critical thinking with technology

Distance Learning

Using technology to develop students’ critical thinking skills.

by Jessica Mansbach

What Is Critical Thinking?

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

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

Communication
Problem-solving

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

Types of Critical Thinking Skills

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

Level of critical thinking	Skills students demonstrate	Questions to ask
Lower levels
Remembering	recognize, describe, list, identify, retrieve
Understanding	explain, generalize, estimate, predict, describe
Higher levels
Applying	carry out, use, implement, show, solve
Analyzing	compare, organize, deconstruct
Evaluating	check, judge, critique, conclude, explain
Creating	construct, plan, design, produce

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

Using Online Tools to Teach Critical Thinking Skills

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

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

Pulling it All Together

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

Additional Resources

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

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

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

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

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

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

Insight Assessment: Measuring Thinking Worldwide

http://www.insightassessment.com/

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

The Critical Thinking Community

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

Behind the Scenes of a DL Video

Ways to Use Panopto in Online Courses

Copying a Canvas Course with Panopto Videos

The Importance of Icebreakers In Online Classes

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

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

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

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

Technology needs to be advance to develop the below factors:

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

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

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

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

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

How Does Technology Affect Critical Thinking?

Technology is always quickly advancing. New apps, new updates, and platforms emerge to help us connect to each other, automate our tasks, or just have fun. But does technology help or hinder critical thinking skills?

Impact of Technology on Critical Thinking

You use technology in one form or another every day. As time goes on, it plays a more significant role in our lives and changes the way we consume and process information. Critical thinking is all about analyzing the information in front of you, thinking about it rationally and without bias, and always asking questions.

Critical thinking includes soft skills like problem-solving, finding cause and effect relationships, interpret data, evaluate arguments, and keep opinions and views malleable and fluid. Technology can both reinforce these skills and also threaten them.

How Does Technology Improve Critical Thinking?

Education and learning.

Schools are introducing more and more technology in the classroom to keep up with advances. They hope to better prepare students for the world of growing technology.

It affects critical thinking by helping students apply what they’ve learned to real-life situations and develop problem-solving skills – two essential elements of critical thinking.

Simulations

Simulation programming is growing in popularity to emulate real-life situations virtually. There are many professional fields, such as aviation and medicine, where certain conditions are rare, but you need to prepare for them. Simulations can virtually simulate flight errors for pilot training or rare diseases for medical students to learn how to address them.

Social Media

Social networks open up the world. You can interact with people halfway around the globe with whom you share things in common. Information sharing and interactions have radically changed since the beginnings of social media.

Is Technology Killing Critical Thinking?

Depending on what technology you’re using and how you’re using it, technology can be damaging to critical thinking.

When it comes to critical thinking, social media is both a positive and a negative. Social media offers the opportunity to access multiple viewpoints, but algorithms tend to show you more of what you’ve already seen.

Reading fiction just for enjoyment is also on the decline with the rise of technology. However, reading fiction can captivate your imagination in ways that visual media – like video games and television – do not.

Final Thoughts

The world of technology is so infinite that it can seem overwhelming. All forms of media don’t work in every setting. There needs to be a balance of modern technology in life , or you run the risk of losing out on developing fundamental skills.

How to Improve Your Critical Thinking Skills

Traditional tools and new technologies..

Posted September 29, 2023 | Reviewed by Lybi Ma

Technology provides access to vast information and makes daily life easier. Yet, too much reliance on technology potentially interferes with the acquisition and maintenance of critical thinking skills in several ways:

1. Information Overload : The constant influx of data can discourage deep critical thinking as we may come to rely on quick, surface-level information rather than delving deeply into a subject.

2. Shortened Attention Span: Frequent digital distractions can disrupt our ability for the sustained focus and concentration required for critical thinking.

3. Confirmatory Bias and Echo Chambers: Technology, including social media and personalized content algorithms, can reinforce confirmation bias . People are often exposed to information that aligns with their beliefs and opinions, making them less likely to encounter diverse perspectives and engage in critical thinking about opposing views.

4. Reduced Problem-Solving Opportunities: Technology often provides quick solutions to problems. While this benefits efficiency, it may discourage individuals from engaging in complex problem-solving, a fundamental aspect of critical thinking.

5. Loss of Research Skills: The ease of accessing information online can diminish traditional research skills, such as library research or in-depth reading. These skills are essential for critical thinking, as they involve evaluating sources, synthesizing information, and analyzing complex texts.

While technology can pose challenges to developing critical thinking skills, it's important to note that technology can also be a valuable tool for learning and skill development. It can provide access to educational resources, facilitate collaboration , and support critical thinking when used thoughtfully and intentionally. Balancing technology use with activities that encourage deep thinking and analysis is vital to lessening its potential adverse effects on critical thinking.

Writing is a traditional and powerful tool to exercise and improve your critical thinking skills. Consider these ways writing can help enhance critical thinking:

1. Clarity of Thought: Writing requires that you articulate your thoughts clearly and coherently. When you need to put your ideas on paper, you must organize them logically, which requires a deeper understanding of the subject matter.

2. Analysis and Evaluation: Critical thinking involves analyzing and evaluating information. When you write, you often need to assess the validity and relevance of different sources, arguments, or pieces of evidence, which hone your critical thinking skills.

3. Problem-Solving: Writing can be a problem-solving exercise in itself. Whether crafting an argument, developing a thesis, or finding the right words to express your ideas, writing requires thinking critically about approaching these challenges effectively.

4. Research Skills: Good writing often involves research, and research requires critical thinking. You need to assess the credibility of sources, synthesize information, and draw conclusions based on the evidence you gather.

5. Argumentation: Constructing a persuasive argument in writing is a complex process requiring critical thinking. You must anticipate counterarguments, provide evidence to support your claims, and address potential weaknesses in your reasoning.

6. Revision and Editing: To be an influential writer, you must learn to read your work critically. Editing and revising requires evaluating your writing objectively, identifying areas that need improvement, and refining your ideas and arguments.

7. Problem Identification: In some cases, writing can help you identify problems or gaps in your thinking. As you write, you might realize that your arguments are not as strong as you initially thought or that you need more information to support your claims. This recognition of limitations is a crucial aspect of critical thinking.

Writing is a dynamic process that engages multiple facets of critical thinking. It has been a valuable tool used in education , business, and personal development for centuries.

Yet, this traditional approach of self-generated written thoughts is rapidly being supplanted by AI -generated writing tools like Chat GPT (Generative Pre-trained Transformer. With over 100 million users of Chat GPT alone, we cannot ignore its potential impact. How might the increasing reliance on AI-generated writing tools influence our critical thinking skills? The impact can vary depending on how the tools are used and the context in which they are employed.

Critical thinking involves evaluating information sources for credibility, relevance, and bias. If individuals consistently trust the information provided by chatbots without critically assessing its quality, it can hinder their development of critical thinking skills. This is especially true if they depend on the chatbot to provide answers without questioning or verifying the information. Relying solely on chatbots for answers may also reduce people's effort in problem-solving. Critical thinking often requires wrestling with complex problems, considering multiple perspectives, and generating creative solutions. If we default to chatbots for quick answers, we may miss opportunities to develop these skills.

However, it's essential to note that the impact of chatbots on critical thinking skills may not be entirely negative. These tools can also have positive effects:

1. Chatbots provide quick access to vast information, which can benefit research and problem-solving. When used as a supplement to critical thinking, they can enhance the efficiency of information retrieval.

2. Chatbots can sometimes assist in complex tasks by providing relevant data or suggestions. When individuals critically evaluate and integrate this information into their decision-making process, it can enhance their critical thinking.

3. Chatbots can be used as learning aids. They can provide explanations, examples, and guidance, which can support skill development and, when used effectively, encourage critical thinking.

In summary, the impact of chatbots on critical thinking skills depends on how we use them. The effect will be harmful if they become a crutch to avoid independent thought or analysis. However, they can be valuable resources when used as tools to facilitate and augment critical thinking and writing processes. Individuals must balance leveraging the convenience of chatbots and actively engaging in independent critical thinking and problem-solving to maintain and enhance their cognitive abilities. You can do that effectively through writing regularly.

Tara Well, Ph.D. , is a professor in the department of psychology at Barnard College of Columbia University.

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

It’s increasingly common for someone to be diagnosed with a condition such as ADHD or autism as an adult. A diagnosis often brings relief, but it can also come with as many questions as answers.

Emotional Intelligence
Gaslighting
Affective Forecasting
Neuroscience

Critical Thinking in the Age of AI

Over the past few decades, online discussions have occasionally turned to the question of whether the tools that allow us easy access to a wealth of information (like Google) help or hurt our ability to reason (i.e., to be critical thinkers) and to learn . We are now seeing this same discussion about new artificial intelligence tools, like ChatGPT. Before reading on, take a moment and think about your own perspective on this: Do these tools help make you a stronger critical thinker or not?

To try and figure this out requires a clear definition of critical thinking, something that is frequently lacking in these discussions. Let’s use what Daniel Willingham, a cognitive scientist, says is his “ commonsensical view .” His definition is that critical thinking is:

Novel: Not a direct repetition of something you’ve learned before.
Self-directed: Not just repeating steps you’ve been given.
Effective: Following patterns that are likely to yield useful conclusions.

These elements are best thought about in the context of the tools we have available: As we use generative AI to create more writing and other content, it will be even more important to approach media with the right framework. Daniel Dennett, the philosopher and scientist, wrote about some mental habits to use (he called them “ intuition pumps ”). Occam’s razor is one that many people are familiar with—don’t rely on a complex explanation when a simpler one works just as well. He also talks about certain things to be on the lookout for, such as a “deepity”: a statement that sounds simple and profound but can be read multiple ways and which is actually quite pointless (Dennett gives the example “Love is just a word”). If you find yourself gasping and going “wow” after encountering one of these, take a moment to see if you can explain what interesting idea it actually revealed; you may not be able to!

