability to solve problems in a variety of contexts.
• You can take specific actions to develop and strengthen your critical and creative thinking skills.

ACTIVITY 1: REFLECT ON CRITICAL THINKING

• Apply critical thinking strategies to your life

Directions:

• Think about someone you consider to be a critical thinker (friend, professor, historical figure, etc). What qualities does he/she have?
• Review some of the critical thinking strategies discussed on this page. Pick one strategy that makes sense to you. How can you apply this critical thinking technique to your academic work?
• Habits of mind are attitudes and beliefs that influence how you approach the world (i.e., inquiring attitude, open mind, respect for truth, etc). What is one habit of mind you would like to actively develop over the next year? How will you develop a daily practice to cultivate this habit?
• Write your responses in journal form, and submit according to your instructor’s guidelines.

ACTIVITY 2: ASSESS YOUR CREATIVE PROBLEM-SOLVING SKILLS

• Access  Psychology Today ’s  Creative Problem-Solving Test  at the  Psychology Today  Web site.
• Read the introductory text, which explains how creativity is linked to fundamental qualities of thinking, such as flexibility and tolerance of ambiguity.
• Then advance to the questions by clicking on the “Take The Test” button. The test has 20 questions and will take roughly 10 minutes.
• After finishing the test, you will receive a Snapshot Report with an introduction, a graph, and a personalized interpretation for one of your test scores.

Complete any further steps by following your instructor’s directions.

LICENSES AND ATTRIBUTIONS

CC LICENSED CONTENT, ORIGINAL

• Critical and Creative Thinking  Authored by : Laura Lucas, Tobin Quereau, and Heather Syrett.  Provided by : Austin Community College.  License :  CC BY-NC-SA-4.0

CC LICENSED CONTENT, SPECIFIC ATTRIBUTION

• Chapter cover image.  Authored by : Hans-Peter Gauster.  Provided by : Unsplash.  Located at :  https://unsplash.com/photos/3y1zF4hIPCg .  License :  CC0: No Rights Reserved
• Creative Thinking Skills  in College Success.  Authored by : Linda Bruce.  Provided by : Lumen Learning.  Located at :  https://courses.lumenlearning.com/collegesuccess-lumen/chapter/creative-thinking-skills/ .  License :  CC BY 4.0
• Critical Thinking  in Educational Psychology.  Authored by : Kelvin Seifert and Rosemary Sutton.  Provided by : Lumen Learning.  Located at:  https://courses.lumenlearning.com/educationalpsychology/chapter/critical-thinking/ .  License :  CC BY 4.0
• Critical Thinking Skills  in College Success.   Authored by : Linda Bruce.  Provided by : Lumen Learning.  Located at :  https://courses.lumenlearning.com/collegesuccess-lumen/chapter/critical-thinking-skills/ .  License :  CC BY 4.0
• Critical Thinking 101: Spectrum of Authority. Provided by: UCB Learn.  Located at :  https://youtu.be/9G5xooMN2_c .  License :  CC BY 4.0
• Evaluate: Assessing Your Research Process and Findings  in Information Literacy.  Authored by : Bernnard, Bobish, Hecker, Holden, Hosier, Jacobsen, Loney, Bullis.  Provided by : Lumen Learning.  Located at :  https://courses.lumenlearning.com/informationliteracy/chapter/evaluate-assessing-your-research-process-and-findings/ .  License :  CC BY-NC-SA-4.0
• Image.  Authored by : Mari Helin-Tuominen.  Provided by : Unsplash.  Located at :  https://unsplash.com/photos/ilSnKT1IMxE .  License :  CC0: No Rights Reserved

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED CONTENT

Where Good Ideas Come From.  Authored by : Steven Johnson. Provided by: Riverhead Books.  Located at :  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NugRZGDbPFU .  License :  All Rights Reserved .  License Terms : Standard YouTube License

How to Stimulate the Creative Process.  Provided by : Howcast.  Located at :  https://youtu.be/kPC8e-Jk5uw .  License :  All Rights Reserved .  License Terms : Standard YouTube License

Version History

Publications

On-demand strategy, speaking & workshops, latest articles, write for us, library/publications.

• Competency-Based Education
• Early Learning
• Equity & Access
• Personalized Learning
• Place-Based Education
• Post-Secondary
• Project-Based Learning
• SEL & Mindset
• STEM & Maker
• The Future of Tech and Work

Getting Smart on Minnesota School Visits

Omaha taskforce on driving regional work-based change, town hall recap: learner-centered ecosystems as a public education reality, ryan lufkin on instructure, acquisition and the future of credentialing, recent releases.

Unfulfilled Promise: The Forty-Year Shift from Print to Digital and Why It Failed to Transform Learning

The Portrait Model: Building Coherence in School and System Redesign

Green Pathways: New Jobs Mean New Skills and New Pathways

Support & Guidance For All New Pathways Journeys

Unbundled: Designing Personalized Pathways for Every Learner

Credentialed Learning for All

AI in Education

For more, see Library |  Publications |  Books |  Toolkits

Microschools

New learning models, tools, and strategies have made it easier to open small, nimble schooling models.

Green Schools

The climate crisis is the most complex challenge mankind has ever faced . We’re covering what edleaders and educators can do about it. 

Difference Making

Focusing on how making a difference has emerged as one of the most powerful learning experiences.

New Pathways

This campaign will serve as a road map to the new architecture for American schools. Pathways to citizenship, employment, economic mobility, and a purpose-driven life.

Web3 has the potential to rebuild the internet towards more equitable access and ownership of information, meaning dramatic improvements for learners.

Schools Worth Visiting

We share stories that highlight best practices, lessons learned and next-gen teaching practice.

View more series…

About Getting Smart

Getting smart collective, impact update, at the intersection of creativity and critical thinking.

Creativity and critical thinking sit atop most lists of skills crucial for success in the 21st century. They represent two of the “Four Cs” in   P21 ’s learning framework (the other two being communication and collaboration), and they rank second and third on the World Economic Forum ’s top ten list of skills workers will need most in the year 2020 (complex problem solving ranks first).

The various lists of 21st-century skills grant creativity and critical thinking such prominence in part because they are human abilities robots and AI are unlikely to usurp anytime soon. The picture of the near future that emerges from these compilations of skills is one in which people must compete against their own inventions by exploiting the most human of their human qualities: empathy, a willingness to work together, adaptability, innovation. As the 21st century unfolds, creativity and critical thinking appear as uniquely human attributes essential for staving off our own obsolescence.

Like many things human, however, creativity and critical thinking are not easily or consistently defined. The William and Flora Hewlett Foundation’s list of “ Deeper Learning Competencies ,” for example, identifies creativity not as its own competency but as a tool for thinking critically. Bloom’s Taxonomy  treats the two as separate educational goals, ranking creativity above critical thinking in the progression of intellectual abilities. Efforts to pin down these skills are so quickly muddled, one is tempted to fall back on the old Justice Stewart remark regarding obscenity: “I know it when I see it.” Unfortunately, that yardstick isn’t much help to teachers or students.

Definitions of creativity tend toward the broad and vague. One of the leading researchers in the area, Robert Sternberg, characterizes creativity  as “a decision to buy low and sell high in the world of ideas.” While this is itself a creative approach to the problem of defining creativity, it is not a solution easily translated into a rubric.

Definitions of critical thinking don’t fare much better. According to one group of researchers , “Critical thinking is the intellectually disciplined process of actively and skillfully conceptualizing, applying, analyzing, synthesizing and/or evaluating information gathered from, or generated by, observation, experience, reflection, reasoning or communication, as a guide to belief and action.” Again, a curiously self-demonstrating definition, but not one ready-made for the classroom.

Generally speaking, creativity is associated with generating ideas, while critical thinking is associated with judging them. In practice, however, the two are not so easy to separate. As parents and teachers know well, creativity without critical judgment tends toward the fanciful, the impractical, the ridiculous. “Creative thinking” becomes a nice way of saying that someone’s ideas have run amok.

At the same time, critical thinking gets short shrift when reduced to making a judgment, since, at its best, critical thinking is also a way of making a contribution. It is fundamentally creative in the sense that its aim is to produce something new: an insight, an argument, a new synthesis of ideas or information, a new level of understanding.

Our grasp of creativity and critical thinking is improved when we see them in symbiotic relationship with one another. Creativity  benefits from our recognizing the role of critical thinking in ensuring the value of novel ideas. In turn, critical thinking  comes into clearer focus when we recognize it as a creative act that enriches understanding by giving rise to something that wasn’t there before.

What does this symbiotic relationship look like in the classroom? Here are a few educational contexts in which creativity is disciplined by critical thinking and critical thinking is expanded through recognition of its creative function:

• Writing.  Creative writing only works when the writer’s critical judgment is brought to bear on the product of their imagination. However richly imagined, a story’s success depends on the skill with which its author corrals and controls their ideas, crafting them into something coherent and cohesive. Storycraft is accomplished by writers who discipline their own creative work by thinking critically about it.Successful academic writing — argumentative, expository — requires not just critical analysis but also creative invention. Academic writers enter into conversation with their readers, their instructors, fellow students, other writers and scholars, anyone affected by or invested in their topic. As in any conversation, a successful participant doesn’t simply repeat back what others have already said, but builds upon it, asking critical questions, fine-tuning points, proposing solutions — in short, creating and contributing something original that extends and enriches the conversation.
• History.  History classes lend themselves readily to creative exercises like imagining the experiences of people in the past, or envisioning what the present might look like if this or that historical event had played out differently. These exercises succeed only when imagination is disciplined by critical thinking; conjectures must be plausible, connections must be logical, and the use of evidence must be reasonable.At the same time, critical analysis of historical problems often employs invention and is (or should be) rewarded for its creativity. For example, a student analyzing the US mission to the moon in terms of the theme of the frontier in American mythology is engaged in an intellectual activity that is at least as creative as it is evaluative.
• Math.  Creative projects can generate engagement and enthusiasm in students, prompting them to learn things they might otherwise resist. In this example , a middle school math class learned about circuitry on their way to creating a keyboard made of bananas. Projects like this one demonstrate that creativity and critical thinking are reciprocal. A banana keyboard is unquestionably creative, but of little utility except insofar as it teaches something valuable about electronics. Yet, that lesson was made possible only by virtue of the creative impulse the project inspired in students.

The skills today’s students will need for success are, at a most basic level, the skills that humans have always relied on for success — the very things that make us human, including our creativity and our capacity for thinking critically. The fact that our defining qualities so often defy definition, that our distinctive traits are so frustratingly indistinct, is just another gloriously untidy part of us that robots will never understand.

For more, see:

• How Dialogue Teaches Critical Thinking and Empathy
• Creating Change-Agents: The Intersection of Critical Thinking and Student Agency
• Philadelphia is Reimagining Arts & Creativity Education Programming

Stay in-the-know with all things EdTech and innovations in learning by signing up to receive the weekly Smart Update .

William Bryant

• @BetterRhetor

Discover the latest in learning innovations

Sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Related Reading

How We Move Forward: Practicing Three Inclusive, Anti-Racist Mindsets for Reopening Schools

What I Learned From the Stanford Certificate in Innovation & Entrepreneurship

Eduprotocols: Facilitating Student Collaboration, Creativity and Ownership

Preparing to Reopen: Six Principles That Put Equity at the Core

Leave a comment.

Your email address will not be published. All fields are required.

Nominate a School, Program or Community

Stay on the cutting edge of learning innovation.

Subscribe to our weekly Smart Update!

Smart Update

What is pbe (spanish), designing microschools download, download quick start guide to implementing place-based education, download quick start guide to place-based professional learning, download what is place-based education and why does it matter, download 20 invention opportunities in learning & development.

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol

Fostering Creativity and Critical Thinking in College: A Cross-Cultural Investigation

Ji hoon park.

1 Department of Psychology, Pace University, New York, NY, United States

2 Developmental and Educational Research Center for Children's Creativity, Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China

Heavon Allen

Associated data.

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Enhancing creativity and critical thinking have garnered the attention of educators and researchers for decades. They have been highlighted as essential skills for the 21st century. A total of 103 United States students (53 female, 24 male, two non-binary, and 24 non-reporting) and 166 Chinese students (128 female, 30 male, one non-binary, and seven non-reporting) completed an online survey. The survey includes the STEAM-related creative problem solving, Sternberg scientific reasoning tasks, psychological critical thinking (PCT) exam, California critical thinking (CCT) skills test, and college experience survey, as well as a demographic questionnaire. A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) yields a two-factor model for all creativity and critical thinking measurements. Yet, the two latent factors are strongly associated with each other ( r =0.84). Moreover, Chinese students outperform American students in measures of critical thinking, whereas Americans outperform Chinese students in measures of creativity. Lastly, the results also demonstrate that having some college research experience (such as taking research method courses) could positively influence both United States and Chinese students’ creativity and critical thinking skills. Implications are discussed.

Introduction

Creativity and critical thinking have been recognized as essential skills in the 21st century ( National Education Association, 2012 ). Many researchers and educators have focused on these two skills, including acquisition, enhancement, and performance. In addition, numerous studies have been devoted to understanding the conceptual complexities involved in creativity and critical thinking. Although similar to each other, creativity and critical thinking are distinctive by definition, each with a different emphasis.

The concept of creativity has evolved over the years. It was almost exclusively conceptualized as divergent thinking when Guilford (1956 , 1986) proposed divergent thinking as a part of intelligence. Earlier measures of creativity took the approach of divergent thinking, measuring creative potential ( Wallach and Kogan, 1965 ; Torrance, 1966 , 1988 ; Runco and Albert, 1986 ; Kim, 2005 ). In 1990s, many creativity scholars challenged the validity of tests of divergent thinking, and suggested that divergent thinking only captures the trivial sense of creativity, and proposed to use the product-oriented method to measure creativity ( Csikszentmihalyi, 1988 ; Amabile, 1996 ; Sternberg and Lubart, 1999 ). A system model of creativity, which recognizes the important roles individual, field, and domain have played, was used as a framework to conceptualize creativity. A widely accepted definition for creativity is a person’s ability to generate an idea or product that is deemed as both novel and appropriate by experts in a field of human activities ( Scott and Bruce, 1994 ; Amabile, 1996 ; Csikszentmihalyi, 1999 ; Sternberg and Lubart, 1999 ; Hunter et al., 2007 ). Corazza and Lubart (2021) recently proposed a dynamic definition of creativity, in which creativity is defined as a context-embedded phenomenon that is tightly related to the cultural and social environment. Based on this new definition, measures of creativity should be context-specific and culturally relevant, especially when it is examined cross-culturally.

Similarly, the conceptualization of critical thinking has also evolved over the years. Earlier definitions emphasized the broad multidimensional aspects of critical thinking, including at least three aspects: attitude, knowledge, and skills ( Glaser, 1941 ). The definition has been evolved to include specific components for each aspect ( Watson and Glaser, 1980 ). For example, critical thinking is recognized as the ability to use cognitive skills or strategies to increase the probability of a desirable outcome ( Halpern, 1999 ). More specifically, cognitive skills such as evaluation, problem-solving, reflective thinking, logical reasoning, and probability thinking are recognized as parts of critical thinking skills in research and assessments ( Ennis, 1987 , Scriven and Paul, 1987 , Halpern, 1999 ). Moving into the 21st century, metacognition and self-regulatory skills have also become essential components for critical thinking in addition to the cognitive skills recognized by earlier scholars ( Korn, 2014 , Paul and Elder, 2019 ).

Similar to the concept of creativity, critical thinking is also viewed as multidimensional and domain specific ( Bensley and Murtagh, 2012 ). For example, critical thinking in psychology, also referred to as psychological critical thinking (PCT), is defined as one’s ability to evaluate claims in a way that explicitly incorporates basic principles of psychological science ( Lawson, 1999 ). As one of the important hub sciences, psychology is often regarded as a foundational course for scientific training in American higher education ( Boyack et al., 2005 ). In psychological discourse, critical thinking is often defined in tandem with scientific thinking, which places significance on hypothesis-testing and problem-solving in order to reduce bias and erroneous beliefs ( Halpern, 1984 ; American Psychological Association, 2016 ; Lamont, 2020 ; Sternberg and Halpern, 2020 ). Based on this definition, measures of critical thinking should assess cognitive skills (i.e., evaluation, logical reasoning) and ability to utilize scientific methods for problem-solving.

In addition to the evolution of the definitions of critical thinking and creativity, research into these two concepts has led to the development of various measurements. For both concepts, there have been numerous measurements that have been studied, utilized, and improved.

The complexities associated with creativity (i.e., context-relevant and domain-specificity) pose a major issue for its measurement. Many different types of creativity measures have been developed in the past. Measures using a divergent thinking approach, such as the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking ( Torrance, 1974 ) and Alternate Uses Test ( Guilford et al., 1960 ), a product-oriented approach, a third person nomination approach, as well as a self-report approach measuring personality ( Gough, 1979 ), creative behavior ( Hocevar and Michael, 1979 ; Rodriguez-Boerwinkle et al., 2021 ), and creative achievement ( Carson et al., 2005 ; Diedrich et al., 2018 ).

Both the divergent thinking and the product-oriented approaches have been widely used in the creativity literature to objectively measure creativity. The tasks of both approaches are generally heuristic, meaning that no correct answer is expected and the process does not need to be rational. When scoring divergent thinking, the number of responses (i.e., fluency) and the rareness of the response (i.e., originality) were used to represent creativity. When scoring products using the product-orientated approach, a group of experts provides their subjective ratings on various dimensions such as originality, appropriateness, and aesthetically appealing to these products using their subjective criteria. When there is a consensus among the experts, average ratings of these expert scores are used to represent the creativity of the products. This approach is also named as Consensual Assessment Technique (CAT; Amabile, 1982 , 1996 ). Some scholars viewed the CAT approach as focusing on the convergent aspect of creativity ( Lubart et al., 2013 ). Recognizing the importance of divergent and convergent thinking in conceptualizing creativity, Lubart et al. (2013) have suggested including divergent thinking and product-oriented approach (i.e., CAT) to objective measures of creativity ( Barbot et al., 2011 ).