Like any habit of mind, people can adopt effective general patterns with effortful practice. And domain-specific critical thinking skills can be supported through instruction. That is, if your goal is to teach someone how to, say, debug a program that isn’t working, there is evidence that it can be taught through direct instruction and practice applying it, getting feedback along the way.

But this gets at another challenge. Frequently, what people mean by critical thinking is the application of approaches to new situations. You may think that someone who just received that training in debugging may be able to use the same underlying skills to help, say, revise an essay. However, there is a lot of psychology research that finds we are generally terrible at transferring critical thinking skills to new situations. We’ll dive into this limitation in people’s abilities to transfer their knowledge in another post, but, for now, we shouldn’t assume that for people using generative AI, being experts in their particular fields will protect them when evaluating false or misleading claims in areas outside their expertise.

So what does all of this mean for a person trying to keep up their critical thinking skills as the use of generative AI ramps up? Here are a few suggestions:

Learn : Continue building your own body of knowledge and skills, even if it is seemingly something that a computer could do for you. That will give you the grounding to potentially make connections and form new ideas that go beyond what even ChatGPT can generate.
Evaluate : Stress the critical in the idea of “critical thinking.” It is well-known that generative AI can hallucinate , particularly when it comes to up-to-date research. Even outside interactions with a tool like ChatGPT, try to apply some healthy skepticism, whether to a news article, a YouTube video, an interesting newsletter, a corporate strategy document, or any other media. Look for additional sources for claims you see, particularly ones that seem too good to be true.
Reflect : After you work with an AI, do some reflecting. For example, if you are using ChatGPT to help you craft a persuasive message (like a marketing email or even a LinkedIn post), ask yourself how it went. Did it produce what you wanted? What elements seemed to align with your thinking and which didn’t? Making sure you stop to explore these questions in your own interactions will help make you a stronger critical thinker when dealing with the output of AI systems.

More Thought Leadership

Unlocking the Future of Learning: The Power of Collaborative Learning

Unlocking Empathy, Communication, and Leadership through VR Training

Educate your workforce with mit horizon.

Accreditation
Value of Accreditation
Standards and Process
Search Accredited Schools

Bright green megaphone icon against dark teal weave pattern

Educational Membership
Business Membership
Find a Member

Learning and Events
Conferences
Webinars and Online Courses

All Insights
B-School Leadership
Future of Work
Societal Impact

Four colored boxes with different icons: notebook, camera lens, compass, and binoculars

Leadership and Governance
Media Center

Accredited School Search
Advertise, Sponsor, Exhibit
Tips and Advice
Is Business School Right for Me?

Assessing Critical Thinking in the Digital Era

The Importance of Assessment

However, while critical thinking is widely recognized as an essential skill, it can be challenging for higher education institutions to quantify or measure how well students have learned it. Assessment is a vital and dynamic component of teaching knowledge, skills, and competencies. It informs program and institutional improvement, providing invaluable information that administrators, faculty, and staff can use to make data-driven decisions that lead to better student outcomes.

One of the key difficulties in assessing critical thinking is defining what it is and how it should be measured. Critical thinking is a complex skill that involves the ability to analyze and evaluate information, think creatively, and make reasoned judgments, as Richard Paul and Linda Elder outline in their 2019 publication . It is not a single skill that can be easily quantified or measured through traditional assessments. As a result, educators have had to develop more nuanced approaches to evaluating critical thinking skills, such as project-based assessments and open-ended questions that require students to demonstrate their reasoning and problem-solving abilities.

While critical thinking is widely recognized as an essential skill, it can be challenging for higher education institutions to quantify or measure how well students have learned it.

Another challenge in measuring critical thinking is ensuring that assessments are fair and unbiased. Assessments that are overly reliant on multiple-choice questions or rote memorization can unfairly disadvantage students who may excel in other areas of critical thinking.

For these reasons, educators need effective assessment methods that accurately measure critical thinking skills in a variety of contexts. These assessments should use consistent and objective criteria to ensure that all students are given equal opportunities to demonstrate their abilities.

However, building such assessment tools and overcoming the barriers associated with measuring critical thinking places a large and sometimes overwhelming administrative burden on faculty and staff. Unfortunately, there can be a negative impact on student performance when faculty members must allocate more time and resources to handling administrative tasks than to teaching courses and supporting learner success.

A Partnership Between Industry and Academia

The need for critical thinking assessment tools is being addressed through a recent partnership between various higher education institutions and Peregrine Global Services, an education technology company specializing in assessment and instructional solutions. Peregrine recently launched its Critical Thinking Assessment to help colleges and universities evaluate this important skill.

To ensure that the assessment tool would meet the specific needs of the higher education community, the company developed its Peregrine Partner Program, which involved beta testing the tool with programs of varying sizes and types during the fall of 2022 and the spring of 2023. Each educational partner provided valuable feedback on how to present data to help schools make informed decisions, how to remove administrative burdens associated with assessment, and how to foster a culture of quality.

The partnership between Peregrine and the higher education institutions has led to several unforeseen advancements in technology. These include the ability to analyze exam data by course, cohort, or program, as well as the implementation of blind scoring to remove scoring bias. The new tool also adopts an innovative approach to assessing critical thinking and generating the data necessary to analyze exam results. For example, schools will be able to sort and filter data by levels of higher-order thinking.

The Critical Thinking Assessment uses a standardized rubric covering six critical thinking subcriteria and provides institutions with the flexibility to customize the exams to meet their needs. Academic programs can tailor the service to cover specific disciplines and assess varying levels of higher-order thinking. Learners receive scenarios randomly, ensuring a unique testing experience for each student.

The system auto-scores multiple-choice questions, while designated program faculty and assessment administrators use a rubric to manually score open-ended items. The short case studies and scenario questions are written and validated by subject matter experts with practical and teaching experience in each specific discipline.

“The Critical Thinking Assessment helps make assessment a facultywide effort, where everyone has buy-in,” says Melodie Philhours, associate professor of marketing and director of assessment at Arkansas State University’s Neil Griffin College of Business in Jonesboro. “The assessment tool significantly reduces the time and resources required for assessment, allowing faculty to focus on teaching and improving student learning outcomes. One of the most significant benefits has been the removal of the administrative burden related to compiling and entering the data, as the results are readily available after the assessment is fully scored.”

At the Forefront of Disruption

The collaboration between Peregrine and its partner schools will benefit not only the institutions involved, but also the broader field of education. Any time higher education and the technology sector can work together, they will drive innovation and disruption, ultimately leading to better learner outcomes. With the Critical Thinking Assessment tool, Peregrine aims to help higher education institutions assess not just retained knowledge, but also acquired skills and competencies.

In the future, Peregrine plans to incorporate AI into the assessment and build an aggregate pool, so schools can compare their results over periods of time, internally and externally, allowing them to benchmark against schools with similar demographics. Until then, Peregrine is offering the tool to schools as a course-level assessment they can use in their overall assessment portfolio.

The partnership between Peregrine and universities highlights the potential for industry and academia to come together to address the challenges faced by higher education. It demonstrates that when universities are at the forefront of disrupting education in a positive manner, they can move along with technology rather than lag behind it.

Assessment and AoL
Collaboration

REVIEW article

How do technology-enhanced learning tools support critical thinking.

$\nNguyen-Thinh Le$

Computer Science Education, Computer Science and Society, Department of Computer Science, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany

This paper reviews existing computer-supported learning systems that have claimed to adopt Socratic methods for enhancing critical thinking. Several notions of Socratic methods are differentiated: the critical thinking framework of Paul and Elder (2006) , the classic Socratic method, the modern Socratic method, and the neo-Socratic group discussion method. Three lessons are highlighted. First, the development of learning systems specifically supporting critical thinking is still lacking Thus, further research in this area is urgent. Second, most developed computer-supported learning systems claim to support Socratic approaches (e.g., Socratic tutoring) which are based on human tutoring strategies and do not show a systematic Socratic method. Third, the classic Socratic method has not been applied in any reviewed learning system.

Introduction

What is critical thinking? The definition of Sumner (1940 , p. 632–633) might be one of the earliest notions of “critical thinking”: [Critical thinking is] “… the examination and test of propositions of any kind which are offered for acceptance, in order to find out whether they correspond to reality or not .” This notion implies active scrutiny of propositions when articulated. Similarly, most definitions share the common requirement on question asking. That is, the critical thinker needs to ask questions in order to test assumptions, to recognize ambiguity, to examine, to interpret, to evaluate, to reason, to reflect, to clarify, to articulate, and to justify positions ( Ennis, 1962 ; Ruggiero, 1975 ; Hallet, 1984 ; Halpern, 1996 ). However, none of these definitions provides a systematic framework for adoption in educational scenarios.

In 2012, Richard Paul published an article criticizing the education of critical thinking at schools as follows: “ The fundamental problems in schooling today at all levels are fragmentation and lower order learning. Both within and between subject areas there is a dearth of connection and depth. Atomized lists dominate curricula, atomized teaching dominates instruction, and atomized recall dominates learning. What is learned are superficial fragments, typically soon forgotten. What is missing is coherence, connection, and depth of understanding… ” ( Paul, 2012 ). Many empirical studies reported a similar situation of critical thinking education at schools. Most teachers and school students do not use deep questions that are supposed to evoke high-order cognitive functions ( Graesser et al., 2010 ; Chafi and Elkhouzai, 2014 ). Thus, students have limited exposure to more beneficial inquiry. Approximately 60% of teachers' questions evoke lower-order cognitive demands, whereas 20% invoke higher-order cognitive demands, leaving 20% that represent procedural day-to-day questions ( Dickman, 2009 ). A recent study conducted with 143 teachers in Germany expressed a similar result that low-order questions are mostly used in classroom teaching ( Le et al., 2018 ).

Critical thinking is the skill that is in high demand in many workplaces nowadays. For global industry groups such as the World Economic Forum, critical thinking has been consistently ranked as one of the top three most important skills from 2015 to 2020 ( WEF, 2016 ). Despite the importance of critical thinking in education, research on technology-enhanced support for developing and enhancing critical thinking is still rare. The goal of this paper is to investigate the research question: How do existing technology-enhanced learning tools help learners develop critical thinking? Answering this question should also shed light on associated pedagogical practices. As a first step, the discussion focuses on the Socratic methods and its relationship with critical thinking.

Methodology

In order to investigate the research question being addressed in this paper, first, it is required to review different approaches to develop critical thinking in order to be able to classify learning tools. Thus, the following sections are devoted to differentiating variants of Socratic approaches to critical thinking.

The Paul-Elder's Socratic Approach to Critical Thinking

One of the pioneers of promoting critical thinking in education is Richard Paul. Paul's definition for critical thinking is as follows: “ Critical thinking is disciplined, self-directed thinking which exemplifies the perfections of thinking appropriate to a particular mode or domain of thought .” Paul suggested the following twelve criteria for perfections of thought: clarity, precision, specificity, accuracy, relevance, consistency, logicalness, depth, completeness, significance, fairness, and adequacy (for purpose). These criteria for perfections of thought can be used to assess the level of critical thinking, and thus, are also referred to as the intellectual standards ( Paul and Elder, 2006 ). In order to achieve the perfections of thought, Paul suggested six categories of questions for critical questioners ( Paul, 1990 , Chapter 19) (see Table 1 ).

Table 1 . Six classes of critical questions proposed by Paul and Elder (2006) .

By applying the six classes of critical questions, the development of social intellectual traits might be expected ( Paul and Elder, 2006 ). The criteria for intellectual standards of critical thinking and the six categories of questions build a framework of critical thinking.

The Classic Socratic Method

The classic Socratic method originated primarily from the early dialogues of Socrates that are documented in Plato's books ( Maxwell, 2014 ). In these dialogues, Socrates used questions to refute existing beliefs of the interlocutor. Such refutation allows the interlocutor to rethink the topic under discussion (e.g., “ What is virtue? ”). The expected result of the classic Socratic method is that the interlocutor can recognize by himself/herself the failure during the process of searching for a correct answer to a discussion question. Another expected effect is that the interlocutor would rethink his/her existing belief more deeply and free himself/herself from holding firmly to his/her wrong belief. This is referred to as the “Socratic effect” by Maxwell and Melete (2014) . Through this effect, new knowledge of the interlocutor may be established.

Boghossian (2012) identified five common steps of the classic Socratic method: (1) Wonder question, (2) Hypothesis, (3) Elenchus (refutation or cross-examination), (4) Acceptance/rejection of the hypothesis, and (5) Action. The first step starts with a wondering question, e.g., “ What is justice? ” (Chapter “The republic,” Plato 1 ). The second step of a Socratic dialogue is the response of the interlocutor who is in charge by presenting a hypothesis, a possible answer or a tentative answer to the question. In this stage, the interlocutor may use his/her knowledge to answer the “wonder” question asked by Socrates. The answer shows the pre-conception of the interlocutor and represents a hypothesis. Socrates would not evaluate the answer given in this stage. The third step of a Socratic dialogue, elenchus or refutation, is the core of Socratic dialogues ( Gulley, 1968 ). The purpose of this step is to ask questions to test the hypothesis given by the interlocutor. The hypothesis could be tested by elenchus (refutation or cross-examination, e.g., fact check, critical questions, counter-arguments, counter-examples, fallacy-check, or check for contradiction, etc.). The purpose of the elenchus (refutation or cross-examination) is to call the hypothesis into question. That is to undermine the interlocutor's belief. The fourth step of a Socratic dialogue is to accept or reject the hypothesis of the interlocutor based on results of rethinking. If a new fact (or counterexample, counter-arguments, fallacy-check, check for contradiction) shows that the hypothesis cannot be true, then the interlocutor should change his/her belief. He/she goes back to the second step and offers another hypothesis. If a new fact (or counter-arguments, fallacy-check, check for contradiction) is rejected by the interlocutor, then both the Socratic questioner and the interlocutor agree that it is neither necessary nor sufficient to undermine the hypothesis. That means that the hypothesis is tentatively accepted. The final step is to act by the interlocutor accordingly, after the cycle of examining facts (or counterexamples, counter-arguments, fallacy-check, check for contradiction) has been finished. That is, one would change his/her pre-conception.

Maxwell and Melete (2014) compared the five steps of the classic Socratic method with the general steps of the scientific approach to investigating a research question. An example from Meno ( Jowett, 2019 ) illustrates the classic Socratic method as follows, sentences in italics are my notes indicating the steps of the classic Socratic method.

The classic Socratic method has been proven useful in teaching and learning ( Lam, 2011 ). However, several researchers argued that the classic Socratic method tends to confuse and to perplex students ( Pekarsky, 1994 ; Tarnopolsky, 2001 ; Weisner and Westerhof-Shultz, 2004 ) and that students may become humiliated and ashamed. Boghossian (2012) represented the opposite point of view by showing different examples: “ The purpose of the Socratic method is not to humiliate, shame, or perplex students, but to help them have beliefs that accord with reality .” For Boghossian, the classic Socratic method has much potential: it can help participants formulate arguments, improve their critical thinking and moral reasoning skills, and learn to distinguish truth from falsity. The perplexed and confused feelings are just the side-effect of the classic Socratic method ( Boghossian, 2010 ). Socratic dialogues, as described above, aim only to free one's wrong belief from holding tightly on to previous convictions, and thus evelop critical thinking.

The Modern Socratic Method

Maxwell (2014) distinguished the modern Socratic method from the classic Socratic method. The modern Socratic method uses questions to lead the interlocutor to acquire knowledge in small steps. This means that the answers of leading questions can be verified and anticipated by the Socratic questioner. This is the main difference between the modern Socratic method and the classic Socratic method such that neither the Socratic questioner nor the interlocutor knows the answer. According to Maxwell, this Socratic method is popular in modern times and thus, referred to as the modern Socratic method. This type of Socratic method is also the root of the dialogues of Socrates. One of the Socrates' dialogues that can illustrate this method is the conversation between Socrates with a slave boy about the geometry experiment found in the dialogues “Meno” (Meno 82b−85d: Socrates and the Slave 2 ). A part of this dialogue is shown in Figure 1 .

Figure 1 . An illustration of modern Socratic dialogues (Meno 82b−85d: Socrates and the Slave, Source: Wikimedia.org ).

The Neo-Socratic Discussion Method

Nelson (1970) developed a Socratic discussion method which is referred to as the neo-Socratic method in literature ( Popp, 2001 ). This method is intended to support a group discussion for six to ten participants. The discussion serves to explain existing but unreflected concepts in daily life (e.g., What is happiness ?) that are fundamental for the discussion. Through a discussion held by the neo-Socratic method, the participants perform argumentation and strive for a result in consensus. Similar to Socratic dialogues that can be found in the books of Plato, the neo-Socratic discussion method applies concrete examples in daily life for self-reflection. Based on self-experience, the participants express their points of view on the discussion question. The central point of this method is the enhancement of self-initiated thinking, the improvement of the ability of logical and objective argumentation, and the promotion of problem-oriented and solution-oriented communication. Heckmann (1981) extended Nelson's neo-Socratic method by explicitly defining the rules for the discussion moderator and for discussion participants. With these rules, Heckmann (1981) wanted to make sure that the abstraction process from examples given by discussion participants is granted. Horster (1994) investigated the theoretical assumptions of the neo-Socratic method, modified the abstraction process proposed by Nelson, and described the neo-Socratic method as Figure 2 illustrates. The steps of this process are elaborated by Horster (1994) . Since this abstraction process of the neo-Socratic method seems to be clearly defined, it could be mapped to a computational model.

Figure 2 . The Socratic group discussion method developed by Nelson (1970) , extended by Heckmann (1981) and Horster (1994) .

The differences between the classic, the modern, and the neo-Socratic discussion methods are summarized in Table 2 .

Table 2 . The differences between the Socratic methods.

Socratic questioning not only involves the use of systematic questioning, but also inductive reasoning ( Carey and Mullan, 2004 ). Inductive reasoning uses specific examples to arrive at a general rule. For example, we can observe from specific examples that a bicycle has two round wheels, a motor bike also has two round wheels, and a car has four round wheels. We would induce a general rule that all vehicles have round wheels.

The foregoing investigation of Socratic Methods is presented as important context for understanding the application of contemporary technology support for critical thinking, for the main reason that most systems have adopted the modern Socratic Method. This discussion now addresses findings associated with this.

For the review of technology-enhanced learning systems for critical thinking, the following inclusion criteria were defined:

1. Scientific articles describing a technology-enhanced learning system must mention “critical thinking” or “Socratic” (including “Socratic dialogue,” “Socratic method,” “Socratic questioning”), and “reasoning”;

2. A system must have educational purposes, e.g., learning, developing/enhancing skills;

3. A system must have been evaluated or technically validated.

In addition to the inclusion criteria, one exclusion criterion is that assessment systems are not considered, because they do not provide didactic/pedagogical strategies to enhance critical thinking skills.