Similar to measures of creativity, measurements of critical thinking are also multilevel and multi-approach. In an article reviewing the construction of critical thinking in psychological studies, Lamont (2020) argues that critical thinking became a scientific object when psychologists attempted to measure it. Different from measures of creativity, where the tasks are heuristic in nature, measures of critical thinking require participants to engage in logical thinking. Therefore, the nature of critical thinking tasks is more algorithmic.

The interest in the study of critical thinking is evident in the increased efforts in the past decades to measure such a complex, multidimensional skill. Watson-Glaser Tests for Critical Thinking ( Watson and Glaser, 1938 ) is widely recognized as the first official measure of critical thinking. Since then, numerous measurements of critical thinking have been developed to evaluate both overall and domain-specific critical thinking, such as the PCT Exam ( Lawson, 1999 ; See Mueller et al., 2020 for list of assessments). A few of the most commonly used contemporary measures of critical thinking include the Watson-Glaser Test for Critical Thinking Appraisals ( Watson and Glaser, 1980 ), Cornell Critical Thinking Test ( Ennis et al., 1985 ), and California Critical Thinking (CCT) Skills Test ( Facione and Facione, 1994 ). As the best established and widely used standardized critical thinking measures, these tests have been validated in various studies and have been used as a criterion for meta-analyses ( Niu et al., 2013 ; Ross et al., 2013 ).

There have also been concerns regarding the usage of these standardized measures of critical thinking on its own due to its emphasis on measuring general cognitive abilities of participants, while negating the domain-specific aspect of critical thinking ( Lamont, 2020 ). The issues associated with standardized measures are not unique to standardized critical thinking measures, as same types of criticisms have been raised for standardized college admissions measures such as the Graduate Record Exam (GRE). To develop an assessment that encompasses a broader range of student abilities that is more aligned to scientific disciplines, Sternberg and Sternberg (2017) developed a scientific inquiry and reasoning measure. This measure is aimed to assess participants’ ability to utilize scientific methods and to think scientifically in order to investigate a topic or solve a problem ( Sternberg and Sternberg, 2017 ). The strength of this measure is that it assesses students’ abilities (i.e., ability to think critically) that are domain-specific and relevant to the sciences. Considering the multidimensional aspect of critical thinking, a combination of a standardized critical thinking measure, an assessment measuring cognitive abilities involved in critical thinking; and a measure that assesses domain-specific critical thinking, would provide a comprehensive evaluation of critical thinking.

The Relationship Between Creativity and Critical Thinking

Most of the studies thus far referenced have investigated creativity and critical thinking separately; however, the discussion on the relationship between creativity and critical thinking spans decades of research ( Barron and Harrington, 1981 ; Glassner and Schwartz, 2007 ; Wechsler et al., 2018 ; Akpur, 2020 ). Some earlier studies on the relationship between divergent thinking and critical thinking have observed a moderate correlation ( r =0.23, p <0.05) between the two ( Gibson et al., 1968 ). Using measures of creative personality, Gadzella and Penland (1995) also found a moderate correlation ( r =0.36, p <0.05) between creative personality and critical thinking.

Recent studies have further supported the positive correlation between critical thinking and creativity. For example, using the creative thinking disposition scale to measure creativity, Akpur (2020) found a moderate correlation between the two among college students ( r =0.27, p <0.05). Similarly, using the critical thinking disposition scale to measure critical thinking and scientific creativity scale and creative self-efficacy scale to measure creativity, Qiang et al. (2020) studied the relationship between critical thinking and creativity to a large sample of high school students ( n =1,153). They found that the relationship between the two varied depending on the type of measurement of creativity. More specifically, the correlation between critical thinking disposition and creative self-efficacy was r =0.045 ( p <0.001), whereas the correlation between critical thinking disposition and scientific creativity was r =0.15 ( p <0.01).

Recognizing the moderate relationship between the two, researchers have also aimed to study the independence of creativity and critical thinking. Some studies have found evidence that these constructs are relatively autonomous. The results of Wechsler et al. (2018) study, which aimed to investigate whether creativity and critical thinking are independent or complementary processes, found a relative autonomy of creativity and critical thinking and found that the variables were only moderately correlated. The researchers in this study suggest that a model that differentiated the two latent variables associated with creativity and critical thinking dimensions was the most appropriate method of analysis ( Wechsler et al., 2018 ). Evidence to suggest that creativity and critical thinking are fairly independent processes was also found in study of Ling and Loh (2020) . The results of their research, which examined the relationship of creativity and critical thinking to pattern recognition, revealed that creativity is a weak predictor of pattern recognition. In contrast, critical thinking is a good predictor ( Ling and Loh, 2020 ).

It is worth noting that a possible explanation for the inconsistencies in these studies’ results is the variance in the definition and the measures used to evaluate creativity and critical thinking. Based on the current literature on the relationship between creativity and critical thinking, we believe that more investigation was needed to further clarify the relationship between creativity and critical thinking which became a catalyst for the current study.

Cross-Cultural Differences in Creativity and Critical Thinking Performance

Results from various cross-cultural studies suggest that there are differences in creativity and critical thinking skills among cultures. A common belief is that individuals from Western cultures are believed to be more critical and creative compared to non-Westerners, whereas individuals from non-Western cultures are believed to be better at critical thinking related tasks compared to Westerners ( Ng, 2001 ; Wong and Niu, 2013 ; Lee et al., 2015 ). For example, Wong and Niu (2013) found a persistent cultural stereotype regarding creativity and critical thinking skills that exist cross-culturally. In their study, both Chinese and Americans believed that Chinese perform better in deductive reasoning (a skill comparable to critical thinking) and that Americans perform better on creativity. This stereotype belief was found to be incredibly persistent as participants did not change their opinions even when presented with data that contradicted their beliefs.

Interestingly, research does suggest that such a stereotype might be based on scientific evidence ( Niu et al., 2007 ; Wong and Niu, 2013 ). In the same study, it was revealed that Chinese did in fact perform better than Americans in deductive reasoning, and Americans performed better in creativity tests ( Wong and Niu, 2013 ). Similarly, Lee et al. (2015) found that compared to American students, Korean students believed that they are more prone to use receptive learning abilities (remembering and reproducing what is taught) instead of critical and creative learning abilities.

Cultural Influence on Critical Thinking

Other studies investigating the cultural influence on critical thinking have had more nuanced findings. Manalo et al. (2013) study of university students from New Zealand and Japan found that culture-related factors (self-construal, regulatory mode, and self-efficacy) do influence students’ critical thinking use. Still, the differences in those factors do not necessarily equate to differences in critical thinking. Their results found that students from Western and Asian cultural environments did not have significant differences in their reported use of critical thinking. The researchers in this study suggest that perhaps the skills and values nurtured in the educational environment have a more significant influence on students’ use of critical thinking ( Manalo et al., 2013 ).

Another study found that New Zealand European students performed better on objective measures of critical thinking than Chinese students. Still, such differences could be explained by the student’s English proficiency and not dialectical thinking style. It was also revealed in this study that Chinese students tended to rely more on dialectical thinking to solve critical thinking problems compared to the New Zealand European students ( Lun et al., 2010 ). Other research on the cultural differences in thinking styles revealed that Westerners are more likely to use formal logical rules in reasoning. In contrast, Asians are more likely to use intuitive experience-based sense when solving critical thinking problems ( Nisbett et al., 2001 ).

These studies suggest that culture can be used as a broad taxonomy to explain differences in critical thinking use. Still, one must consider the educational environment and thinking styles when studying the nature of the observed discrepancies. For instance, cultural differences in thinking style, in particular, might explain why Westerners perform better on some critical thinking measures, whereas Easterners perform better on others.

Cultural Influence on Creative Performance

Historically, creativity studies have suggested that individuals from non-Western cultures are not as creative as Westerners ( Torrance, 1974 ; Jellen and Urban, 1989 ; Niu and Sternberg, 2001 ; Tang et al., 2015 ). For example, in one study, Americans generated more aesthetically pleasing artworks (as judged by both American and Chinese judges) than Chinese ( Niu and Sternberg, 2001 ). However, recent creativity research has suggested that cross-cultural differences are primarily attributable to the definition of creativity rather than the level of creativity between cultures. As aforementioned, creativity is defined as an idea or product that is both novel and appropriate. Many cross-cultural studies have found that Westerners have a preference and perform better in the novelty aspect, and Easterners have a preference and perform better in the appropriateness aspect. In cross-cultural studies, Rockstuhl and Ng (2008) found that Israelis tend to generate more original ideas than their Singaporean counterparts. In contrast, Singaporeans tend to produce more appropriate ideas. Bechtoldt et al. (2012) found in their study that Koreans generated more useful ideas, whereas Dutch students developed more original ideas. Liou and Lan (2018) found Taiwanese tend to create and select more useful ideas, whereas Americans tend to generate and choose more novel ideas. The differences in creativity preference and performance found in these studies suggest that cultural influence is a prominent factor in creativity.

In summary, cross-cultural studies have supported the notion that culture influences both creativity and critical thinking. This cultural influence seems relatively unambiguous in creativity as it has been found in multiple studies that cultural background can explain differences in performance and preference to the dual features of creativity. Critical thinking has also been influenced by culture, albeit in an opaquer nature in comparison to creativity. Critical thinking is ubiquitous in all cultures, but the conception of critical thinking and the methods used to think critically (i.e., thinking styles) are influenced by cultural factors.

Influence of College Experience on Creativity and Critical Thinking

Given its significance as a core academic ability, the hypothesis of many colleges and universities emphasize that students will gain critical thinking skills as the result of their education. Fortunately, studies have shown that these efforts have had some promising outcomes. Around 92% of students in multi-institution research reported gains in critical thinking. Only 8.9% of students believed that their critical thinking had not changed or had grown weaker ( Tsui, 1998 ). A more recent meta-analysis by Huber and Kuncel (2016) found that students make substantial gains in critical thinking during college. In addition, the efforts to enhance necessary thinking skills have led to the development of various skill-specific courses. Mill et al. (1994) found that among three groups of undergraduate students, a group that received tutorial sessions and took research methodology and statistics performed significantly better on scientific reasoning and critical thinking abilities tests than control groups. Penningroth et al. (2007) found that students who took a class in which they were required to engage in active learning and critical evaluation of claims by applying scientific concepts, had greater improvement in psychological critical thinking than students in the comparison groups. There have also been studies in which students’ scientific inquiry and critical thinking skills have improved by taking a course designed with specific science thinking and reasoning modules ( Stevens and Witkow, 2014 ; Stevens et al., 2016 ).

Using a Survey of Undergraduate Research Experience (SURE), Lopatto (2004 , 2008) found that research experience can help students gain various learning skills such as ability to integrate theory and practice, ability to analyze data, skill in the interpretation of results, and understanding how scientists work on problem. All of these learning skills correspond to at least one of the dimensions mentioned earlier in the definition of critical thinking (i.e., evaluation, analytical thinking, and problem solving through). Thus, results of SURE provide evidence that critical thinking can be enhanced through research experience ( Lopatto, 2004 , 2008 ).

In comparison to critical thinking, only a few studies have examined the interaction between creativity and college experience. Previous research on STEM provides some evidence to suggest that STEM education can promote the learner’s creativity ( Land, 2013 , Guo and Woulfin, 2016 , Kuo et al., 2018 ). Notably, study of Kuo et al. (2018) suggest that project-based learning in STEM has the merits of improving one’s creativity. They found that the STEM Interdisciplinary Project-Based Learning (IPBL) course is a practical approach to improve college student’s creativity ( Kuo et al., 2018 ). College research experience in particular, has been reported as important or very important by faculty and students for learning how to approach problems creatively ( Zydney et al., 2002 ).

Although specific college courses aimed to enhance creativity have been scarce, some training programs have been developed specifically to improve creativity. Scott et al. (2004) conducted a quantitative review of various creativity training and found that divergent thinking, creative problem solving, and creativity performance can be enhanced through skill-specific training programs. Embodied creativity training programs, consisting of creativity fitness exercises and intensive workshops, have also been effective in enhancing participants’ creative production and improving their creative self-efficacy ( Byrge and Tang, 2015 ).

Both critical thinking and creativity were also found to be important in students’ learning. Using a longitudinal design for one semester to 52 graduate students in biology, Siburian et al. (2019) studied how critical thinking and creative thinking contribute to improving cognitive learning skills. They found that both critical and creative thinking significantly contributes to enhancing cognitive learning skills ( R 2 =0.728). They each contribute separately to the development of cognitive learning skills ( b was 0.123 between critical thinking and cognitive learning and 0.765 between creative thinking and cognitive learning). The results from research on creativity and critical thinking indicate that training and experiences of students in college can enhance both of these skills.

Current Study

Previous literature on creativity and critical thinking suggests that there is a positive correlation between these two skills. Moreover, cultural background influences creativity and critical thinking conception and performance. However, our literature review suggests that there are only a few studies that have investigated creativity and critical thinking simultaneously to examine whether cultural background is a significant influence in performance. In addition, most of the past research on creativity and critical thinking have relied on dispositions or self-reports to measure the two skills and the investigation on the actual performance have been scarce. Lastly, past studies suggest that the acquisition and enhancement of these skills are influenced by various factors. Notably, college experience and skill-specific training have been found to improve both creativity and critical thinking. However, it is not yet clear how college experience aids in fostering creativity and critical thinking and which elements of college education are beneficial for enhancing these two skills. The cultural influence on creativity and critical thinking performance also needs further investigation.

The current study aimed to answer two questions related to this line of thought. How does culture influence creativity and critical thinking performance? How does college experience affect creativity and critical thinking? Based on past findings, we developed three hypotheses. First, we hypothesized that there is a positive association between critical thinking and creativity. Second, we suggest that college students from different countries have different levels of creativity and critical thinking. More specifically, we predicted that United States students would perform better than Chinese students on both creativity and critical thinking. Last, we hypothesized that having college research experience (through courses or research labs) will enhance creativity and critical thinking.

Materials and Methods

Participants.

The study was examined by the Internal Review Board by the host university in the United States and obtained an agreement from a partner university in China to meet the ethical standard of both countries.

Participants include 103 university students from the United States and 166 university students from Mainland China. Among all participants, 181 were female (67.3%), 54 were male (20.1%), non-binary or gender fluid ( n =3, 1.1%), and some did not report their gender ( n =31, 11.5%). The majority of participants majored in social sciences ( n =197, 73.2%). Other disciplines include business and management ( n =38, 14.1%), engineering and IT ( n =20, 7.4%), and sciences ( n =14, 5.2%). A Chi-square analysis was performed to see if the background in major was different between the American and Chinese samples. The results showed that the two samples are comparable in college majors, X 2 (3, 265) =5.50, p =0.138.

The American participants were recruited through campus recruitment flyers and a commercial website called Prolific (online survey distribution website). Ethnicities of the American participants were White ( n =44, 42.7%), Asian ( n =13, 12.6%), Black or African American ( n =11, 10.7%), Hispanic or Latinos ( n =5, 4.9%), and some did not report their ethnicity ( n =30, 29.1%). The Chinese participants were recruited through online recruitment flyers. All Chinese students were of Han ethnicity.

After reviewing and signing an online consent form, both samples completed a Qualtrics survey containing creativity and critical thinking measures.

Measurements

Steam related creative problem solving.

This is a self-designed measurement, examining participant’s divergent and convergent creative thinking in solving STEAM-related real-life problems. It includes three vignettes, each depicting an issue that needs to be resolved. Participants were given a choice to pick two vignettes to which they would like to provide possible solutions for. Participants were asked to provide their answers in two parts. In the first part, participants were asked to provide as many solutions as they can think of for the problem depicted (divergent). In the second part, participants were asked to choose one of the solutions they gave in the first part that they believe is the most creative and elaborate on how they would carry out the solution (convergent).

The responses for the first part of the problem (i.e., divergent) were scored based on fluency (number of solutions given). Each participant received a score on fluency by averaging the number of solutions given across three tasks. In order to score the originality of the second part of the solution (i.e., convergent), we invited four graduate students who studied creativity for at least 1year as expert judges to independently rate the originality of all solutions. The Cronbach’s Alpha of the expert ratings was acceptable for all three vignette solutions (0.809, 0.906, and 0.703). We then averaged the originality scores provided by the four experts to represent the originality of each solution. We then averaged the top three solutions as rated by the experts to represent the student’s performance on originality. In the end, each student received two scores on this task: fluency and originality.

Psychological Critical Thinking Exam

We adopted an updated PCT Exam developed by Lawson et al. (2015) , which made improvements to the original measure ( Lawson, 1999 ). We used PCT to measure the participants’ domain-specific critical thinking: critical thinking involved in the sciences. The initial assessment aimed to examine the critical thinking of psychology majors; however, the updated measure was developed so that it can be used to examine students’ critical thinking in a variety of majors. The split-half reliability of the revised measurement was 0.88, and test-retest reliability was 0.90 ( Lawson et al., 2015 ). Participants were asked to identify issues with a problematic claim made in two short vignettes. For example, one of the questions states:

Over the past few years, Jody has had several dreams that apparently predicted actual events. For example, in one dream, she saw a car accident and later that week she saw a van run into the side of a pickup truck. In another dream, she saw dark black clouds and lightning and 2days later a loud thunderstorm hit her neighborhood. She believes these events are evidence that she has a psychic ability to predict the future through her dreams. Could the event have occurred by chance? State whether or not there is a problem with the person’s conclusions and explain the problem (if there is one).

Responses were scored based on the rubric provided in the original measurement ( Lawson et al., 2015 ). If no problem was identified the participants would receive zero points. If a problem was recognized but misidentified, the participants would receive one point. If the main problem was identified and other less relevant problems were identified, the participants received two points. If participants identified only the main problem, they received three points. Following the rubric, four graduate students independently rated the students’ critical thinking task. The Cronbach’s Alpha of the expert ratings was acceptable for both vignettes (0.773 and 0.712). The average of the four scores given by the experts was used as the final score for the participants.

California Critical Thinking Skills Test

This objective measure of critical thinking was developed by Facione and Facione (1994) . We used CCT to measure a few of the multidimensions of critical thinking such as evaluation, logical reasoning, and probability thinking. Five sample items provided from Insight Assessment were used instead of the standard 40-min long CCT. Participants were presented with everyday scenarios with 4–6 answer choices. Participants were asked to make an accurate and complete interpretation of the question in order to correctly answer the question by choosing the right answer choice (each correct answer was worth one point). This test is commonly used to measure critical thinking, and previous research has reported its reliability as r =0.86 ( Hariri and Bagherinejad, 2012 ).

Sternberg Scientific Inquiry and Reasoning

This measure was developed by Sternberg and Sternberg (2017) as an assessment of scientific reasoning. We used this assessment as a domain-specific assessment to measure participants’ scientific creativity (generating testable hypotheses) and scientific critical thinking involved in generating experiments. For this two-part measure, participants were asked to read two short vignettes. For one of the vignettes, participants were asked to generate as many hypotheses as possible to explain the events described in the vignette. For the other, create an experiment to test the hypothesis mentioned in the vignette.

After carefully reviewing the measurement, we notice that the nature of the tasks in the first part of this measure (hypothesis generation) relied on heuristics, requiring participants to engage in divergent thinking. The number of valid hypotheses provided (i.e., fluency) was used to represent the performance of this task. We, therefore, deem that this part measures creativity. In contrast, the second part of the measure, experiment generation, asked participants to use valid scientific methods to design an experiment following the procedure of critical thinking such as evaluation, problem-solving, and task evaluation. Its scoring also followed algorithms so that a correct answer could be achieved. For the above reasons, we believe hypotheses generation is a measurement of creativity and experiment generation is a measurement for critical thinking.

Based on the recommended scoring manual, one graduate student calculated the fluency score from the hypothesis generation measurement. Four experts read through all students’ responses to the experiment generation. They discussed a rubric on how to score these responses, using a four-point scale, with a “0” representing no response or wrong response, a “1” representing partially correct, a “2” representing correct response. An additional point (the three points) was added if the participant provided multiple design methods. Based on the above rubric, the four experts independently scored this part of the questionnaire. The Cronbach’s Alpha of the four expert ratings was 0.792. The average score of the four judges was used to represent their critical thinking scores on this task.

College Experience Survey

Participants were asked about their past research experience, either specifically in psychology or in general academia. Participants were asked to choose between three choices: no research experience, intermediate research experience (i.e., research work for class, research work for lab), and advanced research experience (i.e., professional research experience, published works).

Demographic and Background Questionnaire

Series of standard demographic questions were asked, including participants’ age, gender, and ethnicity.

We performed a Pearson correlation to examine the relationship between creativity and critical thinking (the two-c), which include performances on three measures on creativity ( creativity originality , creativity fluency , and hypothesis generation ) and three measures on critical thinking ( experiment generation , CCT , and PCT ).

Most of the dependent variables had a significantly positive correlation. The only insignificant correlation was found between Sternberg hypothesis generation and CCT, r (247) =0.024, p =0.708 (see Table 1 ).

Correlation coefficients for study variables.

Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted by applying SEM through AMOS 21 software program and the maximum likelihood method. One-factor and two-factor models have been analyzed, respectively (see Figure 1 ).

The comparison of the two confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) models: one-factor vs. two-factor.

As it is demonstrated in Table 2 , the value ranges of the most addressed fit indices used in the analysis of SEM are presented. Comparing two models, χ 2 /df of the two-factor model is in a good fit, while the index of the one-factor model is in acceptable fit. The comparison of the two models suggest that the two-factor model is a better model than the one-factor model.

Recommended values for evaluation and the obtained values.

RMSEA,root mean square error of approximation; NFI, normed fit index; CFI, comparative fit index; GFI, goodness-of-fit index; and AGFI, adjusted goodness-of-fit-index ( Schermelleh-Engel et al., 2003 ).

Cross-Cultural Differences in Critical Thinking and Creativity

We conducted a 2 (Country: the United States vs. China)×2 (Two-C: Creativity and Critical Thinking) ANOVA to investigate the cultural differences in critical thinking and creativity. We averaged scores of three critical thinking measurement ( experiment generation , PCT , and CCT ) to represent critical thinking and averaged three creativity scores ( creativity originality , creativity fluency , and hypothesis generation ).

This analysis revealed a significant main effect for the type of thinking (i.e., creative vs. critical thinking), F (1,247) =464.77, p <0.01, η p 2 =0.653. Moreover, there was a significant interaction between country (i.e., the United States vs. China) and type of thinking, F (1,247) =62.00, p <0.01, η p 2 =0.201. More specifically, Chinese students ( M =1.32, SD =0.59) outperformed American students ( M =1.02, SD =0.44) on critical thinking. In contrast, American students ( M =2.59, SD =1.07) outperformed Chinese students ( M =2.05, SD =0.83) on creativity.

Influence of Research Experience on Critical Thinking and Creativity

The last hypothesis states that having college research experience (through courses or research lab) would enhance students’ creativity and critical thinking from both countries. We performed a 2 (Two-C: Creativity and Critical Thinking)×2 (Country: the United States vs. China)×3 (Research Experience: Advanced vs. Some vs. No) ANOVA to test this hypothesis. This analysis revealed a significant main effect for research experience, F (2,239) =4.05, p =0.019, η p 2 =0.033. Moreover, there was a significant interaction between country (i.e., the United States vs. China) and research experience, F (2,239) =5.77, p =0.004, η p 2 =0.046. In addition, there was a three-way interaction among country, two-C, and research experience. More specifically, with an increase of research experience for American students, both critical thinking and creativity improved. In contrast, for Chinese students, the impact of research experience was not significant for creativity. However, some research experience positively impacted Chinese students’ critical thinking (see Figure 2 ).

Estimated marginal means of Two-C for the United States and Chinese samples.

The current study aimed to investigate the relationship between creativity and critical thinking, how culture influences creativity and critical thinking, and how college research experience affects creativity and critical thinking. Our results supported the first hypothesis regarding the positive correlation among all of the dependent variables. The mean correlation between the measures of creativity and critical thinking was 0.230. This result was in line with the findings from previous research ( Gibson et al., 1968 ; Gadzella and Penland, 1995 ; Siburian et al., 2019 ; Akpur, 2020 ; Qiang et al., 2020 ). Moreover, our confirmatory factor analysis yielded similar results as analysis of Wechsler et al. (2018) and Akpur (2020) and provides more evidence of the relative independence between creativity and critical thinking. We found that at the latent variable level, the two skills are highly correlated to each other ( r =0.84). In addition, we found that although the one-factor model was an acceptable fit, a two-factor model was a better fit for analysis. This result suggests that despite the correlation between creativity and critical thinking, the two skills should be studied as separate factors for an appropriate and comprehensive analysis.

The results of this study partially confirmed our second hypothesis and replicated the findings from past studies ( Niu et al., 2007 ; Lun et al., 2010 ; Wong and Niu, 2013 ; Tang et al., 2015 ). As predicted, there was a significant main effect for culture in students’ performance for all six measures in the two-C analysis model. United States students performed better than Chinese students in all three creativity measures, and Chinese students performed better than United States students in all critical thinking measures. Given the diversity in the type of measures used in this study, the results suggest that United States and Chinese students’ performance aligns with the stereotype belief found in study of Wong and Niu (2013) . The findings from the current study suggest that the stereotype belief observed in both United States and Chinese students (United States students generally perform better on creativity tasks, while Chinese students perform typically better on critical thinking tasks) is not entirely unfounded. Furthermore, the clear discrepancy in performance between United States and Chinese students provides more evidence to suggest that creativity and critical thinking are relatively autonomous skills. Although, a high correlation between these two skills was found in our study, the fact that students from two different cultures have two different development trajectories in critical thinking and creativity suggests that these two skills are relatively autonomous.

Lastly, the results also confirmed our third hypothesis, that is, college research experience did have a positive influence on students’ creativity and critical thinking. Compared to students with no research experience, students with some research experience performed significantly better in all measures of creativity and critical thinking. This finding is consistent with the previous literature ( Mill et al., 1994 ; Penningroth et al., 2007 ; Stevens and Witkow, 2014 ; Stevens et al., 2016 ; Kuo et al., 2018 ). The result of our study suggests that college research experience is significant to enhance both creativity and critical thinking. As research experience becomes a more essential component of college education, our results suggest that it not only can add credential for applying to graduate school or help students learn skills specific to research, but also help students enhance both creativity and critical thinking. Furthermore, it is worth noting that this nature held true for both Chinese and American students. To our knowledge, this is a first investigation examining the role of research experience in both creativity and critical thinking cross-culturally.

In addition to the report of our findings, we would like to address some limitations of our study. First, we would like to note that this is a correlational and cross-sectional study. A positive correlation between research experience and the two dependent variables does not necessarily mean causation. Our results indeed indicate a positive correlation between research experience and the two-C variables; however, we are not sure of the nature of this relationship. It is plausible that students with higher creativity and critical thinking skills are more engaged in research as much as it is to argue in favor of a reversed directional relationship. Second, we would like to note the sample bias in our study. Majority of our participants were female, majoring in the social sciences and a relatively high number of participants chose not to report their gender. Third, we would like to note that our study did not measure all creativity and critical thinking dimensions, we discussed in the introduction. Instead, we focused on a few key dimensions of creativity and critical thinking. Our primary focus was on divergent thinking, convergent thinking, and scientific creativity as well as few key dimensions of critical thinking (evaluation, logical reasoning, and probability thinking), scientific critical thinking involved in problem solving and hypothesis testing. Moreover, our results do not show what specific components of research training are beneficial for the enhancement of creativity and critical thinking.

For future research, a longitudinal design involving a field experiment will help investigate how different research training components affect the development of creativity and critical thinking. In addition, a cross-cultural study can further examine how and why the students from different cultures differ from each other in the development of these two potentials. As such, it might shed some light on the role of culture in creativity and critical thinking.

Conclusion and Implication

The result of our study provides few insights to the study of creativity and critical thinking. First, creativity and critical thinking are a different construct yet highly correlated. Second, whereas Americans perform better on creativity measures, Chinese perform better on critical thinking measures. Third, for both American and Chinese students, college research experience is a significant influence on the enhancement of creativity and critical thinking. As research experience becomes more and more essential to college education, its role can not only add professional and postgraduate credentials, but also help students enhance both creativity and critical thinking.

Based on our results, we recommend that research training be prioritized in higher education. Moreover, each culture has strengths to develop one skill over the other, hence, each culture could invest more in developing skills that were found to be weaker in our study. Eastern cultures can encourage more creativity and Western cultures can encourage more critical thinking.

To conclude, we would like to highlight that, although recognized globally as essential skills, methods to foster creativity and critical thinking skills and understanding creativity and critical thinking as a construct requires further research. Interestingly, our study found that experience of research itself can help enhance creativity and critical thinking. Our study also aimed to expand the knowledge of creativity and critical thinking literature through an investigation of the relationship of the two variables and how cultural background influences the performance of these two skills. We hope that our findings can provide insights for researchers and educators to find constructive methods to foster students’ essential 21st century skills, creativity and critical thinking, to ultimately enhance their global competence and life success.

Data Availability Statement

Ethics statement.

The studies involving human participants were reviewed and approved by Institutional Review Board at Pace University. The participants provided their informed consent online prior to participating in the study.

Author Contributions

All authors listed have made a substantial, direct, and intellectual contribution to the work, and approved it for publication., 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.

This work was supported by the International Joint Research Project of Faculty of Education, Beijing Normal University (ICER201904), and a scholarly research funding by Pace University.