Applying these three inclusion criteria and the exclusion criterion, articles were collected from Google Scholar, DBLP and open access journal databases on the Internet, 14 learning systems for critical thinking were included ( Table 2 ). In the following, each system is briefly summarized and assigned to one of the critical thinking approaches. If the authors of the system claimed that it supports the Socratic method but did not show the systematic Socratic method, we will assign that system to the category “claimed to be Socratic.” If a system is still available online, it is indicated by an Internet URL on a column of the table.

The review starts with the learning systems that adopt the modern Socratic method. The common feature is that the systems control the dialogue, ask questions and the students answer the system's questions in free text. One of the earliest computer systems that adopted the modern Socratic method is SCHOLAR ( Carbonell, 1970 ). In this system, the author modeled the domain geography using a semantic network. The system allows mixed initiative dialogues, i.e., both students and the system can initiate questions. The user interface allows the users to input an answer or a question in free form. The system understands the student's question or answer by matching a pattern with pre-specified keywords. In order to generate texts, the system fills answer and question templates with information from the semantic net. Since the semantic network represents only fact knowledge rather than procedural knowledge, the system is limited to categorize student utterances beyond simply right/wrong. Also adopting the modern Socratic method, Weusijana et al. (2004) developed a questioning strategy for the system SASK. It is a domain-independent architecture for deepening students' reflections on well-defined tasks using Socratic dialogues. In the domain of biomedical engineering, for example, the system adopts the questions used by experts for students such as “ What are you trying to do here? ” or “ What variables are you controlling? ” Person and Graesser (2002) developed an intelligent tutoring system that applies the modern Socratic method to improve students' knowledge in the areas of computer literacy and Newtonian physics using an animated agent that is able to ask a series of deep reasoning questions according to the question taxonomy proposed by Graesser and Person (1994) .

Beside the learning systems that applied the modern Socratic method, several learning systems adopted the neo-Socratic group discussion method. Le and Huse (2016) developed a conversational agent that plays the role of a moderator for a group discussion. The conversational agent leads the discussion participants through the phases of the neo-Socratic group discussion method and encourages participants to strengthen their critical thinking in order to develop arguments for the given discussion topic. The evaluation study of the Socratic conversational agent ( Le and Huse, 2016 ) reported encouraging results that the Socratic group discussion moderated by a conversational agent has the tendency to activate participants' thinking and join the group discussion more actively. For similar purpose, Hoeksema (2004) developed a group discussion environment that is intended to serve virtual Socratic dialogues. The Socratic dialogues using this discussion environment are intended to be held similarly in a usual face-to-face environment. Whereas, this work focused on developing an environment for Socratic group discussions, the Socratic conversational agent of Le and Huse (2016) was used to formalize the neo-Socratic group discussion method to help students develop critical thinking.

While the classic and modern Socratic methods are based on the dialogues of Socrates documented in the books of Plato, the conceptualization of the Socratic method has been developed and modified in different guises.

Edelson (1996) developed a so-called Socratic case-based architecture Crimeanate using thought-provoking questions and cases. Two pedagogical principles underlying this architecture are active learning and learning from cases. These principles are implemented by two system components: a task environment and a storyteller. The learning domain supported by this architecture is biology. Specific subject matter is animal adaptation. A session begins with an invitation to the student to create his or her own animal by taking an existing animal and changing it in some way. Following the choice of an animal, the system engages the student in a series of natural language dialogues in which the student considers the ramifications of the proposed modification of his or her animal. The storyteller recognizes opportunities for learning during the course of interactions of the student with the task environment and presents cases that may help the student to learn from his/her own problem.

Glass (2001) developed CIRCSIM, a dialogue-based intelligent tutoring system that uses questions to lead conversations with student and claimed that the pedagogical strategy is Socratic tutoring. This tutoring strategy is based on a corpus of human tutoring dialogues that contains many instances of students' short answers ( Glass, 2001 ). The notion of Socratic tutoring suggested by Glass is as follows: “ The dialogue is under the tutor's control; the machine asks questions and the student answers with free text in imitation of the Socratic style of human tutoring .”

Similarly, Weusijana et al. (2004 , p. 561) characterized a Socratic tutoring method very informally: “ An educator may know of these issues and choose to tutor their learners socratically; to conversationally engage with learners, often while they work on their learning task, with pertinent and probing questions .” Based on this concept of the Socratic method, the authors developed a web-based system that helps students foster reflection.

Domeshek et al. (2002) conceptualized the Socratic method as follows: “ Socratic instruction is a kind of teaching interaction typically applied in high-level professional education (e.g., law and business) and most often characterized by its external form: the teacher asks a lot of questions, and the student answers.” Based on this notion of the Socratic method, Domeshek et al. (2004) developed ComMentor, an automated Socratic tutoring system, for command skills for high-level professional education such as law and business. This system is claimed to be able to guide the student in a Socratic mode as an expert would: the teacher asks questions and the student answers. The sequence of the questions is intended to help the student reconstruct the logic of expert situation analysis and decision-making. Domeshek et al. (2004) described four characteristics of a typical Socratic session: (1) a thought-provoking problem, (2) a student's attempt to provide solutions, (3) the instructor's repeated exploration and challenging of the student's solutions, and (4) incremental justification, elaboration, refinement, and revision of both the student's understanding of the situation under discussion and their proposed solution.

According to the notions for the Socratic method above that are not based on the analysis of Socrates' dialogues, a teacher should engage students by posing questions. It is controversial whether these notions for the Socratic method can be categorized as the modern Socratic method because the modern Socratic method also applies a sequence of questions for that the Socratic questioner anticipates correct answers. However, since the computer applications that adopt these notions for the Socratic method are based on the analysis of human tutoring dialogues, it is questionable whether these dialogues follow a systematic methodology and whether the methodology of human tutors is really effective.

Several educational applications support tutorial dialogues. Olney et al. (2012) presented a method for generating questions for tutorial dialogue. This involves automatically extracting concept maps from textbooks in the domain of biology. Five question categories were deployed: hint, prompt, forced choice question, contextual verification question, and causal chain questions. Also, with the intention of supporting students using conversational dialogues, Lane and VanLehn (2005) developed PROPL, a tutor, which helps students build a natural-language style pseudo-code solution to a given problem. All these educational applications deployed some kinds of dialogue, however, they neither apply the classic nor modern Socratic method.

There have been several computer-supported learning systems for human reasoning which could be considered a part of the critical thinking process since critical thinking involves the use of inductive reasoning ( Carey and Mullan, 2004 ). For example, the framework of critical thinking proposed by Paul and Elder (2006) includes the class of questions that probe reason and evidence. Le and Wartschinski (2018) proposed a cognitive assistant that holds conversation with students to develop human reasoning skills. This study, with more than 60 test persons, showed significant improvement in reasoning skills. Pursuing the similar aim, an existing serious game, Argotario ( Habernal et al., 2017 ) addressed argumentation and critical thinking skills by identifying fallacies in arguments and intentionally developing fallacious arguments during the process of playing a game. Both the cognitive assistant developed by Le and Wartschinski (2018) and the serious game Argotario proposed a conversational agent as the communication interface with the user. However, the difference between these systems lies in the training tasks. The cognitive assistant developed by Le and Wartschinski (2018) covered several issues that lead to irrational thoughts and decisions: (1) sunk cost fallacy, (2) gambler's fallacy, (3) Bayesian reasoning, (4) belief bias in syllogistic reasoning, (5) regression toward the mean, (6) co-variation detection, and (7) Wason's selection tasks. Training tasks provided by this cognitive assistant were based on psychology literature ( Larrick, 2004 ; Toplak et al., 2014 ). The serious game, Argotario, only addressed the single issue of “fallacy.”

From this review of technology-enhanced learning systems for critical thinking ( Table 3 ), we can learn three lessons. First, the number of developed learning systems for critical thinking is still low. Thus, given the proliferation of misinformation and ‘fake news' on the web, further research in this area is arguably urgent. Second, most of the developed learning systems (e.g., Olney et al., 2012 ) claimed that they support Socratic approaches (e.g., Socratic tutoring), which are based on human tutoring strategies rather than Socrates' strategies. It is controversial whether the human tutoring strategies are pedagogically effective and whether they need to be empirically validated before being integrated into a learning system. Third, the classic Socratic method has not been applied in any reviewed learning system. This absence of the classic Socratic method in learning systems can be explained by which the steps of the classic Socratic method might be very challenging to be mapped to a computational model. Especially the third step, which is the core of the classic Socratic method, would require a computer system to be able to ask a question to test a hypothesis by posing a fact check, a counter argument, counter example, a fallacy check, or a check for contradiction.

Table 3 . A summary of computer-supported educational systems for critical thinking.

Conclusions

This paper has reviewed 14 existing technology-enhanced learning systems for critical thinking. The review shows that almost all existing systems adopted the notion of the modern Socratic method, e.g., the system uses questions to lead the learner to acquire knowledge in small steps and knowledge that is to be acquired can be anticipated by the system. Thus, questions and anticipated knowledge of a learning domain can be modeled computationally. Whereas, the modern Socratic method has been adopted in many systems, the classic Socratic method is rarely deployed in computer-supported learning systems. Perhaps the reason is that steps of the classic Socratic method are challenging to be mapped to a computational model. Another finding is that several dialogue-based learning systems claimed to adopt Socratic questioning method, however, they only support conversation between users and the system in natural language. That is, those systems may enhance critical thinking through questions, but a systematic Socratic approach cannot be identified.