• Akpur U. (2020). Critical, reflective, creative thinking and their reflections on academic achievement . Think. Skills Creat. 37 :100683. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2020.100683 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amabile T. M. (1982). Social psychology of creativity: a consensual assessment technique . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 43 , 997–1013. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.43.5.997 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Amabile T. M. (1996). Creativity in Context: Update to “The Social Psychology of Creativity. ” Boulder, CO: Westview Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• American Psychological Association (2016). Guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major: version 2.0 . Am. Psychol. 71 , 102–111. doi: 10.1037/a0037562, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barbot B., Besançon M., Lubart T. (2011). Assessing creativity in the classroom . Open Educ. J. 4 , 58–66. doi: 10.2174/1874920801104010058 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Barron F., Harrington D. M. (1981). Creativity, intelligence, and personality . Annu. Rev. Psychol. 32 , 439–476. doi: 10.1146/annurev.ps.32.020181.002255 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bechtoldt M., Choi H., Nijstad A. B. (2012). Individuals in mind, mates by heart: individualistic self-construal and collective value orientation as predictors of group creativity . J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 48 , 838–844. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.02.014 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bensley D. A., Murtagh M. P. (2012). Guidelines for a scientific approach to critical thinking assessment . Teach. Psychol. 39 , 5–16. doi: 10.1177/0098628311430642 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Boyack K. W., Klavans R., Börner K. (2005). Mapping the backbone of science . Scientometrics 64 , 351–374. doi: 10.1007/s11192-005-0255-6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Byrge C., Tang C. (2015). Embodied creativity training: effects on creative self-efficacy and creative production . Think. Skills Creat. 16 , 51–61. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2015.01.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Carson S. H., Peterson J. B., Higgins D. M. (2005). Reliability, validity, and factor structure of the creative achievement questionnaire . Creat. Res. J. 17 , 37–50. doi: 10.1207/s15326934crj1701_4 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Corazza G. E., Lubart T. (2021). Intelligence and creativity: mapping constructs on the space-time continuum . J. Intell. 9 :1. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence9010001, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Csikszentmihalyi M. (1988). “ Society, culture, and person: A systems view of creativity ” in The Nature of Creativity: Contemporary Psychological Perspectives. ed. Sternberg R. J. (New York: Cambridge University Press; ), 325–339. [ Google Scholar ]
• Csikszentmihalyi M. (1999). “ Implications of a systems perspective for the study of creativity ” in Handbook of Creativity. ed. Sternberg R. J. (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; ), 313–335. [ Google Scholar ]
• Diedrich J., Jauk E., Silvia P. J., Gredlein J. M., Neubauer A. C., Benedek M. (2018). Assessment of real-life creativity: the inventory of creative activities and achievements (ICAA) . Psychol. Aesthet. Creat. Arts 12 , 304–316. doi: 10.1037/aca0000137 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ennis R. H. (1987). “ A taxonomy of critical thinking dispositions and abilities ” in Teaching Thinking Skills: Theory and Practice. eds. Baron J. B., Sternberg R. J. (New York, NY: W H Freeman/Times Books/Henry Holt & Co.), 9–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ennis R. H., Millman J., Tomko T. N. (1985). Cornell Critical Thinking Test Level x and Level z Manual. 3rd Edn . Pacific Grove, CA: Midwest Publications. [ Google Scholar ]
• Facione P. A., Facione N. (1994). The California Critical Thinking Skills Test: Test Manual. Millbrae, CA: California Academic Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gadzella B. M., Penland E. (1995). Is creativity related to scores on critical thinking? Psychol. Rep. 77 , 817–818. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1995.77.3.817 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gibson J. W., Kibler R. J., Barker L. L. (1968). Some relationships between selected creativity and critical thinking measures . Psychol. Rep. 23 , 707–714. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1968.23.3.707, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Glaser E. M. (1941). An Experiment in the Development of Critical Thinking. New York, NY: Teachers College, Columbia University. [ Google Scholar ]
• Glassner A., Schwartz B. (2007). What stands and develops between creative and critical thinking? Argumentation? Think. Skills Creat. 2 , 10–18. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2006.10.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Gough H. G. (1979). A creative personality scale for the adjective check list . J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 37 , 1398–1405. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.37.8.1398 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guilford J. P. (1956). The structure of intellect . Psychol. Bull. 53 , 267–293. doi: 10.1037/h0040755, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Guilford J. P. (1986). Creative Talents: Their Nature, Uses and Development. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Ltd. [ Google Scholar ]
• Guilford J. P., Christensen P. R., Merrifield P. R., Wilson R. C. (1960). Alternate Uses Manual. Menlo Park, CA: Mind Garden, Inc. [ Google Scholar ]
• Guo J., Woulfin S. (2016). Twenty-first century creativity: an investigation of how the partnership for 21st century instructional framework reflects the principles of creativity . Roeper Rev. 38 , 153–161. doi: 10.1080/02783193.2016.1183741 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern D. F. (1984). Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halpern D. F. (1999). Teaching for critical thinking: helping college students develop the skills and dispositions of a critical thinker . New Dir. Teach. Learn. 1999 , 69–74. doi: 10.1002/tl.8005 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hariri N., Bagherinejad Z. (2012). Evaluation of critical thinking skills in students of health faculty, Mazandaran university of medical sciences . J. Mazand. Univ. Med. Sci. 21 , 166–173. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hocevar D., Michael W. B. (1979). The effects of scoring formulas on the discriminant validity of tests of divergent thinking . Educ. Psychol. Meas. 39 , 917–921. doi: 10.1177/001316447903900427 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Huber C. R., Kuncel N. R. (2016). Does college teach critical thinking? A meta-analysis . Rev. Educ. Res. 86 , 431–468. doi: 10.3102/0034654315605917 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Hunter S. T., Bedell K. E., Mumford M. D. (2007). Climate for creativity: a quantitative review . Creat. Res. J. 19 , 69–90. doi: 10.1080/10400410709336883 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jellen H. U., Urban K. (1989). Assessing creative potential worldwide: the first cross-cultural application of the test for creative thinking–drawing production (TCT–DP) . Gifted Educ. 6 , 78–86. doi: 10.1177/026142948900600204 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim K. H. (2005). Can only intelligent people be creative? A meta-analysis . J. Sec. Gifted Educ. 16 , 57–66. doi: 10.4219/jsge-2005-473 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Korn M. (2014). Bosses Seek ‘Critical Thinking,’ but What Is That? Wall Street Journal. Available at: https://online.wsj.com/articles/bosses-seek-critical-thinking-but-what-is-that-1413923730 (Accessed October 18, 2021).
• Kuo H.-C., Tseng Y.-C., Yang Y.-T. C. (2018). Promoting college student's learning motivation and creativity through a STEM interdisciplinary PBL human-computer interaction system design and development course . Think. Skills Creat. 31 , 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2018.09.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lamont P. (2020). The construction of "critical thinking": between how we think and what we believe . Hist. Psychol. 23 , 232–251. doi: 10.1037/hop0000145, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Land M. H. (2013). Full STEAM ahead: the benefits of integrating the arts into STEM . Compl. Adapt. Syst. 20 , 547–552. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2013.09.317 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lawson T. J. (1999). Assessing psychological critical thinking as a learning outcome for psychology majors . Teach. Psychol. 26 , 207–209. doi: 10.1207/S15328023TOP260311 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lawson T. J., Jordan-Fleming M. K., Bodle J. H. (2015). Measuring psychological critical thinking . Teach. Psychol. 42 , 248–253. doi: 10.1177/0098628315587624 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lee H.-J., Lee J., Makara K. A., Fishman B. J., Hong Y. I. (2015). Does higher education foster critical and creative learners? An exploration of two universities in South Korea and the USA . High. Educ. Res. Dev. 34 , 131–146. doi: 10.1080/07294360.2014.892477 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ling M. K. D., Loh S. C. (2020). Relationship of creativity and critical thinking to pattern recognition among Singapore private school students . J. Educ. Res. 113 , 59–76. doi: 10.1080/00220671.2020.1716203 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liou S., Lan X. (2018). Situational salience of norms moderates cultural differences in the originality and usefulness of creative ideas generated or selected by teams . J. Cross-Cult. Psychol. 49 , 290–302. doi: 10.1177/0022022116640897 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lopatto D. (2004). Survey of undergraduate research experiences (SURE): first findings . Cell Biol. Educ. 3 , 270–277. doi: 10.1187/cbe.04-07-0045, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lopatto D. (2008). “ Exploring the benefits of undergraduate research experiences: The SURE survey ” in Creating Effective Undergraduate Research Programs in Science eds. R. Taraban and R. L. Blanton (New York: Teachers College Press; ), 112–132. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lubart T., Zenasni F., Barbot B. (2013). Creative potential and its measurement . Int. J. Talent Dev. Creat. 1 , 41–50. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lun V. M.-C., Fischer R., Ward C. (2010). Exploring cultural differences in critical thinking: is it about my thinking style or the language I speak? Learn. Individ. Differ. 20 , 604–616. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2010.07.001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Manalo E., Kusumi T., Koyasu M., Michita Y., Tanaka Y. (2013). To what extent do culture-related factors influence university students' critical thinking use? Think. Skills Creat. 10 , 121–132. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2013.08.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mill D., Gray T., Mandel D. R. (1994). Influence of research methods and statistics courses on everyday reasoning, critical abilities, and belief in unsubstantiated phenomena . Can. J. Behav. Sci. 26 , 246–258. doi: 10.1037/0008-400X.26.2.246 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mueller J. F., Taylor H. K., Brakke K., Drysdale M., Kelly K., Levine G. M., et al.. (2020). Assessment of scientific inquiry and critical thinking: measuring APA goal 2 student learning outcomes . Teach. Psychol. 47 , 274–284. doi: 10.1177/0098628320945114 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• National Education Association (2012). Preparing 21st Century Students for a Global Society: An educator's Guide to the "Four Cs". Alexandria, VA: National Education Association. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ng A.K. (2001). Why Asians Are less Creative than Westerners. Singapore: Prentice Hall. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nisbett R. E., Peng K., Choi I., Norenzayan A. (2001). Culture and systems of thought: holistic versus analytic cognition . Psychol. Rev. 108 , 291–310. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.291, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Niu L., Behar-Horenstein L. S., Garvan C. W. (2013). Do instructional interventions influence college students' critical thinking skills? A meta-analysis . Educ. Res. Rev. 9 , 114–128. doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2012.12.002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Niu W., Sternberg R. J. (2001). Cultural influences on artistic creativity and its evaluation . Int. J. Psychol. 36 , 225–241. doi: 10.1080/00207590143000036 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Niu W., Zhang J. X., Yang Y. (2007). Deductive reasoning and creativity: a cross-cultural study . Psychol. Rep. 100 , 509–519. doi: 10.2466/pr0.100.2.509-519, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Paul R., Elder L. (2019). The Miniature Guide to Critical Thinking Concepts and Tools. 8th Edn . Lanham, MD: Foundation for Critical Thinking. [ Google Scholar ]
• Penningroth S. L., Despain L. H., Gray M. J. (2007). A course designed to improve psychological critical thinking . Teach. Psychol. 34 , 153–157. doi: 10.1080/00986280701498509 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Qiang R., Han Q., Guo Y., Bai J., Karwowski M. (2020). Critical thinking disposition and scientific creativity: the mediating role of creative self-efficacy . J. Creat. Behav. 54 , 90–99. doi: 10.1002/jocb.347 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rockstuhl T., Ng K.-Y. (2008). The effects of cultural intelligence on interpersonal trust in multicultural teams . In Handbook of Cultural Intelligence: Theory, Measurement, and Applications. (eds.) Ang S., Dyne L.. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe. 206–220. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodriguez-Boerwinkle R., Silvia P., Kaufman J. C., Reiter-Palmon R., Puryear J. S. (2021). Taking inventory of the creative behavior inventory: an item response theory analysis of the CBI. [Preprint]. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/b7cfd [ CrossRef ]
• Ross D., Loeffler K., Schipper S., Vandermeer B., Allan G. M. (2013). Do scores on three commonly used measures of critical thinking correlate with academic success of health professions trainees? A systematic review and meta-analysis . Acad. Med. 88 , 724–734. doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31828b0823, PMID: [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Runco M. A., Albert R. S. (1986). The threshold theory regarding creativity and intelligence: an empirical test with gifted and nongifted children . Creat. Child Adult Q. 11 , 212–218. [ Google Scholar ]
• Schermelleh-Engel K., Moosbrugger H., Müller H. (2003). Evaluating the fit of structural equation models: Tests of significance and descriptive goodness-of-fit measures . Methods of Psychological Research 8 , 23–74. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scott S. G., Bruce R. A. (1994). Determinants of innovative behavior: a path model of individual innovation in the workplace . Acad. Manag. J. 37 , 580–607. [ Google Scholar ]
• Scott G., Leritz L. E., Mumford M. D. (2004). The effectiveness of creativity training: a quantitative review . Creat. Res. J. 16 , 361–388. doi: 10.1080/10400410409534549 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Scriven M., Paul R. (1987). Defining Critical Thinking. In 8th Annual International Conference on Critical Thinking and Education Reform ; August 2–5, 1987.
• Siburian J., Corebima A. D., Ibrohim, Saptasari M. (2019). The correlation between critical and creative thinking skills on cognitive learning results . Eurasian J. Educ. Res. 19 , 99–114. doi: 10.14689/EJER.2019.81.6 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg R. J., Halpern D. F. (eds.) (2020). Critical Thinking in Psychology. 2nd Edn . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg R. J., Lubart T. I. (1999). “ The concept of creativity: prospects and paradigms ” in Handbook of Creativity. ed. Sternberg R. J. (New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; ), 3–15. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sternberg R. J., Sternberg K. (2017). Measuring scientific reasoning for graduate admissions in psychology and related disciplines . J. Intell. 5 , 29. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence5030029, PMID: [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stevens C., Witkow M. R. (2014). Training scientific thinking skills: evidence from an MCAT 2015 aligned classroom module . Teach. Psychol. 41 , 115–121. doi: 10.1177/0098628314530341 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Stevens C., Witkow M. R., Smelt B. (2016). Strengthening scientific reasoning skills in introductory psychology: evidence from community college and liberal arts classrooms . Scholarsh. Teach. Learn. Psychol. 2 , 245–260. doi: 10.1037/stl0000070 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tang M., Werner C., Cao G., Tumasjan A., Shen J., Shi J., et al.. (2015). Creative expression and its evaluation on work-related verbal tasks: a comparison of Chinese and German samples . J. Creat. Behav. 52 , 91–103. doi: 10.1002/jocb.134 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Torrance E. P. (1966). The Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking-Norms-Technical Manual Research Edition-Verbal Tests, Forms A and B Figural Tests, Forms A and B. Princeton, NJ: Personnel Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Torrance E. P. (1974). Torrance Tests of Creativity Thinking: Norms–Technical Manual. Lexington, MA: Ginn. [ Google Scholar ]
• Torrance E. P. (1988). “ The nature of creativity as manifest in its testing ” in The Nature of Creativity. ed. Sternberg R. J. (New York: Cambridge University Press; ), 43–73. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tsui L. (1998). Fostering Critical Thinking in College Students: A Mixed-Methods Study of Influences Inside and Outside of the Classroom (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database. (UMI No. 9917229)
• Wallach M. A., Kogan N. (1965). Modes of Thinking in Young Children: A Study of the Creativity-Intelligence Distinction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. [ Google Scholar ]
• Watson G. B., Glaser E. M. (1938). The Watson-Glaser Tests of Critical Thinking. New York, NY: Institute for Propaganda Analysis. [ Google Scholar ]
• Watson G. B., Glaser E. M. (1980). WGCTA Watson-Glaser Critical Thinking Appraisal Manual: Forms A and B. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wechsler S. M., Saiz C., Rivas S. F., Vendramini C. M. M., Almeida L. S., Mundim M. C., et al.. (2018). Creative and critical thinking: independent or overlapping components? Think. Skills Creat. 27 , 114–122. doi: 10.1016/j.tsc.2017.12.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wong R., Niu W. (2013). Cultural difference in stereotype perceptions and performances in nonverbal deductive reasoning and creativity . J. Creat. Behav. 47 , 41–59. doi: 10.1002/jocb.22 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zydney A. L., Bennett J. S., Shahid A., Bauer K. W. (2002). Faculty perspectives regarding the undergraduate research experience in science and engineering . J. Eng. Educ. 91 , 291–297. doi: 10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00706.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Exploring the Difference: Creative Thinking vs. Critical Thinking

Annie Walls

Creative thinking and critical thinking are two distinct cognitive processes that play important roles in problem-solving and decision-making. While creative thinking involves generating innovative ideas and solutions, critical thinking involves analyzing and evaluating information to make reasoned judgments. Both types of thinking have their unique characteristics and benefits. In this article, we will explore the difference between creative thinking and critical thinking, and how they can be applied in various contexts.

Key Takeaways

• Creative thinking involves generating new ideas and solutions.
• Critical thinking involves analyzing and evaluating information to make reasoned judgments.
• Creative thinkers are characterized by their curiosity, open-mindedness, and willingness to take risks.
• Critical thinkers are characterized by their skepticism, logical reasoning, and attention to detail.
• Creative thinking can lead to innovation and breakthroughs.

Understanding Creative Thinking

Defining creative thinking.

Creative thinking is the ability to think outside the box and generate innovative ideas. It involves breaking free from conventional ways of thinking and exploring new possibilities. Creativity is the key element in creative thinking , as it allows individuals to come up with unique and original solutions to problems.

Creative thinking is not limited to artistic endeavors; it can be applied to various aspects of life, including problem-solving, decision-making, and even everyday tasks. It requires an open mind, a willingness to take risks, and the ability to see things from different perspectives.

In order to foster creative thinking, it is important to create an environment that encourages experimentation and exploration. This can be done by providing opportunities for brainstorming, encouraging collaboration, and embracing failure as a learning opportunity.

Here are some techniques that can enhance creative thinking:

• Mind mapping: A visual tool that helps organize thoughts and generate new ideas.
• Divergent thinking: Generating multiple solutions to a problem.
• Analogical thinking: Drawing connections between unrelated concepts.

Tip: Embrace curiosity and embrace the unknown. Be open to new experiences and ideas, and don't be afraid to take risks.

Characteristics of Creative Thinkers

Creative thinkers possess a unique set of characteristics that set them apart from others. They have the ability to think outside the box and come up with innovative solutions to problems. Imagination plays a crucial role in their thought process, allowing them to envision possibilities that others may not see. They are open-minded and willing to explore different perspectives, which helps them generate fresh ideas. Creative thinkers are also comfortable with ambiguity and uncertainty, as they understand that these conditions can lead to breakthroughs. They are not afraid to take risks and are willing to challenge the status quo.

Benefits of Creative Thinking

Creative thinking offers numerous benefits that can enhance various aspects of life. One of the key advantages of creative thinking is the ability to generate innovative ideas and solutions. Creativity allows individuals to think outside the box and come up with unique approaches to problems. This can lead to breakthroughs and advancements in various fields.

Another benefit of creative thinking is its impact on personal growth and self-expression. By engaging in creative activities, individuals can explore their inner thoughts and emotions, allowing for self-discovery and self-reflection. Creative pursuits such as painting, writing, or playing an instrument can serve as outlets for self-expression and can contribute to overall well-being.

In addition, creative thinking can foster collaboration and teamwork. When individuals approach problems with a creative mindset, they are more likely to seek input and ideas from others. This promotes a collaborative environment where diverse perspectives are valued and innovative solutions are developed.

Furthermore, creative thinking can enhance problem-solving skills. By thinking creatively, individuals are able to consider multiple perspectives and explore alternative solutions. This can lead to more effective problem-solving and decision-making processes.

Overall, creative thinking offers a range of benefits, from generating innovative ideas to fostering collaboration and enhancing problem-solving skills.

Techniques for Enhancing Creative Thinking

In order to enhance creative thinking, there are several techniques that can be employed:

• Mind Mapping : This technique involves visually organizing ideas and concepts in a non-linear manner, allowing for connections and associations to be made.
• Brainstorming : This popular technique involves generating a large number of ideas in a short amount of time, without judgment or evaluation.
• Divergent Thinking : This approach encourages exploring multiple possibilities and perspectives, thinking outside the box, and avoiding conventional solutions.

Tip: When using these techniques, it is important to create a supportive and non-judgmental environment that encourages free thinking and idea generation.

By utilizing these techniques, individuals and teams can unlock their creative potential and generate innovative ideas to drive growth and success.

Exploring Critical Thinking

Defining Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is essentially a questioning, challenging approach to knowledge and perceived wisdom. It involves ideas and information from an objective perspective, analyzing and evaluating them to form well-reasoned judgments and decisions. It goes beyond accepting information at face value and encourages a deeper understanding of the subject matter. Critical thinkers are curious, open-minded, and willing to consider different perspectives. They are skilled at identifying biases and assumptions, and they strive to make logical and evidence-based conclusions.

Characteristics of Critical Thinkers

Critical thinkers possess several key characteristics that set them apart:

• Analytical Skills : Critical thinkers are adept at analyzing information and breaking it down into its component parts. They can identify patterns, evaluate evidence, and draw logical conclusions.
• Open-mindedness : Critical thinkers are willing to consider different perspectives and are open to changing their beliefs or opinions based on new evidence or information.
• Skepticism : Critical thinkers approach information with a healthy dose of skepticism. They question assumptions, challenge authority, and seek evidence to support or refute claims.

Tip: Critical thinkers actively engage in critical reflection, constantly questioning their own thinking and seeking to improve their reasoning abilities.

Benefits of Critical Thinking

Critical thinking has numerous benefits that can positively impact various aspects of life. It enhances problem-solving skills, allowing individuals to analyze complex situations and make informed decisions. Analytical thinking is a key component of critical thinking, enabling individuals to break down problems into smaller parts and examine them from different perspectives. This approach helps in identifying potential biases and assumptions, leading to more objective and rational decision-making.

In addition, critical thinking promotes effective communication . By critically evaluating information and arguments, individuals can articulate their thoughts and ideas more clearly and persuasively. They can also identify logical fallacies and inconsistencies in others' arguments, enabling them to engage in meaningful and constructive discussions.

Furthermore, critical thinking fosters creativity and innovation . By questioning assumptions and challenging conventional wisdom, individuals can generate new ideas and approaches. Critical thinkers are more open to exploring alternative solutions and are willing to take risks in order to achieve better outcomes.

Developing Critical Thinking Skills

Developing critical thinking skills is essential for success in both personal and professional life. It involves the ability to analyze information objectively, evaluate arguments and evidence, and make informed decisions. Here are some strategies that can help enhance your critical thinking skills:

• Ask Questions: One of the key aspects of critical thinking is asking thoughtful and probing questions. This helps you gain a deeper understanding of the subject matter and challenges assumptions.
• Seek Different Perspectives: To develop critical thinking skills, it is important to consider multiple viewpoints and perspectives. This allows you to evaluate arguments from different angles and make well-rounded judgments.
• Practice Problem-Solving: Critical thinking involves problem-solving skills. Engaging in activities that require you to analyze and solve problems can help sharpen your critical thinking abilities.
• Reflect on Your Thinking: Take time to reflect on your own thinking process. Consider the biases, assumptions, and logical fallacies that may be influencing your thoughts and decisions.
• Continuous Learning: Critical thinking is a skill that can be developed and improved over time. Engage in continuous learning, read diverse perspectives, and challenge your own beliefs and assumptions.

By incorporating these strategies into your daily life, you can enhance your critical thinking skills and become a more effective problem solver and decision-maker.

Comparing Creative and Critical Thinking

Different Approaches to Problem Solving

When it comes to problem solving, creative thinking and critical thinking take different approaches. Creative thinkers often rely on their imagination and intuition to generate unique and innovative solutions. They think outside the box and are not afraid to take risks. On the other hand, critical thinkers approach problem solving in a more analytical and logical manner. They carefully analyze the problem, gather information, and evaluate different options before making a decision.

Role of Imagination and Logic

The role of imagination and logic in creative and critical thinking is crucial. Imagination allows us to think outside the box, explore new possibilities, and come up with innovative ideas. It is the fuel that ignites creativity and helps us see beyond the obvious. On the other hand, logic provides the framework for organizing and analyzing information, making rational decisions, and solving problems systematically. It helps us evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of our ideas.

When it comes to problem-solving, a balance between imagination and logic is essential. While imagination helps generate unique and unconventional solutions, logic ensures that these solutions are practical and viable. By combining the two, we can approach problems with a structured yet imaginative mindset, finding innovative solutions and making connections that others may overlook.