Author Contributions

The author confirms being the sole contributor of this work and has approved it for publication.

Conflict of Interest

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

Acknowledgments

I acknowledge support by the German Research Foundation (DFG) and the Open Access Publication Fund of Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.

1. ^ Plato: “The republic” available on The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy (IEP) https://www.iep.utm.edu/republic/

2. ^ Meno 82b - 85d: Socrates and the Slave https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/Meno82b-85d.svg

Boghossian, P. (2010). Socratic Pedagogy, Critical Thinking, and Of-fender Programming. Offender Programs Report .

Google Scholar

Boghossian, P. (2012). Socratic pedagogy: perplexity, humiliation, shame and a broken egg. Edu. Philos. Theor. 44, 710–720. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-5812.2011.00773.x

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Carbonell, J. R. (1970). AI in CAI: artificial intelligence approach to computer assisted instruction. IEEE Transac. Man-Machine Syst. 11, 190–202. doi: 10.1109/TMMS.1970.299942

Carey, T. A., and Mullan, R. J. (2004). What is Socratic questioning? Psychother. Theor. Res. Pract. Train. 41, 217–226. doi: 10.1037/0033-3204.41.3.217

Chafi, M. E., and Elkhouzai, E. (2014). Classroom interaction: investigating the forms and functions of teacher questions in Moroccan primary school. J. Innovat. Appl. Stud. 6, 352–361.

Dickman, N. E. (2009). The challenge of asking engaging questions. Curr. Teach. Learn. 2, 3–16.

Domeshek, E. A., Holman, E., and Luperfoy, S. (2004). “ComMentor: socratic tutoring for high-level command skills,” in Proceedings of Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC) (Orlando, FL).

Domeshek, E. A., Holman, E., and Ross, K. G. (2002). “Automated socratic tutors for high-level command skills,” in Proceedings of the Interservice/Industry Training Simulation and Education Conference (Orlando, FL).

Edelson, D. C. (1996). Learning from cases and questions: the so-cratic case-based teaching architecture. J. Learn. Sci. 5, 370–410. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0504_3

Ennis, R. H. (1962). A concept of critical thinking. Harvard Edu. Rev. 32, 81–111.

Glass, M. (2001). Processing language input in the CIRCSIM-tutor intelligent tutoring system. J. Artif. Intellig. Edu. 2001, 210–221.

Graesser, A. C., Ozuru, Y., and Sullins, J. (2010). “What is a good question?” in Threads of Coherence in Research on the Development of Reading Ability , eds M. G. McKeown and L. Kucan (Guilford, NY), 112–141.

Graesser, A. C., and Person, N. K. (1994). Question asking during tutoring. Am. Edu. Res. J. 31, 104–137. doi: 10.3102/00028312031001104

Gulley, N. (1968). The Philosophy of Socrates . London: Macmillan.

Habernal, I., Hannemann, R., Pollak, C., Klamm, C., Pauli, P., and Gurevych, I. (2017). “Argotario: computational argumentation meets serious games,” in Proceedings of the EMNLP System Demonstrations (Copenhagen: Association for Computational Linguistics), 7–12.

Hallet, G. L. (1984). Logic for the Labyrinth: A Guide to Critical Thinking . Washington, DC: University Press of America.

Halpern, D. F. (1996). Thought and Knowledge: An Introduction to Critical Thinking, 3rd edn . Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Heckmann, G. (1981). “Das sokratische Gespräch,” in Erfahrungen in Philosophischen Hochschul-Seminare (Frankfurt).

Hoeksema, K. (2004). “Virtuelle Sokratische Gespräche - Umsetzung einer Idee aus dem Philosophieunterricht,” in Proceedings on Modellierung als Schlüsselkonzept in intelligenten Lehr-/Lernsystemen (Marburg).

Horster, D. (1994). Das Sokratische Gespräch in Theorie und Praxis .

Jowett, B. (2019). A Dialogue of Socrates . Available online at: http://classics.mit.edu/Plato/meno.html (accessed October 4, 2019).

Lam, F. (2011). The Socratic Method as an Approach to Learning and Its Benefits . Dietrich College Honors Theses, Research Showcase @CMU.

Lane, H. C., and VanLehn, K. (2005). Teaching the tacit knowledge of programming to novices with natural language tutoring. J. Comput. Sci. Edu. 15, 183–201. doi: 10.1080/08993400500224286

Larrick, R. P. (2004). “Debiasing,” in Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, Chapter 16 , eds D. J. Koehler and N. Harvey (Oxford: Wiley Online Library), p. 316–338.

Le, N.-T., and Huse, N. (2016). “Evaluation of the formal models for the Socratic method,” in Proceedings of the 13rd International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (Zagreb: Springer Verlag), 69–78.

Le, N.-T., Shabas, A., and Pinkwart, N. (2018). “A question generation framework for teachers,” in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education (Oxford: Springer Verlag), 182–186.

Le, N.-T., and Wartschinski, L. (2018). A cognitive assistant for improving human reasoning skills. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 117, 45–54. doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2018.02.005

Maxwell, M. (2014). Introduction to the Socratic Method and Its Effect on Critical Thinking . Available online at: http://www.socraticmethod.net/

Maxwell, M., and Melete, K. (2014). How to Use the Socratic Method. The Socratic Method Research Portal Dedicated to Advancing the Use of the Socratic Method . Available online at: http://www.socraticmethod.net/

Nelson, L. (1970). “Die sokratische methode,” in Gesammelte Schriften in neun Bänden, Vol. 1 (Hamburg).

Olney, A. M., Graesser, A., and Person, N. K. (2012). Question generation from concept maps. Dialogue Discourse 3, 75–99. doi: 10.5087/dad.2012.204

Paul, R. (1990). “Excerpts from critical thinking: what every person needs to survive in a rap-idly changing world,” in Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique , eds R. W. Paul, A. J. A. Binker (Rohnert Park, CL: Sonoma State University Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique).

Paul, R. (2012). “The critical connection: higher order thinking that unifies curriculum, instruction, and learning,” in Critical Thinking: What Every Person Needs to Survive in a Rapidly Changing World, Chapter 16, eds J. Willsen, A. J. A. Binker (Oxford: Foundation for Critical Thinking Publisher), 293–296. Available online at: http://www.criticalthinking.org/pages/richardpaul-anthology/1139 (accessed May 06, 2019).

Paul, R., and Elder, L. (2006). The Thinker's Guide to the Art of Socratic Questioning. The Foundation for Critical Thinking .

Pekarsky, D. (1994). Socratic teaching: a critical assessment. J. Moral Edu. 23, 119–134. doi: 10.1080/0305724940230202

Person, N. K., and Graesser, A. C. (2002). “Human or computer? AutoTutor in a bystander turing test,” in Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems (Biarritz), 821–830.

Popp, S. (2001). Das sokratische Gespräch - Eine Methode der diskursiven Begriffsklärung .

Ruggiero, V. R. (1975). Beyond Feelings: A Guide to Critical Thinking . Port Washington, NY: Alfred Pub. Co.

Sumner, W. G. (1940). Folkways: A Study of the Sociological Importance of Usages, Manners, Customs, Mores, and Morals . New York, NY: Ginn and Co.

Tarnopolsky, C. (2001). “Socratic elenchus and platonic myth in Plato's Gorgias,” in Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Association (San Francisco, CA).

Toplak, M. E., West, R. F., and Stanovich, K. E. (2014). Assessing miserly information processing: an expansion of the cognitive reflection test. Think 20:844729. doi: 10.1080/13546783.2013.844729

WEF (2016). WEF . Available online at: http://reports.weforum.org/future-of-jobs-2016/shareable-infographics (accessed May 6, 2019).

Weisner, J., and Westerhof-Shultz, J. (2004). Breaking the Silence: dialogical learning in the middle grades. Edu. Foundations 18, 33–49.

Weusijana, B. K., Riesbeck, C. K., and Walsh, J. T. (2004). “Fostering re-flection with socratic tutoring software: results of using inquiry teaching strategies with web-based HCI techniques,” in Proceedings of International Conference for the Learning Sciences (ICLS) (New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Keywords: critical thinking, classic Socratic method, modern Socratic method, Socratic group discussion, critical thinking

Citation: Le N-T (2019) How Do Technology-Enhanced Learning Tools Support Critical Thinking? Front. Educ. 4:126. doi: 10.3389/feduc.2019.00126

Received: 07 May 2019; Accepted: 15 October 2019; Published: 06 November 2019.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2019 Le. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Nguyen-Thinh Le, nguyen-thinh.le@hu-berlin.de

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

Classroom Q&A

With larry ferlazzo.

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

Eight Instructional Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking

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

The new question-of-the-week is:

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

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

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

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

Current Events

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

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

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

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

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

Here are the two photos and a student response:

F - Focus on both photos and respond for three minutes

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

‘Before-Explore-Explain’

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

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

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

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

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

An Issue of Equity

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

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

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

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

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

So, what does that really look like?

Unpack and define critical thinking

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

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

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

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

Designing experiences for critical thinking

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

1.Choose Compelling Topics: Keep it relevant

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

2. Make Local Connections: Keep it real

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

3. Create Authentic Projects: Keep it rigorous

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

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

Critical Thinking & Student Engagement

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

QUESTIONING

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

TALK TIME / CONTROL

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

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

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

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

You can also contact me on Twitter at @Larryferlazzo .

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

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

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

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

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

Sign Up for EdWeek Update

Edweek top school jobs.

A teacher erases a large red question mark a student is writing on a whiteboard.