In summary, imagination and logic are two sides of the same coin when it comes to creative and critical thinking. They complement each other and work together to enhance our ability to think creatively and critically.

Balancing Intuition and Analysis

When it comes to problem-solving, finding the right balance between intuition and analysis is crucial. Intuition allows us to tap into our subconscious knowledge and make quick decisions based on gut feelings. On the other hand, analysis involves a systematic and logical approach to gather and evaluate information. Both intuition and analysis have their strengths and weaknesses, and leveraging both can lead to more effective problem-solving.

To strike a balance between intuition and analysis, consider the following:

• Trust your instincts: Pay attention to your gut feelings and initial reactions, as they can provide valuable insights.
• Gather and evaluate data: Take the time to gather relevant information and analyze it objectively.
• Seek different perspectives: Engage with others who have different viewpoints to challenge your assumptions and broaden your thinking.

Tip: Remember that finding the right balance between intuition and analysis is a dynamic process. It requires practice and reflection to develop a nuanced approach to problem-solving.

Collaboration and Individuality in Thinking

Collaboration and individuality are two key aspects of thinking that play a crucial role in both creative and critical thinking. While collaboration allows for the exchange of ideas and perspectives, individuality brings unique insights and approaches to the table. Collaboration fosters a sense of teamwork and encourages diverse thinking, which can lead to innovative solutions. On the other hand, individuality allows individuals to think independently and bring their own creativity and expertise to the problem-solving process.

In order to effectively balance collaboration and individuality in thinking, it is important to create an environment that values both. This can be achieved by promoting open communication and active listening, where team members feel comfortable sharing their ideas and opinions. Additionally, providing opportunities for individual reflection and brainstorming can help stimulate creativity and encourage unique perspectives.

To further enhance collaboration and individuality in thinking, organizations can implement strategies such as group brainstorming sessions , where team members can collectively generate ideas and build upon each other's thoughts. This encourages collaboration while also allowing individuals to contribute their own unique insights. Another strategy is to assign individual tasks within a larger project, giving team members the opportunity to work independently and bring their own creative solutions to the table.

In summary, collaboration and individuality are both essential components of thinking that contribute to creative and critical thinking processes. By fostering a balance between collaboration and individuality, organizations can harness the power of teamwork and individual creativity to drive innovation and problem-solving.

In the article section of my website, I would like to discuss the topic of 'Comparing Creative and Critical Thinking'. Creative thinking and critical thinking are two essential cognitive skills that play a significant role in problem-solving, decision-making, and innovation. While creative thinking involves generating new ideas, thinking outside the box, and exploring different perspectives , critical thinking focuses on analyzing, evaluating, and questioning information to make informed judgments. Both types of thinking are crucial in today's fast-paced and complex world. By understanding the differences and similarities between creative and critical thinking, individuals can enhance their problem-solving abilities and foster a culture of innovation. If you want to learn more about the power of creative thinking and how it can transform your business, visit th website, Creativity Keynote Speaker James Taylor - Inspiring Creative Minds .

In conclusion, both creative thinking and critical thinking are essential skills that complement each other in problem-solving and decision-making. While creative thinking allows for innovative ideas and out-of-the-box solutions, critical thinking provides the necessary analysis and evaluation to ensure the feasibility and effectiveness of those ideas. Flexibility is a key aspect of creative thinking, enabling individuals to adapt and explore different perspectives, while accuracy is a fundamental element of critical thinking, ensuring logical reasoning and evidence-based conclusions. By harnessing the power of both creative and critical thinking, individuals can enhance their problem-solving abilities and make well-informed decisions in various aspects of life.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between creative thinking and critical thinking.

Creative thinking involves generating new ideas, possibilities, and solutions, while critical thinking involves analyzing, evaluating, and making reasoned judgments.

Can someone be both a creative thinker and a critical thinker?

Yes, individuals can possess both creative and critical thinking skills. They can use creative thinking to generate ideas and critical thinking to evaluate and refine those ideas.

Which is more important, creative thinking or critical thinking?

Both creative thinking and critical thinking are important and complement each other. Creative thinking generates new ideas, while critical thinking helps evaluate and implement those ideas effectively.

How can I enhance my creative thinking skills?

You can enhance your creative thinking skills by engaging in activities that stimulate your imagination, such as brainstorming, mind mapping, and exploring new perspectives.

What are some techniques for developing critical thinking skills?

Techniques for developing critical thinking skills include analyzing arguments, evaluating evidence, questioning assumptions, and considering different perspectives.

Is creative thinking limited to artistic pursuits?

No, creative thinking is not limited to artistic pursuits. It can be applied to various fields and industries, including problem-solving in science, business, technology, and more.

Popular Posts

Beste keynote spreker over ondernemerschap.

James Taylor is een inspirerende spreker en expert op het gebied van ondernemerschap. Met zijn

Beste Keynote Spreker over Cultuur

James Taylor is een van de beste culture keynote speakers in de industrie. Met zijn

Beste Keynotespreker over Cryptocurrency

In de wereld van cryptocurrency is het cruciaal om de juiste spreker te vinden die

Beste Keynote Spreker voor Teambuilding

Als het gaat om het kiezen van de beste keynote spreker voor teambuilding, is het

Beste Samenwerkings Keynote Spreker

James Taylor is een uitstekende spreker en facilitator die een geweldige partner is in samenwerking.

Mejor Orador Principal de Atención Médica

James Taylor es reconocido como uno de los mejores oradores en el campo de la

James is a top motivational keynote speaker who is booked as a creativity and innovation keynote speaker, AI speaker , sustainability speaker and leadership speaker . Recent destinations include: Dubai , Abu Dhabi , Orlando , Las Vegas , keynote speaker London , Barcelona , Bangkok , Miami , Berlin , Riyadh , New York , Zurich , motivational speaker Paris , Singapore and San Francisco

Latest News

• 415.800.3059
• [email protected]
• Media Interviews
• Meeting Planners
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Cookie Policy

FIND ME ON SOCIAL

© 2024 James Taylor DBA P3 Music Ltd.

Why Critical Thinking and Creativity are the Dynamic Duo You Need in Today's World

Unlock your inner genius, and discover the role of creativity in developing critical thinking skills and why they work together as a dynamic duo.

In an age where information overload is the new normal, developing critical thinking and creativity skills has become more important than ever.

From the moment we’re born, our brains are constantly being stimulated and challenged to develop new thought processes and problem-solving skills.

As artists, we know all too well the value of creativity in our artistic endeavors.

However, creativity isn't just a tool for arts and crafts ; it also plays a key role in developing our critical thinking skills.

In today's fast-paced and ever-changing world, creative and critical thinking is a vital skill to have; it allows us to analyze and problem solve, conceptualize and communicate effectively, and to develop new and innovative ideas.

The two skills of critical thinking and creativity are seemingly unrelated abilities that are actually a match made in heaven, working synergistically to help you navigate the complexities of modern life.

When combined, the two empower you to think more effectively and solve problems faster.

Creativity helps you to open up your mind and to think outside the box, while critical thinking provides structure and guidance so that you can make sense of your ideas.

This dynamic duo helps you to effectively engage with the world around you and make well-informed decisions.

By understanding the relationship between creativity and critical thinking, you can unlock your inner genius and unleash the power of both.

When you put them together, they become a powerful driving force that can help you to succeed in any area of life.

So, let's dive into the fascinating world of critical thinking and creativity, and explore how they can empower you to take on any challenge!

The Power Couple: Critical Thinking and Creativity

Critical thinking is all about objectively analyzing information, while creativity is about generating new ideas and perspectives.

Both skills are essential to making informed decisions.

Critical thinking is the sequential, disciplined process of actively examining, analyzing, synthesizing, and evaluating information, while creativity helps to open your mind and explore new possibilities.

Critical thinking processes help you understand the facts, while creative thinking skills allow you to come up with solutions to a problem.

It's vital to employ critical evaluation in order to distinguish between valid and invalid conclusions, while creative problem-solving skills are essential for finding innovative, new solutions to everyday life and work challenges.

Combined, they help you think more effectively and make decisions based on sound logic and reasoning, allowing you to work smarter, not harder.

The two words may seem like opposites, but in reality they work together to create a dynamic duo that can help you reach new heights.

When it comes down to it, critical thinking without creativity is just memorization, while creativity without critical thinking might as well just be daydreaming.

When you combine the two, something magical happens; you become empowered to assess situations and develop creative solutions that will give you an advantage in any field.

By understanding the process behind both critical thinking and creativity, you can harness their power to become a stronger, more well-rounded problem solver.

When combined, the skills of critical and creative thinking allow you to:

• Make better decisions:

In today's fast-paced world, the ability to quickly evaluate information and make informed choices is essential.

Critical thinking helps you separate fact from fiction, while creativity allows you to think outside the box and come up with innovative solutions.

Together, they help you make decisions with confidence and clarity .

• Solve problems more effectively:

Complex problems require creative thinking and the ability to analyze multiple perspectives.

By honing both your critical thinking and creativity, you'll be better equipped to tackle even the most daunting challenges.

• Stand out in the workplace:

Employers value employees who can think critically and creatively, as they bring fresh ideas and unique problem-solving abilities to the table.

Boosting these skills can make you a valuable asset to any team.

So, don't be afraid to unleash your creative side and get the most out of critical thinking abilities.

How Creativity Fuels Critical Thinking

Creativity is at the heart of critical thinking.

It helps you to open up your mind, think outside the box, and consider different perspectives; critical thinking and creative thinking go hand in hand.

Creativity helps to break down barriers and allows you to consider ideas that may not be immediately obvious; new world ideas, new world perspectives, and new ways of doing things can all be unlocked through convergent thinking and divergent thinking.

It can also help you to make better connections between ideas , and to recognize patterns and trends.

Creative thinking can also help you to come up with innovative solutions to problems and generate new inspiration , which are essential for effective critical thinking.

When used together, creativity and critical thinking complement each other perfectly; creativity helps you to think flexibly and explore different angles, while critical thinking provides the structure and guidance to make sense of your ideas.

• Breaking free from conventional thinking

Creativity pushes you to explore new ideas and challenge conventional wisdom.

This open-mindedness is essential for critical thinking, as it helps you consider multiple perspectives and evaluate each one objectively.

This is why creativity and critical thinking are such a powerful duo; they allow you to break out of your comfort zone, see things from a different angle, and challenge the status quo.

Creativity can also help you to become more efficient at solving problems, as it gives your brain a break from analytical thinking, allowing it to come up with new ideas and solutions.

• Connecting the dots

Creative thinkers excel at making connections between seemingly unrelated concepts.

This skill is invaluable for critical thinking, as it allows you to identify patterns, relationships, and underlying structures in complex information.

This creative problem solving can help you make sense of complex problems and develop innovative solutions.

By using creativity to your advantage, you can become a more creative and effective critical thinker.

The key is to use your imagination and explore different possibilities; this will open up new avenues of thought and allow you to take your critical thinking skills to the next level.

Fostering Imagination

When we engage in creative practices, we challenge ourselves to think outside of the box.

As we push ourselves to consider new perspectives, ideas, and solutions, it helps to cultivate an imaginative mindset, which is the foundation of critical thinking.

Imagination allows us to hypothesize, visualize and conceptualize, which in turn enriches our problem-solving arsenal.

That's why it is so important to step outside of your artistic comfort zone and explore new art supplies , subjects, and techniques.

By doing so, you can foster your imagination and become a more effective critical thinker.

Encouraging Exploration

Creativity and critical thinking go hand in hand, and we can use our artistic skills to explore and interpret the world around us.

Whether we're sketching , painting , or shooting photography , we are constantly looking for patterns, contrasts, and connections.

Engaging in creative practices opens doors to new ideas and perspectives and helps us question things that we take for granted.

It encourages us to seek out complexity, probe underlying assumptions, and discover new paths to knowledge.

By exploring and questioning the world around us, we can become better critical thinkers.

Developing Problem-solving Skills

When we encounter creative problems, we develop critical thinking skills to overcome them effectively.

As we face challenges, we learn how to determine the root cause of a problem, break it down into smaller components, and then develop and test possible solutions.

This problem-solving process builds our analytical skills, logical reasoning, and decision-making skills.

Whether it's working out how best to arrange a still life composition, or conceptualizing a design solution, the problem-solving process acquires high relevance and transferability in our personal and professional lives.

Enhancing Communication Skills

As artists, we communicate with the world through our art , and creativity plays a vital role in how we do this.

But it's not only artistic communication that benefits from our creative thinking, it's our general communication skills as well.

As we create and interpret art , we learn to express ourselves more effectively.

We learn to choose our words carefully, use engaging visuals, and find new ways to share our thoughts and ideas.

Engaging in creative practices also develops our ability to listen and interpret, key skills in our personal and professional lives.

Empowering Innovation

Critical thinking and creativity allow us to view problems, challenges and even opportunities through new and innovative perspectives.

This leads us to develop solutions that are more effective, efficient, and novel compared to conventional, less creative solutions.

Innovators often make use of computational thinking, design thinking, systems thinking, and critical thinking to develop new products, services, systems, processes, and solutions to social, scientific, and technological challenges.

Creativity empowers individuals, teams, and organizations to bring forth new ideas and solve wicked problems.

Kickstarting Your Creative Thinking

Critical thinking and creativity are the dynamic duo you need in today's world; they work together to empower you to make better decisions, solve problems more effectively, stand out in the workplace, and innovate in any area of life.

Creative thinking allows you to open up your mind and explore new ideas, while critical thinking gives you the structure and guidance to make sense of them.

Ready to start using creativity and critical thinking together?

Here are some proven tips and techniques to help you tap into your creative potential!

• Embrace curiosity:

Ask questions, seek out new experiences, and never stop learning.

A curious mindset fuels creativity and critical thinking alike.

• Challenge assumptions:

Creativity flourishes when you're willing to break out of your comfort zone and challenge the status quo.

So, question the status quo and look for alternative explanations.

This will help you think more creatively and develop a healthy skepticism that's vital for critical thinking.

• Take breaks:

Give yourself time to relax and let your mind wander.

Research shows that taking breaks can actually boost creativity and help you make connections between seemingly unrelated ideas.

This will help you to see things from a different perspective and come up with innovative solutions.

Unleashing the Power of Creativity to Boost Critical Thinking

Creativity and critical thinking are a dynamic duo that can help you succeed in any area of life.

Creativity is not just for artists; it's a fundamental aspect of critical thinking, and it plays a vital role in our personal and professional lives.

By cultivating creativity, we can enhance our imagination and exploration, problem-solving, communication, and innovation skills, which are essential to remain relevant and successful in the workplace of the future.

Now that you're armed with the knowledge of how critical thinking and creativity are intertwined, and equipped with some handy techniques to jump start your creative juices, it's time to put them into practice.

Embrace your inner creative genius and watch as your critical thinking skills soar to new heights.

So, what are you waiting for?

Keep pushing your artistic limits, explore new art mediums , challenge your perspective, and always remember, creativity is the key to unlock your critical thinking potential!

With the right amount of creative thinking and critical analysis, you can open up a world of possibilities!

Start flexing your creative muscles and become the critical thinker you were always meant to be!

Ready to embrace creative and critical thinking and looking to learn more? Check out James Taylor's video!

Want even more content about creativity and art?

Be sure to check out all of our creative chronicles !

Interested in tapping into your creative potential?

Check out some of our other articles:

- Neurodiversity

- Fun art challenges

- Creating amazing art

- Peace of mind through art

- Crafts for rainy days

- Crafting tips

- Embracing the creative process

Curious People Change the World: Harnessing the Power of Creativity and Curiosity

The Art of Patience and Prudence: How to Take Your Creativity to the Next Level

Creative Joy: The Power of a Grateful Heart and Embracing Life's Many Blessings

Rejuvenate Your Creativity: Revitalizing Your Life for Greater Inspiration!

Trust the Process: Embracing the Journey in Creativity and Life

Handling Rejection Like a Pro: Mastering the Art of Rejection

Education in the 21st Century pp 9–27 Cite as

Creativity and Critical Thinking

• Peter Ellerton 6 &
• Robert Kelly 7  
• First Online: 31 January 2022

1040 Accesses

1 Citations

The twenty-first century has seen a rapid growth of curriculum initiatives that consider the development of cross-curriculum competencies as a core issue, and significant for every discipline area. Both because of such cross-curriculum developments and because of the nature of STEM itself, the integration of the particular core competencies of ‘creativity’ and ‘critical thinking’ across the STEM disciplines has also grown rapidly in educational importance. Creativity and critical thinking in education are best viewed from the perspectives of both learner development and teacher expertise, with the attributes specific to each concept appropriately seen as increasing in sophistication or complexity over time. A broad examination of each of the two concepts and their interrelatedness, and the consequent implications for educational practice concerned with developing them, creates a lens through which to view the application of creativity and critical thinking across the complexity and diversity of the STEM disciplines and their integrated forms.

• Critical thinking

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

Buying options

• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info
• Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Altan, S., Lane, J. F., & Dottin, E. (2017). Using habits of mind, intelligent behaviors, and educational theories to create a conceptual framework for developing effective teaching dispositions. Journal of Teacher Education, 70 (2), 169–183. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487117736024 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Amabile, T. (2012). The componential theory of creativity . Boston: Harvard Business School.

Google Scholar  

Amabile, T., & Pratt, M. (2017). The dynamic componential model of creativity and innovation in organizations: Making progress, making meaning. Research in Organizational Behavior, 37 , 157–183.

Annas, J. (1995). Virtue as a skill. International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 3 (2), 227–243. https://doi.org/10.1080/09672559508570812 .

Bailin, S., & Battersby, M. (2016). Fostering the virtues of inquiry. An International Review of Philosophy, 35 (2), 367–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-015-9307-6 .

Bowers, S. (2019). Irish teenager wins Google science award for microplastics project . Retrieved from https://www.irishtimes.com/news/science/irish-teenager-wins-google-science-award-for-microplastics-project-1.3971256

Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry . New York.