Sign Up & Sign In

IT technical skills

The growing importance of critical thinking in IT education

This is a guest blog by Dr Arosha K. Bandara, senior lecturer in Computing at The Open University

A criticism often levelled at IT education is that by the time you come to apply the skills, they might be out of date. Why learn technology skills when that technology might not be in use in a couple of years?

IT does change fast, but the fundamentals of how we design and build systems change at a slower pace. As long as we learn about today’s technology in the context of how it relates to the business world and how it is likely to evolve, then we will be in a much better position to respond intelligently to the changing world.

But this is often overlooked by both formal and in-house training programmes, which have favoured skills which address very specific challenges. In order to be adequately prepared to tackle tomorrow’s technology challenges, we need to move from a mindset of knowing how to apply technology to well understood situations, to one of being able to think critically about problems, and identify solutions to unknown as well as familiar technology issues.

Think differently

To prepare IT professionals for the rapidly changing world of technology, we need to instil an approach based on critical thinking. I’ll look at how we might do this, before putting this approach in context.

The organisation you work in is complex. It is shaped by the nature of individual thinking processes as well as existing technology and business pressures. Any changes will have causes and consequences that may have a much wider impact. Solving a problem will change things, which could lead to other problems.

Different people see different priorities. There is sometimes no obvious answer, or many different reasonable answers. But there are also wrong answers, which can be pursued, sometimes at great cost. These often result from a very narrow focus on the problem out of context.

Interconnections are too often ignored, a single cause may be presumed, or an individual quickly blamed. This is not exclusive to IT, we see this in wider society all the time – it’s easier to blame crime on individual criminals than deal with the many complex societal factors that lead some to criminality. The other mistake is a focus on outcomes – ie how many criminals can we arrest rather than how many crimes can we prevent.

To avoid these mistakes, problems should be approached by thinking about the systems that affect the challenge or opportunity. This is more difficult than isolating and addressing a problem, but ultimately more likely to produce a better solution.

Thinking about systems

As well as looking at how technology works, it is necessary to think about how people will react to it. Is a great new technology too hard to learn? Will tough new security procedures incentivise people to circumvent them? We need to understand the systems in which new technology operates.

Cognitive mapping is a technique for understanding and shaping the mental models your stakeholders use to perceive, contextualise, simplify, and make sense of otherwise complex problems. Thinking through these will help ensure new technologies and programmes have the results they are supposed to.

However good your plan is, you won’t foresee everything, so it is also critical to continuously test and review, and feed that learning into your ever evolving plans. Throughout the life cycle of any project, topics such as stakeholders, finance, risk, people, project administration and quality must be constantly reviewed in the context of the project.

The world of the future will require more understanding of flexible management. We will have to place more emphasis on learning as we go and making sure that learning changes our practice and organisations. We need to get used to this.

Critical thinking in context

Two core skills of any modern IT professional are cyber security and software engineering. Both relate to complex real world challenges and can only be dealt with effectively if they think critically.

Firstly, cyber security. Any IT professional needs to fully explore the available security technologies and stay up to date with them. But they also need to think through the risks that may arise in all relevant aspects of an organisation’s operations which may impact security, including human factors, web services and system upgrades.

You also need to be able to plan for when things do go wrong. Again, this needs an understanding of attackers’ motivations and employee weaknesses, as well as of the technologies available to circumvent your defences, and a sense of how these could evolve. It also requires an understanding of the legal frameworks and technologies relevant to digital forensics, which are essential when responding to cyber security incidents. Only then can effective plans be made.

Teaching all this must be put in a real world context. In our own post-graduate courses, most students learn these techniques by crafting a fit-for-purpose Information Security Management System for the organisation where they work.

Secondly, software engineering. Contact between the business and the external world is often mediated by software, and the business has a responsibility to its wider community that may be served, or jeopardised, by this software.

Skilled software engineers can add a lot of value by creating or adapting software, from managing projects and sales, analysing performance and customer data, and automating tasks. All of these exist in a complex real world, where humans react to change in different ways. Any new system must understand how users or customers will respond to it.

The skill is not one of knowing how to do this, it is one of knowing how to model the relationships between the software, the organisation it serves, and its wider environment. This approach must be used in development, roll out, updates and maintenance – it is an evolving process.

Critical thinking doesn’t mean ignoring technology, of course. The process can be evolved further by an understanding of different software engineering tools that can help them simulate, manage and monitor. Using these effectively is part of the skill of good IT planning.

A critical approach allows you to plan effectively

IT is critical to business and will become ever more so. It exists in an increasingly networked and interconnected world, where groups, teams, organisations and even nations will have to be smarter in their ways of working together.

IT professionals therefore need to be able to think in ways that reflect these challenges. IT education at all levels must teach how to take a critical approach which relates technical competencies to complex technological, human and business issues.

Dr Bandara teaches Postgraduate Computing courses at The Open University aimed at helping IT professionals advance by using technology strategically to drive the business forward.

To ensure an IT project's long-term success, stakeholders should keep track of certain KPIs to ensure technical debt is as low as...

The U.S. Commerce Department's proposal to ban software and hardware for connected vehicles imported from China or Russia might ...

Apple joined a list of big tech companies voluntarily committing to responsible AI. But without regulation, there is no legal ...

Security researcher Simone Margaritelli discovered vulnerabilities in the Common UNIX Printing System that attackers could ...

Ensuring the security of your company's online payment systems is key to preventing costly attacks, meeting compliance ...

The Institute for Security and Technology's Ransomware Task Force says a shift to big game hunting tactics led to a significant ...

Arista highlights its consolidation of network management tools within CloudVision, while HPE extends Aruba Central to include ...

Automation makes networks more efficient, but engineers must first mitigate the risks. With planning and training, enterprises ...

CI/CD processes help deploy code changes to networks. Integrating a CI/CD pipeline into automation makes networks more reliable, ...

Hock Tan unscored the importance of customers at the Boston VMware User Group UserCon, but users remain uneasy about the recent ...

Extreme heat and inadequate cooling systems can lead to power failures in data centers. Calculate the duration of your UPS ...

Intel's turnaround efforts are progressing, but the chipmaker will need more than government funding and a deal that expands its ...

The database vendor's new update includes an integration with pgvector that provides users with the vector search capabilities ...

The vendor's latest set of capabilities includes prebuilt applications and automated features aimed at making it easier to use ...

Metadata management tools can range from comprehensive packages of many features to masters of a specific niche. Consider 9 of ...

News Literacy: Critical-Thinking Skills for the 21st Century

Three methods for teaching critical thinking skills and smart media consumption habits to a generation growing up in a climate of information overload.

Your content has been saved!

Every teacher I've worked with over the last five years recalls two kinds of digital experiences with students.

The first I think of as digital native moments , when a student uses a piece of technology with almost eerie intuitiveness. As digital natives, today's teens have grown up with these tools and have assimilated their logic. Young people just seem to understand when to click and drag or copy and paste, and how to move, merge and mix digital elements.

The second I call digital naiveté moments , when a student trusts a source of information that is obviously unreliable. Even though they know how easy it is to create and distribute information online, many young people believe -- sometimes passionately -- the most dubious rumors , tempting hoaxes (including convincingly staged encounters designed to look raw and unplanned ) and implausible theories .

How can these coexist? How can students be so technologically savvy while also displaying their lack of basic skills for navigating the digital world?

What to Believe?

Understanding this extends beyond customary generational finger wagging. While it's tempting to blame students themselves for failing to think critically, we should remember that the digital revolution represents one of the most radical changes in human history.

Students today face a greater challenge in evaluating information than their parents or grandparents did at their age. The cumulative amount of information that exists on the planet, from the beginning of recorded history to the present, is, by realistic estimates , doubling every two years. And even though digital natives have grown up in the information age, many of the adults and institutions in their lives are still grappling with its implications. In other words, it's likely that the kind of credulity we see in young people reflects our own collective uncertainty about what we encounter on the digital frontier. Finally, the skills that students need to effectively sort fact from fiction are often missing from school curricula.

This isn't to suggest any shortcoming on the part of today's teachers. Without the classroom time, quality teaching materials and professional development opportunities in the emerging field of news literacy , teachers cannot reasonably be expected to guide their students to achieve these new skills.

News literacy is a relatively new field in media studies that focuses on defining and teaching the skills that citizens need to evaluate the credibility of the information they encounter, and on examining the role that credible information plays in a representative democracy.

It's also a subject that most students find inherently engaging and relevant. In fact, a recent study found that 84 percent of young people between the ages of 15 and 25 say they would benefit from learning these skills.

3 Exercises in News Literacy

But the question for teachers remains: "How can I integrate news literacy into my classroom amid so many other priorities, standards and goals?" I'd like to share three accessible ideas for how to do so.

Reinvent Current Events

Have students collect examples of information that they feel is timely and important. Then lead a discussion about who produced the content and for what purpose. Is it intended to inform? Persuade? Entertain? Sell? Create small groups and assign each a key characteristic of credibility to study:

Quality sourcing
Verification
Word choice
Documentation

Then have each team lead an assessment of its assigned attribute. Consider writing a group letter to the reporter, creator or editor about items that are either exemplary or problematic.

Explore the Power of Information

Pose an "essential question for the day" that explores the power and impact of information (e.g., "What changes would we see in the U.S. if the First Amendment protections of speech and press were repealed?"). Then use such websites as the Committee to Protect Journalists or Reporters Without Borders to examine press freedoms around the world. Track the number of journalists jailed, kidnapped or killed in 2014, and investigate the circumstances surrounding these incidents.

Fact-Checking Challenge

Display a different example of dubious information each week or month and challenge your students to research its accuracy using non-partisan fact-checking resources and advanced web searching . Give prizes or extra credit to those who get it right, or work collaboratively to seek answers as a class.

The Practice of Critical Thinking

Not only can these ideas be adapted to explore a range of relevant issues in a variety of academic subjects and grade levels, they also embody the principles of 21st century learning and are aligned with Common Core State Standards .

News literacy education has the potential to engage students and ignite their critical thinking. More importantly, it can empower them to make better-informed choices in their lives as they move beyond the classroom and into the world.

For more information about the News Literacy Project, including our free online professional development session this spring, visit our website .

Thinking critically about critical thinking dispositions in technology education

Published: 05 February 2020
Volume 31 , pages 465–488, ( 2021 )

Cite this article

Willem Rauscher ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-5741-160X 1 &
Hendri Badenhorst 1

1539 Accesses

3 Citations

Explore all metrics

While much research has been done on Critical Thinking (CT) skills, the disposition toward CT has not been adequately investigated. The paucity of literature regarding technology teachers’ disposition toward CT is particularly problematic as these teachers have to assist learners with the designing and making of solutions (artefacts) to problems that are often ill structured. Solving these problems is complicated and involves critical thinking. Helping learners to find solutions to these problems, therefore, requires teachers to be willing to think critically and encourage critical thinking in the classroom. Profiling these teachers’ dispositions could reveal their inclination to employ critical thinking, and give an indication of the likelihood that they may foster CT skills and the disposition toward CT in the classroom. In addition, such profiling could provide a descriptive baseline for further investigation into the relationship that seems to exist between CT dispositions and professions. This study, therefore, aimed to investigate technology teachers’ disposition to think critically in terms of their habits of mind. Quantitative research, using an online survey, was employed in this study. A Likert Scale instrument comprising 42 statements, derived from Facione’s (Informal Log 20(1): 61–84, 2000 ) seven habits of mind, was administered to South African technology teachers. The participants had to rate their level of agreement with each statement on a six-point scale. The research findings revealed that this sample had a positive disposition toward CT. The habits of mind that ranked the strongest were CT Self-confidence and Inquisitiveness, while Mature Judgment ranked the weakest (although still in a positive direction). Further research is needed to establish which dispositions should be emphasised in order to address the dispositional needs in technology education.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Strategies for fostering critical thinking dispositions in the technology classroom

Critical Thinking in Postgraduate Degree Work at the Israel Technological University, Ecuador

Teaching Critical Thinking– A Task-Based Approach: Work in Progress

Explore related subjects.

Artificial Intelligence
Medical Ethics
Digital Education and Educational Technology

American Philosophical Association. (1990). Critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction . Recommendations prepared for the committee on pre - college philosophy . California State University, Fullerton. ERIC Doc. No. ED 315-423.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., & Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to research in education . Belmont: Wadsworth.

Google Scholar

Beyer, B. (1990). What philosophy offers to the teaching of thinking. Educational Leadership, 47 (5), 55–60.

Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., et al. (2012). Defining twenty-first century skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and teaching of 21st century skills . Dordrecht: Springer.

Department of Basic Education. (2011). National curriculum statement: Curriculum and assessment policy statement (CAPS) . Technology Grades 7–9. Pretoria: Government Printing Works.

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think . Boston: D.C. Heath & Co.

Book Google Scholar

Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., Harney, O. M., & Kavanagh, C. (2017). Facilitating a student-educator conceptual model of dispositions towards critical thinking through interactive management. Educational Technology Research and Development, 65, 47–73.

Article Google Scholar

Dwyer, C. P., Hogan, M. J., & Stewart, I. (2015). The effects of argument mapping-infused critical thinking instruction on reflective judgement. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 16, 11–26.

Ennis, R. (1996). Critical thinking dispositions: Their nature and assessability. Informal Logic, 18 (2), 165–182.

Ennis, R. (2018). Critical thinking across the curriculum: A vision. Topoi: An International Review of Philosophy, 37 (1), 165–184.

Facione, P. A. (1990). The delphi report: Executive summary; critical thinking: A statement of expert consensus for purposes of educational assessment and instruction . California: California Academic Press.

Facione, P. A. (2000). The disposition toward critical thinking: Its character, measurement, and relationship to critical chinking skill. Informal Logic, 20 (1), 61–84.

Facione, P. A. (2015). Critical thinking: What it is and why it counts (pp. 1–30). Insight Assessment.

Facione, P. A., Sánchez, C. A., Facione, N. C., & Gainen, J. (1995). The disposition toward critical thinking. The Journal of General Education, 44 (1), 1–25.

Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.

Halpern, D. F. (2014). Thought and knowledge: An introduction to critical thinking (5th ed.). New York: Psychology Press.

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

Jonsson, A., & Lindén, S. (2009). The quest for the best consumer confidence indicator. European economy - economic papers (Vol. 372). Brussels: European Commission Directorate-General for Economic and Financial Affairs.

Mcbride, R. E., Xiang, P., & Wittenburg, D. (2002). Dispositions toward critical thinking: the preservice teacher’s perspective. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 8 (1), 29–40.

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

Paul, R. W. (2012). Critical thinking: What every person needs to survive in a rapidly changing world (4th ed.). Tomales, CA: Foundation for Critical Thinking.

Perkins, D., Jay, E., & Tishman, S. (1993). Beyond abilities: A dispositional theory of thinking. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39 (1), 1–21.

Schooner, P., Nordlöf, C., Klasander, C., & Hallström, J. (2017). Design, system, value: The role of problem-solving and critical thinking capabilities in technology education, as perceived by teachers. Design and Technology Education: An International Journal, 22, 60–75.

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

Trilling, B., & Fadel, C. (2009). 21st century skills: Learning for life in our times . San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Van Niekerk, E., Ankiewicz, P., & De Swart, E. (2010). A process-based assessment framework for technology education: A case study. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 20 (2), 191–215.

Watson, L. (2015). What is inquisitiveness. American Philosophical Quarterly, 52 (3), 273–287.

Wright, K. B. (2005). Researching Internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and web survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10 (3). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00259.x .

Download references

This publication was produced with support from the Teaching and Learning Development Capacity Improvement Programme, a partnership programme between the Department of Higher Education and Training and the European Union. Its contents are the sole responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department or the European Union.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, Faculty of Education, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa

Willem Rauscher & Hendri Badenhorst

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Willem Rauscher .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Rauscher, W., Badenhorst, H. Thinking critically about critical thinking dispositions in technology education. Int J Technol Des Educ 31 , 465–488 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09564-3

Download citation

Accepted : 29 January 2020

Published : 05 February 2020

Issue Date : July 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-020-09564-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Critical thinking
Disposition
Habits of mind
Technology education
Find a journal
Publish with us
Track your research

Productivity hacks - 3 min read

5 Tech Tools to Encourage Critical Thinking

These five simple tools allow you to inspire critical thinking in your students. Encourage them to take the information you’re giving them, and show what they know with mind maps, puzzles and more!

Discovery Education: Puzzlemaker

Students can use Discovery’s Puzzlemaker suite of tools to make customized word searches, letter tile puzzles, hidden message games and more. Use this as a v ocabulary activity station . Students pair up and create a puzzle for their teammate to solve using the words they’re learning that week.

This gives both students a chance to work with vocabulary in a new and fun way that requires extra thinking and problem solving.

MindMeister

Mind mapping is a valuable tool to facilitate critical thinking, and technology has made it easier than ever to bring this into your classroom.

Use MindMeister, a simple and easy to implement mind mapping tool, to encourage students to think about a topic, lesson, problem or subject from every angle . This activity helps them look at the whole picture with a critical eye, rather than just studying the facts that are being taught in the curriculum.

Check out this compilation of inspiring educational mind maps , which cover topics like grammar, geography and reading comprehension.

Whooo’s Reading

Answering open-ended questions is a simple way to facilitate critical thinking with students. However, many reading comprehension tools only allow students to answer multiple-choice questions, rather than requiring them to formulate their own answer.

Whooo’s Reading, an online reading log, not only requires students to answer open-ended questions, but every automatically prompted question is Common Core-aligned, so you can be sure your students are thinking about the text in terms of the various reading and writing anchors.

Learn more about how this tool has helped more than 10,000 teachers improve their students’ reading comprehension at the Learn2Earn teacher blog .

Neo K12: Flow Chart Games

While this tool only has pre-defined flow chart games, in a variety of categories ranging from life sciences to the human body, you can use them to inspire critical thinking where appropriate.

For example, use flow chart games when exploring photosynthesis . Students have to drag and drop the various stages in the right part of the cycle. Require each student to write what each part of the cycle is about for a complete interactive thinking activity. Note that use of this this tool requires a monthly subscription.

This online business tool was not made for the classroom; however, students can use it to map out the visual representation of a process, adding notes, colors and details to show their knowledge of the topic. All diagrams are saved in your “Online Diagram Library” so students can access this content when studying for an exam or to show their parents.

You also have access to a large database of pre-made diagrams . Use these as supplementary materials for a lesson you’ve already written or as examples of what you expect from students with their own diagram.

This is a guest post by Jessica Sanders. Jessica is the Director of Social Outreach for Learn2Earn, an online fundraising platform that allows students raise money by reading books. She grew up reading books like The Giver and Holes, and is passionate about making reading as exciting for young kids today as it has always been for her. Follow Learn2Earn on Twitter and Facebook , and send content inquiries to [email protected] .

Bring teamwork online for good with MeisterTask.