Dottin, E. (2009). Professional judgment and dispositions in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25 , 83–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.06.005

Ellerton, P. (2015). Metacognition and critical thinking: Some pedagogical imperatives. In M. Davies & R. Barnett (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of critical thinking in higher education (pp. 409–426). https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137378057_25 .

Facione, P. A. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction. Research findings and recommendations . Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED315423

Gloor, P. (2017). Swarm leadership and the collective mind . Bingley, UK: Emerald.

Book   Google Scholar  

Gotz, I. (1981). On defining creativity. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism, 39 , 297–301.

Guilford, J. (1959). Traits of creativity. In H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation (pp. 142–161). New York: Harper.

IDEO . (2012). Design thinking toolkit for educators (2nd ed.). Retrieved from https://designthinkingforeducators.com

Kallick, B., & Costa, A. L. (2008). Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 essential characteristics for success. Association for Supervision & Curriculum Development . http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/uql/detail.action?docID=410671

Kelly, R. (2012). Educating for creativity: A global conversation . Edmonton: Brush Education.

Kelly, R. (2016). Creative development: Transforming education through design thinking, innovation and invention . Edmonton: Brush Education.

Kelly, R. (2020). Collaborative creativity: Educating for creative development, innovation and entrepreneurship . Edmonton: Brush Education.

Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University.

Lubart, T. I. (2000). Models of creative process: Past, present and future. Creativity Research Journal, 13 (3–4), 295–308.

Mead, G. H. (1910). The psychology of social consciousness implied in instruction. Science, 31 (801), 688–693.

Mulnix, J. W. (2010). Thinking critically about critical thinking. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44 (5), 464–479. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-5812.2010.00673.x .

OECD. (2018a). Teaching, assessing and learning creative and critical thinking skills in education . Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/assessingprogressionincreativeandcriticalthinkingskillsineducation.htm

OECD. (2018b). Fostering and assessing students’ critical and creative thinking skills in higher education . Retrieved from https://www.oecd.org/education/ceri/Fostering-and-assessing-students-creative-and-critical-thinking-skills-in-higher-education.pdf

Osborn, A. (1963). Applied imagination . New York: Charles Schribner.

Partnership for 21st Century Learning (P21). (2018). Retrieved from http://www.p21.org/members-states/partner-states

Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008). The miniature guide to critical thinking: Concepts and tools / by Richard Paul and Linda Elder (5th ed.). Dillon Beach, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Piirto, J. (2004). Understanding creativity . Scottsdale: Great Potential.

Plucker, J., Beghetto, R., & Dow, G. (2004). Why isn’t creativity more important to educational psychologists? Potentials, pitfalls, and future directions in creativity research. Educational Psychologist, 39 , 83–96.

Sawyer, R. K. (2012). Explaining creativity: The science of innovation . New York: Oxford University.

Scriven, M., & Paul, R. (2011, November 23). Defining critical thinking . Retrieved from http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/defining-critical-thinking/766

United Nations. (2019). United Nations sustainable development goals . Retrieved from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/

Siegel, H. (1989). Epistemology, critical thinking, and critical thinking pedagogy. Argumentation, 3 (2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00128144 .

Siegel, H. (2017). Education’s epistemology: Rationality, diversity, and critical thinking . https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190682675.003.0007 .

Sperber, D., & Mercier, H. (2012). Reason as a social competence. In H. Landemore & J. Elster (Eds.), Collective wisdom—Principles and mechanisms (pp. 368–392). New York: Cambridge University.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

The Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2013). It takes more than a major: Employer priorities for college learning and student success . Retrieved from https://www.aacu.org/sites/default/files/files/LEAP/2013_EmployerSurvey.pdf

Topping, K. J., & Trickey, S. (2007). Impact of philosophical enquiry on school students’ interactive behaviour. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 2 (2), 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2007.03.001 .

Van Gelder, T., Bissett, M., & Cumming, G. (2004). Cultivating expertise in informal reasoning. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie Expérimentale, 58 (2), 142–152. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0085794 .

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

Waks, L. J. (2014). Education 2.0: The learning web revolution and the transformation of the school . Boulder: Paradigm.

Wallas, G. (1926). The art of thought . New York: Harcourt Brace.

Willingham, D. T. (2008). Critical thinking: Why is it so hard to teach? Arts Education Policy Review, 109 , 21–32. https://doi.org/10.3200/AEPR.109.4.21-32 .

Willingham, D.T. (2019). How to teach critical thinking . Retrieved from https://education.nsw.gov.au/media/exar/How-to-teach-critical-thinking-Willingham.pdf

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

Peter Ellerton

Faculty of Arts, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada

Robert Kelly

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert Kelly .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Monash University, Clayton, VIC, Australia

Amanda Berry

University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand

Cathy Buntting

Deborah Corrigan

Richard Gunstone

Alister Jones

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Ellerton, P., Kelly, R. (2021). Creativity and Critical Thinking. In: Berry, A., Buntting, C., Corrigan, D., Gunstone, R., Jones, A. (eds) Education in the 21st Century. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85300-6_2

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85300-6_2

Published : 31 January 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-85299-3

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-85300-6

eBook Packages : Education Education (R0)

Share this chapter

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

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons
• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

7.2: Critical Thinking and Creative Thinking

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 81999

• Kelvin Seifert & Rosemary Sutton
• University of Manitoba & Cleveland State University via Global Text Project

Critical thinking

Critical thinking requires skill at analyzing the reliability and validity of information, as well as the attitude or disposition to do so. The skill and attitude may be displayed with regard to a particular subject matter or topic, but in principle it can occur in any realm of knowledge (Halpern, 2003; Williams, Oliver, & Stockade, 2004). A critical thinker does not necessarily have a negative attitude in the everyday sense of constantly criticizing someone or something. Instead, he or she can be thought of as astute: the critical thinker asks key questions, evaluates the evidence for ideas, reasons for problems both logically and objectively, and expresses ideas and conclusions clearly and precisely. Last (but not least), the critical thinker can apply these habits of mind in more than one realm of life or knowledge.

With such a broad definition, it is not surprising that educators have suggested a variety of specific cognitive skills as contributing to critical thinking. In one study, for example, the researcher found how critical thinking can be reflected in regard to a published article was stimulated by annotation — writing questions and comments in the margins of the article (Liu, 2006). In this study, students were initially instructed in ways of annotating reading materials. Later, when the students completed additional readings for assignments, it was found that some students in fact used their annotation skills much more than others— some simply underlined passages, for example, with a highlighting pen. When essays written about the readings were later analyzed, the ones written by the annotators were found to be more well reasoned— more critically astute— than the essays written by the other students.

In another study, on the other hand, a researcher found that critical thinking can also involve oral discussion of personal issues or dilemmas (Hawkins, 2006). In this study, students were asked to verbally describe a recent, personal incident that disturbed them. Classmates then discussed the incident together in order to identify the precise reasons why the incident was disturbing, as well as the assumptions that the student made in describing the incident. The original student— the one who had first told the story— then used the results of the group discussion to frame a topic for a research essay. In one story of a troubling incident, a student told of a time when a store clerk has snubbed or rejected the student during a recent shopping errand. Through discussion, classmates decided that an assumption underlying the student's disturbance was her suspicion that she had been a victim of racial profiling based on her skin color. The student then used this idea as the basis for a research essay on the topic of "racial profiling in retail stores". The oral discussion thus stimulated critical thinking in the student and the classmates, but it also relied on their prior critical thinking skills at the same time.

Notice that in both of these research studies, as in others like them, what made the thinking "critical" was students' use of metacognition — strategies for thinking about thinking and for monitoring the success and quality of one's own thinking. This concept was discussed in Chapter 2 as a feature of constructivist views about learning. There we pointed out that when students acquire experience in building their own knowledge, they also become skilled both at knowing how they learn, and at knowing whether they have learned something well. These are two defining qualities of metacognition, but they are part of critical thinking as well. In fostering critical thinking, a teacher is really fostering a student's ability to construct or control his or her own thinking and to avoid being controlled by ideas unreflectively.

How best to teach critical thinking remains a matter of debate. One issue is whether to infuse critical skills into existing courses or to teach them through separate, free-standing units or courses. The first approach has the potential advantage of integrating critical thinking into students' entire educations. But it risks diluting students' understanding and use of critical thinking simply because critical thinking takes on a different form in each learning context. Its details and appearance vary among courses and teachers. The free-standing approach has the opposite qualities: it stands a better chance of being understood clearly and coherently, but at the cost of obscuring how it is related to other courses, tasks, and activities. This dilemma is the issue— again— of transfer , discussed in Chapter 2. Unfortunately, research to compare the different strategies for teaching critical thinking does not settle the matter. The research suggests simply that either infusion or free-standing approaches can work as long as it is implemented thoroughly and teachers are committed to the value of critical thinking (Halpern, 2003).

A related issue about teaching critical thinking is about deciding who needs to learn critical thinking skills the most. Should it be all students, or only some of them? Teaching all students seems the more democratic alternative and thus appropriate for educators. Surveys have found, however, that teachers sometimes favor teaching of critical thinking only to high-advantage students— the ones who already achieve well, who come from relatively high- income families, or (for high school students) who take courses intended for university entrance (Warburton & Torff, 2005). Presumably the rationale for this bias is that high- advantage students can benefit and/or understand and use critical thinking better than other students. Yet, there is little research evidence to support this idea, even if it were not ethically questionable. The study by Hawkins (2006) described above, for example, is that critical thinking was fostered even with students considered low-advantage.

Creative thinking

Creativity is the ability to make or do something new that is also useful or valued by others (Gardner, 1993). The "something" can be an object (like an essay or painting), a skill (like playing an instrument), or an action (like using a familiar tool in a new way). To be creative, the object, skill, or action cannot simply be bizarre or strange; it cannot be new without also being useful or valued, and not simply be the result of accident. If a person types letters at random that form a poem by chance, the result may be beautiful, but it would not be creative by the definition above. Viewed this way, creativity includes a wide range of human experience that many people, if not everyone, have had at some time or other (Kaufman & Baer, 2006). The experience is not restricted to a few geniuses, nor exclusive to specific fields or activities like art or the composing of music.

Especially important for teachers are two facts. The first is that an important form of creativity is creative thinking , the generation of ideas that are new as well as useful, productive, and appropriate. The second is that creative thinking can be stimulated by teachers' efforts. Teachers can, for example, encourage students' divergent thinking — ideas that are open-ended and that lead in many directions (Torrance, 1992; Kim, 2006). Divergent thinking is stimulated by open-ended questions— questions with many possible answers, such as the following:

• How many uses can you think of for a cup?
• Draw a picture that somehow incorporates all of these words: cat, fire engine, and banana.
• What is the most unusual use you can think of for a shoe?

Note that answering these questions creatively depends partly on having already acquired knowledge about the objects to which the questions refer. In this sense divergent thinking depends partly on its converse, convergent thinking , which is focused, logical reasoning about ideas and experiences that lead to specific answers. Up to a point, then, developing students' convergent thinking— as schoolwork often does by emphasizing mastery of content— facilitates students' divergent thinking indirectly, and hence also their creativity (Sternberg, 2003; Runco, 2004; Cropley, 2006). But carried to extremes, excessive emphasis on convergent thinking may discourage creativity.

Whether in school or out, creativity seems to flourish best when the creative activity is its own intrinsic reward, and a person is relatively unconcerned with what others think of the results. Whatever the activity— composing a song, writing an essay, organizing a party, or whatever— it is more likely to be creative if the creator focuses on and enjoys the activity in itself, and thinks relatively little about how others may evaluate the activity (Brophy, 2004). Unfortunately, encouraging students to ignore others' responses can sometimes pose a challenge for teachers. Not only is it the teachers' job to evaluate students' learning of particular ideas or skills, but also they have to do so within restricted time limits of a course or a school year. In spite of these constraints, though, creativity still can be encouraged in classrooms at least some of the time (Claxton, Edwards, & Scale-Constantinou, 2006). Suppose, for example, that students have to be assessed on their understanding and use of particular vocabulary. Testing their understanding may limit creative thinking; students will understandably focus their energies on learning "right" answers for the tests. But assessment does not have to happen constantly. There can also be times to encourage experimentation with vocabulary through writing poems, making word games, or in other thought-provoking ways. These activities are all potentially creative. To some extent, therefore, learning content and experimenting or playing with content can both find a place— in fact one of these activities can often support the other. We return to this point later in this chapter, when we discuss student-centered strategies of instruction, such as cooperative learning and play as a learning medium.

Strange Bedfellows: Creativity & Critical Thinking

What you thought you knew about creativity in critical thinking..

Posted March 16, 2018

• What Is Cognition?
• Find counselling near me

Creative and critical thinking often get ‘lumped together’ as buzzwords within the realm of educational outcomes and, as a result, people often try to draw links between the two. While they may share some common features, the two processes in fact have just as many differences as similarities. By examining both thoroughly, we can see their strengths as processes, and indeed how one can enhance the other.

When a person thinks, they may have a goal in mind; other times, they might let their imaginations run wild; for example, coming up with stories or jokes. Sometimes, they think with caution to ensure logic every step of the way, especially when they care about the real-world implications of their thinking. Taking these broad possibilities into account, it can be said that people think in order to decide what to do; in order to decide what to believe; or simply for fun. However, if the goal is to decide what to do or what to believe; and if a person genuinely cares about the outcome of a decision-making or problem-solving process, then they need to activate reasonable and logical thinking — critical thinking.

When we aim to solve problems, it is necessary to ask ourselves whether the solution is logical and feasible. If it isn’t, then it’s reasonable to go back to the drawing board until the solution meets these criteria. However, such assessment may not be possible in some cases; perhaps crucial, relevant knowledge (which may be needed to assess such logic and feasibility) may not be readily available for solving the problem and, thus, a collation of insight and the ability to think outside the box may be an attractive alternative. This ability to ‘think outside the box’ is often referred to as creative thinking (for further context on this description, see Dwyer et al., 2016).

According to Sternberg (2003; 2006), creative thinking refers to the convergence of intellectual abilities, knowledge, styles of thinking, personality and motivation ; which may, subsequently, yield a solution or conclusion that is (1) unusual or novel and (2) appropriate or valuable (Halpern, 2014; Runco & Jaeger, 2012; Sternberg, 2010). It is worth noting that though this may sound like a useful skill, in the absence of critical thinking, creative thinking alone is not particularly practical for solving problems or drawing conclusions regarding issues we care about (Sternberg, 2002). Though creative thinking is utilized when relatively novel tasks or situations are encountered (Sternberg, 2005), it is vital that reflective judgment be engaged when the novel tasks or situations require careful consideration (i.e. an individual’s purposeful, self-regulated consideration and understanding of the nature, limits, and certainty of knowing; how this can affect how they defend their judgments and reasoning in context; and acknowledgement that their views might be falsified by additional evidence obtained at a later time; Dwyer, 2017; King & Kitchener, 1994).

However, it is possible for creative thought to be complementary to critical thinking, considering the amount of creativity involved in the synthesis of information necessary to infer a conclusion or solve a problem in a reflective manner. In this scenario, the gathering of credible, relevant and logically sound information, while at the same time acknowledging the limits, certainty and nature of knowledge, is key. That is, we ‘create’ by synthesizing information we have previously analyzed and evaluated, so that a logical and feasible conclusion/solution may be inferred. However, not all creative thinking complements critical thinking in this way. So, it is reasonable to advise that if in doubt, one should not resort to proposing a creative solution before all other avenues involving critical thinking have been considered. This is not to say that creative thinking is a bad thing, but rather, it should be used alongside critical thinking and with caution. Just because a solution is creative does not mean it is feasible.

In recent times, to exemplify this in class, I ask my students how they would resolve the recent conflicts in Syria. Students generally return blank stares, even after a few moments to deliberate. I then put forward that one solution would be to "nuke’" Syria. Of course, the reactions generally range from sarcastic snickering to bewilderment and disgust. I promptly add that I neither advocate this position, nor do I support such violence; but, such action would likely put an end to the crisis. Though this solution has great potential, I add, it’s not feasible – morally, politically or economically. No matter how ‘creative’ a solution may be, in order to work, they must be both logical and feasible; and so, creative thinking-based problem-solving must be used with caution. Again, if we genuinely care about the outcome of our decision-making process, critical thinking is necessary.

Lateral thinking, a "popular" form of creative thinking, has gained notoriety in the past few decades, based on the work of Edward DeBono (1967). In contrast to critical thinking, lateral thinking is more concerned with the migration of thinking from what is known across the spectrum of possibilities rather than reflective inference of reasonable solutions or conclusions (Dwyer, 2017). That is, lateral thinking involves the provocation and generation of ideas, as well as the selection of an idea as a means of breeding and applying new associated ideas (DeBono, 1985). According to De Bono, lateral thinking is engaged because of previously failed attempts at solving problems; and thus, ‘digging the hole deeper’, which is an important facet of critical thinking, may not work. One must change the approach, or direction (i.e. lateral ), to thinking. However, applying inference and reflective judgment, inherent in critical thinking, is more likely to yield a logical and feasible solution; and is thus a better approach to making a decision than that of lateral, creative thinking. For example, according to DeBono’s comparison of real-world problem-solving to a game of chess, ‘pieces’ are not given to us, but instead created through lateral thinking. The problem with this perspective is that the credibility, relevance or logical strength of these creations is not accounted for and, if it were really a case of not having the pieces necessary to play, then recognizing their limits and uncertainty in response to such real-world situations (i.e. reflective judgment) would yield better results than relying on creativity alone.

As I conclude, we are left with the question: ‘If creative thinking isn’t really useful or practical for critical thinking, then why are they often confused for one another or even discussed in tandem as some kind of ideal form of higher-order cognition ?’ Like so many other issues we encounter in this blog, it depends on how you conceptualize it. Critical thinking and creative thinking are very different entities if you treat the latter as something similar to lateral thinking or ‘thinking outside the box’. However, if we conceptualize creative thinking as synthesizing information for the purpose of inferring a logical and feasible conclusion or solution, then it becomes complementary to critical thinking. Steve Jobs once explained creativity as just ‘connecting things... When you ask creative people how they did something, they feel a little guilty because they didn’t really do it, they just saw something. It seemed obvious to them after a while.’ However, it remains that this creative process may just be heightened inference ability (i.e. through the synthesis of credible, relevant and logically sound information – connecting things ). Thus, creativity (i.e. inference in this context) is already a component of critical thinking. So then, what’s all the fuss? First, it would be a disservice to the concept of critical thinking to not explain its difference to other ‘popular’ forms of thought, such as creative thinking and lateral thinking. Again, this is not to say that creative thinking is a bad thing – it can be used to complement critical thinking; but it depends on how you conceptualise it. Second, even if we treat it like ‘heightened inference ability’, we are not resorting to creativity alone - all other avenues involving critical thinking must be considered. That is, we can think creatively by synthesizing information we have previously thought about critically (i.e. through analysis and evaluation) for the purpose of inferring a logical and feasible conclusion or solution. Thus, given this caveat, we can infuse our critical thinking with creative thinking, but we must do so with caution.

De Bono, E. (1967). The use of lateral thinking. London: Jonathan Cape.

De Bono, E. (1985). Six thinking hats. Boston: Little Brown.

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

Dwyer, C.P., Hogan, M.J., Harney, O.M. & Kavanagh, C. (2016). Facilitating a student-educator conceptual model of dispositions towards critical thinking through interactive management. Educational Technology & Research, 65, 1, 47-73.

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.

Runco, M. A., & Jaeger, G. J. (2012). The standard definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 24(1), 92-96.

Sternberg, R. J. (2002). Raising the achievement of all students: Teaching for successful intelligence. Educational Psychology Review, 14, 4, 383-393.

Sternberg, R. J. (2003). The development of creativity as a decision-making process. Creativity and development, 91-138.

Sternberg, R. J. (2005). The theory of successful intelligence. Revista Interamericana de Psicología/Interamerican Journal of Psychology, 39, 2, 189-202.

Sternberg, R. J. (2006). The nature of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 18, 1, 87-98.

Sternberg, R. J. (2010). The dark side of creativity and how to combat it. In D.H. Cropley et al. (eds.), The Dark Side of Creativity. UK: Cambridge University, 316-328.

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 Support Group
• International
• New Zealand
• South Africa
• Switzerland
• 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

• design tutorials
• inspiration

How Critical Thinking Improves Creativity

Learning how critical thinking improves creativity.

Do you ever just find yourself in a creative rut? I don’t know if you have ever experienced writer’s block, but a creative rut can be closely compared to the feeling of writer’s block.

You ponder for hours on end, trying to devise a creative plan for your next project, but… Nothing. You can almost hear the crickets chirping in the background.

While you can’t avoid creative ruts altogether – as they are just part of life and part of the hump you must climb over to successfully pull together a creative plan – there are ways to improve your creativity…

One of those ways is by learning to think critically. A good critical approach is important to have when trying to be creative…

Wait, what is critical thinking?

Critical thinking is one of those phrases that when asked to define it, you define it using the phrase itself. When someone asks you what is critical thinking, your first response might be “well, to think critically.” But, that answer does not really offer much insight into the phrase and how to achieve critical thinking.

So, let’s break it down.

By formal definition, critical thinking is the act of objective evaluation and analysis of an issue to form a judgment. The goal of critical thinking is to consider the issue from all angles so that you can create a plausible, educated solution for or view on the issue.

How do you combine critical and creative thinking?

Oftentimes, people think of critical thinking and creative thinking as residing on totally opposite ends of the thought spectrum. While this is partially true, as they are two different types of thinking, it is not entirely true – the two can be combined.

Compare the two: critical thinking involves comparison, planning, hypothesizing, critiquing and classification; whereas, creative thinking just involves creating something original or new.

So, critical thinking is the actual process of creating something new or original (creative thinking).

However, sometimes starting with a critical approach to thinking might inhibit your creative thinking abilities. Instead, try being creative first. Let your mind wander and just write down anything you think of.

Next, apply critical thinking. Dive deeper into your options and analyze each one – giving attention to the cause and effect, the plan, and forecast the outcome. Then, go back to creative thinking.

Is there a way you could further improve the ideas? Do you now have better ideas now that you have your proposed plans mapped out?

What are the benefits of combining the two ways of thinking?

By combining the forces of both critical and creative thinking , you give yourself a more reasonable approach to situations. It allows you to make creative, yet smart decisions.

Critical thinking is important in decision-making, whether it be business decisions or personal life decisions. By allowing your creative juices to flow, while also applying critical thinking, you will be able to openly explore all details of each of your business options, but in an effective way. Having strong critical approach is important for delivering high quality products or services. Customer reviews provide companies with feedback that affects their decision-making process. Whether if it’s analysis of hockey skates or gym equipment, reviews are important for making necessary product and service improvements or changing creative direction.

Abilities you gain from applying critical thinking include:

• Analyzing arguments
• Asking and answering detailed questions
• Providing clarification
• Knowing how to judge the credibility of a source
• Deciding on action
• Interacting with others

These are just a handful of the abilities and skills you gain through critical thinking. But, by using a combination of creativity and critical thinking you can improve the way you live and work – making yourself more productive, efficient, and more knowledgeable about a variety of areas.

Another benefit you gain from combining these two ways of thinking is diversity. Critical thinking and creative thinking occur on opposite sides of the brain, so by teaching yourself to combine the two, you are exercising both sides of your brain.

Therefore, by exercising both sides of your brain equally, you begin to become more creative as you start to see things through a different light and become well-versed in a variety of different areas of life.

It is all about finding a balance between the two – be creative , but also be critical of your creative decisions. By forcing yourself to think critically about your creative choices, you will find yourself experiencing better, more detailed, and more efficient plans and results.

• There are no comments, be first to comment!

Embracing The Creative Journey: Ignite Your Passion And Unlock Limitless Potential

Color Psychology 101

5 Great Tips For Your Creative Mood Board

What is an Omnipotentialite?

Thriving As A Creative In The Corporate World

How To Get Out Of A Creative Slump

Recreating The Iconic 'Mouse in Manhattan' Scenery From Tom & Jerry Classic Cartoons

Meticulously Crafted Paper Sculptures By Lisa Lloyd

Vibrant Flat Vector Planets Illustration - Free Download Pack

Create AVATAR Movie Poster in Photoshop Tutorial

How To Animate Element Along SVG Path

Folded 3D Digital Sculptures Illustration By Maxim Shkret

Geometric Anamorphic Perspective Illusion Paintings By Truly Design Studio

Deadpool Logo Movie Poster Photoshop Tutorial

25 Graphic Design Icons

Learning The UI Design Fundamentals

Create 3D Card Hover Pure CSS Effect

Create CSS3 Animated Search Box

Subscribe to our mailing list for up to date and exclusive content.

Copyright © 2009 - 2024 icanbecreative

Key Difference

Know the Differences & Comparisons

Difference Between Creative Thinking and Critical Thinking

Table of Contents

Introduction

As our world becomes more complex and quickly changing, the ability to think both critically and creatively is increasingly prized.

Both creative thinking and critical thinking play crucial roles in problem-solving, decision making, and innovation – though they should be understood separately with different approaches from each one bringing something unique to the table.

Creative thinking encompasses brainstorming novel ideas, exploring possibilities and thinking out of the box. It fosters imagination and intuition while building connections between seemingly disparate concepts.

On the other hand, critical thinking involves evaluating information, challenging assumptions and applying logical reasoning in assessing validity of arguments or evidence presented against one.

Understanding the differences between creative thinking and critical thinking is vital for unlocking their full cognitive potential.

By investigating their respective characteristics, processes, and outcomes we can gain a more in-depth knowledge of both types of thinking as well as their roles and how they complement one another.

This content outline seeks to clearly differentiate creative thinking and critical thinking by outlining their unique features, approaches, and applications.

By understanding their differences as well as examining how they may work together in various situations, we can foster more holistic thinking skill sets while improving problem-solving capabilities in various contexts.

Definition of creative thinking

Creative thinking refers to the cognitive process of coming up with novel and original ideas or solutions by exploring various perspectives, making connections between seemingly disparate elements, and thinking beyond conventional boundaries.

Divergent thinking plays a central role in creative thinking by providing multiple possibilities and exploring various approaches; creative thinking often relies on imagination, intuition, and risk-taking; it involves divergent thinking as well.

Creative thinking relies on flexible mindsets openness to new experiences as well as transcendence from established norms and patterns in its pursuit.

Creativity plays an essential part in problem-solving, innovation as well as the creation of artistic, scientific, technological breakthroughs.

Definition of critical thinking

Critical thinking refers to the mental process of analyzing, evaluating, and interpreting information or situations logically and objectively.

Skillful reasoning involves being able to assess evidence objectively, identify logical fallacies, and apply reasoning skills in order to form rational judgements or conclusions.

Critical thinking involves critically analyzing assumptions, biases and arguments to ascertain the validity and reliability of information.

Critical thinking emphasizes evidence-based reasoning, logical consistency and being able to recognize and evaluate different perspectives or arguments in order to effectively solve problems, make informed decisions and form informed opinions across various domains – be they academic institutions, professional settings or daily life.

Comparison Table of Creative Thinking and Critical Thinking

Here’s a comparison table highlighting the key differences between creative thinking and critical thinking:

While creative thinking and critical thinking have distinct focuses and approaches, they are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they can complement and enhance each other.

By integrating creative thinking into critical thinking processes, new and innovative solutions can be explored, and by applying critical thinking to creative ideas, their feasibility and effectiveness can be evaluated.

Understanding the differences and connections between creative thinking and critical thinking provides individuals with a broader thinking toolkit, enabling them to approach problems and challenges from multiple angles and make more informed decisions.

Creative thinking focuses on generating new ideas and possibilities

Creative thinking primarily centers on developing novel ideas and possibilities. To do this effectively, creative thinkers often break away from conventional patterns of thought by opening themselves up to different perspectives and engaging in divergent thinking, which involves coming up with multiple ideas or solutions for any given situation.

Divergent thinking allows creative thinkers to expand the range of possible options available while considering unconventional or innovative approaches.

Creative thinking involves the willingness to explore unfamiliar territories, question assumptions and push the limits of what is considered possible.

This type of thinking encourages imagination, brainstorming and free association of ideas in order to generate fresh insights and unique solutions – the goal being originality, novelty and creativity in problem-solving decisions as well as art, literature, design or innovation projects.

Creative thinking unleashes new possibilities by sparking creative thought processes that produce fresh concepts.

Creative thinking paves the way for exploration and innovation, helping individuals to find unconventional solutions, uncover groundbreaking discoveries, and produce lasting impacts.

Critical thinking focuses on analyzing and evaluating information

Critical thinking involves the analysis and evaluation of information. This involves thoroughly scrutinizing evidence, arguments or situations to ascertain their validity, reliability and logical coherence before reaching informed judgments or decisions based on objective reasoning. Critical thinkers strive to use objective and rational analyses in making well-informed judgements or decisions.

Critical thinking requires individuals to engage in an active process of questioning assumptions, identifying biases, assessing arguments or evidence critically and attempting to comprehend its underlying reasoning – whether logical, supported by evidence, or susceptible to fallacies.

Critical thinking involves applying logic, evidence evaluation and systematic analysis in an organized fashion to make informed decisions, avoid misinformation or manipulation and gain a more nuanced understanding of complex issues.

Critically evaluating information allows individuals to make more informed decisions by recognizing patterns, drawing inferences and recognizing logical inconsistencies – this skill involves skills such as data analysis, pattern recognition and inferencing; critically analyzing it provides opportunities for more informed decisions that avoid misinform or manipulation and increases understanding more nuanced understanding of complex issues by critically analyzing it!

Critical thinking has many applications in academia, professional settings and everyday life. It allows individuals to evaluate the credibility of sources, identify flaws in arguments and navigate complex or ambiguous situations with an analytical mindset.

Complementary Relationship Between Creative and Critical Thinking

Creativity and critical thinking do not contradict each other; in fact, they form a complementary relationship that can enhance problem-solving and decision-making processes. Creative thinking generates new ideas while critical thinking provides an analytical framework to evaluate and refine those concepts. Here are some ways creative and critical thinking can work together:

Idea Generation and Evaluation: Creative thinking fosters an array of concepts, while critical thinking enables evaluation and selection of those most likely to bear fruit. Critical thinking allows objective evaluation, identification of any flaws or potential defects, consideration of practicality and feasibility and ultimately determines success or failure of projects.

Problem Identification and Analysis: Creative thinking allows us to quickly recognize problems or challenges by approaching them from different angles and considering multiple viewpoints, while critical thinking allows for an in-depth examination of its underlying causes and possible solutions.

Innovative Solutions and Refinement: Creative thinking fosters original and novel solutions, while critical analysis assesses them on viability, potential shortcomings and practical constraints to make sure they align.

Decision-Making: Creative thinking can provide a variety of options; critical thinking helps evaluate their advantages and disadvantages. Critical thinking allows a systematic consideration of evidence, logic reasoning, potential consequences and other forms of evidence resulting in more informed and effective decision-making processes.

Adaptation and Improvement: Creative thinking allows for flexibility and adaptation in response to changing circumstances or feedback, while critical thinking helps identify areas for improvement, recognize potential pitfalls, and refine ideas or strategies based on evidence or feedback.

Individuals can achieve more comprehensive and effective problem-solving, innovation, and decision making by integrating creative and critical thinking. This combination encourages exploration while still remaining analytical; ultimately producing more robust outcomes.

Importance of integrating both types of thinking

Integrating both creative and critical thinking skills is of critical importance for various reasons:

Holistic Problem-Solving: By integrating creative and critical thinking, individuals can approach problems from various angles. Creative thinking generates fresh concepts, while critical analysis provides tools to evaluate and refine these new ideas. By taking this holistic approach to problem-solving, individuals increase the odds of finding effective and well-rounded solutions.

Critical Thinking Improves Decision-Making: Critical thinking allows individuals to assess the feasibility, reliability and coherence of ideas generated through creative thinking, thus aiding individuals in making more informed and evidence-based decisions while considering both imaginative possibilities as well as real world realities.

Adaptability and Innovation: Creative thinking promotes flexibility, adaptability and thinking beyond established norms; critical thinking adds structure for evaluating creative ideas against viability and effectiveness criteria. Combining both types of thinking enables innovative forward-looking approaches while remaining grounded by rationality and evidence.

Overcoming Challenges: Meeting obstacles and complex problems requires both creative and critical thinking skills, with creative thought producing innovative perspectives and solutions while critical analysis evaluates each option’s merits and drawbacks. Combining both types of thinking allows individuals to tackle problems more effectively while developing comprehensive strategies.

Transdisciplinary Thinking: Many complex real-world problems and projects necessitate multidisciplinary or transdisciplinary approaches, where creative and critical thinking come together seamlessly to bring diverse fields, perspectives and methodologies together into a synthesis that fosters holistic understanding while also producing innovative and well-informed solutions. By merging creative and critical thinking approaches in such environments individuals are better able to draw from multiple fields, perspectives and methodologies in order to solve them successfully.

Lifelong Learning: Integrating creative and critical thinking fosters an attitude of curiosity, open-mindedness and continuous learning. Both forms of thinking involve actively engaging with information while questioning assumptions and exploring possibilities – these combined abilities equip individuals with valuable tools for lifelong education in an ever-evolving world.

By integrating creative and critical thinking, individuals can leverage both approaches for enhanced problem-solving, decision making, and creative endeavors.

Examples of how creative and critical thinking can work together

Absolutely! Below are a few examples of how creative and critical thinking work hand-in-hand:

Product Design: Creativity can lead to groundbreaking ideas for product designs, while critical analysis identifies any feasible, market demand or manufacturing challenges associated with each idea. By employing both aspects of thinking together, designers can produce products which fulfill both functional and creative criteria.

Scientific Research: Creative and critical thinking both play important roles in scientific inquiry. Creative thought can generate hypotheses and explore novel avenues of inquiry while critical thought ensures the research design is rigorous and data analysis valid. Integrating both types of thinking allows scientists to make groundbreaking discoveries while maintaining scientific integrity of their work.

Marketing Campaigns: Creative thinking provides imaginative and eye-catching marketing concepts, while critical analysis evaluates target audiences, market trends and potential effects of each concept. By combining creative with critical thinking, marketers can develop campaigns that not only catch attention but also resonate with target audiences to deliver desired outcomes.

Problem Solving in Business: Creative and critical thinking work together to generate many potential solutions to business issues, while creative thinkers generate numerous creative potential solutions while critical thinkers evaluate risks, costs and impacts of each solution.

By employing both types of thinking together, business professionals can come up with novel yet cost-effective strategies aligned with organizational goals.

Literary Analysis: Creative thinking allows for imaginative interpretations and exploration of themes and symbols within literature, while critical thinking assesses textual evidence, evaluates coherence of arguments, and considers author intent. When used together, literary scholars can produce sophisticated analyses of literary works that integrate creative and critical thought effectively.

Entrepreneurship: Creative thinking helps entrepreneurs identify new business opportunities and innovative business models, while critical analysis examines market potential, competitive landscape analysis and financial viability for each idea. By employing both forms of thinking to formulate successful ventures they can create sustainable and long-term ventures.

In these instances, the integration of creative and critical thinking leads to more robust and effective results. It allows innovative ideas to be evaluated, refined, and implemented logically and thoughtfully; ultimately resulting in solutions that are both innovative and pragmatic.

Creative and critical thinking are Complementary approaches to Problem-solving, decision-making and Innovation.

Creative thinking entails Brainstorming for new ideas while Exploring Possibilities; critical thinking uses objective evaluation of information to evaluate it logically and critically.

Integrating both types of thinking allows individuals to maximize both approaches and produce more comprehensive and effective results.

Creative thinking encourages innovation, broadens perspectives and fosters out-of-the-box thinking; critical thinking provides evidence-based analysis which verifies those ideas.

Integrating Creative and critical Thinking skills is crucial for both Personal and Professional growth, Adaptability, Informed decision-making, and the establishment of an environment of continuous learning and innovation.

Together these forms of thinking help individuals meet challenges with resilience, flexibility and balance that leads to improved problem-solving abilities, innovation and eventual success.