Articles you might also like

Project timeline: meet deadlines, hit milestones, and achieve project goals

How to create a powerful team mission statement + examples

The top 7 team management skills that make teams successful

Search form

Critical thinking and problem solving with technology.

Brief Summary: Critical thinking and problem solving is a crucial skill in a technical world that can immediately be applied to academics and careers. A highly skilled individual in this competency can choose the appropriate tool to accomplish a task, easily switch between tools, has a basic understanding of different file types, and can troubleshoot technology when it’s not working properly. They can also differentiate between true information and falsified information online and has basic proficiency in data gathering, processing and interpretation.

Learners with proficient skills in critical thinking and problem solving should be able to:

Troubleshoot computers and mobile devices when issues arise, like restarting the device and checking if it requires a software or operating system update
Move across tools to complete a task (for example, adding PowerPoint slides into a note taking app for annotation)
Differentiate between legitimate and falsified information online
Understand basic file types and know when to use them (for example, the difference between .doc and .pdf files)

Market/Employer Trends: Employers indicate value in employee ability to problem solve using technology, particularly related to drawing information from data to identify and solve challenges. Further, knowing how to leverage technology tools to see a problem, break it down into manageable pieces, and work toward solving is of important value. Employers expect new employees to be able to navigate across common toolsets, making decisions to use the right tool for the right task.

Self-Evaluation:

Key questions for reflection:

How comfortable are you when technology doesn’t work the way you expect?
Do you know basic troubleshooting skills to solve tech issues?
Do you know the key indicators of whether information you read online is reliable?

Strong digital skills in this area could appear as:

Updating your computer after encountering a problem and resolving the issue
Discerning legitimate news sources from illegitimate ones to successfully meet goals
Converting a PowerPoint presentation into a PDF for easy access for peers who can’t use PowerPoint
Taking notes on a phone and seamlessly completing them on a computer

Ways to Upskill:

Ready to grow your strength in this competency? Try:

Reviewing University Libraries’ resources on research and information literacy
Read about troubleshooting in college in the Learner Technology Handbook
Registering for ESEPSY 1359: Critical Thinking and Collaboration in Online Learning

Educator Tips to Support Digital Skills:

Create an assignment in Carmen prompting students to find legitimate peer-reviewed research
Provide links to information literacy resources on research-related assignments or projects for student review
Develop assignments that require using more than one tech tool to accomplish a single task

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

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

What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples

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

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

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

Critical thinking skills help you to:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Scribbr Citation Checker New

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

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

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

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

Academic examples

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

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

Nonacademic examples

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

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

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

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

When encountering information, ask:

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

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

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

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

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

Plagiarism

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

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

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

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

Critical thinking skills include the ability to:

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

Ask questions such as:

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

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

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

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

Being information literate means that you:

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

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

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

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

Cite this Scribbr article

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

Ryan, E. (2023, May 31). What Is Critical Thinking? | Definition & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 29, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/working-with-sources/critical-thinking/

Is this article helpful?

Eoghan Ryan

Other students also liked, student guide: information literacy | meaning & examples, what are credible sources & how to spot them | examples, applying the craap test & evaluating sources, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

COMMENTS

Using Technology To Develop Students' Critical Thinking Skills
The cognitive skills at the foundation of critical thinking are analysis, interpretation, evaluation, explanation, inference, and self-regulation. When students think critically, they actively engage in these processes: To create environments that engage students in these processes, instructors need to ask questions, encourage the expression of ...
Is technology producing a decline in critical thinking and analysis
Stuart Wolpert. January 27, 2009. As technology has played a bigger role in our lives, our skills in critical thinking and analysis have declined, while our visual skills have improved, according to research by Patricia Greenfield, UCLA distinguished professor of psychology and director of the Children's Digital Media Center, Los Angeles.
Using technology to teach critical thinking skills
Fortunately, research has uncovered five ways technology can be used to teach critical thinking skills. 1. Interactive activities can stimulate student interest and improve academic achievement. Education researchers agree that engaging students in interactive, multisensory activities that promote elaboration, questioning, and explanation can ...
How Does Technology Affect Critical Thinking?
Appropriate technology in classrooms increases students' academic achievement, self-confidence, motivation in class, and attendance. Technology helps students move beyond sitting attentively and listening and promotes more hands-on learning. It affects critical thinking by helping students apply what they've learned to real-life situations ...
How to Improve Your Critical Thinking Skills
Consider these ways writing can help enhance critical thinking: 1. Clarity of Thought: Writing requires that you articulate your thoughts clearly and coherently. When you need to put your ideas on ...
Critical Thinking in the Age of AI
Let's use what Daniel Willingham, a cognitive scientist, says is his " commonsensical view.". His definition is that critical thinking is: Novel: Not a direct repetition of something you've learned before. Self-directed: Not just repeating steps you've been given. Effective: Following patterns that are likely to yield useful ...
Assessing Critical Thinking in the Digital Era
Technology is poised to revolutionize education. Instead of being disrupted by the new tech, schools should participate in its development. ... Critical thinking is a complex skill that involves the ability to analyze and evaluate information, think creatively, and make reasoned judgments, as Richard Paul and Linda Elder outline in their 2019 ...
Does Technology Help Boost Students' Critical Thinking Skills?
The Reboot Foundation was started—and funded—by Helen Bouygues , whose background is in business, to explore the role of technology in developing critical thinking skills. It was inspired by ...
Leveraging Technology to Develop Students' Critical Thinking Skills
This article describes the nexus of the Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK) framework, principles of the Backward Curriculum Design process, and the Education 1.0, 2.0, & 3.0 communication flows working together to help TK-12 educators leverage technology tools to support the development of students' critical thinking skills.
How Do Technology-Enhanced Learning Tools Support Critical Thinking?
For the review of technology-enhanced learning systems for critical thinking, the following inclusion criteria were defined: 1. Scientific articles describing a technology-enhanced learning system must mention "critical thinking" or "Socratic" (including "Socratic dialogue," "Socratic method," "Socratic questioning"), and ...
Eight Instructional Strategies for Promoting Critical Thinking
Students grappled with ideas and their beliefs and employed deep critical-thinking skills to develop arguments for their claims. Embedding critical-thinking skills in curriculum that students care ...
Technology-Enhanced CT: A Systematic Review
Abstract. This study presents a systematic review of the literature regarding the use of technology to develop critical thinking (CT). This review analyzed 57 publications from 2010 to 2020. With an inductive content analysis, the study reached the themes related to the educational processes followed to develop technology-supported CT, the ...
The growing importance of critical thinking in IT education
Critical thinking doesn't mean ignoring technology, of course. The process can be evolved further by an understanding of different software engineering tools that can help them simulate, manage ...
Bridging critical thinking and transformative learning: The role of
In recent decades, approaches to critical thinking have generally taken a practical turn, pivoting away from more abstract accounts - such as emphasizing the logical relations that hold between statements (Ennis, 1964) - and moving toward an emphasis on belief and action.According to the definition that Robert Ennis (2018) has been advocating for the last few decades, critical thinking is ...
News Literacy: Critical-Thinking Skills for the 21st Century
News Literacy: Critical-Thinking Skills for the 21st Century. Three methods for teaching critical thinking skills and smart media consumption habits to a generation growing up in a climate of information overload. New! Every teacher I've worked with over the last five years recalls two kinds of digital experiences with students.
Thinking critically about critical thinking dispositions in technology
The development of critical thinking skills is key to unlocking a lifetime of learning (Trilling and Fadel 2009).Critical thinking has, in fact, become an increasingly important feature in the educational policies of many countries (Binkley et al. 2012).In South Africa, the Department of Basic Education has also articulated the need for learners to think critically.
5 Tech Tools to Encourage Critical Thinking
Mind mapping is a valuable tool to facilitate critical thinking, and technology has made it easier than ever to bring this into your classroom. Use MindMeister, a simple and easy to implement mind mapping tool, to encourage students to think about a topic, lesson, problem or subject from every angle. This activity helps them look at the whole ...
Critical Thinking and Problem Solving with Technology
Critical Thinking and Problem Solving with Technology. Brief Summary: Critical thinking and problem solving is a crucial skill in a technical world that can immediately be applied to academics and careers. A highly skilled individual in this competency can choose the appropriate tool to accomplish a task, easily switch between tools, has a ...
Digital education tools for critical thinking development
The priority of informatization of education involves the use of digital tools for the development of critical thinking through active learning methods, such as discussions, brainstorming, project-based learning, trainings, business games and case studies (Pegov & Pyanikh, 2010). Russia's strategies for socioeconomic development until 2024 and ...
What Is Critical Thinking?
Critical thinking is the ability to effectively analyze information and form a judgment. To think critically, you must be aware of your own biases and assumptions when encountering information, and apply consistent standards when evaluating sources. Critical thinking skills help you to: Identify credible sources. Evaluate and respond to arguments.
The influence of information technologies on creative and critical
ARLE model improved critical thinking (8.77 in AR group, 7.60 in the traditional group) and creativity (593 in AR group, 570 in the traditional group). The resulting data demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed model of learning with the augmented reality technology. The research findings have practical implications.
(PDF) Critical Thinking and Digital Technologies: Concepts
The aim of this study is to identify the new trends on technology use in developing critical thinking skills. By this purpose, the researches published between 2008-2014 in Science Direct database ...
Critical theory and the question of technology: The Frankfurt School
To answer this question an account of the theory of technology across critical theory will be provided as a starting point. The second section offers a contemporary assessment of the relevance of the theory of technology in critical theory, taking recent literature on digitization and surveillance capitalism as examples that appear to confirm the prognoses of first-generation critical theory.