As part of your journey, embrace both creative thinking and critical thinking equally to unlock your full potential, broaden your horizons and lead you towards greater achievements in every area of life.

Recap of the key differences between creative thinking and critical thinking

Here’s an overview of the differences between creative thinking and critical thinking:

Creative Thinking: Engaging in creative thinking involves brainstorming new ideas, possibilities and solutions; emphasizing exploration, intuition and imagination; employing divergent thinking techniques in order to generate multiple solutions simultaneously; leading to innovative and original concepts.

Critical Thinking is used across artistic, scientific, and technological endeavors and emphasizes analysis, logic, and objectivity to assess information critically. Critical Thinking develops skills such as fluency, flexibility and originality of thinking that lead to positive results in any endeavor.

Eventually this leads to Critical Thinking being applied by experts in an academic environment for analysis purposes – typically this means writing essays for examination in exams! Utilizes convergent thinking to identify and select the optimal solutions, leading to informed decision-making and problem solving.

Also used for problem-solving, decision-making, and critical evaluation of information. Develops analytical, logical and evaluative skills. Though creative thinking and critical thinking may have different approaches and purposes, both types are equally essential in terms of effective problem-solving and decision making.

By integrating both types of thinking, individuals are better able to approach challenges from various angles, generate innovative ideas while critically assessing them for successful outcomes.

Importance of developing both types of thinking skills

Strengthening both creative thinking and critical thinking abilities is of great significance, for several reasons:

Comprehensive Problem Solving: Cultivating both types of thinking allows individuals to approach problems from multiple angles. Creative thinking helps generate innovative solutions while critical thinking provides analytical tools for evaluating and refining those ideas.

Combined together, this holistic approach enhances problem-solving abilities while increasing chances of finding effective and comprehensive solutions.

Adaptability and Resilience: In an ever-evolving world, being adaptable and creative are two vital skills. Creative thinking promotes flexibility, adaptability, and thinking outside established norms; critical thinking equips individuals with skills for evaluating creative ideas critically.

By cultivating both types of thinking simultaneously, individuals can more successfully navigate complex or changing situations with resilience and creativity.

Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Innovation and entrepreneurialism require creative thinking skills for success. Individuals who cultivate these abilities are better able to generate new ideas, identify opportunities, and think outside the box when developing products, services or solutions with innovative features or capabilities.

Meanwhile, critical thinking helps evaluate market potential and risks associated with such ideas – all essential elements for innovation and entrepreneurialism success.

Critical Thinking Skills Are Essential to Informed Decision-Making: Critical thinking skills are integral in making informed and effective decisions. Cultivating them allows individuals to evaluate evidence, consider opposing viewpoints and evaluate logical coherence of arguments; creative thinking adds variety and imagination that enables informed decisions with both practical and innovative potential in mind.

Personal and Professional Growth: Fostering creative and critical thinking abilities is central to personal and professional growth. Creative thinking develops imagination, open-mindedness and the capacity for forward-thinking; while critical thinking expands analytical, logical and evaluative capabilities.

Both skills can be utilized across various domains as transferrable assets that aid problem-solving, innovative thinking and lifelong learning.

As previously discussed, developing both creative thinking and critical thinking abilities is fundamental for effective problem-solving, adaptability, innovation, informed decision-making and personal growth.

By honing both forms of thinking simultaneously, individuals can approach challenges with an adaptive and balanced mindset for greater success and satisfaction across various aspects of life.

Encouragement for readers to embrace and cultivate both thinking approaches

As readers, I urge all to embrace and develop both creative thinking and critical thinking approaches. Doing so can open up new possibilities, enhance problem-solving abilities, and lead to greater success across various areas of life.

Here’s why both approaches should be explored:

Expand Your Perspectives: Embracing both creative and critical thinking will enable you to look at problems and opportunities from different angles. Creative thinking offers fresh approaches and imaginative solutions; critical analysis provides objective evaluation. By adopting both approaches simultaneously, your perspective broadens considerably while you gain greater insight into complex issues.

Creativity Fuels Innovation and Growth: Creativity is essential to innovation, driving both personal and professional success. By challenging conventional thinking patterns and considering unique solutions for issues that arise.

Critical Thinking serves to validate those unique concepts by making sure they’re practical, viable and well-reasoned; cultivating both ways of thinking will allow you to foster innovation while propelling you toward continuous development and success.

Enhance Problem-Solving Capabilities: Integrating creative and critical thinking creates an invaluable problem-solving arsenal. Creative thinking helps generate ideas, while critical thinking evaluates and refines them using evidence and logic – this combination gives you a powerful set of tools for taking on challenges effectively and finding lasting solutions.

Navigating Change with Resilience: In an ever-evolving world, adaptability is of the utmost importance. Creative thinking teaches you the ability to accept change with open arms, adapt with the times, and seize new opportunities with flexibility and curiosity.

Critical thinking complements this by making sure decisions are grounded in evidence and sound reasoning; together these approaches help you navigate uncertainties with grace and welcome change with resilience.

Making Informed Decisions: Critical thinking helps you assess information objectively, evaluate arguments fairly and make well-informed decisions. Creative thinking opens up more options and possibilities.

By combining both approaches together, you become a more thoughtful decision-maker who considers both innovative ideas as well as practical concerns when making choices.

Never stop working towards improving both creative and critical thinking abilities; it is a journey worth embarking upon. So nurture your curiosity, practice brainstorming sessions, seek diverse viewpoints, sharpen analytical abilities, embrace discomfort when exploring new ideas or challenging assumptions, cultivating both forms of thinking can unlock full cognitive potential while positioning you for success in an ever-evolving world.

Harness the power of creative and critical thinking together and allow them to drive you toward greater creativity, innovation, and success.

Related Posts

• University of Toronto Quarterly

Critical Condition: Replacing Critical Thinking with Creativity by Patrick Finn (review)

• Diane Conrad
• University of Toronto Press
• Volume 86, Number 3, Summer 2017
• pp. 258-259
• View Citation

Additional Information

• Buy Article for $27.50 (USD)

• Buy Digital Article for $27.50 (USD)

Project MUSE Mission

Project MUSE promotes the creation and dissemination of essential humanities and social science resources through collaboration with libraries, publishers, and scholars worldwide. Forged from a partnership between a university press and a library, Project MUSE is a trusted part of the academic and scholarly community it serves.

2715 North Charles Street Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

+1 (410) 516-6989 [email protected]

©2024 Project MUSE. Produced by Johns Hopkins University Press in collaboration with The Sheridan Libraries.

Now and Always, The Trusted Content Your Research Requires

Built on the Johns Hopkins University Campus

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.

The Peak Performance Center

The pursuit of performance excellence, critical thinking vs. creative thinking.

Creative thinking is a way of looking at problems or situations from a fresh perspective to conceive of something new or original.

Critical thinking is the logical, sequential disciplined process of rationalizing, analyzing, evaluating, and interpreting information to make informed judgments and/or decisions.

Critical Thinking vs. Creative Thinking – Key Differences

• Creative thinking tries to create something new, while critical thinking seeks to assess worth or validity of something that already exists.
• Creative thinking is generative, while critical thinking is analytical.
• Creative thinking is divergent, while critical thinking is convergent.
• Creative thinking is focused on possibilities, while critical thinking is focused on probability.
• Creative thinking is accomplished by disregarding accepted principles, while critical thinking is accomplished by applying accepted principles.

About Creative Thinking

Creative thinking is a process utilized to generate lists of new, varied and unique ideas or possibilities. Creative thinking brings a fresh perspective and sometimes unconventional solution to solve a problem or address a challenge.  When you are thinking creatively, you are focused on exploring ideas, generating possibilities, and/or developing various theories.

Creative thinking can be performed both by an unstructured process such as brainstorming, or by a structured process such as lateral thinking.

Brainstorming is the process for generating unique ideas and solutions through spontaneous and freewheeling group discussion. Participants are encouraged to think aloud and suggest as many ideas as they can, no matter how outlandish it may seem.

Lateral thinking uses a systematic process that leads to logical conclusions. However, it involves changing a standard thinking sequence and arriving at a solution from completely different angles.

No matter what process you chose, the ultimate goal is to generate ideas that are unique, useful and worthy of further elaboration. Often times, critical thinking is performed after creative thinking has generated various possibilities. Critical thinking is used to vet those ideas to determine if they are practical.

Creative Thinking Skills

• Open-mindedness
• Flexibility
• Imagination
• Adaptability
• Risk-taking
• Originality
• Elaboration
• Brainstorming

About Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is the process of actively analyzing, interpreting, synthesizing, evaluating information gathered from observation, experience, or communication. It is thinking in a clear, logical, reasoned, and reflective manner to make informed judgments and/or decisions.

Critical thinking involves the ability to:

• remain objective

In general, critical thinking is used to make logical well-formed decisions after analyzing and evaluating information and/or an array of ideas.

On a daily basis, it can be used for a variety of reasons including:

• to form an argument
• to articulate and justify a position or point of view
• to reduce possibilities to convergent toward a single answer
• to vet creative ideas to determine if they are practical
• to judge an assumption
• to solve a problem
• to reach a conclusion

Critical Thinking Skills

• Interpreting
• Integrating
• Contrasting
• Classifying
• Forecasting
• Hypothesizing

Copyright © 2024 | WordPress Theme by MH Themes

College internships matter more than ever — but not everyone can get one

Some colleges, companies are working to broaden access to internships, while diversifying the talent pipeline for employers.

When Kim Churches took on the job as head of The Washington Center, a nonprofit organization that provides college students with internships, she was on a mission. It was the fall of 2021. The United States was just emerging from months of lockdowns and all-remote work and learning, which had exposed and exacerbated huge inequities in educational opportunities.

“I wanted to ensure greater inclusion,” Churches said — which, in her case, meant expanding access to internships, particularly for students from historically underrepresented groups.

Internships have long been a coveted component of the college experience, but now the pressure to secure them — and to secure them earlier — is growing, as students and their parents look for ways to stand out on job applications, universities work to demonstrate a high return on investment and employers increasingly rely on internships as part of their strategies to recruit and vet candidates. But traditional internships are not universally accessible.

“At any college now, the first thing the parents ask is, ‘How are the internships?’ ” said Anthony Carnevale, director of the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. “It’s a prized commodity.”

Groups like The Washington Center have built their reputations by placing students in high-quality summer or semester-long internships. But these often pay little or no money and require interns to fund their own travel and housing — thereby excluding many students. Recognizing that, The Washington Center and other organizations have in recent years created new programs to serve a broader pool of learners.

“Not everybody is a traditional 18- to 22-year-old student,” Churches said. “Not everybody can take an internship out of their geographic area for a full summer or semester.”

Nationwide, slightly more than 60 percent of students who graduated in 2023 completed an internship during college, according to survey data collected by the National Association of Colleges and Employers. At elite universities, that figure was much higher — almost 90 percent at the University of Pennsylvania, for example, according to the school’s career services office.

But at the City College of New York, where two-thirds of students receive Pell Grants , only 35 to 40 percent of students typically complete an internship before graduation, school administrators said.

“I would think that number would be higher for those who wanted to do one but couldn’t,” said Katie Nailler, director of the college’s Career and Professional Development Institute.

The college tries to make sure students get paid or at least subsidized when they do an internship. It sponsors paid internships itself with faculty members and college centers. And it partners with external organizations such as LifeSci NYC, a public-private initiative to support the STEM industry in New York, to place students in paid summer or academic-year internships.

But in addition to programs that pay students, “We also need programs that are flexible,” said Francesca Anselmi, executive director of the Office for Experiential Learning at City College, pointing out that many students have year-round jobs and need to keep them in the summer.

On the other side of the equation, employers are increasingly turning to internships as part of their recruiting pipeline.

Erica Kryst, executive director of Cornell Career Services, said that in more than 10 years working in this field, she has seen employers — especially big companies in finance, consulting and tech — increasingly focus on college juniors they hire as interns rather than on seniors applying for full-time jobs.

“Internships are almost viewed as a long-term interview process,” she said.

Eight out of 10 employers surveyed by the National Association of Colleges and Employers said that internships provided the best return on investment as a recruiting strategy, compared with career fairs, on-campus visits, panels or other activities. Between two similar job candidates, an internship in the industry is “the number-one tiebreaker,” said Joshua Kahn, associate director of research and public policy at NACE.

“There’s a race to get talent early,” said Barbara Hewitt, executive director of career services at the University of Pennsylvania. That, in turn, has resulted in a “focus on getting practical experience in many ways earlier in students’ academic careers,” Hewitt said.

Today, students have more options for earning that type of experience. The Washington Center, for example, last year began offering fully funded, short-term career-readiness programs. One was a cybersecurity program, consisting of a paid virtual “micro-internship” and online training in professional skills. The program also included an all-expenses-paid gathering in Washington, where participants visited Amazon and Verizon offices, attended technical workshops and listened to speakers from the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security.

Ninety percent of the program’s participants were from historically underrepresented groups, and 60 percent were first-generation college students, according to The Washington Center. The participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 43.

“This met my needs,” said Faris Nabeel, 26. Nabeel, who was the first in his family to go to college, was working overnight shifts as a behavioral health associate while also studying full time at the University of Arkansas. The program was his first opportunity to participate in a professional internship. It was remote, roughly 10 hours a week for eight weeks, and consisted of researching and helping plan an event in the U.S. Virgin Islands to increase awareness about cybersecurity. He earned a $500 stipend.

Nabeel credited the internship with helping him build new skills, get into a master’s degree program in cybersecurity and land his current job as a security operations center analyst.

But, he said, “if it was in person, I probably would have enjoyed it more,” noting that the time difference with his East Coast employer, remote communication and online distractions made the job harder. And if he had been employed as a full-time, salaried intern, he said, he could have focused exclusively on that experience and learned more.

While groups like The Washington Center have been around for decades, several new internship organizations have sprung up in recent years, offering programs that broaden access.

U.K.-based Virtual Internships was established in 2018 with the goal of removing barriers to internship participation, especially abroad, co-founder Ed Holroyd Pearce said. The program offers fully remote internships that last one to four months, require a commitment of 10, 20 or 30 hours per week, and have start dates throughout the year. It also includes access to an online curriculum in professional skills development.

Its biggest market is the United States, Holroyd Pearce said. The company partners with universities, colleges and governments, which typically fund the program or grant academic credit — often to students who face barriers to getting work experience.

Virtual Internships partners with a Canadian organization funded by the government, for example, on a program that trains workers who are changing or transitioning careers. And the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business, also working with the company, identifies first-year students with the least work experience and helps place them in internships to give them a boost as they apply for summer positions during their sophomore and junior years.

Virtual Internships’ survey data shows that supervisors’ perceptions of the interns’ abilities on core career-readiness skills such as communication, critical thinking and teamwork increased substantially during the internships. About a quarter of interns receive offers to extend or get hired full time, Holroyd Pearce said.

Micro-internships like Nabeel’s are another relatively new option. Chicago-based Parker Dewey, which launched in 2016, facilitates short-term contract projects, such as blogging, social media or data cleanup, that typically are done remotely, require 10 to 40 hours of work total and pay $20 to $25 per hour.

Students respond to one or more short-answer questions when they apply — and employers, who aren’t allowed to filter applicants by GPA or major, weigh those answers more heavily than the students’ résumés or pedigrees, chief executive Jeffrey Moss said.

“Essentially what we’ve done is lowered the stakes for both students and employers,” Moss said. “The employer can ‘take a chance’ on someone who came from a different background, not a finance major with a 3.7 GPA.”

That in turn, Moss said, creates an opportunity for the student, who might land a summer internship or full-time role as a result. It also drives behavior change at the employer company, which now has access to and can recruit from a more diverse student pool, Moss said.

More than 80 percent of students selected for Parker Dewey’s micro-internships come from populations that are underrepresented in the workforce, including first-generation, Pell-eligible, adult-learner, veteran and racial or ethnic minority students, Moss said.

Still, Moss added, micro-internships are “a feeder and a complement” to summer internships — not a replacement.

In 2022, City College of New York announced a new partnership with Braven, a national nonprofit founded in 2013 with the goal of promoting economic mobility by getting students from underrepresented groups into a “strong first job” or graduate school after college.

Braven runs a three-credit career development course inside its partner schools, which in addition to City College include Lehman College in the Bronx; Rutgers University-Newark; Spelman College, in Atlanta; and San José State University, among others.

In the semester-long course, volunteers from employer partners coach and mentor a small cohort of students on career skills, including leadership, problem-solving and communication. Students must apply for internships, ideally completing two in person and for pay before they graduate.

“We are very clear about what a high-quality internship looks like, and you need to get paid,” founder and chief executive Aimée Eubanks Davis said.

After the course, students continue to receive mentoring, invitations to network, listings for jobs and internships, and guidance to help them apply. Over 2½ years, Braven follows its students to see if they are on track for their postgraduate goals — and intervenes if they’re not.

The model appears to be working. In 2023, 60 percent of Braven “fellows” landed in quality jobs or graduate schools within six months of graduation, compared with 43 percent of their peers nationally, according to the organization.

Kahn, of the National Association of Colleges and Employers, said that third-party internship providers and programs provide a crucial bridge between students and employers, offering experience and networking that otherwise might not be available to historically underrepresented students.

But ultimately, he said, the best and most sustainable solution is for employers to offer more paid internships — as many large companies already do.

“Interns provide valuable insights, creativity and skills on real projects that organizations can monetize,” he wrote in an email.

Without such pay, many students will continue to have limited options for participating in internships.

Alexandra Sandoval Flores, a junior at the University of Texas at Austin, saved money from three jobs and took out loans to pay for her internship at a legal firm in Spain last summer. The experience “changed my life,” she said, opening her eyes to new career possibilities as well as a new culture.

But she could only afford to go for four weeks and wished she had been able to stay longer.

“Coming from someone who is an immigrant, a minority, Hispanic, Latina, it’s very heartbreaking to know that a lot of us deserve these opportunities and we can’t get them,” Sandoval Flores said. “We know we have the qualities for them, and the only thing holding us back is the financial side.”

This story about college internships was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter .